Tom Brady | Page 6 | Syracusefan.com

Tom Brady

11 of the 12 *Pats footballs dropped two pounds each. 0 of the 12 Colts footballs dropped in any measure.

Just another incredible "coincidence".

Meanwhile...

http://nypost.com/2015/01/25/bill-nye-torches-belichick-explanation-didnt-make-any-sense/


So someone did a controlled study based on field conditions, and we discount t because "bill Nye the Science Guy" says it couldn't happen and yells go Seahawks at the end. I also have not seen any statement regarding the Colts balls not dropping any(for that matter i don't know that they were re tested after the first time with the officals. I will need to see that to jump onto your thought process.. please provide it if you have seen it.
 
So someone did a controlled study based on field conditions, and we discount t because "bill Nye the Science Guy" says it couldn't happen and yells go Seahawks at the end. I also have not seen any statement regarding the Colts balls not dropping any(for that matter i don't know that they were re tested after the first time with the officals. I will need to see that to jump onto your thought process.. please provide it if you have seen it.
If the Colts balls were deflated then the NFL would say so so that this story could go away. Use some common freakin' sense.
 
If the Colts balls were deflated then the NFL would say so so that this story could go away. Use some common freakin' sense.

At no point did the NFL or anyone for that matter indicate that the Colts balls were tested after the initial test. You are making an assumption that their balls withstood the weather conditions and there was no change to the PSI. Show me the proof that their balls maintained the pre game PSI levels(or anything within .3PSI) and i will take my ball and go home.
 
This is hysterical, edge of your seat stuff

I do think what Robert Kraft said is completely irresponsible and out of touch with what's going on out there.

The truth is Robert, your franchise was once caught and convicted of breaking NFL rules. Following that, people are going to be suspicious, wouldn't you? If you want to be upset with the NFL, and notice he's speaking to Wells the attorney and not Goodell, you know, the man in charge, then be upset with them for how they handled that first transgression (burning the tapes, etc). That has left A LOT of concern out there that what the Patriots were doing was worse than we all heard about. Be mad at how they handled that issue.

I suspect we'll never know how 11/12 footballs became under-inflated. Could be as simple as BB is more diabolical than we realize and he has the balls inflated in 75 degree, pressurized rooms so when they're brought outside they shrink...but I don't think Kraft's defiant speech will do anything to help his buddy Goodell. Thought that was pretty tone-deaf.

As an aside, the NFL has a wide distribution about how long their investigations take, and they don't always conform to reality...9 months for Ray Rice (fine), 4 days for Spygate, and now up to 3-4 weeks for DeflateGate? It's almost as though the independent investigator is there to get this thing through the Super Bowl and reassess later. What possibly could be taking so long? Why not be talking to Brady?

I don't believe (once again) they are doing themselves any favors (both Kraft & Goodell) relative to a suspicious public, and that's not good for them in my opinion
 
I would be curious to see relevant data regarding how many fumbles are lost on run plays vs. pass plays. After that I would look to see if New England shift in offensive philosophy in 2007 to a more pass heavy environment had an impact. I could be 100 percent wrong but it may have an impact. I have a hard time believing you can attribute those results to a pound or two in PSI specifically if we are to believe the difference is do drastic, how did it take 8 years to notice the issue.

Why wouldn't it take that long? One or two seasons isn't statistically significant wrt fumbles; which is something you'd be happy to point out I'm sure if that's what the analysis was based on.
 
Why wouldn't it take that long? One or two seasons isn't statistically significant wrt fumbles; which is something you'd be happy to point out I'm sure if that's what the analysis was based on.

I meant how did it take 8 years to notice the balls had less pressure if this has been the practice for that long as is suggested by the study. It also fails to mention that for a period of time their feature back was Benjarvis Green Ellis. A man who had 862 carries in college without a signal instance of fumbling the ball. Point is it is one view on data that fails to include some other factors.
 
I meant how did it take 8 years to notice the balls had less pressure if this has been the practice for that long as is suggested by the study. It also fails to mention that for a period of time their feature back was Benjarvis Green Ellis. A man who had 862 carries in college without a signal instance of fumbling the ball. Point is it is one view on data that fails to include some other factors.

Meh, LawFirm was never a bell cow. And he of course fumbled multiple times as soon as he got to Cincy.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
170,325
Messages
4,885,102
Members
5,991
Latest member
CStalks14

Online statistics

Members online
162
Guests online
868
Total visitors
1,030


...
Top Bottom