- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Breaking news: Non-referee entered refs locker room and took game balls
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:10 pm to KosmoCramer
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:10 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:Solid reputable. Dont argue the information
Did New England decide to stop underinflating balls in 2013?
1
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:10 pm to lsupride87
They were 24th in the league in 2013.
Did they stop underinflating the balls?
Did they stop underinflating the balls?
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:11 pm to Oyster
quote:Fired, I doubt it. More like paid to take the blame.
The end result of this is some poor equipment manager will get fired for taking the initiative on him self to bleed the balls.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:13 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:So focus on one year and not the 7 year average and data since the rule change. Solid
They were 24th in the league in 2013.
Did they stop underinflating the balls?
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:13 pm to lsupride87
The average is flawed and has been refuted multiple times on here.
They are above average, but not by a huge margin.
They are above average, but not by a huge margin.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:15 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:How so?
The average is flawed and has been refuted multiple times on here.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:16 pm to lsupride87
From a post in the other thread on this very same "research" and the very same link:
"The Patriots have fumbled once every 67 offensive plays (once per game) since the beginning of the 2007 season, not once every 187 plays.
NFL stats per NFL.com and Pro football Reference websites:
Offensive Plays by New England:
2007 - 1080
2008 - 1126
2009 - 1189
2010 - 1078
2011 - 1002
2012 - 1072
2013 - 1094
2014 - 1053
Total offensive plays 2007 through 2014 seasons = 8694
Fumbles by New England per season:
2007 - 14
2008 - 17
2009 - 17
2010 - 9
2011 - 15
2012 - 14
2013 - 27
2014 - 16
Total fumbles 2007-2014 seasons = 129
8694 offensive plays divided by 129 fumbles = 1 every 67.39 offensive plays
By comparison, another bad-weather, winning team, 2007-2014 Green Bay Packers averaged 5 fumbles more per season than the Patriots did over that 8 year span. FIVE per season. One additional fumble for every 3+ games.
LINK
LINK
LINK /
LINK /
In addition, your PJMEDIA guy repeatedly quoted 2007 as the beginning year for studies numbers, while the Sharp Football website clearly states they only went back to the year 2010. The significance of this 3-year variance is that PJMEDIA attempted to link it with 2007 because both "Spygate" and the perfect 16-0 regular season took place in 2007, creating a scenario that the Patriots started "cheating" on ball pressure immediately after being caught doing the sideline filming. The numbers used by PJMEDIA in your link are for 5 years not 8 years as they claim, and they are incorrect anyway
Some of you can read just about anything on the internet and run with it, when you can just as easily verify the numbers for yourself. But then, it sounds so much more sinister to claim they fumbled once every 187 offensive plays than once every 67 offensive plays."
LINK
"The Patriots have fumbled once every 67 offensive plays (once per game) since the beginning of the 2007 season, not once every 187 plays.
NFL stats per NFL.com and Pro football Reference websites:
Offensive Plays by New England:
2007 - 1080
2008 - 1126
2009 - 1189
2010 - 1078
2011 - 1002
2012 - 1072
2013 - 1094
2014 - 1053
Total offensive plays 2007 through 2014 seasons = 8694
Fumbles by New England per season:
2007 - 14
2008 - 17
2009 - 17
2010 - 9
2011 - 15
2012 - 14
2013 - 27
2014 - 16
Total fumbles 2007-2014 seasons = 129
8694 offensive plays divided by 129 fumbles = 1 every 67.39 offensive plays
By comparison, another bad-weather, winning team, 2007-2014 Green Bay Packers averaged 5 fumbles more per season than the Patriots did over that 8 year span. FIVE per season. One additional fumble for every 3+ games.
LINK
LINK
LINK /
LINK /
In addition, your PJMEDIA guy repeatedly quoted 2007 as the beginning year for studies numbers, while the Sharp Football website clearly states they only went back to the year 2010. The significance of this 3-year variance is that PJMEDIA attempted to link it with 2007 because both "Spygate" and the perfect 16-0 regular season took place in 2007, creating a scenario that the Patriots started "cheating" on ball pressure immediately after being caught doing the sideline filming. The numbers used by PJMEDIA in your link are for 5 years not 8 years as they claim, and they are incorrect anyway
Some of you can read just about anything on the internet and run with it, when you can just as easily verify the numbers for yourself. But then, it sounds so much more sinister to claim they fumbled once every 187 offensive plays than once every 67 offensive plays."
LINK
This post was edited on 1/27/15 at 2:17 pm
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:19 pm to KosmoCramer
There is no need in arguing anymore. What will it take for you to say they intentionally deflated the balls?
For me to say they didnt, something like it coming out that for whatever reason the NFL retested the PSI outside instead of back in the locker room. This would be retarded of them, but at least it would actually make sense. If that comes out I will say the PSI drop was not intentional.
For me to say they didnt, something like it coming out that for whatever reason the NFL retested the PSI outside instead of back in the locker room. This would be retarded of them, but at least it would actually make sense. If that comes out I will say the PSI drop was not intentional.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:21 pm to lsupride87
I don't really care either way, but these "reports" are terrible things to go off of because they are so contradictory.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:24 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:frick the reports then
I don't really care either way, but these "reports" are terrible things to go off of because they are so contradictory.
Bottom line is the patriots balls were under inflated after inspection and the colts were not. The only way this is possible without the Patriots cheating is the refs are liars, they re-measured for whatever reason outside, or aliens. My whole point is more likely than not the balls were manipulated. What is your basis for saying they most likely were not? Not being an arse just want to hear from a non-patriots fan 
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:31 pm to lsupride87
There are lots of reasons. I just don't think the Patriots would be this nefarious for something that many or most would deem negligible in the effects on the actual game.
It would seem much more likely that the balls were inflated at or below the lowest possible threshold before the game and they may have changed slightly due to the weather, not ALL being gauged by the officials, etc.
I highly doubt all the balls were even the same PSI to start, let alone at halftime. I would assume there was a bit of variance.
The Colts balls could have started at or above the highest allowable threshold and then slightly diminished as did the Patriots but still fell within the allowable boundry.
There are a lot of other explanations aside from the Patriots nefariously paying an employee to take the balls into the bathroom on camera with a preset gauge that would remove exactly 1 PSI from each of the 12 balls in 90 seconds, and they had this planned, practiced and done for every game.
What about away games where they have no control over the movement of the balls from the room to the field, what do they do then?
It just seems more likely that it naturally happened due to a slew of other reasons none of which are nefarious.
It would seem much more likely that the balls were inflated at or below the lowest possible threshold before the game and they may have changed slightly due to the weather, not ALL being gauged by the officials, etc.
I highly doubt all the balls were even the same PSI to start, let alone at halftime. I would assume there was a bit of variance.
The Colts balls could have started at or above the highest allowable threshold and then slightly diminished as did the Patriots but still fell within the allowable boundry.
There are a lot of other explanations aside from the Patriots nefariously paying an employee to take the balls into the bathroom on camera with a preset gauge that would remove exactly 1 PSI from each of the 12 balls in 90 seconds, and they had this planned, practiced and done for every game.
What about away games where they have no control over the movement of the balls from the room to the field, what do they do then?
It just seems more likely that it naturally happened due to a slew of other reasons none of which are nefarious.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:33 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:This is irrelevant though. If they passed inspection, then dropped because of the temperature outside, they would go back to normal upon re-inspection inside. That is why it just seems so much more likely manipulation was involved
I highly doubt all the balls were even the same PSI to start, let alone at halftime. I would assume there was a bit of variance.
The Colts balls could have started at or above the highest allowable threshold and then slightly diminished as did the Patriots but still fell within the allowable boundry.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:36 pm to lsupride87
quote:
This is irrelevant though. If they passed inspection, then dropped because of the temperature outside, they would go back to normal upon re-inspection inside
Eventually, but not immediately.
Do you even science, bro?
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:38 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:Are the patriots, the refs, and everyone involved so fricking retarded to not know to let the balls adjust before remeasuring?
Eventually, but not immediately.
Do you even science, bro?
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:41 pm to lsupride87
It would take hours, they determined they were underinflated in minutes.
I'm not even saying that the pressure drop due to temperature is the cause, but when the switched balls they certainly didn't let them acclimate before testing.
After the balls were quarenteened under armed guard for later testing then they would get a much better reading.
I'm not even saying that the pressure drop due to temperature is the cause, but when the switched balls they certainly didn't let them acclimate before testing.
After the balls were quarenteened under armed guard for later testing then they would get a much better reading.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:43 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:Are we sure about this? Or is this a Kosmo answer?
It would take hours
Cause pulling a random arse time limit sounds like something I would do too 
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:47 pm to lsupride87
quote:A caller this morning said 'perhaps the Colts re-inflated their balls at halftime' or they would have been under as well from the cool weather. Farfetched, but at least it was a new twist.
The only way this is possible without the Patriots cheating is the refs are liars, they re-measured for whatever reason outside, or aliens.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:48 pm to lsupride87
It would take a lot of time to warm up the air molecules in the ball. Plus the ball itself acts as insulation on the molecules so it takes a good while.
This also works the other way as it would take a long time to get the ball's air molecules to cool down to noticeably drop the pressure of the balls in the first place. But they were outside for ~ 4 hours which would be long enough.
This also works the other way as it would take a long time to get the ball's air molecules to cool down to noticeably drop the pressure of the balls in the first place. But they were outside for ~ 4 hours which would be long enough.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:50 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:I am reading 10-15 minutes. But it isnt an exact science
It would take a lot of time to warm up the air molecules in the ball. Plus the ball itself acts as insulation on the molecules so it takes a good while.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 2:51 pm to lsupride87
Dare I ask for a link?
Page 9 of 12
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News