Patriots to play in Mexico?

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
13,814
Pittsburgh, PA
We were one of the first to volunteer for the London games, right? 2009, I think?

Fat lot of good that goodwill did us with the league office. Unless it'll make Kraft a lot of money, I don't know why he'd stick his neck out on this one. The Raiders, Chargers, Cowboys and Cardinals have plenty of fans in Mexico, but the only thing that likes New England Patriots down there are the bacteria in the water.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,590
Hingham, MA
We were one of the first to volunteer for the London games, right? 2009, I think?

Fat lot of good that goodwill did us with the league office. Unless it'll make Kraft a lot of money, I don't know why he'd stick his neck out on this one. The Raiders, Chargers, Cowboys and Cardinals have plenty of fans in Mexico, but the only thing that likes New England Patriots down there are the bacteria in the water.
Eh I'd rather play the Raiders in Azteca than Oakland
 

patoaflac

Member
SoSH Member
May 6, 2016
1,789
Maybe the real plan is Goodell pointing Brady with a green laser through all the game.
 

SemperFidelisSox

suzyn
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
20,729
Boston, MA
Home
Kansas City Chiefs
San Diego Chargers
Atlanta Falcons
Carolina Panthers
AFC South Same Place Finisher
Miami Dolphins
New York Jets
Buffalo Bills

Away
Denver Broncos
Oakland Raiders
New Orleans Saints
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
AFC North Same Place Finisher
Miami Dolphins
New York Jets
Buffalo Bills
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
21,626
Oakland will probably be at least decent again next year and have ardent fans. I'd have no problem from a competitive edge playing that in Mexico City.

But lol at the NFL trying to expand in Mexico overall.
 
Jul 18, 2005
23
Does altitude affect how much the ball weighs?
Yes. While I appreciate the implied mocking of those who think Ballghazi had anything to do with the weight of the balls, there are a few subtle effects that would reduce the weight of the balls. You tapped into my nerd brain enough to get me thinking about it, so I thought someone else might be interested in the result.

The most obvious is that the force of gravity decreases as you move away from the attracting object, the center of the earth in this case, as a function of 1/R^2. The article linked below came up with about 0.2% reduction for twice the altitude we are talking about, so this effect would be good for about 0.1% reduction without checking their math.

The second effect is latitude related rather than altitude related. As you move toward the equator, the anthropomorphized earth tries to fling you off harder. The ball would be moving faster at the equator than the poles, resulting in a centripetal force in the opposite direction to gravity which would reduce the effective weight. The article does the math one link further and comes up with 0.5% difference between the poles and the equator, but the function would not be linear and the difference between Foxboro and Mexico city is much less, so I'm guessing 0.1%-ish for this too.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/42-our-solar-system/the-earth/gravity/93-does-gravity-vary-across-the-surface-of-the-earth-intermediate

Then the actual amount of air in the ball would be slightly less because the ambient pressure is lower and the balls are set to a gauge pressure. I haven't totally thought through the bouyancy aspect, but it seems like it should be neutral. Anyway, since the weight of the ball comes mostly from the non-air contributions, this effect would be very small and difficult to measure. As such, this one is what Tom will be generally aware of.
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
And Germany!
Germany makes a lot of sense (and cents, obviously). There's a ton of American football fans there, way more than the UK. Games are shown on broadcast TV and get pretty solid ratings. And Germany produces actual NFL players.

I've been to a couple NFL games at Wembley and some other NFL stuff, and you can't walk 10 feet without hearing German.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
13,192
Waltham, MA
Yes. While I appreciate the implied mocking of those who think Ballghazi had anything to do with the weight of the balls, there are a few subtle effects that would reduce the weight of the balls. You tapped into my nerd brain enough to get me thinking about it, so I thought someone else might be interested in the result.

The most obvious is that the force of gravity decreases as you move away from the attracting object, the center of the earth in this case, as a function of 1/R^2. The article linked below came up with about 0.2% reduction for twice the altitude we are talking about, so this effect would be good for about 0.1% reduction without checking their math.

The second effect is latitude related rather than altitude related. As you move toward the equator, the anthropomorphized earth tries to fling you off harder. The ball would be moving faster at the equator than the poles, resulting in a centripetal force in the opposite direction to gravity which would reduce the effective weight. The article does the math one link further and comes up with 0.5% difference between the poles and the equator, but the function would not be linear and the difference between Foxboro and Mexico city is much less, so I'm guessing 0.1%-ish for this too.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/42-our-solar-system/the-earth/gravity/93-does-gravity-vary-across-the-surface-of-the-earth-intermediate

Then the actual amount of air in the ball would be slightly less because the ambient pressure is lower and the balls are set to a gauge pressure. I haven't totally thought through the bouyancy aspect, but it seems like it should be neutral. Anyway, since the weight of the ball comes mostly from the non-air contributions, this effect would be very small and difficult to measure. As such, this one is what Tom will be generally aware of.
It might be twice the altitude, but that's measuring from sea level. the formula you're referring to used R, which is the radius of the Earth. The weight difference would not be halved because the change in R between the two geographical locations is a few orders of magnitude lower then R.

All this is fun to think about, but the effects are negligible for the purposes of sport.
 
Jul 18, 2005
23
It might be twice the altitude, but that's measuring from sea level. the formula you're referring to used R, which is the radius of the Earth. The weight difference would not be halved because the change in R between the two geographical locations is a few orders of magnitude lower then R.

All this is fun to think about, but the effects are negligible for the purposes of sport.
That was taken into account, and actually was the only reason why a linear approximation of change of gravity with altitude was appropriate. If you actually do the math, the effect of adding 7,382' in altitude to a 20,902,261' mean radius of the earth is a decrease of 0.071% in weight. Doubling the altitude to 14,764' would give a decrease of 0.141% in weight.

We are in total agreement on the impact of these effects.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
13,192
Waltham, MA
That was taken into account, and actually was the only reason why a linear approximation of change of gravity with altitude was appropriate. If you actually do the math, the effect of adding 7,382' in altitude to a 20,902,261' mean radius of the earth is a decrease of 0.071% in weight. Doubling the altitude to 14,764' would give a decrease of 0.141% in weight.

We are in total agreement on the impact of these effects.
Yes, of course, the inverse square law. I was thrown off by the fact that the altitude was halved and the weight loss doubled. I should have actually thought through the math :)
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Staff member
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
7,797
KPWT
I'm hearing it is the Raiders game. The rumor that is popular in Raider fan circles is that the Raiders will play three in a row in Mexico City and Mark Davis had his choice of New England or Dallas to play in Mexico during the 2017 season and chose the team that is much less popular south of the border.

This could all be bullshit, it is just shit that people that are around our seats and park next to us at the Coliseum say, but they are usually right. Season ticket holders are pissed because the Pats tickets would sell for 2-3 times face on the ticket exchange.
 
Last edited:

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
13,814
Pittsburgh, PA
On the physics side, I thought the biggest difference was the much-reduced density of the outside air, which reduces drag and thus makes kickoffs, punts and FGs much longer, and I assume would make thrown balls sail a little bit.
 
Jul 18, 2005
23
On the physics side, I thought the biggest difference was the much-reduced density of the outside air, which reduces drag and thus makes kickoffs, punts and FGs much longer, and I assume would make thrown balls sail a little bit.
Yes, there are real and significant effects. At that altitude, there would be a roughly 25% reduction in density relative to a game played at sea level at the same temperature and humidity. That would result in a 25% reduction in drag force throughout the flight of the ball. And then there are the physiological effects that have been well covered in Denver game discussions.

The joke about weighing balls just got me thinking about how significant any actual weight changes would be (unsurprisingly insignificant, but larger than I would have guessed).
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Staff member
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
7,797
KPWT
On the physics side, I thought the biggest difference was the much-reduced density of the outside air, which reduces drag and thus makes kickoffs, punts and FGs much longer, and I assume would make thrown balls sail a little bit.

Of course, last Monday we didn't see any bad overthrows on deep balls that seemed to surprise the Qbs, and the kickoffs and punts seemed pretty normal. I was hoping Marquette King would nail an 80 yarder or something like that and the kicking game all seemed fairly normal.

The real test will be tomorrow when the Texans and Raiders play again to see if there are any lingering affects on their bodies from the altitude and pollution. Oakland went down to only one pass practice this week specifically for that concern.

Weirdly, the NFL schedulers have them both playing teams with extra rest. Carolina is coming off a Thursday game prior to playing the Raiders and San Diego is coming off a bye before going to Houston.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
6,684
Nobody thinks it's a bad idea for the Patriots to play in Mexico because of the BB/Brady Trump stuff? Or does Rog think that'll increase ratings?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
64,887
Oregon
Nobody thinks it's a bad idea for the Patriots to play in Mexico because of the BB/Brady Trump stuff? Or does Rog think that'll increase ratings?
Nobody outside of New England gives a crap about BB and Brady being friends of Trump
 

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,721
Northern Colorado
It seems weird to make Oakland play in Mexico two years in a row (and possibly three according to Gunfighter), but this could be one situation where Mark Davis doesn't mind since he is moving the team and, thus, possibly looking to expand his fanbase as much as possible. Also, he might want to garner favor with the league (insert joke here) and doesn't care about pissing off the Oakland locals since he already will with the move.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Staff member
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
7,797
KPWT
The Raiders sent out their season ticket renewal info today and it indicates that 10 games will be played in Oakland next year, including the Pats. The date to get the maximum rewards for paying for your tickets in full is 3 March, which is before the schedule & dates release announcement.

So, either the Mexico City thing is not going to happen in 2017, or the Raiders are going to be granting many refunds.
 

Three10toLeft

lurker
Oct 2, 2008
1,497
Asheville, NC
This is strictly anecdotal, but I definitely remember an ESPN Deportes reporter leading up to this year's game in Mexico City saying the Raiders, Cardinals, Cowboys, and Patriots all had huge followings in Mexico. He said the reason the Patriots were popular, unsurprisingly, was because of how they were thought of as "winners".

If that's true, I can definitely understand why the league would be eager to put them on the ticket for the next Mexico City game.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
26,119
Nobody outside of New England gives a crap about BB and Brady being friends of Trump
Eh, I think it's currently the hep reason to hate on the Patriots.

http://deadspin.com/a-certain-fancy-dog-might-not-share-that-opinion-1791808149

The thing that irks me is that Brady never officially endorsed Trump. He had that hat in his locker, what, a year ago? 15 months ago? Back when Trump's candidacy was still basically a lark, so when he was asked about it Brady said "Sure, it would be great to have [my golf buddy] as president, why not?" And then when asked to discuss the actual politics of it, he declined to comment. And his wife said they both voted for Clinton (which may or may not be bullshit, but still), and he declined to comment on that. So in the realm of athletes supporting Trump, Brady is at like a 3/10.

He shouldn't have put that hat in the locker, no doubt. But I just have a hard time getting worked up about a guy who goes out of his way to NOT talk about non-football topics NOT talk about Trump.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
13,814
Pittsburgh, PA
That "Revolvution" guy in the comments with the familiar-looking avatar had quite the repartee.

There's a certain amount of truth to the idea that if you don't want to be asked about your politics, don't make a political statement. Pats fans are sympathetic to Brady basically saying "hey, I wasn't trying to make a political statement", which he probably wasn't. But for every neutral observer, at the moment, anything connected to Trump is a third rail - whatever someone believes, you're either with 'em or you're against 'em.

Brady has nothing to gain right now, on fahkin' super bowl week, by clarifying that he wasn't trying to make a political statement. But I would be only mildly shocked if he clarified that in the offseason sometime, perhaps through some sympathetic reporter doing a long-form piece with context.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
26,119
The thing is, Brady put the hat in the locker 16 months ago. Nobody was taking Trump seriously in September, 2015. He was a sideshow. Huffington Post had him in the Entertainment section.

Meanwhile, it is now Super Bowl week. Of course he's not going to say anything about it now, of all times. It's ludicrous to think that he will. Nobody (aside from Bennett) has said anything remotely interesting about politics. Suggesting that Brady should be expected to make a national statement about Trump's actions over the past week because he jokingly supported him 16 months ago is absurd. And, frankly, there's nothing...NOTHING...that Brady could say that would silence the critics, anyway. If he came out and said "Donald Trump is a fascist pig, I can't believe I even ever considered him my friend!" then Deadspin would skewer him for being his friend in the first place.

Would I prefer that Brady have said something (say, a month ago) indicating he didn't vote for Trump? Sure. But ultimately, I never look to sports figures for political guidance, and nor should anyone else, so it's just not that big of a deal.
 
Last edited:

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
24,628
Here
Gotta be a decent shot that Mexico cancels the game at this point, right?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
16,291
As long as neither Brady nor Belichick go full-Schilling, I dont care who they vote for. (I get that some might not see any real difference, but I do.)
 

Investor 11

Plobbably the greatest videographer ever
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2006
3,076
San Diego
I wonder when we will get a confirmed date for the game. It looks like they announced the date last year when the game was announced. In the meantime, I've got a bunch of prospective hotel bookings.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,590
Hingham, MA
I wonder if this will have any potential impact on the 2018 schedule. The Pats have Jacksonville as a road opponent, I was thinking that game would end up in London (Pats have played there in 2009 and 2012), but that may not happen now?
 

Investor 11

Plobbably the greatest videographer ever
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2006
3,076
San Diego
I wonder if this will have any potential impact on the 2018 schedule. The Pats have Jacksonville as a road opponent, I was thinking that game would end up in London (Pats have played there in 2009 and 2012), but that may not happen now?
Reasonable question. Do you think they would not a be a London 2018 possibility because the NFL would want some diversity in these games or because the Pats would balk at it? From the Pats standpoint, I'd imagine the chance at neural field game is seen as a big benefit.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,590
Hingham, MA
Reasonable question. Do you think they would not a be a London 2018 possibility because the NFL would want some diversity in these games or because the Pats would balk at it? From the Pats standpoint, I'd imagine the chance at neural field game is seen as a big benefit.
The former. I don't think the Pats would balk.

That being said, there are 5 scheduled international games in 2017, so that makes 10 teams. Haven't checked to see if any teams have played internationally in back to back seasons. Checking now.

Jacksonville plays in London every year.

Miami played there in 2014 and 2015.

Detroit played there in 2014 and 2015.

Raiders in Mexico 2016 and 2017.

I couldn't go in 2012 due to life circumstances, and 2009 wasn't really on the table either, but I think I would be highly likely to go to a Pats game in London if they play there in 2018