#DeflateGate (Court of Appeals Reinstates Suspension)

[celticsclay]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

Wouldn't a better statistic be receptions vs. targets?
The whole argument is that the ball is inflated (Rodgers) or deflated (Brady) because of QB preference for throwing the ball. This is the first I've seen about there being some preference on the part of the running back....

Following that line of thought, shouldn't Green Bay and Rogers in particular lead the league in fumbling since whatever year we can put it to make it look like they do?

No no guys it is great research. Someone wrote it and it has numbers. Fool proof

[kraidstar]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

Wouldn't a better statistic be receptions vs. targets?
The whole argument is that the ball is inflated (Rodgers) or deflated (Brady) because of QB preference for throwing the ball. This is the first I've seen about there being some preference on the part of the running back....

Following that line of thought, shouldn't Green Bay and Rogers in particular lead the league in fumbling since whatever year we can put it to make it look like they do?

No no guys it is great research. Someone wrote it and it has numbers. Fool proof

+1
and if you don't protect the ball on this team you don't play. not hard to understand, it's a visible strategy you can see in their style of play. a lot of teams, like, say, the san diego chargers take big risks trying to get extra yards and risk fumbles. this is one of the reasons why the chargers look like chokers and the pats look so clutch. their style prohibits them from making risky, game-killing plays.
brady also has tons of touches but doesn't run much, takes few sacks, and knows exactly when to get rid of the football. he could get more yards if he wanted to, but he knows how valuable it is to protect the ball.
 

[fairweatherfan]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

Wouldn't a better statistic be receptions vs. targets?
The whole argument is that the ball is inflated (Rodgers) or deflated (Brady) because of QB preference for throwing the ball. This is the first I've seen about there being some preference on the part of the running back....

Nah, too much noise in receiver ability/quality of throw etc.  There's some noise involved with different players having different fumble tendencies - a secondary analysis tracking the players over time instead of just the team would've helped a lot to argue against this - but receptions have a lot more volatility since it's much harder to catch a ball then just hold on to it.  It's a much more equal baseline for comparison, though like everything else it's imperfect.

My bigger beef is they initially just looked at fumbles lost, and the numbers don't appear as strong when you look at overall fumbles, though there's still a gap there when compared to other non-dome teams.

EDIT: Some folks with some stats knowledge in the comments are bringing up some criticisms as well.

[BballTim]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

Wouldn't a better statistic be receptions vs. targets?
The whole argument is that the ball is inflated (Rodgers) or deflated (Brady) because of QB preference for throwing the ball. This is the first I've seen about there being some preference on the part of the running back....

  Less inflated balls would be easier to get a good grip on, leading to more receptions and fewer fumbles.

[BitterJim]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

Wait, a coach that has on multiple occasions sat his best running back (Ridley) due to fumbles and that is known to despise turnovers has a team that fumbles less than other teams?  No way!

[D.o.s.]

This is why I'd now question even the facts when they do come out.  If the NFL came right out and said, hey ball #1 was inflated to X at halftime, ball #2 was Y, and so on and so on for all the balls on both the Colts and Patriots I'd have had no choice but to believe them.  The Ref should have come out right away and said, "hey I inflated or deflated each ball to X, I used this gauge, the balls weren't noticeably warm or cold for either team," but now it seems like he is in the witness protection program.  I don't trust anything the NFL says from here on out.  This has been horribly mismanaged.  Did the NFL let the Patriots play with under inflated footballs for the first half of the AFC Championship game?  If they did, it can't be a big deal or the NFL has literally no credibility.  If it isn't a big deal... what the heck is going on with a special investigator and a months long investigation planned.

What? we know what happened in regards to the disccovery of the ball. I've already quoted this once:

According to a person familiar with the background of the matter, the Colts first noticed something unusual after an interception by Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson in the second quarter. Jackson gave the ball to a member of the Colts' equipment staff, who noticed the ball seemed underinflated and then notified coach Chuck Pagano.

General manager Ryan Grigson was notified in the press box, and he contacted Mike Kensil, NFL director of football operations. Kensil then told the on-field officials at halftime, when the Patriots led 17-7.

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/super-bowl/nfl-opens-patriots-deflated-football-probe-after-afc-championship-win-1.9821346

This has been refuted... Jackson, the colts player, denied it himself.

Wrong. Jackson said that he didn't feel the ball was deflated, which is a very different thing. Read it again:

Jackson gave the ball to a member of the Colts' equipment staff, who noticed the ball seemed underinflated and then notified coach Chuck Pagano.

The fact that Jackson was trying to keep the ball as a souvenir is irrelevant, because the equipment staff manager was the one who noticed it was soft.

[footey]

Sure, people do it all the time. There are also plenty of people who actually have been innocent.  Now, I have no idea how this thing will settle when everything is said & done but to have the head coach have two press conferences about it, the starting QB have one, and now the owner?  All denying any guilt?  If they are actually guilty, this is one helluva leap of faith to be taking. 

Yeah, it would be ballsy.  It could be all are telling the truth, or one or more is lying (or, in Kraft's case, perhaps telling the truth as he knows it). 

I think it's impossible to tell from press conferences.  People lie all the time, regardless of the risk.  Let's say Belichek did it:  what are his options?  Stay silent, and everybody assumes guilt.  Admit it, and his legacy is trashed.  Or lie, and hope the league buys into it.  Of course, he'd say the same thing if he was innocent, as well.  It's just so hard to tell.

I don't think we can apply logic in terms of "why lie, when it would really suck if he got caught", though.  The most striking example to me was Bill Clinton, who lied directly and unequivocally to the American people (as well as under oath), despite huge potential consequences.

The Pats have a track record for cheating, no more than most other teams in the NFL, I would argue.  They do not have a track record for lying.  Don't confuse the two.

[loco_91]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

Wait, a coach that has on multiple occasions sat his best running back (Ridley) due to fumbles and that is known to despise turnovers has a team that fumbles less than other teams?  No way!

Agreed, that article is really dumb. What it does show is that the Pats are good at preventing fumbles. What it doesn't show, even remotely a little bit, is that the cause is deflated footballs. In particular:
-Is there any evidence that deflated balls cause less fumbles?
-Is there no other explanation (for example, coaches' priorities) for the disparity?

[footey]

I am incredulous that the NFL has chosen to drag this as much as they have. If they have (1) video of the balls taken from the officials' locker room to the field with a loo stopover, (2) the feed from 47 or so cameras on the field during the game, and (3) a plausible alternative scenario that can easily be replicated, they should be close to done.

The bottom line is that it appears that the balls can pretty much be tracked from inspection to the game. Will the NFL will be trying to convince us that one dude was able to doctor 12 footballs in 90 seconds in a bathroom (for the record, that's 7.5 secs per ball, not accounting for taking them out of the zipper bag and putting them back in)?!

Good thing he didn't take a dump.

[footey]

If I was Kraft, I'd be peeved too.  That's multiple leaks that make his organization look bad.  Both, seemingly, coming from the NFL. 

That press conference certainly sounded like he was going all in that the Pats are innocent of any wrongdoing.  Awfully ballsy thing to do if you're lying.

Yeah, but people do it all the time (see Lance Armstrong, Roger Clemens, etc.).  Kraft didn't come off credible at all.  In fact no one has come off as credible for the Patriots.  (For the record, I am not a Patriots, Colts, or Seahawks fan so I could really care less about this from that perspective).

Sure, people do it all the time. There are also plenty of people who actually have been innocent.  Now, I have no idea how this thing will settle when everything is said & done but to have the head coach have two press conferences about it, the starting QB have one, and now the owner?  All denying any guilt?  If they are actually guilty, this is one helluva leap of faith to be taking. 

However, you are an admitted Ravens fan, right?  Might be a little skewed, don't you you think?

EDIT:  And, full disclosure, I do root for the Pats.  Like to think I'm more level headed than a lot of Pats fans out there right now but I do root for them.

I am a Ravens fan, but again I don't think that has much to do with this situation.

I just don't find it as credible.  I mean if the Colts defensive player on an interception could immediately tell something was wrong with the ball, how the hell did none of the Patriots know this. 

Brady looks especially bad.  At one point saying he can't tell the difference, but at another saying he likes a softer ball.  Well which is it?

Sorry, I lost you at "I am a Ravens fan..."

[celticsclay]

I am incredulous that the NFL has chosen to drag this as much as they have. If they have (1) video of the balls taken from the officials' locker room to the field with a loo stopover, (2) the feed from 47 or so cameras on the field during the game, and (3) a plausible alternative scenario that can easily be replicated, they should be close to done.

The bottom line is that it appears that the balls can pretty much be tracked from inspection to the game. Will the NFL will be trying to convince us that one dude was able to doctor 12 footballs in 90 seconds in a bathroom (for the record, that's 7.5 secs per ball, not accounting for taking them out of the zipper bag and putting them back in)?!

Good thing he didn't take a dump.

Yea if he was trying to take a dump while delflating balls all in 90 seconds that would have gotten really messy.

[footey]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

This article is not interesting. It is an insult to anyone (apparently not you) who has any idea how hard the Pats work at minimizing fumbles.  Not just in practices.  Punishing players (e.g. Ridley) who dare to lose possession just once. 

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

I guess the writer of this article hasn't seen Stephen Ridley play.

[celticsclay]

Very interesting article that certainly doesn't paint the Patriots in a very good light.

Makes it look like this isn't just an issue for this season.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

This article is not interesting. It is an insult to anyone (apparently not you) who has any idea how hard the Pats work at minimizing fumbles.  Not just in practices.  Punishing players (e.g. Ridley) who dare to lose possession just once.

yea the comments on that article are more interesting then the article itself.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

If I was Kraft, I'd be peeved too.  That's multiple leaks that make his organization look bad.  Both, seemingly, coming from the NFL. 

That press conference certainly sounded like he was going all in that the Pats are innocent of any wrongdoing.  Awfully ballsy thing to do if you're lying.

Yeah, but people do it all the time (see Lance Armstrong, Roger Clemens, etc.).  Kraft didn't come off credible at all.  In fact no one has come off as credible for the Patriots.  (For the record, I am not a Patriots, Colts, or Seahawks fan so I could really care less about this from that perspective).

lance, roger, bonds etc were all taking major PEDs and never would have never been harassed for something as minor as this. some of those drugs lance was taking that increase blood oxygen levels are actually life-threatening, your body can overheat, causing death. bonds and clemens were so jacked up on steroids that their body types changed.
the ball pressure thing is more equivalent to if bonds had used illegal batting gloves or lance wore an illegal knee brace or something stupid like that. the league would tell them to stop doing it, the media would ignore it, and then it would be forgotten.
if this is the worst thing the patriots have (possibly) done, then that's pretty tame, the vikings and panthers were caught illegally tampering with balls this year and got no penalty, and the story didn't even really make the news.

This is a point I've brought up a couple times, and I don't know why the Patriots haven't brought it up. Brady, Belichick, Kraft, and every other Patriots defender should be demanding to know how the Vikings AND the Panthers could break the rules ON NATIONAL TV and not get punished, or investigated, or publicly excoriated. This ball-heating incident was such a nonevent, in fact, that I didn't hear about it until AFTER the Patriots kerfuffle. Ridiculous.