You’re seriously trying to use that Rosenberg article? I’m honestly amazed the SI editors allowed that to be published.
Exactly…
Sometimes when people hand-wave, scoff, or mock something, it’s because it’s really, really stupid.
That article is really, really stupid and I’m sorry I wasted my time reading it, because it made me dumber and also made me sad that the dude who wrote it gets to be a sportswriter as a profession. Leaving aside the videotape thing and the current thing, here’s what’s there:
-
The substitution stuff from the Ravens game, which was completely legal. It wasn’t “I’m not touching you.” It was legal. The author of the article also claims that the Patriots went to a hurry up when using Vereen and the other guy as ineligible, which is false. They huddled.
-
There is a television screen visible to the Patriots sideline, which supposedly allows them to view TV replays and, I guess, get some kind of advantage in terms of deciding when to challenge a play. First of all, this is transparently dumb for anyone who has ever watched a football game on TV (any coach who waits for the TV reply to decide whether to throw a flag has already missed the chance to throw the flag, first of all, and also BOTH TEAMS HAVE GUYS WATCHING THE REPLAYS IN THE BOOTH). But also, and very importantly, this is legal and not cheating.
-
The Patriots don’t talk in public about team business, even when it seems like trivial team business. This is not only legal and not cheating, it’s not even vaguely problematic.
After those three things, the author starts “just asking questions.” Here’s one:
The person who wrote that paragraph should not make a living as a journalist. it then disintegrates into a bunch of “people wonder”-type statements. It also falsely states that the rule against rolling up on a QB’s knees was created after Bernard Pollard injured Tom Brady… which will come as a surprise to Carson Palmer, the actual player who inspired the rule much earlier.
So.
You were asked to substantiate the idea that the Patriots consistently break the rules. In response you posted a link to an article describing three instances where the Patriots broke no rules and including two outright lies. Do you understand why that makes you look like you have an agenda not based on the facts at hand?
That article has already been torn to shreds here and elsewhere on the internet.
I mean, seriously? Belichick is using a TV screen outside the stadium to help him decide what to challenge instead of the big-ass screens right in front of him and his own coaches whose job it is to decide these things? It’s not the stupidest thing I’ve ever read, but it’s on the list.
The rest is just a pathetic laundry list of insinuation.
I’m failing to see anything in that article that points to the Patriots doing any rule breaking, just the standard feedback loop. You get enough “cheating is just what they do- proof is spygate, they therefore must be doing multiple nefarious things consistantly because thats what they do, because spygate” articles by sensationalist clickbate journalists, then it feeds off itself and becomes ingrained as truth. A national sports reporter has even accused them of conspiring to get easier schedules for God’s sake- schedules are completely formulaic. But again, provide any actual evidence that they break rules more than the rest of the league, and I will gladly tip my hat to you.
I saw the Pats were flagged at least once for an eligible receiver not reporting as such in the Colts game. Or maybe he reported too late. Either way, I suspect the eligibility reporting time and method is what the Ravens were pissed about. There are rules for that, too.
I also read this morning that the Ravens tipped off the Colts to look out for underinflated footballs. Not sure if it’s true or not, don’t recall the source.
OK… <shrug>
Harbaugh came out and said they didn’t notice any issues will ball pressure in their game.
Taken to mean you’ve got nothing. That’s cool, obviously you can feel however you want. People’s villains need to be built up to be as villainous as can be, it makes it more fun to hate the team you hate.
There are. And the Patriots didn’t break them. Well, if they got flagged, apparently they did break them once, and were penalized for it. But if a team getting flagged constitutes evidence that they were cheating, then we’re in big, big trouble.
ETA: That Sports Illustrated article is really irritating me. How did that guy write that article, turn it in, and feel good about it? How did an editor not stare blankly at it for five minutes before deleting it and telling the author to start over? How is it still posted on the site?
taken to mean that getting into a “No true Scotsman” debate is pointless. The fact remains that within the league (The players. The coaches. The executives.) it is known that there is something smelly up Foxboro way. It’s no sweat off my balls (underinflated, overinflated, or properly inflated) whether you folks believe it or not.
Literally nothing you’ve posted indicates that what you’ve said in your second sentence is a fact. A hacky writer claiming that “everyone knows it” does not mean that everyone knows it.
It’s OK. Everyone has things they accept in defiance of the facts. At least yours is related to sports.
I’m mostly following this story for the humor and entertainment value - somehow I really have a hard time believing that there’s a big advantage to be gained by a little doctoring of footballs. I really don’t think that deflated balls had much to do with Blount running over the Colts like they were a frickin’ Pop Warner team.
That said, I don’t know if the humor was intentional or not, but check out the backdrop behind Belichick in the video of his press conference:
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/patriots-coach-says-doesnt-know-balls-were-deflated-154513510--nfl.html
Seriously. Gillette #flexball? Now that’s funny.
Is there any chance this is because the temperature when the balls were inflated was different than on the field? If the balls were inflated in a room with 75 degree air and then taken outside to the cold field, wouldn’t the pressure naturally go down as the air inside the ball cooled off?
From what I’ve read by people who understand a lot more physics than I do, it’d be impossible for a temperature change to effect a 2-psi drop in pressure unless it was really enormous - which in this case, it would not have been.
But the thing is, we don’t know yet whether it’s certain that the balls were ever properly inflated. Do they actually test them quantitatively pre-game? Based on Aaron Rodgers comments - remember, he said they overinflate them and then see if the officials notice - my guess is that they don’t. They probably just have the refs do a common-sense check and go from there; it’s less time consuming and I doubt they care that much.
So the way this probably went down was: Brady (or someone) has the equipment people underinflate the balls by 1-1.5 psi, hoping the refs won’t notice. The refs don’t notice. The balls go into play. During the game, the dropping temperatures cause the already underinflated balls to deflate even further, making it more noticeable to the Colts’ players.
I realize it’s much more dramatic to imagine Bill Belichick sending his ninja squad out there to deflate the balls after they’ve already been turned over to the officiating crew, under the lights in a crowded stadium just before a nationally televised football game… but I think my scenario sounds more realistic.
Yeah, the temperature change would cause the pressure to change, but not by much; the pressure changes in proportion to the temperature change.
75 degrees F is 297 degrees Kelvin, so call it 300 to make the math easy. A drop from 12.5 PSI to 10.5 PSI is a 16% drop. A 16% drop from 300 Kelvin is 252 K, which is -6F. The game temperature was around 50F, I think.
They generally do about 2 hours before the game. Each ball gets inspected, marked as certified, and placed in a bag in each team’s locker room.
In this particular case, the crew reportedly did check the balls.
But 2 hours is a lot of time. It’s not like the officials stand guard or anything. Each team gets their balls a couple hours before the game. Certainly enough time to inflate or deflate balls before the game really got going.
I did the same calculation in another thread, and Maserschmit pointed out where we both went wrong: we’re working in gage pressure instead of absolute pressure. When we say that the footballs are inflated to 12.5 psi, that’s not entirely accurate - they’re inflated to 12.5 psi above atmospheric pressure. The absolute pressure in a ball that checks out at 12.5 psi is actually 27.2 psi (assuming atmospheric pressure of 14.7). Instead of a 16% drop from 12.5 to 10.5, we’re looking for a 7.4% drop from 27.2 to 25.2.
That drop is easily explained going from the 300 K locker room to a 278 K (41 °F) field. No tampering required.