(01-23-2015 08:29 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  So much hatred/jealousy out there. As a Patriot fan since 1976, I find it hilarious.

The TV ratings for this year's bowl are going to set all-time records.

That just means you patriots fans will watch Belichick and Brady lose their third Super Bowl since 2007 on a much grander scale, in terms of viewership.

(01-23-2015 08:29 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  So much hatred/jealousy out there. As a Patriot fan since 1976, I find it hilarious.

The TV ratings for this year's bowl are going to set all-time records.

Exactly, I don't think the Patriots had anything to do with it, I think it was the refs (aka the NFL) behind giving the Pats an advantage.

(01-23-2015 08:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-23-2015 08:38 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(01-23-2015 06:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-23-2015 04:45 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(01-23-2015 04:19 PM)ken d Wrote:  That may well be true. In fact, I expect this whole thing has more to do with receivers than QB's if performance is the issue. But if it is true, and if the league has a vested interest in enhancing fan interest by establishing rules favoring the offense in general and QBs in particular, then why would they set a minimum limit higher than most QB's want if that limit is going to be equally favorable to both teams? Why not just have a lower limit or a wider range? In fact, why have an upper limit at all if overinflation is generally assumed to hurt performance?

You've spent the entire thread saying there was no advantage for it. Now that you are confronted with the reality that there is one, instead of addressing it, you act as though the Patriots are victims of the mean bad NFL for setting rules that don't benefit them, as opposed to acknowledging the Pats intentionally broke the rules to try to get an advantage. Why it is a rule is irrelevant: the fact that it IS a rule, a well known one, and one the purposely tried to circumvent is the issue.

Your response is like the guy in court who tries to argue a speeding ticket by calling into question why the speed limit was only 35 mph on that road. It does not matter if you ahev a valid reason why the speed limit should be higher, if you were going 45 mph, you are guilty. End of story.

Yes, the rule is stupid but if one team follows it while the other doesn't then it is a competitive advantage. They need to do away with the rule but until they do it needs to be followed. Blatant disregard for the rule is actually proof of an attitude and behavior that is a bigger issue itself than the one particular rule breaking.

That doesn't logically follow. If there turns out to be no actual difference in performance, then no one gains an advantage by not following the rule. That's not to say you shouldn't have consequences for not following a rule. But if the NFL has a rule about how long a players hair can be, and can fine a player for breaking that rule, that doesn't mean the player gained a competitive advantage. He just broke a rule, and an arbitrary one at that.

Personally, I believe the rule makes no sense if you believe that an underinflated ball gives a competitive advantage. If it did, the rule should establish a lower limit for inflation, but not an upper limit. The fact there is an upper limit suggests the league is saying on the one hand that an underinflated ball gives a competitive advantage and simultaneously that an overinflated ball does. Which is it? And when the range around the presumed "sweetspot" where nobody has an advantage is plus or minus 0.5 PSI stretches the limits of credulity. I doubt anybody, even a QB who makes his living gripping and throwing footballs, could detect a difference that small without instruments.

Um, there absolutely is a difference in performance.....THAT IS WHY THE QUARTERBACKS CARE.

Your metaphor fails, I am sorry. The air pressure in the ball actually can make a difference in performance. If one quarterback has his balls at a specific level that he likes the best but that level is out of the rule specified parameters then that quarterback is very likely to have a competitive advantage over the opposing team's quarterback that doesn't have the ball at his favored air pressure due to actually following the rule.

Some folks need to not be so damn blasphemous with their use of the word "logic".

The rule is terrible but as long as it is in place then a team can gain an advantage if they don't follow it while the other team follows it. It is a very simple concept, I know it is not lost upon you.


We agree about the rule. You are right that it should go but until it does, any breaking of the rule should be punishable.

I agree. And the punishment for this outrageous offense should be severe. I'd say that 15 yards and loss of down is about right.

(01-23-2015 10:15 PM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(01-23-2015 08:29 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  So much hatred/jealousy out there. As a Patriot fan since 1976, I find it hilarious.

The TV ratings for this year's bowl are going to set all-time records.

Exactly, I don't think the Patriots had anything to do with it, I think it was the refs (aka the NFL) behind giving the Pats an advantage.

If you are saying that the league wanted the Patriots to win, that's one thing. That's just business. But if you are saying that the league conspired to give the Patriots an advantage that the Colts didn't have in order to make the Colts lose, that's going over the top in my book.

Here's how I read the situation after a solid week of commentary and analysis in the media. I think that the officials probably did what they have been doing all year in every stadium. They probably looked at the game balls before the game started and said "Yep, those look and feel like real footballs, alright. Play ball." I'm guessing that's only a slight exaggeration.

Now, for all we know, Andrew Luck may well have been using underinflated footballs for the Colts' first 17 games. Just like maybe half or more of the QB's in the league. But this game was different. The Ravens, pissed off that they had been beaten by the Pats yet again, thought of a clever way to get back at their arch enemy and its evil leaders, Belicheck and Brady. Tip off the Colts to make sure they were using balls that were inflated within the arbitrary but unenforced standard set by the NFL. Then, if they are losing at the half, narc on the Pats and Brady as a way to get inside their heads so they won't play as well in the second half.

Brilliant plan, since the NFL can hardly acknowledge that this is a rule they haven't really paid any attention to before this (albeit for good reason), and that they themselves were negligent in not discovering this egregious offense (sarcasm intended) before the game started. Of course, the problem was that the plan backfired, and instead of getting into the Pats' heads, the Colts found out they had just poked the bear instead.

Now the NFL has a problem. The talking heads in the media aren't going to pass up an opportunity to feign outrage and moral indignation to drive ratings up. They are even going to dredge up that old chestnut, The Integrity of the Game to tell us how morally superior they are to that evil villain that everyone loves to hate, Belicheck. My guess is they (the NFL) will wag their finger disapprovingly and levy a fine that will be a drop in the bucket to any NFL team or coach and hope this will all go away. Somewhere down the road, they will then change the rule so they don't get put in this position again.

I can't wait.

IMHO, some of the comments in this thread very starkly illustrate the worst of what has emerged in society - namely people with agendas issuing self righteous accusations of guilt, with required punishments, when evidence of culpability has yet to be discovered. Often times, these initial accusations turn out to be demonstrably false - such as the Duke Lacrosse incident, the UVA fraternity gang rape story, etc.

Both BB and TB have denied in the strongest terms any involvement in this. They are not stupid people. IF they had any direct or indirect involvement, it would eventually come out, sooner or later. When it did, the hit to their reputations, their place in the game, and the penalties levied against them, would likely be catastrophic and would far exceed anything applied to them had they just initially copped to involvement in deflating the footballs.

As of this date and time, we know that all but one of the Patriots footballs used in the first half were found to be under inflated. So far, THAT'S ALL WE KNOW! I have heard some offer opinions that the Patriots were set up in all of this. I have heard opinions that the environment may have played a role. As of this time, the facts backing these opinions are just as lacking as any facts tying BB or TB to this.

People may have their suspicions about BB due to Spygate or their overall dislike of him (IMHO, mostly due to the fact that he routinely beats the teams they are fans of), that's OK. Where it crosses the line, IMHO, is when people have already determined a finding of guilt and are now demanding punishment when evidence to support such actions has yet to be established.

Look, I am a Pats fan, but if it is proven that either or both of these guys have lied, then I will certainly support the most severe of sanctions being applied. But I also expect that such an occurrence would only come after proof of such actions has been established. If no such evidence is ever discovered, then no penalties or sanctions are warranted (and people will continue to think about them what they may). If facts surface to exonerate them, then I would hope that there will be a long line of public apologies from the talking heads who have already proclaimed their guilt. (I won't hold my breath on this last point.)

Belichick is giving the middle finger to the NFL and saying, "Prove it".

Good. F the NFL.

(01-25-2015 09:58 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Belichick is giving the middle finger to the NFL and saying, "Prove it".

Good. F the NFL.

You are quite the hypocrite when it comes to situations of an Institution like the NFL or the NCAA having to figure out what they should do in a particular situation.

When it is the Pats, a team that you like, it is **** the NFL. When it is the NCAA overstepping it's mandate with Penn State, the NCAA sucks for not overstepping it's mandate.

By your opinion on the NCAA and Penn State situation, the NFL should stick it hard to the Pats.

It's really not hard to understand. EVERY SPORT has rules around the specifications for the equipment they use. If there weren't, those sports would stop being what they are and turn into something completely different. If that's what you want, then invent a new game.

ive heard alot of chatter from the patriots but did any one actually say "we did not deflate the ballls, ask anyone else to do it, or are aware of anyone that did it on their own direction." ?

(01-25-2015 11:06 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  ive heard alot of chatter from the patriots but did any one actually say "we did not deflate the ballls, ask anyone else to do it, or are aware of anyone that did it on their own direction." ?

Well, the Patriots have said in the strongest of terms that they as an organization completely complied with all the rules and did nothing wrong. That's a pretty strong position. If you have watched BB in his last two press conferences, it seems pretty clear that he has been the most specific and unambiguous of his entire career.

(01-25-2015 10:37 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  It's really not hard to understand. EVERY SPORT has rules around the specifications for the equipment they use. If there weren't, those sports would stop being what they are and turn into something completely different. If that's what you want, then invent a new game.

Of course, this is an accurate statement. Yes, it appears the footballs were under inflated in the first half. What is hardly clear is HOW they got that way. What the Patriots and BB haters won't even consider for a minute is perhaps they lost pressure after being filled indoors and then were moved out in the cold for several hours. If you follow any of the science folks who have started to "weight in" on this question, pretty much all of them have stated that a loss of pressure under these conditions and circumstances would be likely.

There are reports that the Colts footballs were properly inflated, but we have yet to receive any of the specifics here. For example, were Patriots footballs initially inflated to the minimum 12.5 psi? If so, I would think that it would be hardly surprising that after being out in the for several hours, they would lose pressure and be under the minimum. Were all of the footballs under inflated by an exact amount or did it vary? Conversely, were the Colts footballs initially inflated to the higher pressure of 13.5 psi? If so, it would stand to reason that they would be more likely to still be within regulation when measured again. When were they measured again? When they were still out on the field in the elements, or after they were brought back inside? We don't yet know the answers to these questions.

Perhaps the investigators, who, according to reports, are the best in the business, will get to the bottom of this. Perhaps they will be unable to do so. IMHO, until they do so, people who have already proclaimed the Patriots, BB, and TB guilty are haters with an agenda. Again, if they do uncover evidence that proves they lied, I will join in the condemnation and expectation of strong sanctions. If this is not proven, I expect to see a long list of public apologies issued (again, not holding my breath on the latter point).

This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

(01-25-2015 02:22 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

So if there's no advantage to be gained from deflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place? Pats fans can't seem to answer that question. Probably because they know they were caught cheating, then lied about cheating, then lied about lying about cheating.

(01-25-2015 02:28 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 02:22 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

So if there's no advantage to be gained from deflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place? Pats fans can't seem to answer that question. Probably because they know they were caught cheating, then lied about cheating, then lied about lying about cheating.

There is zero proof they "cheated". But if they did, it would not be the first time this happened.

It is against the rules for a defense to shout defensive signals that simulate the QB's signals, to get the offensive line to jump. That is cheating. But it happens all the time.

I think the sports journalist Jim Gray (?) was asked if Bill Belichick should be suspended for one year. He said that would be like executing someone for jaywalking.

The hysteria over this is way beyond reality.

(01-25-2015 02:22 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

There was an amusing article earlier this week on ESPN, in which the former Carolina GM said he was suspicious of the Patriots' tactics when the Pats beat them in the Super Bowl several years ago. It was then pointed out in that article that several of the Panthers on that Super Bowl team, including 3 starting offensive linemen, were busted for steroid use.

(01-25-2015 02:49 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 02:22 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

There was an amusing article earlier this week on ESPN, in which the former Carolina GM said he was suspicious of the Patriots' tactics when the Pats beat them in the Super Bowl several years ago. It was then pointed out in that article that several of the Panthers on that Super Bowl team, including 3 starting offensive linemen, were busted for steroid use.

I read that. He's a bitter old man and he should have kept his mouth shut.

(01-25-2015 02:28 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 02:22 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

So if there's no advantage to be gained from deflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place? Pats fans can't seem to answer that question. Probably because they know they were caught cheating, then lied about cheating, then lied about lying about cheating.

That's a good question. And it's one that fans of every team can't seem to answer. The only answer would seem to be the one that exasperated parents have been using for generations when their children ask why they can't do something: "Just because".

There is also a rule in place about overinflating the footballs. If there is no advantage to be gained from inflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place about that?

William Stephen Belichick speaks the truth. He is the Mona Lisa Vito of Football even if he says he isn't.

(01-25-2015 07:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 02:28 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 02:22 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

So if there's no advantage to be gained from deflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place? Pats fans can't seem to answer that question. Probably because they know they were caught cheating, then lied about cheating, then lied about lying about cheating.

That's a good question. And it's one that fans of every team can't seem to answer. The only answer would seem to be the one that exasperated parents have been using for generations when their children ask why they can't do something: "Just because".

There is also a rule in place about overinflating the footballs. If there is no advantage to be gained from inflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place about that?

With the deflated balls, the Pats out scored the Colts 17-7. With the normal balls, the Pats out scored the Colts 28-0.

Clearly a competitive advantage.

(01-25-2015 08:15 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 07:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 02:28 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 02:22 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  This stuff happens all the time. In the AFC championship game about 10 years ago, the Colts had fake crowd noise pumped through their sound system. I know the Cubs let their infield grass grow to about 6" deep to slow down ground balls when they had elderly and slow infield players.

But since the Patriots are involved (the most successful franchise with a pretty boy QB married to a supermodel) all hell breaks loose.

And I bet the loudest voices right now come from people who cheated on exams all through school and still cheat on their income taxes.

So if there's no advantage to be gained from deflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place? Pats fans can't seem to answer that question. Probably because they know they were caught cheating, then lied about cheating, then lied about lying about cheating.

That's a good question. And it's one that fans of every team can't seem to answer. The only answer would seem to be the one that exasperated parents have been using for generations when their children ask why they can't do something: "Just because".

There is also a rule in place about overinflating the footballs. If there is no advantage to be gained from inflating the footballs, why is there a rule in place about that?

With the deflated balls, the Pats out scored the Colts 17-7. With the normal balls, the Pats out scored the Colts 28-0.

Clearly a competitive advantage.

BenJarvis Green-Ellis, do you remember him? Played for the Pats and was known for NOT fumbling the ball. Went to the Cincinnati Bengals and gets a serious case of fumblitis. At the risk of getting a non-answer, do you care to speculate as to WHY that happened?