Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bad Morty

Deflategate merge -- pending appeal results

Recommended Posts

Non profit, lol....You might want to do some research on AEI, specifically their involvement with exxon mobile.

They are a non-profit. That's not conjecture - it's fact. Read their website:

 

AEI is a private, nonpartisan, not-for-profit institution dedicated to research and education on issues of government, politics, economics and social welfare. AEI’s purpose is to serve leaders and the public through research and education on the most important issues of the day. AEI research is conducted through seven primary research divisions: Economics, Foreign and Defense Policy, Politics and Public Opinion, Education, Health, Energy and the Environment and Society and Culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the "society and culture" part of their mission statement I would presume. They also did their own research on Bounty Gate. This organization is an independent think tank. They don't do contract work - they are a non-profit. So nobody goes to them and says "hey we'll pay you $x to study this". Secondly, they are NOT a "group of economists". They are a group of academics from all disciplines, representing I believe it said over 200 universities across the country.

 

These guys are legit, and they are heavyweights. This isn't a group of "Patriots fans"...and they say the Wells report's science was poorly done and not credible. That's reality. You can shoot the messenger all you like. Obviously, I love this report...but it can't be dismissed as a "bought and paid for" effort.

 

I am not shooting the messenger or anyone else for that matter, only saying that Deflategate does not rise to the level of an important issue of the day, and that the authors are economists and not physicists or engineers, and that the lead author grew up in Massachusetts.  The fact that they did research on Bounty Gate is irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FIFA is also a non profit organisation.

 

The NFL was also until earlier this year, as are educational institutions like Univs. of Kentucky, Alabama, Oregon, Miami, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the "society and culture" part of their mission statement I would presume. They also did their own research on Bounty Gate. This organization is an independent think tank. They don't do contract work - they are a non-profit. So nobody goes to them and says "hey we'll pay you $x to study this". Secondly, they are NOT a "group of economists". They are a group of academics from all disciplines, representing I believe it said over 200 universities across the country.

 

These guys are legit, and they are heavyweights. This isn't a group of "Patriots fans"...and they say the Wells report's science was poorly done and not credible. That's reality. You can shoot the messenger all you like. Obviously, I love this report...but it can't be dismissed as a "bought and paid for" effort.

Just because a group is non profit does not mean they don't get paid to do studies.  I am very familiar with AEI because of my interest in politics and the world political stage.

 

All you've stated about them is what was basically written in the first paragraph of the article.  I am sure that Gilette is one of their corporate sponsors though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not shooting the messenger or anyone else for that matter, only saying that Deflategate does not rise to the level of an important issue of the day, and that the authors are economists and not physicists or engineers, and that the lead author grew up in Massachusetts.  The fact that they did research on Bounty Gate is irrelevant.

You may not be shooting the messenger, but you are reaching at straws trying to claim that AEI isn't a credible independent source. The authors are economists...you have said this twice now. Do you seriously believe that the organization didn't have actual scientists perform the scientific analysis described in their report? They have resources available to them in every academic discipline, so you can be certain that physicists performed the scientific studies. It's also a stretch to believe that the organization would put it's entire existence on the line because one of their researchers is an angry Patriots fan who grew up in Massachusetts and is mad about the NFL.

 

So instead of trying to discredit an organization with unquestionable credentials, why not think about what they are saying? Because it makes a lot of sense....you don't have to be a scientist to know that a football measured immediately after coming in from the cold can't really be compared to one that warmed up for 15 minutes before being measured. The Wells report ignored this in order to reach a conclusion. There's no denying this now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I don't expect Goodell will back down on the punishment at all. He is too gutless to do the right thing and risk the wrath of the pitchfork carrying mob who wants the Patriots punished in order to give them a better chance to win. I've accepted that. I'm just happy to see that the charges against them have been proven to be laughably false...it's a legacy thing now.

 

 

I don't thing anything has been "proved" false. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When are we going to get the final verdict?

My guess is Never. haha

Seriously, the appeal date is June 23, that is the next step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this new report is saying is "hold on a sec...it's clear that the Colts balls that were used for comparison sat in a warm room for 15 minutes before they took the halftime measurements..now here is science that proves that those balls would have re-inflated significantly in that time frame, so you can't make the claim that the different rates of deflation is valid evidence"

 

The hole in that theory is as they were measuring the Patriots balls, those last few (Pats balls) also had 15 minutes to warm up as well, they didn't measure all 11 super fast, then wait 15 minutes, then measure 4 Colts balls all nice and warmed up.  so as the Pats balls warmed up, they should have benn at or real close to 12.5 but were not. Try again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When are we going to get the final verdict?

I believe Brady's hearing is set for June 23

 

no - their dismissal of the logo gauge depended on the claim that the difference in the pressure drops between the Colts balls and the Pats balls couldn't be explained. Here is a quote from one of the scientists:

 

On the key question of which gauge was used by referee Walt Anderson to test the PSI levels of the footballs used in the AFC Championship Game, Deflategate investigator Ted Wells punted.

Instead, on a conference call today, Wells turned that question over to his partner, Lorin Reisner. And Reisner then claimed that it doesn’t matter.

“The question of which gauge was used by Walt Anderson before the game — it just doesn’t effect any of the ultimate conclusions,” Reisner said. “The difference in the pressure drops between the two teams was found to be statistically significant regardless of the gauge used.”

 

This is what the AEI report has called foul on. They have proven that the Colts balls sitting in the warm room for 15 minutes longer than the Pats balls when they were measured makes the bold comment null and void. The Colts balls reinflated significantly during that 15 minutes.

Perfectly for you, the Wells report addressed this.

 

Page 203 of the URL I posted twice:

it suggests the possibility that the lower pressures observed in the measurements of the Patriots footballs recorded at halftime could simply be due to the Patriots footballs being measured first, and that the higher pressures seen in the Colts footballs could be a result of being measured at a later time. Therefore, the main focus of the transient experiments was to determine if variation in measurement timing was sufficient to explain the variation in the observed differences in the average pressure drops between the teams, given the ranges of likely environmental factors present on Game Day and the realistic timing of measurements given the sequencing and duration of the various events known to have occurred at halftime. For the reasons described below and based on our experiments, the timing of the measurements taken during halftime of the AFC Championship Game does not on its own completely account for the difference in the observed average pressure drops between the two teams

 

Page 215:

Based on the above conclusions, although the relative “explainability” of the results from Game Day are dependent on which gauge was used by Walt Anderson prior to the game, given the most likely timing of events during halftime, the Patriots halftime measurements do not appear to be explained by the environmental factors tested, regardless of the gauge used.

 

It's like this institute that you keep quoting didn't even bother to read the Wells report and instead is just trying to come up with any excuse to invalidate it.  It's like if someone were to say a person handling footballs uses the term "deflator" to reference his attempts at weight loss.....you'd have to be foolish to even think of saying this stuff to anyone....oh wait....

 

The only people who will think what the institute is saying is true (given what you've shown me so far) is people who didn't actually read the Wells report and are just looking for excuses.

 

Oh I don't expect Goodell will back down on the punishment at all. He is too gutless to do the right thing and risk the wrath of the pitchfork carrying mob who wants the Patriots punished in order to give them a better chance to win. I've accepted that. I'm just happy to see that the charges against them have been proven to be laughably false...it's a legacy thing now.

Laughably false?  When did this happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Brady's hearing is set for June 23

 

Perfectly for you, the Wells report addressed this.

 

Page 203 of the URL I posted twice:

it suggests the possibility that the lower pressures observed in the measurements of the Patriots footballs recorded at halftime could simply be due to the Patriots footballs being measured first, and that the higher pressures seen in the Colts footballs could be a result of being measured at a later time. Therefore, the main focus of the transient experiments was to determine if variation in measurement timing was sufficient to explain the variation in the observed differences in the average pressure drops between the teams, given the ranges of likely environmental factors present on Game Day and the realistic timing of measurements given the sequencing and duration of the various events known to have occurred at halftime. For the reasons described below and based on our experiments, the timing of the measurements taken during halftime of the AFC Championship Game does not on its own completely account for the difference in the observed average pressure drops between the two teams

 

Page 215:

Based on the above conclusions, although the relative “explainability” of the results from Game Day are dependent on which gauge was used by Walt Anderson prior to the game, given the most likely timing of events during halftime, the Patriots halftime measurements do not appear to be explained by the environmental factors tested, regardless of the gauge used.

 

It's like this institute that you keep quoting didn't even bother to read the Wells report and instead is just trying to come up with any excuse to invalidate it.  It's like if someone were to say a person handling footballs uses the term "deflator" to reference his attempts at weight loss.....you'd have to be foolish to even think of saying this stuff to anyone....oh wait....

 

The only people who will think what the institute is saying is true (given what you've shown me so far) is people who didn't actually read the Wells report and are just looking for excuses.

 

Laughably false?  When did this happen?

When the next (paid for a specific result) report is filed from the American Injustice League; Chelsea Chapter. {  ugh....  :-(  }

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again.....  Not going to happen. Brady will get between 2 and 4 games and end of story.

 

Why... ? Because the guy took the balls into the pee place and stuck them. Brady was aware in some capacity no doubt. 

I don't think Roger lowers it all. This will go to fed court. We will see what happens there. The league has answered for zero on this whole "investigation" so we will see what gets brought to light ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Roger lowers it all. This will go to fed court. We will see what happens there. The league has answered for zero on this whole "investigation" so we will see what gets brought to light ...

 

 

I don't think so . Brady probably at this point realizes he did break the rules. Before he said " I don't think I broke the rules." I think it get's lowered a bit and put to sleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so . Brady probably at this point realizes he did break the rules. Before he said " I don't think I broke the rules." I think it get's lowered a bit and put to sleep.

I don't know. He seems pretty adamant about his innocence and you don't hire Keesler to just accept two games on an appeal. Most feel he is fighting this down to zero in court. I would rather he just accept the two as you say and get this silly violation put to bed as at this point who really cares. On to 2015 and the drive for five. But I think for Brady this is bigger right now than this upcoming season. It is his reputation and it would seem he is going to go all the way. We will find out soon enough ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so . Brady probably at this point realizes he did break the rules. Before he said " I don't think I broke the rules." I think it get's lowered a bit and put to sleep.

I fully expected him to file an appeal, most people do with the hope of getting the suspended games reduced.   I think there is a possibility that Goodell  sticks to the 4 games suspension, and at the very least I see him maybe cutting it in half.

 

I don't see Brady taking it any further than that.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may not be shooting the messenger, but you are reaching at straws trying to claim that AEI isn't a credible independent source. The authors are economists...you have said this twice now. Do you seriously believe that the organization didn't have actual scientists perform the scientific analysis described in their report? They have resources available to them in every academic discipline, so you can be certain that physicists performed the scientific studies. It's also a stretch to believe that the organization would put it's entire existence on the line because one of their researchers is an angry Patriots fan who grew up in Massachusetts and is mad about the NFL.

 

So instead of trying to discredit an organization with unquestionable credentials, why not think about what they are saying? Because it makes a lot of sense....you don't have to be a scientist to know that a football measured immediately after coming in from the cold can't really be compared to one that warmed up for 15 minutes before being measured. The Wells report ignored this in order to reach a conclusion. There's no denying this now.

 

Keep up with the comic relief, it really is great.  "Reaching at straws", tremendous, absolutely tremendous.

 

If they did have "scientists" do the analysis, why did they not state so in the "study".  That would be normal protocol. Also to say the AEI has unquestionable credentials is like saying The Center For American Progress has unquestionable credentials.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so . Brady probably at this point realizes he did break the rules. Before he said " I don't think I broke the rules." I think it get's lowered a bit and put to sleep.

Not sure if you saw this article by Lester Munson back when Goodell appointed himself to hear the appeal, http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12920021/nfl-nflpa-guilty-detrimental-conduct-actions-court

 

He makes some interesting points about how Goodell presiding over Brady's appeal will actually help Brady in federal court.

 

The players and their lawyers, though, are more likely to succeed in their attack on Goodell's decision to preside over Brady's appeal of his four-game suspension.

 

The NFLPA's anger over Goodell's decision is understandable. There is no doubt that the collective bargaining agreement between the players and the owners gives Goodell the authority to appoint himself to hear the appeal, but there is considerable doubt that he has the authority to delegate decisions on player discipline to Troy Vincent, as he appears to have done in the Brady situation. Vincent, a former leader of the players' association who switched to the owners' side during heated negotiations in February of 2010, signed the letter that announced Brady's suspension.

 

Not only does the delegation of authority to Vincent appear to be a violation of the CBA, it is clear that Goodell will be called as a witness in a hearing in which he is the presiding officer. The union lawyers are clearly entitled to demand his testimony. They will ask Goodell to explain his decision to delegate the Brady decision to Vincent; they will ask him about the possibility of a "sting operation" that targeted the Patriots; and they will ask him to explain his approval of the four-game suspension.

 

In its demand that Goodell remove himself from the proceeding, the union will also question Goodell's partiality as he sits in judgment of his own staff and their work in the deflation incident. In addition to Vincent, there are at least 14 staffers who were involved in the episode, ranging from T. David Gardi, the NFL's senior vice president of football operations, to Milton Britton, the kicking ball coordinator for Gillette Stadium.

 

If Goodell refuses to remove himself from the Brady appeal, the union will go to court with overwhelming evidence that the league did not provide its biggest star with appropriate due process, and Goodell will face another humiliating defeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Bad Morty your have brought in the largest pile of horse dung I have read at all about this whole matter. You refuse to believe the truth so now you reach for straws in any attempt to keep arguing about this. When are you going to realize that the Patriots have been caught? The Patriots have accepted the fines and the loss of draft picks. Brady now faces 4 games suspended pending an appeal. He may get it reduced but very unlikely get it thrown out. The Patriots have already signed a QB to cover any injury to the back up now. Exactly what does that say? IMO Kraft knows Brady is going to lose time or he would not have signed another QB. That makes more sense than some bias report you pulled up. You can do what you call debate till hades freezes over and it will still make no difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They got zero on Brady other than him complaining about the Jets ball that were overinflated to an illegal 16 psi that Wells never followed up on or actually did but did not bother to include his interview with the game day ref.

 

They got zero on Brady other than him complaining about the Jets ball that were overinflated to an illegal 16 psi that Wells never followed up on or actually did but did not bother to include his interview with the game day ref.

 

You have answered your own question if Brady was complaining about the balls being overflated in the jets game, Well then it goes to say he was aware during the course of the season if the balls were inflated or deflated to his specification. End of conversation it started over the deflation now it comes to where he was not truthful to the league about knowing anything about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how Colt fans ignore two FACTS:

The Colts apparently cheated as well, as their balls were also below the legal limit.

Secondly, a Colts employee illegally used a needle on the ball on the sideline. That's a violation of the rule .

But hey, witch hunts are more fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if you saw this article by Lester Munson back when Goodell appointed himself to hear the appeal, http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12920021/nfl-nflpa-guilty-detrimental-conduct-actions-court

 

He makes some interesting points about how Goodell presiding over Brady's appeal will actually help Brady in federal court.

 

The players and their lawyers, though, are more likely to succeed in their attack on Goodell's decision to preside over Brady's appeal of his four-game suspension.

 

The NFLPA's anger over Goodell's decision is understandable. There is no doubt that the collective bargaining agreement between the players and the owners gives Goodell the authority to appoint himself to hear the appeal, but there is considerable doubt that he has the authority to delegate decisions on player discipline to Troy Vincent, as he appears to have done in the Brady situation. Vincent, a former leader of the players' association who switched to the owners' side during heated negotiations in February of 2010, signed the letter that announced Brady's suspension.

 

Not only does the delegation of authority to Vincent appear to be a violation of the CBA, it is clear that Goodell will be called as a witness in a hearing in which he is the presiding officer. The union lawyers are clearly entitled to demand his testimony. They will ask Goodell to explain his decision to delegate the Brady decision to Vincent; they will ask him about the possibility of a "sting operation" that targeted the Patriots; and they will ask him to explain his approval of the four-game suspension.

 

In its demand that Goodell remove himself from the proceeding, the union will also question Goodell's partiality as he sits in judgment of his own staff and their work in the deflation incident. In addition to Vincent, there are at least 14 staffers who were involved in the episode, ranging from T. David Gardi, the NFL's senior vice president of football operations, to Milton Britton, the kicking ball coordinator for Gillette Stadium.

 

If Goodell refuses to remove himself from the Brady appeal, the union will go to court with overwhelming evidence that the league did not provide its biggest star with appropriate due process, and Goodell will face another humiliating defeat.

Since this guy apparently knows the future and knows everything that will happen, do you think he could slip me the lottery numbers for next week?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how Colt fans ignore two FACTS:

The Colts apparently cheated as well, as their balls were also below the legal limit.

Secondly, a Colts employee illegally used a needle on the ball on the sideline. That's a violation of the rule .

But hey, witch hunts are more fun.

 

 

LOL. Back with more ridiculous crap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if you saw this article by Lester Munson back when Goodell appointed himself to hear the appeal, http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12920021/nfl-nflpa-guilty-detrimental-conduct-actions-court

 

He makes some interesting points about how Goodell presiding over Brady's appeal will actually help Brady in federal court.

 

The players and their lawyers, though, are more likely to succeed in their attack on Goodell's decision to preside over Brady's appeal of his four-game suspension.

 

The NFLPA's anger over Goodell's decision is understandable. There is no doubt that the collective bargaining agreement between the players and the owners gives Goodell the authority to appoint himself to hear the appeal, but there is considerable doubt that he has the authority to delegate decisions on player discipline to Troy Vincent, as he appears to have done in the Brady situation. Vincent, a former leader of the players' association who switched to the owners' side during heated negotiations in February of 2010, signed the letter that announced Brady's suspension.

 

Not only does the delegation of authority to Vincent appear to be a violation of the CBA, it is clear that Goodell will be called as a witness in a hearing in which he is the presiding officer. The union lawyers are clearly entitled to demand his testimony. They will ask Goodell to explain his decision to delegate the Brady decision to Vincent; they will ask him about the possibility of a "sting operation" that targeted the Patriots; and they will ask him to explain his approval of the four-game suspension.

 

In its demand that Goodell remove himself from the proceeding, the union will also question Goodell's partiality as he sits in judgment of his own staff and their work in the deflation incident. In addition to Vincent, there are at least 14 staffers who were involved in the episode, ranging from T. David Gardi, the NFL's senior vice president of football operations, to Milton Britton, the kicking ball coordinator for Gillette Stadium.

 

If Goodell refuses to remove himself from the Brady appeal, the union will go to court with overwhelming evidence that the league did not provide its biggest star with appropriate due process, and Goodell will face another humiliating defeat.

 

 

Suggestion... give it up. Brady is not going to Federal court as he's guilty as all hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how Colt fans ignore two FACTS:

The Colts apparently cheated as well, as their balls were also below the legal limit.

Secondly, a Colts employee illegally used a needle on the ball on the sideline. That's a violation of the rule .

But hey, witch hunts are more fun.

Really?  Those "facts" are news to me.  Let's see what the investigation said:

 

Marlow  agreed  that the  difference  in  the  magnitude  of  the average pressure  drops between  the Patriots and Colts footballs is statistically significant, regardless of which of the two gauges was used  to  set  the balls  pre-game  and  test  them  at  halftime  and  regardless  of  whether  the  starting pressure for the Colts game balls is assumed to be 13.0 or 13.1 psi

...

Exponent concluded that, within the range of likely game conditions and circumstances studied, they could identify no set of credible environmental or physical  factors  that  completely  accounts  for the Patriots  halftime  measurements  or  for  the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls, as compared to the loss in air pressure  exhibited  by  the  Colts  game  balls

...

What is most significant about the halftime measurements is that the magnitude of the reduction in average pressure was greater for the Patriots footballs when compared to that of the Colts footballs.

 

Now, if you could direct to your source on your second "fact", that would be great.  Please refer me to what page in the Wells report this Colts person is mentioned as breaking the rules.

 

Just because you say something is a fact, doesn't mean it's a fact.  And that's a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's pretty silly to argue against it when the Pats have already admitted guilt.

Except this never happened.

Seriously, do people here ever look at primary evidence? Or do you just listen to what the media feeds you?

None of you read the report .

None of you have read the NY Times article that tore the Wells Report apart.

Mine have read the Pete number of national articles that have poked thousands of holes in the Wells Report.

Not sure why I returned, because my prediction on how people here would take the article came 100% true. No willingness to be objective, swallow BSPN hook , line, and sinker, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except this never happened.

Seriously, do people here ever look at primary evidence? Or do you just listen to what the media feeds you?

None of you read the report .

None of you have read the NY Times article that tore the Wells Report apart.

Mine have read the Pete number of national articles that have poked thousands of holes in the Wells Report.

Not sure why I returned, because my prediction on how people here would take the article came 100% true. No willingness to be objective, swallow BSPN hook , line, and sinker, etc.

Do Pats fans look at primary evidence?  The stuff in the Wells report seems pretty conclusive to me.  Did you read it?

 

Let's be objective.  The AEI has a history of bending their findings to fit what they want their shareholders to see.  Furthermore, anything Bad Morty has posted in regards to the AEI report is refuted by the Wells report.  In fact, the things the AEI claim in their report suggest they didn't read the Wells report.  For more details on these, please read my previous posts in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet.. none of the Colts balls were below.......

Are we done with this crap already, cheaters cheat, lets just stuff it in their face in October and then January if need be. Beat these clowns and do it viciously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how Colt fans ignore two FACTS:

The Colts apparently cheated as well, as their balls were also below the legal limit.

Secondly, a Colts employee illegally used a needle on the ball on the sideline. That's a violation of the rule .

But hey, witch hunts are more fun.

 

 

I will 

 

Really?  Those "facts" are news to me.  Let's see what the investigation said:

 

Marlow  agreed  that the  difference  in  the  magnitude  of  the average pressure  drops between  the Patriots and Colts footballs is statistically significant, regardless of which of the two gauges was used  to  set  the balls  pre-game  and  test  them  at  halftime  and  regardless  of  whether  the  starting pressure for the Colts game balls is assumed to be 13.0 or 13.1 psi

...

Exponent concluded that, within the range of likely game conditions and circumstances studied, they could identify no set of credible environmental or physical  factors  that  completely  accounts  for the Patriots  halftime  measurements  or  for  the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls, as compared to the loss in air pressure  exhibited  by  the  Colts  game  balls

...

What is most significant about the halftime measurements is that the magnitude of the reduction in average pressure was greater for the Patriots footballs when compared to that of the Colts footballs.

 

Now, if you could direct to your source on your second "fact", that would be great.  Please refer me to what page in the Wells report this Colts person is mentioned as breaking the rules.

 

Just because you say something is a fact, doesn't mean it's a fact.  And that's a fact.

 

 

Would it be OK for me to have a contest and pay $100 to the winner's favorite charity ? It would be for the most ridiculous , outrageous post by a certain  poster that just appeared in this thread. I think would be in good fun to go back through these threads and just look at all the ridiculous statements . I will send the winners check to you for mailing and proof of payment .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why I returned,

haha  maybe you like the conflict  :scratch:    :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why I returned, because my prediction on how people here would take the article came 100% true. No willingness to be objective, swallow BSPN hook , line, and sinker, etc.

 

Funny, my prediction on how the Pats fans here would take the Wells report and any subsequent articles has come 100% true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?  Those "facts" are news to me.  Let's see what the investigation said:

 

Marlow  agreed  that the  difference  in  the  magnitude  of  the average pressure  drops between  the Patriots and Colts footballs is statistically significant, regardless of which of the two gauges was used  to  set  the balls  pre-game  and  test  them  at  halftime  and  regardless  of  whether  the  starting pressure for the Colts game balls is assumed to be 13.0 or 13.1 psi

...

Exponent concluded that, within the range of likely game conditions and circumstances studied, they could identify no set of credible environmental or physical  factors  that  completely  accounts  for the Patriots  halftime  measurements  or  for  the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls, as compared to the loss in air pressure  exhibited  by  the  Colts  game  balls

...

What is most significant about the halftime measurements is that the magnitude of the reduction in average pressure was greater for the Patriots footballs when compared to that of the Colts footballs.

 

Now, if you could direct to your source on your second "fact", that would be great.  Please refer me to what page in the Wells report this Colts person is mentioned as breaking the rules.

 

Just because you say something is a fact, doesn't mean it's a fact.  And that's a fact.

 

Now, now, don't start using real facts with these Pats fans.  You know that they live in some alternate reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Brady's hearing is set for June 23

 

Perfectly for you, the Wells report addressed this.

 

Page 203 of the URL I posted twice:

it suggests the possibility that the lower pressures observed in the measurements of the Patriots footballs recorded at halftime could simply be due to the Patriots footballs being measured first, and that the higher pressures seen in the Colts footballs could be a result of being measured at a later time. Therefore, the main focus of the transient experiments was to determine if variation in measurement timing was sufficient to explain the variation in the observed differences in the average pressure drops between the teams, given the ranges of likely environmental factors present on Game Day and the realistic timing of measurements given the sequencing and duration of the various events known to have occurred at halftime. For the reasons described below and based on our experiments, the timing of the measurements taken during halftime of the AFC Championship Game does not on its own completely account for the difference in the observed average pressure drops between the two teams

 

Page 215:

Based on the above conclusions, although the relative “explainability” of the results from Game Day are dependent on which gauge was used by Walt Anderson prior to the game, given the most likely timing of events during halftime, the Patriots halftime measurements do not appear to be explained by the environmental factors tested, regardless of the gauge used.

 

It's like this institute that you keep quoting didn't even bother to read the Wells report and instead is just trying to come up with any excuse to invalidate it.  It's like if someone were to say a person handling footballs uses the term "deflator" to reference his attempts at weight loss.....you'd have to be foolish to even think of saying this stuff to anyone....oh wait....

 

The only people who will think what the institute is saying is true (given what you've shown me so far) is people who didn't actually read the Wells report and are just looking for excuses.

 

Laughably false?  When did this happen?

yeah I'm not sure you are getting how the AEI report has debunked this...

 

The pressure of a football depends on the ambient temperature of the atmosphere in which it is located. Footballs inflated to 12.5 PSI at room temperature will drop in pressure when taken into the cold. The pressure in the football will increase when it is brought back into a warm room. Estimating how much the pressure in the ball will decline when the external temperature changes involves straightforward physics.

An investigation that identifies wrongdoing on the part of the Patriots should document three things: that the pressure in the Patriots balls declined more than the pressure in the Colts balls, that the pressure in the Patriots balls was significantly below the level predicted by basic physics, and that the pressure in the Colts balls was not statistically above or below the level predicted by basic physics. The confluence of these three results would represent a smoking gun. However, the statistically different reduction in pressure could result either because the Patriots balls declined more than predicted or because the Colts balls declined less than predicted. The Wells report provides no statistical analysis on this key point.

 

The problem here is that ideally,

measurements would have been taken simultaneously for all balls, outdoors, at the end of the half, and with the same gauge that was used before the game. Instead, the balls were taken inside and measured there, but not measured simultaneously. The pressure was checked twice for the Patriots balls (once with each gauge), after which the Patriots balls were reinflated and the Colts ball pressure was measured. Only 4 of the Colts balls (instead of all 12) were measured because halftime ended and the officials ran out of time. The fact that the officials ran out of time is highly material: it implies that the Colts balls were inside a warm room for almost the entire halftime before they were measured and thus had a chance to warm up.

 

The Wells report’s analysis focuses on the pressure drop of the Patriots balls between their pregame and halftime measurements relative to the pressure drop of the Colts balls between their pregame and halftime measurements. The question the report attempts to answer is whether the pressure drop of the Patriots balls can be explained as

the natural pressure drop of a football used during the game, or whether only human intervention can explain the pressure reduction.

Fortunately, the Wells report provides sufficient data to test this. First, it specifies the range of pressures that the Ideal Gas Law suggests the balls could have read given the temperature change from indoors to outdoors. That range, according to the report, is 11.32 to 11.52 in the case of the Patriots and 11.80 to 12.00 in the case of the Colts (Wells Jr., Karp, and Reisner 2015). Again, as there is uncertainty concerning which gauge was used before the game, we explore all four possible permutations.

 

The Wells report also documents that the temperature of the surrounding environment influences the internal pressure of a football even over very short time intervals. The report notes, for instance, that the 0.7 PSI impact on a football of "vigorous rubbing" dissipates after a window of roughly 15–30 minutes. And a chart on page 31 of the Exponent section of the Wells report shows pronounced effects of air temperature on ball pressure in a span of what appears to be roughly 15 minutes (Wells Jr., Karp, and Reisner 2015, 31).

 

The report also notes that halftime was scheduled to last 13 minutes and that the Colts balls were measured toward the very end of that window, when they ran out of time. We can therefore infer that the Colts balls were tested after being indoors for a period of a bit less than 15 minutes. The first of the Patriots balls was measured right at the beginning of halftime, followed by the others.

The differences in the pressure drop of each team’s balls between pregame and halftime that are documented by the Wells report can be explained by this difference in the timing of measurements. Tables 6 and 7 report the results of a t-test for whether the pressure of the balls measured at halftime is statistically distinguishable from the bottom of the range predicted for the beginning of based on the Ideal Gas Law.6 In principle, one could take into account the duration of exposure to the ambient temperature of the Officials’ Locker Room, where the halftime testing occurred, when forming a benchmark for what the pressure of the each team’s balls should measure if there were no illegal tampering.

 

Yet the officials’ failure to record the precise time at which the balls were tested during halftime precludes the possibility of making precise adjustments for the expected pressure of the balls based on their exposure to the room’s ambient temperature.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except this never happened.

Seriously, do people here ever look at primary evidence? Or do you just listen to what the media feeds you?

None of you read the report .

None of you have read the NY Times article that tore the Wells Report apart.

Mine have read the Pete number of national articles that have poked thousands of holes in the Wells Report.

Not sure why I returned, because my prediction on how people here would take the article came 100% true. No willingness to be objective, swallow BSPN hook , line, and sinker, etc.

Well, bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...

 

Yet the officials’ failure to record the precise time at which the balls were tested during halftime precludes the possibility of making precise adjustments for the expected pressure of the balls based on their exposure to the room’s ambient temperature.

 

You can't just copy and paste parts of a report without actually reading it in context and then say you know what they're talking about.  If you actually read my responses, you'll see that I refuted your points.  It's a discussion.  You have to read my response and consider it before responding. 

 

In fact, I'll even bring the link up for you.  You don't even need to search for it.  Just click the link:

http://forums.colts.com/topic/38827-research-institute-disproves-wells-report/?p=1121333

 

And if you actually go to the Wells report (for which I've posted the link twice), you can read the entirety of those comments in their context and you'll see how the timing of the measurements was deemed to not be a significant factor.

 

In summary: the Wells investigation took your/the AEI's point into consideration when they did their analysis and determined it didn't make a difference.  So the AEI and you have both clearly not read the Wells report, yet you're both trying to refute it.  As I posted before, I wanted to read the parts of the Wells report that you had a problem with so I could understand what's going on and make an educated and informed response.  I suggest you do the same and really read the parts of the Wells report that I've highlighted so you can also make a more informed response, instead of simply regurgitating what you've said before (which, ironically, is a regurgitation of what the AEI said...which we've already determined is baseless)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't just copy and paste parts of a report without actually reading it in context and then say you know what they're talking about.  If you actually read my responses, you'll see that I refuted your points.  It's a discussion.  You have to read my response and consider it before responding. 

ha! You pasted the Wells report at me where they claimed they accounted for the increase in pressure in the Colts balls from the longer time in the warmer ambient air...what all of the above points out is that there is no way they could properly account for that change since there is no record of how long the balls were in the ambient air before they were measured. Wells might have allowed for 5 minutes in 75 degree temperatures for all we know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...