Pneumonic

To deflate -2psi would require a dP of 2 so solving math (as per previous equation) would result in outside temp (To) having to be 274.57K (or ~35F). If the balls did in fact measure 2 psi less then I don't see how the weather alone (IIRC the coldest the temp dropped too was 41F) could account for such a psi drop. However, we also had atmospheric drop and a wet leather ball which, would very likely account for added deflation #'s. Don't get ahead of the game, now. We'll take that up next year in grade 8.

We don't know what really happened though. It's ALL speculative! Your explanation as well as my possible scenario along with Belichicks and any other person who has voiced an opinion on this matter.

With all the leaks being bandied about, I could see an endless # of viable scenarios unfolding. Maybe the holdup isn't even Patriots related as you believe?

Last report I saw was that 1 of the balls was around 2 psi under 12.5 while the others were all <1 psi under. In any case, we have no official word from the league at this time so it's all speculative. We are talking about the NFL here. When it comes to investigative work, pretty much all of what they do lacks common sense. As a scientific guy, I can vouch that mother nature could have caused the balls to become under-inflated without any shenanigans by the Patriots.

We don't know what truly happened. All we have is speculation and rumor. All it needed to be was around a 20-23 delta T to see a weather induced psi drop that was suitable to cause the under-inflated ball condition. Here's a quick example. Outdoor temp during game: 51F = 283.71K =Tout Indoor temp when measuring balls: 74F = 296.48K = Tin Assume: Pb (ball psig) = 14.56 psi (atmosphere) Pi = Pb+12.5 (min psi of ball at time of weighing) = 27.06 psi Doing the maths: PV=nRT -> Pi/Tin = Po/Tout 27.06/296.48 = Po/283.71 Po=25.89 dP=1.17 P=12.5-1.17=11.23psi

So long as we are speculating ..... let's suppose that, pre-game, the Colts footballs measured legal at 13.5 PSI while the Pats came in legal at 12.5 PSI. Everyone's happy. The weather conditions during the game were such that both sets of footballs lose ~1 PSI. When re-measured at halftime, the Colts' 13.5 PSI set of balls now measure 12.5 PSI which are still within legal spec. Meanwhile, the Pats once legal 12.5 PSI set of balls now measure 11.5 PSI which makes them 1 PSI out of spec and now illegal. All happens without any tampering done by anyone besides mother nature. This was the pt Belichick was trying to make during his press conference which, not everyone seemingly deciphered.

But, there are still a great number who still don't get it and who wear their dunce hat well. My guess is Florio will say just about anything (on either side of this issue) if doing so increases traffic flow to his site.

BB knew full well that his audience is made-up of 80% of a populace of people who don't have >grade 8 math/science knowledge so why would he bother explaining to them the idea gas formula with emphasis on delta P/T, kelvins, PSIa/g, kPaa, relative humdity, absolute/barometric pressure, dewpoint/condensation, etc? He might well have spoken chinese to them instead. All he wanted to do was explain to the dunces out there that the possibility exists that climatic conditions alone could have caused the pressure drop in the footballs being talked about.

Define significant?

PV=nRT

But, those with suitable knowledge, would not have needed to tune in for Belichick's Bill Nye's segment because they already wou;ld have known that any (supposed) drop in pressure in the Patriots balls could be readily explained via basic physics and required no human tampering.

Considering the IQ of the target demographic, it was far better he went the dumbed down route than try to explain things via the formula PV=nRT.

If I had to guess I presume Belichick "dumbed" things down so that the masses could kinda relate in some basic physics way. In almost a eugenics movement kinda way for those too stupid to grasp things on their own.

So, are we now at the point where Brady/ Belichick/Kraft are the only persons of interest who have not lied and/or given inconsistent/false statements in this deflategate fiasco?

Well, the * key would surely get a fierce workout if said investigation took place.

Why would Kraft apologize for something they didn't do? Blank apologized because his team did cheat; he admitted so. And on this recent cheating revelation by the Falcons ..... where is the uproar? This is admitted cheating and not just a fabricated rumour afterall. Why are all of the media outlets not up in arms and asking for justice?

Boomer Esiason has commented on deflate-gate. http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/02/04/esiason-on-deflategate-coordinated-effort-by-ravens-colts-to-embarrass-tom-brady/ In addition to revealing that only 1 of the balls in the game was 2 PSI below the limit, Boomer also suggests that said ball was likely the one that D Jackson INT and may have been purposely deflated by the Colts in a conspiracy concocted by Ravens Harbaugh and Indy Pagano to embarrass Brady for calling out harbaugh for not knowing the rules in their playioff game. If so, I betcha Harbaugh and Pagano are not sleeping well these nights.

I started watching in the late 70's so can't comment on the older QB's but, from this point on, it's Brady followed by Montana. Brady gets the nod for the following 2 reasons: Montana played with 12 offensive pro bowlers (including the GOAT WR) in his 4 SB wins; Brady played with just 2. Brady's 4 SB wins, 2 SB losses, 2 one and dones in the playoffs is superior to Montana's 4 SB wins, 3 one and dones in the playoffs. Unless you believe that getting eliminated in the 1st round of the playoffs is somehow better than winning your way to the SB, then penalizing Brady for getting to the finish line more times than Montana is ludicrous ..... especially when the reason Montana didn't get to the finish line more often is because of his poor play in those playoff games ..... check out the 1 and done seasons between 85-87 when Montana did his best Peyton Manning imitation and stunk up the joint.

Championship banner raising time for the SB victor. Obviously this can only be done at home.

Plenty has to go right to win even a single Lombardi ... nevermind multiples one. Heck, a missed kick here or there and the Pats could be 1-5 in super bowls. Then again, minus two miraculous and fluky catches by Giants receivers, the Pats are 6-0 in super bowls.

Logic isn't a strong suit for haters it seems. Heck, to some haters, it's better losing and not getting to a SB then it is getting there and losing. I guess it takes all kinds. If you are so certain of your stance on this why the heck did you start the thread?

And let's not limit things to just this last SB win. After being behind or tied in the 4th quarter, Brady delivered in the clutch and had his team in the lead in SB games against: 1. The Rams (W) 2. The Panthers (W) 3. The Giants (L) 4. The Giants (L) And, of course this last Seahawks game.

More like the Pats going 7-1 the last 8 times BB's Pats have faced Ryan's Jets. Rex talks a good game at least.

If the Pats weren't in the division then, yeah, maybe luck prevails and a couple SB wins transpire. But, the Pats (with a great QB and HC) are in the division and need to be overcome for luck to even have a snowballs chance in hell of happening.

Anything is possible I suppose but, in answer to your original question, no team will get to the Pats level of domination without an elite QB ...... or HC.