dave mcbride Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 IMO It's going to be a blowout Superbowl win for the Seahawks whether it's Brady or Garropalo playing QB for the Patriots. This is the biggest distraction ever in a Superbowl and the Pats are a one man team going against a very nasty defense on a team which happens to be defending champions who are getting no publicity at all in this Superbowl. Think Carroll won't use that as a motivational tool? He's going to tell them that Brady has stolen endorsement money from you and your family because of this. Stolen post-football opportunities from them. As far as Gronk goes, the Seahawks know how to bait you in the secondary and they will be able to fool Brady into thinking he's open and grab a couple of interceptions. I initially thought this, but there is one counterexample referred to earlier in this thread - the 1980 Raiders, who were at war with the league over the pending move and embroiled in a serious tete-a-tete in the short window before the SB. It was basically Al D and his outlaw gang against the world -- or at least that's what he got his team to believe. They blew out the Eagles, 27-10, and it wasn't as close as the score. I could see that happening here.
DC Tom Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Thats a really good point I have note heard brought up. Probably because it's so bloody obvious.
dave mcbride Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 You are lawyering very well. No, he doesn't say they used a gauge but he is very certain that the balls were "at the prescribed pressure level ...". How else to get that judgment without a gauge? To think that they moved to replace those balls without a gauge defies logic. You said earlier that you would be surprised if they actually had a gauge, and now presented with evidence that they had one, you grasp at the possibility that they had it but didn't use it? Honestly, I can see no reason to question the conclusion that they cheated. And how is this shilling for the league when we don't know what judgment or punishment the league is going to announce? kj This Boston Globe piece supports your argument: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/23/patriots-footballs-were-inspected-approved-before-afc-title-game/FxnyFsD2KjSEWETZKLTqeL/story.html "The Patriots may or may not have deliberately taken air out of their footballs Sunday night against the Colts. But their footballs definitely went through the proper pregame protocol and passed inspection. According to an NFL source with direct knowledge of the situation, referee Walt Anderson inspected all 24 of the Patriots’ footballs with a pressure gauge supplied by the league, as well as all 24 footballs from the Colts. All 48 footballs were found to be within the allowable range of 12.5-13.5 pounds per square inch."
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) Probably because it's so bloody obvious. Occam's Razor the simplest answer is often correct This Boston Globe piece supports your argument: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/23/patriots-footballs-were-inspected-approved-before-afc-title-game/FxnyFsD2KjSEWETZKLTqeL/story.html "The Patriots may or may not have deliberately taken air out of their footballs Sunday night against the Colts. But their footballs definitely went through the proper pregame protocol and passed inspection. According to an NFL source with direct knowledge of the situation, referee Walt Anderson inspected all 24 of the Patriots’ footballs with a pressure gauge supplied by the league, as well as all 24 footballs from the Colts. All 48 footballs were found to be within the allowable range of 12.5-13.5 pounds per square inch." Blame them Edited January 23, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever
l< j Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 I never said that they didn't cheat. I'm just pointing out that there's another entity in full CYA mode - the league. Presumably the Pats have been using this type of ball for years. It was never noticed until now? As for what I meant by shilling: the league would look bad if it came out that they were careless about this issue and consistently did a half-assed job (if any job at all) of measuring with a gauge. My point was that I'm suspicious that they treat the issue with any seriousness and hence don't actually measure them with any precision even if the gauge is available. They will do that now, of course. I admit to some bias about King. He was one of the many well-connected NFL reporters/columnists who refused to cover the concussion crisis until Alan Schwartz finally reported on it for the Times. The issue was known for a while before Schwartz finally broke it in a big way, and the people involved said that Schwartz (a baseball writer) was the first to not turn down writing about it for fear of losing his connections with the league, which desperately wanted to sweep it under the rug. Just remember who is buttering King's bread when you read his stuff. He's a league guy through and through. That's why he has the connections and clout that he has. I'm too snippy today. Apologize to you for that. Second one today King isn't above suspicion, for sure, but I always felt he was very quick to accept the league's handling of Spygate and to ignore those transgressions when talking about the Pats. So I see his writing here as a departure from what I would have expected. And I am not quite seeing how his unambiguous opinion that they cheated is helping the league here. kj
BUFFALOKIE Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 I wanna know what Kiko Alonso thinks about Brady's balls. Would he prefer them breaded or sauteed? What is the Campbells recipe for flat balls and rice? FOOTBAAAALS!!!!!!NOM NOM NOM NOM!!!!
Mr. WEO Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 IMO It's going to be a blowout Superbowl win for the Seahawks whether it's Brady or Garropalo playing QB for the Patriots. This is the biggest distraction ever in a Superbowl and the Pats are a one man team going against a very nasty defense on a team which happens to be defending champions who are getting no publicity at all in this Superbowl. Think Carroll won't use that as a motivational tool? He's going to tell them that Brady has stolen endorsement money from you and your family because of this. Stolen post-football opportunities from them. As far as Gronk goes, the Seahawks know how to bait you in the secondary and they will be able to fool Brady into thinking he's open and grab a couple of interceptions. A one man team? The Seahawks are getting no publicity at all? Is your avatar a picture of your planet?
K D Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 I think I saw something on tv about the patriots deflating their balls or something. Has anyone heard anything about this? I wish they would talk about it more so I could get some more details :-X
DC Tom Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Occam's Razor the simplest answer is often correct Actually, Occam's Razor is "given two equalivent theories, the simpler is more correct." Same thing in this case, though. Personally, I prefer Occam's Bludgeon: "Given two equivalent theories, I'm right."
tombstone56 Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 I kinda found it interesting that the one ball they found aok was the one t he kicker was using ,the rumor was it was over inflatted , why no mention on espn,
papazoid Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 NFL issues statement on Deflategate investigation http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/23/nfl-issues-statement-on-deflategate-investigation/
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 Actually, Occam's Razor is "given two equalivent theories, the simpler is more correct." Same thing in this case, though. Personally, I prefer Occam's Bludgeon: "Given two equivalent theories, I'm right." ROTFLMAO I kinda found it interesting that the one ball they found aok was the one t he kicker was using ,the rumor was it was over inflatted , why no mention on espn, no that is totally wrong. the Kicking ball is separate and I'd imagine that there were multiple K balls
BuffaloHokie13 Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 I think I saw someone mention this up thread, but is there any chance the balls were filled with hot air (120+) prior to inspection so they would fall to substantially lower temps naturally without ball boys sneaking around letting air out? It might explain the lack of footage
1billsfan Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) I initially thought this, but there is one counterexample referred to earlier in this thread - the 1980 Raiders, who were at war with the league over the pending move and embroiled in a serious tete-a-tete in the short window before the SB. It was basically Al D and his outlaw gang against the world -- or at least that's what he got his team to believe. They blew out the Eagles, 27-10, and it wasn't as close as the score. I could see that happening here. It was a much different league back then in terms of mass media exposure. IMO the tsunami of negative media coverage (even their local media and fans are turning on them) will be too overwhelming for a Pats team with only two players (?) who have Superbowl rings. Plus the Eagles had never won a Superbowl before and the Seahawks are reigning champs. We shall see. Edited January 23, 2015 by 1billsfan
DC Tom Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 I think I saw someone mention this up thread, but is there any chance the balls were filled with hot air (120+) prior to inspection so they would fall to substantially lower temps naturally without ball boys sneaking around letting air out? It might explain the lack of footage I mentioned it. The air would have to be about 130-140. It wouldn't be easy, but it is possible. Of course, the lack of footage is also explained by: who the hell films the ball boy? NFL issues statement on Deflategate investigation http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/23/nfl-issues-statement-on-deflategate-investigation/ What I like most about this is how it highlights the incredible stupidity of throwing Tom Brady in front of a pack of wolves yesterday.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 I mentioned it. The air would have to be about 130-140. It wouldn't be easy, but it is possible. Of course, the lack of footage is also explained by: who the hell films the ball boy? What I like most about this is how it highlights the incredible stupidity of throwing Tom Brady in front of a pack of wolves yesterday. The timing of that coming right after they restructured his contract to make him easier to cut is really interesting to me, but that's for another topic I suppose
Thunderstealer Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 The chief referee's should now have an air gauge in pocket for measuring during TV timeouts.
1billsfan Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 The chief referee's should now have an air gauge in pocket for measuring during TV timeouts. I highly doubt that footballs will be handled by team representatives ever again on game days.
dave mcbride Posted January 23, 2015 Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) It was a much different league back then in terms of mass media exposure. IMO the tsunami of negative media coverage (even their local media and fans are turning on them) will be too overwhelming for a Pats team with only two players (?) who have Superbowl rings. Plus the Eagles had never won a Superbowl before and the Seahawks are reigning champs. We shall see. I'm predicting the Seahawks to win 31-13. Prior to the controversy, I was predicting Seattle winning 26-17. I also think that the Pats will be getting absolutely zero favors from the refs. I expect Seattle's DBs to have free rein to hold throughout the game. Edited January 23, 2015 by dave mcbride
Recommended Posts