- 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
Deflated: the Statistically Impossible Patriots Fumble Record; cheating proved?
Posted on 1/30/15 at 5:56 pm
Posted on 1/30/15 at 5:56 pm
quote:
Sharp Football Analysis:
One can CLEARLY SEE the Patriots, visually, are off the chart. There is no other team even close to being near to their rate of 187 offensive plays (passes+rushes+sacks) per fumble. The league average is 105 plays/fumble. Most teams are within 21 plays of that number.
quote:
Patriots partisans might crow — well, what good does deflating a football do? Simple. It creates angles on a football that didn’t exist when playing by the rules and allows a runner, passer, center, and, most importantly, a quarterback to better grip the ball. With the avoidance of turnovers being so central to winning football, a deflated football helps you win.
But it gets worse for Brady and the Patriots. Sharp Football Analysis was able to trace the emergence of this phenomena to a bright-line date: 2007. Starting in 2007, the Patriots suddenly began to hold onto the football at a statistical rate likely to occur 1 time in 16,233. A rational person might conclude this is the moment when someone on the Patriots cooked up the scheme to illegally deflate the ball:
As you can see, the Patriots won their Super Bowls having a below average rate of fumbles lost given today’s average of 105 plays/game. But in 2007, something happened to propel them to a much better rate (you’ll remember, that just so happened to be the same year they went 16-0 in the regular season). But even looking at these numbers, its clear how insane the 187 number is: they are almost running 100 MORE plays without a single fumble as compared to the 2002-2006 period when they won 2 of their 3 Super Bowls.
To further illustrate how these numbers are astonishing, the below graphics lay out clearly how far off the Patriots are from the rest of the league. Its evident to the eye how far removed they are from the norm. Whether we look at a histogram laying it out, where the Patriots and their 187 plays/fumble is far from the “bell shaped curve”:
quote:
Could the Patriots be so good that they just defy the numbers? As my friend theorized: Perhaps they’ve invented a revolutionary in-house way to protect the ball, or perhaps they’ve intentionally stocked their skill positions with players who don’t have a propensity to fumble. Or perhaps still, they call plays which intentionally result in a lower percentage of fumbles. Or maybe its just that they play with deflated footballs on offense. … But regardless of what, specifically, is causing these numbers, the fact remains: this is an extremely abnormal occurrence and is NOT simply random fluctuation.
LINK
There will always be an asterisk next to all of their Super Bowl wins.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 5:57 pm to hikingfan
o0o0o0o0o0o0oooo a graph!
Sold!
Sold!
Posted on 1/30/15 at 5:57 pm to hikingfan
Pretty sure they still get a ring even with an asterisk.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 6:00 pm to hikingfan
Great article, really.
Consider what would happen to a pitcher who was found to have doctored all his baseballs. Footballs are inflated to a specific PSI range FOR A REASON.
The punishment should be severe.
Consider what would happen to a pitcher who was found to have doctored all his baseballs. Footballs are inflated to a specific PSI range FOR A REASON.
The punishment should be severe.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 6:02 pm to hikingfan
quote:
or perhaps they’ve intentionally stocked their skill positions with players who don’t have a propensity to fumble.
Wasn't LeGarrette Blount a notorious fumbler before joining the Patriots?
Posted on 1/30/15 at 6:16 pm to hikingfan
Analyzing lost fumble rate is pointless. He's also provided incorrect stats.
This post was edited on 1/30/15 at 6:17 pm
Posted on 1/30/15 at 6:20 pm to hikingfan
For what it's worth, this graph and matching statistics are not only incorrect, the Patriots aren't even on the extreme end.
Posted on 1/30/15 at 8:43 pm to hikingfan
You really should ban yourself
Posted on 1/30/15 at 9:13 pm to hikingfan
quote:
There will always be an asterisk next to all of their Super Bowl wins.
How many of those occurred between 2010 and 2014?
Posted on 1/30/15 at 10:06 pm to hikingfan
A deeper dive in the stats to debunk aside, the whole premise is absurd. They've been cheating for ~5 years, just never been caught until now? Ridiculous.
Posted on 1/31/15 at 6:54 am to hikingfan
I am done fighting this nonsense but this 'theory' has been widely and vastly debunked by a broad spectrum of analysts - let Google be your friend.
Besides that, I want to taste the sweet, sweet tears of the sore losers after the Pats castrate the Crotch Grabbers tomorrow.
For the Sore Loser Babies
Besides that, I want to taste the sweet, sweet tears of the sore losers after the Pats castrate the Crotch Grabbers tomorrow.
For the Sore Loser Babies
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)