Bad Morty
-
Posts
981 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Bad Morty
-
-
Can you explain to me exactly what part of the Wells report you have a problem with?
Sure...the biggest issue to me starts with the fact that they discounted Anderson's recollection that he used the logo gauge, a point which, if true, would exonerate the Pats completely based on the measurements they got at halftime. As the AEI report clearly points out, if you are going to objectively analyze data without knowing which of 2 possible gauges were used, then you need to run the regression models on 4 possible scenarios, each of which is equally likely (given that you are dismissing the information provided by the ref regarding which gauge was used) and you need to weight the outcomes of those 4 scenarios equally. The Wells report says it considered "all permutations"...it did not. There is no evidence or data provided that verifies this claim. So right off the bat, they are using incomplete data to rule out a scenario that didn't fit the narrative that balls were tampered with.
Additionally, though the Wells report claims (almost in passing) that it "considered" the effect of warming of the Colts balls during halftime on the readings of their balls, again no details are provided on what assumptions they used (and we know they HAD to use assumptions as the refs didn't indicate how long the balls sat in the room before measuring them) or on what impact their assumptions led to.
The essential claim of the Wells report is that A) The logo gauge was not the gauge that was used, and B) even if the logo gauge WAS used, it doesn't explain the relative difference between the Colts pressure change and the Pats pressure change, therefore it doesn't matter which gauge was used.
Their methods for arriving at that conclusion are not complete at best, dishonest at worst.
-
What I find entertaining is how voices that knew with absolute certitude that Robert Kraft was going to bring the league to its knees fell deathly silent when Kraft announced he would not appeal.
Now that the sting from that has worn off, there is absolute certitude that the Wells Report is going to be destroyed in court.
It's been destroyed outside of court...
-
The legal pressure is between 12.5-13.5 psi. While Kraft suspended the 2 ball boys without pay. Sorry but you can try all you want. These punishments are going to stick.
you need to read the report. The balls should have read 11.3 or thereabouts based on the conditions per the Wells report. 3 were over that, 6 were within 0.3 of that, and the other 2 were within 0.5. And that's on the gauge that Wells decided was the correct gauge...not the one that Walt Anderson said he used. On that gauge, the balls all checked out ok.
-
The report was about something that never happened? Like it's a fictional story? Come on now.Here's the Patriots winning numbers......... Last I checked, this is nonfiction.
Those numbers on the right, as measured using the gauge Walt Anderson remembers using, don't indicate anything illegal occurred at all. The ones on the left, using the other gauge, show 3 balls that are over the expected result of natural inflation, 3 more that are within 0.2 PSI of that, 3 that are within around 0.3PSI, and 2 that are within 0.5PSI
I was led to believe that all the balls were 2ilbs too low and that they were so soft that a Linebacker could tell right away that they were all deflated?
-
Why do Pats fans keep bringing up the 25k fine? That is listed as the BARE MINIMUM. NOT the quota.
Because given that nearly $3M in fines has been handed out ($1M to Kraft, $1.8M to Brady for 4 missed games), the context of $25K is pretty relevant. They handed out 120 times the minimum fine.
-
. Vice versa too.Believe it or not, I really couldn't give a %, but sometimes I just can't help but point out the obvious and question some of the reasoning, or lack there of.
nah...I think most of us Pats fans are already conditioned to the idea that he's going to miss 4 games, so anything less than that is a 'win' in our eyes.
-
Lol...peope are going to absolutely lose their minds if somehow Brady ends up not being suspended, aren't they?
-
Also in line with common sense that he wouldn't have to instruct them each and every time, they knew the process.
See...it works that way too.
But that is a completely un-provable theory. We're now getting into deep minutiae on what is looking more and more like an insignificant situation. The absolute worst case scenario here now is that an amount of air might have been taken out of some footballs that wasn't significant enough to yield measurements at half-time that made it clear that anything at all happened. That's the worst case scenario.
-
Also zero evidence of common sense.
it is MORE in line with common sense to think that Brady never said one explicit word to those guys instructing them to deflate footballs after the refs had checked them.
-
I can appreciate that but you still have to look at everything in the whole picture .. from start to end. I don't believe it proves anything. Question... they state that there is 10 minutes between testing the NE balls to the Indy balls. I would think that is false to at least a degree. Did they start the process immediately ? When did they decide to stop testing. What were the differences in pressure of .. say the last 2 NE balls tested and the first 2 Colts balls tested ? If different then they would be wrong..
I've given FAR too much thought to this, but I think if I had to make a call on what happened, it is probably that McNally took the balls into the bathroom and quickly pinned them. So at the end of the day, I think the Patriots should have received some punishment for that. However, the very small amount of time he had in the bathroom combined with ball measurements that don't really indicate that the balls were de-pressurized by any material amount (if at all) really has to be considered a mitigating circumstance when the talk turns to severity of punishment and legacy. The story was originally floated that all of the Pats balls were 2 lbs under the limit and that they were so flat that a Colts linebacker was able to tell that the balls had been deflated. That's why this story will never go away. The reality is that either nothing at all happened OR that something truly insignificant happened...something that warrants a penalty for sure, but nothing close to the penalty that was handed out. And there is ZERO evidence whatsoever to suggest that Brady ordered anyone to do anything illegal.
-
You are kidding ... or are you just delusional ? It would be more like they found that person dead at the bottom of a cliff . The new evidence shows that it was very slippery where the person fell or was pushed off. So now you have to add that factor to the circumstantial evidence you had. It would not "prove " innocence as you are stating.
If you came into the discussion with the "Pats are guilty no matter what the evidence says!" mentality, then yes. But the science in the Wells report itself wasn't very strong to begin with. It started weak, and has been shown by AEI (and others in the scientific community) to not just be weak, but flat out wrong. The balls measured as would be expected given the conditions.
-
Locking of this thread is looming.
That typically happens when Colts fans start losing the argument I've found.
-
not all of the deleted texts were able to be retrieved
Really? I hadn't heard that anywhere, but ok...so the logical presumption then is that there is a text from Brady to one of those guys saying "Dudes - I want you to make sure you take the game balls after the refs have checked them and deflate them below the legal limit"?
Lol.
-
Yup.....
And my response to that would be that there is likely damning evidence in the texts of his cell phone which is why he won't give up the transcripts between him and the equipment guys.....
you are aware they read all his texts to the equipment guys on the equipment guys phones, right?
-
Since my Patriot friends continue to link every story concerning Deflategate, then I'm going to continue to poke holes in it....
This latest report disproves nothing. It only shows that another scenario, or a different interpretation is possible. And that's fine.
The Wells Report is NOT only the testing of the footballs. The Wells report also includes Brady's behavior, his lack of cooperation, and the lack of cooperation of the Patriots organization. The AEI report does not touch upon that aspect of the Wells report.
So, if all there was to Brady's guilt or innocence was the air pressure testing, then maybe -- MAYBE -- the Patriots would have a case. But that's not the situation. The Patriots lack of cooperation tilts the scales of justice against them. Not giving up the phone info is damning. Not allowing another interview with the equipment guys is damning. Kraft's repeated use of the term "conclusive proof" when he knew full-well that's not the official standard used by league -- "preponderance of the evidence" is the standard.... Kraft deliberately poisoning the waters is damning for his organization. The rest of the league owners turning against Kraft is damning.
Sorry Patriots fans..... you can spit or pee into the wind all you want, but that liquid coming back at you is not rain... and never has been..... you're only kidding yourselves....
If the science shows that the balls behaved as they would be expected to behave given the conditions, then it doesn't matter what text messages were sent. You may think I committed murder because there is a victim that can't be found and because I sent a text message to my friend calling myself "the murderer"...but when the supposed victim shows up alive and well at a bar the next day, then my texts don't really matter much. That's what's happening here. The new report flat out tells you that the science data that was found from measuring the balls at half time suggests strongly that the balls simply deflated as they should have in the conditions. Wells' conculsion to the contrary is flawed.
-
I should proofread better.
what I meant was I can hardly wait until the week 6 matchup this year.
We should call out the National Guard for the Forum that week
I knew what you meant!
-
because the NFL decides to not prosecute rules violators and rewrites the rules to make them more clearly delineate the rules to the people who already knew them to begin with...does not mean they did not violate the rule in the first place.
lol...actually that's precicely what it means. In the utopia you are describing, we shouldn't need written rules at all...teams all know what they are and should just...you know...follow them.
-
You're assuming other coaches would do it. Why do you assume they didn't think of it and discard it..because you believe that nonsnes about BB being a genius? c'mon.
If you follow, I did not suggest anybody violated a code of honor. They violated the rules. They understood the inherent problem, helped to create the rule to prevent the problem, approved of how it was written. The only thing they did not violate was the simplistic interpretation of how it was written. That's still a violation.
Look at it this way, if you and me were in a position to create hiway speed limits, understand the problem speeding causes, decide to erect signs to communicate the law, and decide that the speed limit is 55, but when we get to the posted sign, the sign says 65, ..did we violate the law if we travel 63?
Yes, we did..because we decided what the law was and knew what it was despite what the sign says.
No I'm pretty sure that if the sign says "Speed Limit 65", no court is ever going to find me in violation of the law if I was travelling 63. That's a terrible analogy. You have no basis whatsoever for claiming that the rule was written in error, as a 65 MPH sign would have been a mistake. Perhaps you missed this:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24954397/nfl-patriots-ran-legal-formations-vs-ravens
In an email to the Baltimore Sun on Sunday, NFL vice president of football communications Michael Signora said everything the Patriots did was within the rule book.
"Everything was legal from a formation and reporting standpoint," Signora wrote.
-
Here's a really good link on the evolution of the NFL rulebook. As you will see, there are numerous examples of rules that were enacted to close loopholes that teams found. So again - spare me the sanctimony over the tactics Belichick employed vs Baltimore....it's nothing new.
http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/evolution-of-the-nfl-rules/
-
The league doesn't make rules to enhance winning. The league makes rules to create a watchable product. Violating the rules detracts from the watchability of the product, and eventually lowers revenue for all. Coaches need to know their place and be taught that violating the rules is worse than losing, and need to be run out of the league immediately for doing it. Especially those that do it multiple times and rather smuggly when they do.
And I didn't lose anything. The Ravens and Colts lost.
yeah...except nobody violated any rules, and that pretty much nullifies the point you are trying to make. Instead, you are creating a fictitious narrative that there is some sort of "code of honor" among the NFL coaching fraternity that Belichick violated. That is nonsense. Harbaugh would have done the exact same thing...had he thought of it. If you think otherwise, then you are hopelessly naïve. The play was legal. You can cry all you like that it wasn't, but that doesn't change the fact that it was. Now, it's illegal, and you can rest comfortably knowing that the Patriots won't ever run plays out of that formation again. The league rulebook is FILLED with rules that were put in place to counteract tactics that teams employed prior the rule being enacted. That is exactly how a rulebook evolves in any sport.
-
They said that because they weren't yet smart enough to see the ramifications of what BB did. They are now.
Imagine a group of business colleagues sitting in their annual meeting adjusting the rules of how they are going to conduct their business, trying to solve an issue with positioning of employees in certain spots, then one of the 32 owners is sitting in a corner taking notes and, after reducing what they all agreed to writing, noticed the admin assistant put a comma where a period should have been, and thereby unknowingly changing the "legal" written rule away from what everybody agreed it would say. Then, ignoring the incompleteness of the written rule all business season, that one colleague uses it during the most critical point of the season to advance his business ahead of the businesses who were all in the same room discussing and approving with how the rule was written to convey their agreement.
Its a "gotcha" tactic. Not an outplaying and outcoaching the opponent tactic. Its more than "violating the spirit of the rule". Its nearly a flat out double cross. Yeah, lucky for BB that someone like Vito Corleone doesn't own the Ravens.
This here is a LOT of sour grapes. There is no such "code of honor" among coaches...that is pure and utter nonsense. These guys would all cut each others' throats to win. There is nothing worse than sanctimony when preached by those who lost.
-
I'm never going to Boston I couldn't do it if your all this stupid I would be in jail for ever just for hitting dumb people in the mouth
lol
-
Risk a fire storm? Personally, I think the most plausible scenario is that Brady has been doing it for a long time, and players and some coaches and execs knew all about it for a long time. Just like the McGuire Sosa roid HR derby, everybody knew, but the cheating benefitted the interest in the game, and indirectly benefitted everyone.
Also, calling out Brady over the years would just sound like sour grapes on the part of the losers, because there was never any real way of proving the conduct. And it took an act of Congress..literally..to finally get the "scientific proof" of steroid use in baseball. No NFL team has the means to prove the cheating, and the NFL has no desire to stop the goose from laying golden eggs.
Accusing someone of cheating, especially in something as ticky tack as deflating footballs, when you have no way of substantiating it, just sounds like whining sour grapes. Not to mention that all teams probably use stickem, or even PEDs, so many cheat on some level.
Well, that process all blew up when the Pats P.Oed the Ravens and the league with their bush-league "hide the eligible receiver" ploy in the divisional game. That provided enough motivation for the Ravens and Colts (who should have hosted the AFCCG against the Ravens BTW) to finally to call out the Pats for deflating footballs, something that many around the league probably knew was going on for years.
The process by which the pats were caught, kind of an unprofessional cumbersome gathering of the footballs by the refs and the somewhat flawed "science" and Wells report, is something that was done on the fly after the fact. The refs and the league never thought to have a procedure for catching something that has been going on for years that nobody cared about until the bush-league 4th quarter series in the Ravens game.
That's the accurate account of the situation .
Science...schmience.
This is actually the most reasonable presentation of this that I've read. I don't agree with all of what you've said, but you are rational.
-
I'll quote this snippet from your very good post.
As I said before...science, schmience...people use the word way too liberally these days, and put way too much emphasis on science. Typically now, science is being used as a debate tactic to offer supporting arguments for a person's opinion...an opinion that has already been determined by something else.
True science has no predetermined opinion, usually only a theory that is eventually disproved. Science oftentimes...in fact most times.....never finds the truth. What happens is the process measures what it can measure based upon the data at hand, and oftentimes that process fails to prove or conclude anything...so science stops short of forming a conclusion.
Most of the time, people who commission scientific studies do so because they want answers. But wanting answers does not guarantee that science will provided them with answers. When science can't provide them with the truth about what happened, we are left to extrapolate a conclusion from the evidence.
The proper way to use science in this debate is to say that science was inconclusive, it did not prove what happened, it could not determine the truth. But since we still want answers, we continue with other-than-science processes to form a conclusion...and that is perfectly legitimate. In this case, the factors involved are...who stood to benefit, who had opportunity, previous history, integrity or lack thereof of the people involved, etc. combined with what the science says, or didn't say.
Its a simple but bogus debate tactic to say..."since science doesn't prove what happened, we can't form a conclusion and punish the perpetrators". If we had to rely only upon science to form conclusions, we wouldn't form many conclusions about anything since most of the time all of the data simply isn't there.
I don't necessarily disagree with this, and it actually gets to the core of why this story never made a lot of sense to me, particularly from the "who stood to benefit" angle. Let's forget the new report here and just go with the absolute worst case scenario for the Patriots, that being that the non-logo gauge was the gauge used pre-game to set the Patriots balls to 12.5 (despite Walt Anderson remembering that he used the other gauge)...per the Wells report, the ideal gas law would have predicted that the Patriots balls should have deflated to 11.3 PSI given the conditions. According to the halftime readings of the non-logo gauge, 3 of the 11 Pats balls were over that limit, 3 others were at 11.1 (0.2 PSI lower than expected), 2 were at 10.95 (0.35 PSI) and the last 3 were at 10.85, 10.7, and 10.5....so in other words, ONE ball measured as much as 0.5 PSI lower than expected if you believe the non-logo gauge was used.
Do you buy for one second that the Patriots would risk the crap-storm that they have gotten here in order to take a fraction of a PSI out of SOME of their footballs? It makes no sense. If there was a scheme to deflate balls in place, every damn ball would be significantly lower than expected. There's no point in risking what you think they risked to get such an infinitesimal reduction in psi.
The report was about something that never happened? Like it's a fictional story? Come on now.
. Vice versa too.
Deflategate merge -- pending appeal results
in NFL General
Posted
Let me ask you this...is it possible that the deflator went into the bathroom with a gauge, pinned the balls to make sure they were 12.5...maybe even let a little air out of a couple that were a bit high to get them down to 12.5, then brought the balls to the field? That's a violation and it should be penalized. But it would also explain why the science isn't showing conclusive evidence of the balls being deflated below legal limits. Just a thought.