reddogblitz Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) I am now going to talk purely from a engineering standpoint. - The pressure in a ball will drop when the temperature drops and unless you are dealing with non-ideal fluids, the change should follow the ideal gas law. Pressure and temperature are dire Even though it was January in Boston, the temp was 50 degrees. Will footballs lose pressure at that temp? If so, Seattle plays a lot of games with weather related pressure drops too. Edited May 11, 2015 by reddogblitz
NoSaint Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Yup. If Payton can get suspended because he should have known what was going on in his lockerroom, Belicheat should be as well.where that may fall apart here is that the nfl ws convinced the saints were discussing this openly with half (or more) of the team and coaching staff during meetings. much harder to claim head in the sand when the nfl decides thats the case, and i dont think they have here.
Luxy312 Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Yup. If Payton can get suspended because he should have known what was going on in his lockerroom, Belicheat should be as well. I completely forgot about Payton. Plausible deniability had no bearing in that situation. Excellent reminder!
YoloinOhio Posted May 11, 2015 Author Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) Excellent article and Goodell hits the proverbial nail on the head. It doesn't matter whether it gave the Patriots a competitive advantage or not. The NFL has rules and those rules were broken. I would not be terribly shocked if hoodie is gone for 8 games in additional to Brady being gone for 2 or possibly 4. similarly - there was not a competitive advantage gained by ray farmers texts. Some would say NFL execs should be able to text coaches during games due to all of the technology used to communicate during games as it is. However, he violated a rule and was held accountable. Some feel players should be allowed to smoke pot, especially if they reside in a state where it is legal. Smoking pot doesn't provide a competitive advantage. However, the NFL rule says they can't, and they are held accountable if they do. Edited May 11, 2015 by YoloinOhio
dave mcbride Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) This guy is the Jerry Sullivan of Boston. He's been despised for ages. Shaughessy is HORRIBLE. He makes Jerry look like a prince. That said, this is a reasonable piece. Edited May 11, 2015 by dave mcbride
Mike in Horseheads Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) Tim Cowlishaw @TimCowlishaw 15s15 seconds ago Dallas, TX OK, is that enough of a penalty for you -- 4 games for Brady, 1st and 4th round picks, $1 million? I think so. Best part of this is if they tank they lost their 1st !! Edited May 11, 2015 by Mike in Horseheads
dave mcbride Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I completely forgot about Payton. Plausible deniability had no bearing in that situation. Excellent reminder! What happened in New Orleans was far, far, far more egregious than deflategate. There's really no comparison.
Fan in Chicago Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Read the report. The outside consulting firm of numerous science experts in the specific field, as well as a renown Columbia professor hired to investigate these very things spend dozens and dozens of pages explaining these things in EXHAUSTIVE detail, and doing experiments and models and came to the conclusion independently that humans fukked with the balls. Where exactly did I dispute the assertion that the deflated balls were an intentional act ?
Kelly the Dog Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Where exactly did I dispute the assertion that the deflated balls were an intentional act ? You didn't. But you were mentioning direct laws of physics, and the needle, etc. as possible reasons why there is some discrepancy in what were the causes, and reason to not just jump to conclusions, or at least are troubling to you. And i said read the report. They specifically addressed everything you brought up ad nauseum with pages and pages and pages of experiments, facts, models, and explanations why none of those exact things you mentioned could have affected it. Which made the scientists and the professor conclude what they did.
Fan in Chicago Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 You didn't. But you were mentioning direct laws of physics, and the needle, etc. as possible reasons why there is some discrepancy in what were the causes, and reason to not just jump to conclusions, or at least are troubling to you. And i said read the report. They specifically addressed everything you brought up ad nauseum with pages and pages and pages of experiments, facts, models, and explanations why none of those exact things you mentioned could have affected it. Which made the scientists and the professor conclude what they did. I was responding to the Florio article. And by me specifically talking about the crooked needle, I was supporting the theory that the difference in pressure could not be attributed to the (mis) shape of the needle. Florio seems fascinated by that aspect as if to imply that the needle's deformity somehow explains the difference in pressure measurement. I was making the point that it could not. Heck, I am not explaining this again when my original post was pretty clear IMO.
NoSaint Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I was responding to the Florio article. And by me specifically talking about the crooked needle, I was supporting the theory that the difference in pressure could not be attributed to the (mis) shape of the needle. Florio seems fascinated by that aspect as if to imply that the needle's deformity somehow explains the difference in pressure measurement. I was making the point that it could not. Heck, I am not explaining this again when my original post was pretty clear IMO. It made sense to me, if any consolation
DC Tom Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I was responding to the Florio article. And by me specifically talking about the crooked needle, I was supporting the theory that the difference in pressure could not be attributed to the (mis) shape of the needle. Florio seems fascinated by that aspect as if to imply that the needle's deformity somehow explains the difference in pressure measurement. I was making the point that it could not. Heck, I am not explaining this again when my original post was pretty clear IMO. Why the hell are you both arguing? You both agree. Bottom line: a bent needle influences dynamic pressure (i.e. flow), but not static. Refs were measuring static pressure. The needle could have been pretzel-shaped and it wouldn't have made a difference.
It's in My Blood Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) Why is it necessary to merge a thread with an old one when the information pertaining to the topic has widespread implications throughout the NFL? One thread should be designated to the report. The other should be designated to the punishments. This isn't about a player getting caught smoking pot. It's about the reigning superbowl MVP and the NFL golden boy of the last 15 years, cheating, lying,and bribing Pats* employees. Edited May 12, 2015 by It's in My Blood
Kelly the Dog Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I was responding to the Florio article. And by me specifically talking about the crooked needle, I was supporting the theory that the difference in pressure could not be attributed to the (mis) shape of the needle. Florio seems fascinated by that aspect as if to imply that the needle's deformity somehow explains the difference in pressure measurement. I was making the point that it could not. Heck, I am not explaining this again when my original post was pretty clear IMO. I understand now. And my bad if there was some confusion. I had no idea what your stance was on this or anything else. I didn't read or remember whether you thought it was right or wrong. I was just taking the post specifically and said the report addressed all of that stuff in great detail. And when you mentioned the Ideal Gas Law, which became a sore spot for me because of the way Florio was using it, I just chimed in and said this is already debunked.
Fan in Chicago Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 It made sense to me, if any consolation Thanx. Why the hell are you both arguing? You both agree. Bottom line: a bent needle influences dynamic pressure (i.e. flow), but not static. Refs were measuring static pressure. The needle could have been pretzel-shaped and it wouldn't have made a difference. Indeed. I was kinda taking the science approach to say a few things including the one you mentioned. I think there were multiple screw ups in this. My assertion immediately after this first broke and even now, is that Brady* and Co. continuously flirt with the fringes of the rules because they know that the worst that can happen is far less than the Lombardi trophy I understand now. And my bad if there was some confusion. I had no idea what your stance was on this or anything else. I didn't read or remember whether you thought it was right or wrong. I was just taking the post specifically and said the report addressed all of that stuff in great detail. And when you mentioned the Ideal Gas Law, which became a sore spot for me because of the way Florio was using it, I just chimed in and said this is already debunked. Peace, Kelly. I got testy when I saw my precious half hour of writing seemingly wasted. You know that half hour I would have rather spent creeping on random Facebook profiles. That half hour.
Recommended Posts