2014 NFL Season

[tim_m]

Yeah, if he did it and acted alone and you can prove it. What do you do? I don't think you can penalize the whole team unless they can prove not only he did it but the coaches knew. If he acted alone i think the worse that happens is he gets fired.

[faldor]

Yeah, if he did it and acted alone and you can prove it. What do you do? I don't think you can penalize the whole team unless they can prove not only he did it but the coaches knew. If he acted alone i think the worse that happens is he gets fired.

You could probably still fine the team since he, in essence, works for them. But I wouldn't expect suspensions or loss of draft picks. Unless they can prove they had knowledge of this, or if he has routinely done this over an extended period of time. I'm sure they're looking into such things. All of that would be pretty hard to find in my estimation.

[Sober_times]

I don't think the Ball Boy did anything. Reports suggests its 12 balls from each team and he's in the private bathroom for 90 seconds. He took a piss. Though ProFootballTalk has a source that says its entirely possible that they deflated the footballs in that 90 second period. Yes, they said a source told them.   

I find it quite funny that PFT needs an anonymous source to tell them that 11 of 12 footballs could possibly be deflated in a 90 second time frame. Again, this whole thing is ridiculous.

[tim_m]

Yeah, if he did it and acted alone and you can prove it. What do you do? I don't think you can penalize the whole team unless they can prove not only he did it but the coaches knew. If he acted alone i think the worse that happens is he gets fired.

You could probably still fine the team since he, in essence, works for them. But I wouldn't expect suspensions or loss of draft picks. Unless they can prove they had knowledge of this, or if he has routinely done this over an extended period of time. I'm sure they're looking into such things. All of that would be pretty hard to find in my estimation.

That's all assuming team officials knew what he was doing but likely hard to prove as you said.

[Sober_times]

ESPN is reporting that the investigative team is meeting with the Physics department at Columbia University to determine the environmental impacts of inflated footballs. After reading people from MIT, Harvard and others that the Boston Globe has reported on and with this new development, I think the Patriots are going to be vindicated and no punishment is coming as deflation was naturally occurring. People at the league office/ownership who hate Belichick and/or Kraft have leaked elements of this investigation to make the Patriots look bad. Starting with the Colt's Jim Irsay who originally leaked the story to his friend Bob Kravitz. The media took this story and has blown it out of proportion.

The reputation is forever tainted in the eyes of some. And I think the people within the league office and ownership who don't like Kraft and Belichick will be happy with that. The NFL itself won't punish them.

At least that is what I'm thinking.

[faldor]

Yeah, if he did it and acted alone and you can prove it. What do you do? I don't think you can penalize the whole team unless they can prove not only he did it but the coaches knew. If he acted alone i think the worse that happens is he gets fired.

You could probably still fine the team since he, in essence, works for them. But I wouldn't expect suspensions or loss of draft picks. Unless they can prove they had knowledge of this, or if he has routinely done this over an extended period of time. I'm sure they're looking into such things. All of that would be pretty hard to find in my estimation.

That's all assuming team officials knew what he was doing but likely hard to prove as you said.

I was going with a scenario wher the locker room attendant admits guilt but says he did it on his own, without any direction from the team. I don't see that happening, but if it did I think the team could still be fined because of his actions.

[pilferk]

ESPN is reporting that the investigative team is meeting with the Physics department at Columbia University to determine the environmental impacts of inflated footballs. After reading people from MIT, Harvard and others that the Boston Globe has reported on and with this new development, I think the Patriots are going to be vindicated and no punishment is coming as deflation was naturally occurring. People at the league office/ownership who hate Belichick and/or Kraft have leaked elements of this investigation to make the Patriots look bad. Starting with the Colt's Jim Irsay who originally leaked the story to his friend Bob Kravitz. The media took this story and has blown it out of proportion.

The reputation is forever tainted in the eyes of some. And I think the people within the league office and ownership who don't like Kraft and Belichick will be happy with that. The NFL itself won't punish them.

At least that is what I'm thinking.

Which is fine.

But my question is, and has been: Why didn't the pressure on the Colt's balls change?

I don't disagree that the weather COULD have influenced inflation rate.  But, what doesn't make any sense is why it would effect the Pats balls MORE than the Colts balls.  When the colts balls were tested, they, reportedly, had not seen the same kinds of fluctuations, but were exposed to the same weather factors.

I've yet to see any expert address that. Maybe I've missed something?

[Sober_times]

We don't know the starting point for the PSI in the Colts footballs. That is a variable we would need to know. All that has been reported on is that they stayed legally within range of 13.5 to 12.5 PSI level. It is entirely possibly the Colts footballs starting at 13.5 or a little over depending on gauge used(as that can be another variable) and ended up staying within range. I doubt the refs recorded what PSI levels they were at, just rather they stayed within legal range. If the Patriots started out at the minimum of 12.5 its entirely feasible the environment could cause a drop in pressure.

Edit: Thought I should add. Many former quarterbacks have said people with smaller hands prefer a ball less inflated and guys with bigger hands prefer a football over inflated. It seems to my admitted biased opinion, that the Patriots would turn in footballs before the game under-inflated or right at the 12.5 lowest level and the refs pump them up to fit within range(as Peter King has said refs do that). The Colts in contrast, with luck having larger hands then Brady, would issue footballs at the 13.5 highest level or slightly over inflated and the refs would let air out to hit range.

[pilferk]

We don't know the starting point for the PSI in the Colts footballs. That is a variable we would need to know. All that has been reported on is that they stayed legally within range of 13.5 to 12.5 PSI level. It is entirely possibly the Colts footballs starting at 13.5 or a little over depending on gauge used(as that can be another variable) and ended up staying within range. I doubt the refs recorded what PSI levels they were at, just rather they stayed within legal range. If the Patriots started out at the minimum of 12.5 its entirely feasible the environment could cause a drop in pressure.

Edit: Thought I should add. Many former quarterbacks have said people with smaller hands prefer a ball less inflated and guys with bigger hands prefer a football over inflated. It seems to my admitted biased opinion, that the Patriots would turn in footballs before the game under-inflated or right at the 12.5 lowest level and the refs pump them up to fit within range(as Peter King has said refs do that). The Colts in contrast, with luck having larger hands then Brady, would issue footballs at the 13.5 highest level or slightly over inflated and the refs would let air out to hit range.

I'll revisit to be sure...but the reports I read say the colts balls were both within legal range AND had not changed as significantly at the Pats balls did, from the pre-game inspection to half time.

Not JUST that the Colts balls were within legal limits.

So, again...I've seen no one address that issue.

[pilferk]

I just re-verified.  According to a bunch of published reports (mostly noteably by Peter King at SI), the NFL officials checked all 24 balls prior to the game.  At halftime, they checked again, after complaints from the Colts.  They found 11 of 12 of the Pats balls were underinflated by roughly 2 psi (so down to about 10.5 psi), and all 12 of the Colts balls were at the same rate of pressure they were when checked pre-game.

They then re-inflated the Pats balls.

They checked all 24 balls at the end of the game, and all were at the same rate of pressure they were at halftime (after re-inflation).

Here's a couple references (the second is BY King, the first sources him):

http://larrybrownsports.com/football/nfl-patriots-humans-weather/253317

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/01/23/deflategate-patriots-super-bowl-xlix

I've seen the same reported, without the King source, in a bunch of other places.

Edit: Which means the Colts balls held their rate of inflation for roughly 4 hours, through the same changes in conditions (inside/outside/inside/outside), environment, and general usage patterns. And the Pats balls "re-held" theirs for about 2 hrs, post halftime (which sort of rules out conditions and imperfections).

[Sober_times]

The media has been all over the place with this story. There are other reports that the footballs could have been under-inflated between .5 PSI to 2 PSI. So its unsure rather they were all at 10.5 or not. Some reports say they were, some say they were not. If the NFL already determined that it was the Patriots and not the weather then why are they bothering contacting Columbia University to see the effect of weather on the football? If the NFL had definitive proof the Patriots had deflated the football, it would have came out by now(Kraft and the NFL would want to move on from the controversy as quickly as possible). Several media reports are contradicting each other. There is stuff that Fox says that ESPN says otherwise. Its all over the place. This whole thing is a mess. We could waste pages writing about everything we don't know at this point.

[pilferk]

The media has been all over the place with this story. There are other reports that the footballs could have been under-inflated between .5 PSI to 2 PSI. So its unsure rather they were all at 10.5 or not. Some reports say they were, some say they were not. If the NFL already determined that it was the Patriots and not the weather then why are they bothering contacting Columbia University to see the effect of weather on the football? If the NFL had definitive proof the Patriots had deflated the football, it would have came out by now(Kraft and the NFL would want to move on from the controversy as quickly as possible). Several media reports are contradicting each other. There is stuff that Fox says that ESPN says otherwise. Its all over the place. This whole thing is a mess. We could waste pages writing about everything we don't know at this point.

So..in other words...you prefer to ignore the stuff that doesn't directly support YOUR support of the Pats?

That's fine...and I'm honestly not trying to be confrontational. But...that's the long and short of it.

There have been MULTIPLE reports, reporting the same "stuff" I passed along, and honestly...Peter King is pretty reputable. I'm asking a question that is legitimately backed up by numerous reputable press reports.  And I'm getting "well, there are some inconsistencies in some of the press reports, so...."

But pretty much every report about the testing of the colts balls say close to the exact same thing.

So the question remains: How does one explain the disparity?  If you choose to not answer it...fair enough. But, you are, by the looks of things, ignoring the possibility that the info is correct in your previous responses.

I'd offer that the NFL is trying to do 2 things:

1) Be as thorough as possible, which means following every single potential lead or bit of information. Given some of the outcomes/challenges of their recent high profile rulings...I"m not shocked by that tact.

2) Delay any decision until AFTER the Superbowl

The other thing is: Just because they know (or very strongly suspect) there was human intervention doesn't mean they know who, where, or why.  Would you prefer they just drop the hammer on Belicheck, Brady, and the entire organization if it was some lone acting equipment manager?

Due diligence.  They're going to do it.  We'll see what conclusion they come to at the end of it all.

I don't know the Pats are guilty of anything. But there are definitely questions that need to be addressed.

"Something" happened to those balls that seems to be unusual.  I think MOST people can agree with that....

Edit: If a football with a minimum pressure of 12.5 is underinflated by 2 PSI, it's at 10.5 PSI.  That's what I meant.

[Sober_times]

Oh come on now, you want to be confrontational, but its cool. 

I'm saying the media as a whole has been all over the place with this story and as a Patriot fan I believe the explanations the Patriots have given thus far and believe the media is searching for controversy. While doing that they have reported many, many different things.

Lets start with how it started:
Ravens tipped off Colts
http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/nfl-was-ready-to-check-new-england-patriots-footballs-against-colts-report-says-1.9829583

NFL Sting cuz several teams tipped of nfl.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/did-nfl-run-sting-operation-on-patriots-to-trigger-deflate-gate--051258575.html

NFL doesn't know how it happened

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/397011/nfl-doesnt-want-know-how-deflate-gate-happened-andrew-c-mccarthy

Jackson noticed difference, oh wait no he didn't and the Patriots used colts footballs apparently

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/01/deflategate-colts-dqwell-jackson-new-england-patriots



I can keep providing article links that show the PSI levels are different. I can keep showing articles that say the weather impacted it. Or I can show articles that say it didn't impact it. My point still stands. We don't know shit and everybody has made an opinion on it. I want the NFL to study the difference a deflated ball can make that doesn't include the opinions of people without scientific study. I want the NFL to study if weather could have caused this issue. I want the NFL to publish what levels the PSI were at before/half-time/after game(if those records are even kept, which we don't know, all reports keep saying they stayed within range). I want the Patriots to be held responsible if it is found somebody physically doctored the balls rather a ball boy or not. I think the weight of the punishment should be dictated by what the studies show the actual impact a deflated football can make on a game. Unlike Spygate; The grip or velocity or other potential advantages or disadvantages of over inflated and under inflated footballs can be scientifically proven. As sports science gave a small presentation on it, but I want more done to determine it.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12226086

This whole story is all over the place with media reporting different things on a daily basis. Contradicting each others reports. Because most physicists have said that Belichick's explanation is plausible, I am for now believing it until the NFL says otherwise as we can't really trust what the media has been telling us because it keeps changing.

[pilferk]

Oh come on now, you want to be confrontational, but its cool. 

I honestly don't.

But I also honestly don't think it's at all productive to bury your head in the sand and ignore reputable published information, either.

I get there's some differences in reports.  But in relation to what's been reported about the colts balls being tested...I'm not seeing any differences in the reports that are out there. They all seem to say the colts balls stayed the same (not just "in range") from pre game to half time to post game.

I'm saying the media as a whole has been all over the place with this story and as a Patriot fan I believe the explanations the Patriots have given thus far and believe the media is searching for controversy. While doing that they have reported many, many different things.

Lets start with how it started:
Ravens tipped off Colts
http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/nfl-was-ready-to-check-new-england-patriots-footballs-against-colts-report-says-1.9829583

NFL Sting cuz several teams tipped of nfl.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/did-nfl-run-sting-operation-on-patriots-to-trigger-deflate-gate--051258575.html

NFL doesn't know how it happened

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/397011/nfl-doesnt-want-know-how-deflate-gate-happened-andrew-c-mccarthy

Jackson noticed difference, oh wait no he didn't and the Patriots used colts footballs apparently

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/01/deflategate-colts-dqwell-jackson-new-england-patriots

And yet...none of those specifically address the consistent report (I've not seen anything different) that the colts balls were the same at half time, and at the end of the game.

You can point to all the other differences and conflicting information you want.  It doesn't invalidate THIS piece.

It just means you've decided to believe what you're going to believe, regardless.

And that's cool.  But it still doesn't answer my very legitimate question.

As for the PSI differences...I think if it were .5 PSI, across the board, in all 11 balls, you'd be hearing a LOT less.  I think we can assume it was larger than that, at least in MOST cases.

I can keep providing article links that show the PSI levels are different. I can keep showing articles that say the weather impacted it. Or I can show articles that say it didn't impact it. My point still stands. We don't know shit and everybody has made an opinion on it.

We know the levels changed on some of the Patriots balls. Enough of a difference, and enough of the balls, to warrant an NFL look. THAT we know.

I want the NFL to study the difference a deflated ball can make that doesn't include the opinions of people without scientific study.

I'd offer that doesn't matter, because the rule is the rule, and you can't break it.  Advantage or not, it's the rule.

It's like some of the NCAA's stupid rules (you can have cream cheese, but not lox, on bagels given to student athletes).  It doesn't matter they are stupid.  And you can argue they're stupid and should be changed til the cows come home.  But the fact is..they are the rules, and if you break them, you're subject to the consequences of doing so.

You are, essentially, cheating. by the rulebook...whether it actually gives you an advantage or not.  So says the NCAA, so says the NFL, so says MLB, etc.

I know..it's "your" team, so you likely object to that potential terminology being applied. But..it is what it is.

AND, I'd argue, if someone DID it, whether it ACTUALLY provides an advantage or not, they had a reason for doing it..which was likely they THOUGHT it caused an advantage.  I doubt it was just to make all the balls fit in the ball bag better...you know?

So, to sum up, whether it actually does provide an advantage or not doesn't matter.

It might matter if you were arguing to get the rule changed, going forward.  It does not matter if someone knowingly broke the rule, NOW.

I want the NFL to study if weather could have caused this issue.

I think they are, and they should. That's part of due diligence, and, reportedly, that's what they're doing.

 But weather would effect BOTH sets of balls, likely. No?

I want the NFL to publish what levels the PSI were at before/half-time/after game(if those records are even kept, which we don't know, all reports keep saying they stayed within range).

See, you keep saying "all reports say they stayed within range".  That's not true.  I've linked you reports that state the colts balls stayed the same, and the Pats balls, once reinflated, stayed the same from half time til end of game. That was according to King, who's source was, reportedly, an NFL official.  There are other reports of the same, not sourced directly to King (whether they used his report as an uncredited source or not, IDK). So...definitely not "all reports". In fact, I can't find ANY reports, after King's publish date, that say that.  All the reports I find after that date say "the same" or "almost exactly the same". Not "in range".

You're stuck on the "in range" when there are numerous reports correcting that bit.

I expect you'll get more specific info once the NFL completes it's investigation..either from them, or from leaks more closely involved in the investigation.  That's the typical MOI.

I want the Patriots to be held responsible if it is found somebody physically doctored the balls rather a ball boy or not.

I think who it was, and how far up in the org the plan goes, directly effects the punishment.  And the rule actually states the punishment falls to the individual, rather than the organization...so....

NFL might go for a larger punishment if the organization, as a whole (or it's leadership), were directly involved in "conspiracy to circumvent the rules"...but I'd be shocked if that was true (or able to be proven).  This isn't a systemic operation like filming opponents would be.

I think the weight of the punishment should be dictated by what the studies show the actual impact a deflated football can make on a game. Unlike Spygate; The grip or velocity or other potential advantages or disadvantages of over inflated and under inflated footballs can be scientifically proven. As sports science gave a small presentation on it, but I want more done to determine it.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12226086

Nope, doesn't matter.  It's the rule.  You follow it.  You break it, you're subject to a fine.

How big a fine would be directly related to how many times the rule was (proven) to be broken, and how involved the organization was, as a whole, in the rule breaking.  That's not my opinion, FYI...it's the NFL's (and pretty much every professional and collegiate governing body).

This whole story is all over the place with media reporting different things on a daily basis. Contradicting each others reports. Because most physicists have said that Belichick's explanation is plausible, I am for now believing it until the NFL says otherwise as we can't really trust what the media has been telling us because it keeps changing.

It's plausible, but not in a vacuum.  Again, physics doesn't just apply to one set of balls, and not the other, when subjected to the same conditions.

So, again, it comes down to:

Why did it effect the Pats balls, and not the Colts?

I'm not saying it was, for sure, human intervention.  That would be one explanation.  But if not human, then what was the different environmental factor they were subjected to.

THAT'S the explanation I want.  Because, while I've seen the physicists explanations...bunches of them.....not one has addressed the "Then why were the other 12 balls, subjected to the same testing, at the same time, and the same environmental factors, not also changed".

And so far...crickets.

If you don't want to acknowledge the reports as factual/plausible/reputable, take it as a hypothetical:

IF the Pats balls were deflated at the half by as much as 2 PSI, and the Colts balls were not...how could that have happened without human intervention? What could have caused that? Is there anything?

Anyone wanting to weigh in, please feel free!

[faldor]

The media has been all over the place with this story. There are other reports that the footballs could have been under-inflated between .5 PSI to 2 PSI. So its unsure rather they were all at 10.5 or not. Some reports say they were, some say they were not. If the NFL already determined that it was the Patriots and not the weather then why are they bothering contacting Columbia University to see the effect of weather on the football? If the NFL had definitive proof the Patriots had deflated the football, it would have came out by now(Kraft and the NFL would want to move on from the controversy as quickly as possible). Several media reports are contradicting each other. There is stuff that Fox says that ESPN says otherwise. Its all over the place. This whole thing is a mess. We could waste pages writing about everything we don't know at this point.

So..in other words...you prefer to ignore the stuff that doesn't directly support YOUR support of the Pats?

That's fine...and I'm honestly not trying to be confrontational. But...that's the long and short of it.

There have been MULTIPLE reports, reporting the same "stuff" I passed along, and honestly...Peter King is pretty reputable. I'm asking a question that is legitimately backed up by numerous reputable press reports.  And I'm getting "well, there are some inconsistencies in some of the press reports, so...."

But pretty much every report about the testing of the colts balls say close to the exact same thing.

So the question remains: How does one explain the disparity?  If you choose to not answer it...fair enough. But, you are, by the looks of things, ignoring the possibility that the info is correct in your previous responses.

I'd offer that the NFL is trying to do 2 things:

1) Be as thorough as possible, which means following every single potential lead or bit of information. Given some of the outcomes/challenges of their recent high profile rulings...I"m not shocked by that tact.

2) Delay any decision until AFTER the Superbowl

The other thing is: Just because they know (or very strongly suspect) there was human intervention doesn't mean they know who, where, or why.  Would you prefer they just drop the hammer on Belicheck, Brady, and the entire organization if it was some lone acting equipment manager?

Due diligence.  They're going to do it.  We'll see what conclusion they come to at the end of it all.

I don't know the Pats are guilty of anything. But there are definitely questions that need to be addressed.

"Something" happened to those balls that seems to be unusual.  I think MOST people can agree with that....

Edit: If a football with a minimum pressure of 12.5 is underinflated by 2 PSI, it's at 10.5 PSI.  That's what I meant.

Well you're choosing to believe the reports that seem to infer the Patriots are guilty, no? There are conflicting "pro Patriots" reports. And they aren't written by Pat Patriot himself. Legitimate reporters. Just as legitimate as Peter King and Chris Mortensen, who botched the whole Ray Rice saga, by the way. It's all what you choose to believe. I'll freely admit, there's plenty of "evidence" and reports for you to think they're guilty, and most people do. But it does work the other way as well.

As for the Colts balls. IF King's sources are right, and they've been wrong before, there still could be an explanation as to how the pressure in their balls didn't change. And this is not MY theory. They had a round table of people on CNN speaking about this very issue and the question was posed to the physics professor, or whatever he was. The expert in that field said that it would depend on when the balls were tested. The balls do change pressure due to climate conditions. If balls were brought into a 75 degree room from a soaking wet 47 degree field, the balls would eventually return to their normal pressure. What that exact time period is, I don't know. But it's quite possible they measured the Patriots balls first since they were the balls in question. Maybe by the time they got around to measuring the Colts balls, enough time had passed for them to return to an equilibrium. I know it may sound far fetched, but again, that's not MY theory. That was provided by someone far smarter than me.

[pilferk]

Well you're choosing to believe the reports that seem to infer the Patriots are guilty, no?

Nope, not at all.

"Something" happened.

I'm looking for an explanation as to what.

But it has to be plausible, given the information at hand.

I believe King (and other's) reports because...I don't see a lot of different accounts as to what the results of testing the colts balls were.

So I'm trying to reconcile that.

Thus, the question.

It's an honest question.  No agenda. No judgement.

What could cause that?

There are conflicting "pro Patriots" reports. And they aren't written by Pat Patriot himself. Legitimate reporters. Just as legitimate as Peter King and Chris Mortensen, who botched the whole Ray Rice saga, by the way. It's all what you choose to believe. I'll freely admit, there's plenty of "evidence" and reports for you to think they're guilty, and most people do. But it does work the other way as well.

Can you point to some different reports on the testing of the Colts balls results?

I honestly haven't seen them.

I've seen OTHER stuff, other differences and conflicting info.  But nothing on that one...at least not since those reports started surfacing late last week.

As for the Colts balls. IF King's sources are right, and they've been wrong before, there still could be an explanation as to how the pressure in their balls didn't change. And this is not MY theory. They had a round table of people on CNN speaking about this very issue and the question was posed to the physics professor, or whatever he was. The expert in that field said that it would depend on when the balls were tested.

The reports out say the balls were all tested at the same time, in the same place, pre-game. Again, I've seen no conflicting information, and the NFL confirmed that's the gameday procedure.

At half time? We're not sure.  Maybe that's it....

And the reports weren't JUST from King, unless other reporters are sourcing his report/article uncredited (possible, I guess).

The balls do change pressure due to climate conditions. If balls were brought into a 75 degree room from a soaking wet 47 degree field, the balls would eventually return to their normal pressure. What that exact time period is, I don't know. But it's quite possible they measured the Patriots balls first since they were the balls in question. Maybe by the time they got around to measuring the Colts balls, enough time had passed for them to return to an equilibrium. I know it may sound far fetched, but again, that's not MY theory. That was provided by someone far smarter than me.

It sounds a little far fetched, you're right. Like someone searching for a remote theory that might fit, rather than something they really thought had happened.

But at least it's a plausible theory.

I'd guess, though, that was not the case.  But..maybe.  It's better than absolutely nothing, which is what I had heard prior to that.

Edit: To add to above..but then the balls were all tested, again, post game...and the Pats balls and the Colts balls were, reportedly, "the same" as they were at halftime.

ONE set had to be tested first, post game.  Maybe enough time had lapsed for that set of tests, though...that they'd all gotten back to equilibrium.  Just sort of "thinking out loud".

[faldor]

That's the problem. We don't have all the facts, or nearly enough of the facts to come to a definitive conclusion. And apparently, neither does the NFL. What were the PSI's for both sets of balls pre game, halftime, and post game? How/where/when were they tested? Really, without ALL that information, we can't know for sure. We can pick and choose from the leaked information, but it's all over the place. You'll hurt your brain trying to do it. Trust me, I've tried.

Let me say this though. The Patriots have been defiant saying they did nothing wrong. I take that two ways. Either they know for a fact that they did nothing wrong, or they know for a fact that the NFL will be unable to find a direct link to Kraft, Beliichick, or Brady. They'd look pretty foolish if it comes out that Tom did it himself or directed the ball boy to do it. I guess it wouldn't be the first time an athlete lied and later had to apologize for doing so. But they're taking such a hard stance, I have to think they know something that works in their favor, or they could end up with serious egg on their face and have to pay a stiff penalty.

IF, it was the ball boy, they'll have some explaining to do. Because I highly doubt a ball boy would do that on his own volition. But I think it's going to be hard for them to prove unless someone breaks down and confesses. I don't see that happening either though.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the actual game itself?

The Pats have lost to teams with great defenses in the past. I think Seattle would fall into that category, so they could have their troubles. BUT, this year they have a pretty good defense themselves. That seems to be going under the radar. They have had some issues stopping the run at times and they've given up their fair share of big plays. Both of which, the Seahawks are pretty good at. Then again, the Seahawks are somewhat one dimensional on offense. IF the Pats can load up and stop the run, you'd have to like their chances.

It'll be interesting to see how the Pats come out considering all they've dealt with the last few weeks. They could come out on fire, like times they've been questioned before. Or they could let the weight of all the controversy bear down and get the best of them. It SHOULD be a fascinating game.

[Sober_times]

You engage in arguments all the time, I come to the conclusion you enjoy it. I think that's a fair assumption. You may disagree. None the less, i'm not upset or insulting you by saying that. At least I don't believe so but whatever that isn't the point. I wasn't burying my head in the sand.

I operate from the general statement that the Patriots did nothing wrong. I look for proof that they did something wrong. All we have at this point is media reports from unnamed sources that contradict each other on a regular basis. It seems to me, that you and the media in general are operating from the conclusion the Patriots had to have done something wrong.  Regarding some statements made:

Most say stuff like this: All of the balls the Colts used met standards, according to the report. As taken from http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/12202450/nfl-says-new-england-patriots-had-inflated-footballs-afc-championship-game

We don't know the exact reading they had pre-game, half-time or post game. As various reports do indicate that the colts met standards or stayed within range but they don't indicate exact numbers. Let me know if I need to go into the nexis database pull some articles and link them all here. I can do that if your insistent.

I was using the other article links as an example of the varying reports this incident has given us over the last week. I have read far too much about deflating footballs rather through SI.com and Peter King, Pro-football Talk, Yahoo news, ESPN, Boston Globe, Herald and other sources. Of course as a Patriot fan I want them to be vindicated and start with the premise they are innocent. That doesn't change the fact that the only thing we have right now is conjecture as to what happened. The majority of the public is using the conjecture to convict the Patriots. 

If its deemed the Patriots purposely deflated footballs, I agree the Patriots should be punished. The rulebook has a $25,000 fine. Some reports indicate that they could be fined and drafts taken away. My feeling is, that if the advantage of a deflated football is neglible, as in it doesn't exist, give them the minimum fine and change the rule. If its found to give a bigger advantage, give them a bigger punishment. Like most punishment is done. It should fit the crime. That was my point on that.

 

[Sober_times]

Does anyone have any thoughts on the actual game itself?

The Pats have lost to teams with great defenses in the past. I think Seattle would fall into that category, so they could have their troubles. BUT, this year they have a pretty good defense themselves. That seems to be going under the radar. They have had some issues stopping the run at times and they've given up their fair share of big plays. Both of which, the Seahawks are pretty good at. Then again, the Seahawks are somewhat one dimensional on offense. IF the Pats can load up and stop the run, you'd have to like their chances.

It'll be interesting to see how the Pats come out considering all they've dealt with the last few weeks. They could come out on fire, like times they've been questioned before. Or they could let the weight of all the controversy bear down and get the best of them. It SHOULD be a fascinating game.

You're right and it is going to be interesting to see if they come out as angry team like they did against Cincinnati.

Here are my thoughts on the game:

The Patriots have a hard time dealing with interior rushing, historically, as they tend to use smaller more athletic interior lineman. Guys like Wendall or Connolly. Seattle lost a key interior pass rusher to injury so that should help the Patriots. If the line can hold the interior and allow a pocket to be completed for Brady I think the Patriots can excel against the legion of boom. They can't allow a 4 man rush to get to Brady. Must force Seattle to get creative for pressure.

Gronk is a bad match-up for anybody and should be used as a decoy. Since Seattle's defense so rarely adjusts to what the offense is doing, it should be easy to use motion for Brady to read the defense and take advantage of possible mis-matches. Either with Edelman, Vareen, Wright, Amendola or otherwise. I believe Gronk will get a couple good plays, but its going to come down to how everyone else does. Brady will have to spread it around which he loves to do anyway. I don't think Seattle will blitz very often and when they do, advantage goes to Patriots as Brady's numbers are extremely high vs. the blitz. If the 4 man rush doesn't get home, then Seattle may blitz and that does work into what Brady does well as he is great against 5 or more rushers.

The key for Patriots defense will be keeping Wilson in the pocket and limiting the Lynch run and the read option which Seattle excels at. The Patriots Secondary should have no problems covering the likes of Baldwin, Kearse and the supporting cast. Its going to come down to the front 7 and how they deal with Lynch and the read option. If they stop the run, this is going to be a long game for Seattle.

I look at what Seattle has done over the last half of the season and don't see it as that impressive. As the competition they have faced hasn't exactly been top tier. So I think they are coming in a little over-rated. I believe the Patriots have a better Quarterback, Coach, and defense then the Broncos had last year and that Seattle is not nearly as good. I expect a good game with Wilson vs. Patriots defense being the difference maker. I think Revis, McCourtey, Browner, or Collins will make a special play on a Wilson mistake that will cost Seattle the game.

[pilferk]

You engage in arguments all the time, I come to the conclusion you enjoy it. I think that's a fair assumption. You may disagree. None the less, i'm not upset or insulting you by saying that. At least I don't believe so but whatever that isn't the point. I wasn't burying my head in the sand.

Whatever gets you through the night...it doesnt't invalidate the point. I'd also point out...i didnt start the argument.  Asked a question...based on reputable, legit, pretty wide spread, reporting.

I operate from the general statement that the Patriots did nothing wrong. I look for proof that they did something wrong. All we have at this point is media reports from unnamed sources that contradict each other on a regular basis. It seems to me, that you and the media in general are operating from the conclusion the Patriots had to have done something wrong.

Incorrect.

I'm operating under the conclusion something happened, whch resulted in the balls testing at a lower presuure rate.

I'm not assumng guilt or innocence, of anyone. Look at my initial question.

I'd be perfectly ok accepting the weather explanation, if someone could realistically reconcile the fact the colts balls didnt change, reportedly.

  Regarding some statements made:

Most say stuff like this: All of the balls the Colts used met standards, according to the report. As taken from http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/12202450/nfl-says-new-england-patriots-had-inflated-footballs-afc-championship-game

Which a) doesnt semantically say anything different than the articles i linked...it's just less descriptive/informative and b) was published before the more descriptive/informative reports came out.

In other words, its still not different, just differently phrased, information. Nothing there conflicts with the later reports.

Is there an article that says the colts balls changed signficantly, too, during half time testing?

We don't know the exact reading they had pre-game, half-time or post game. As various reports do indicate that the colts met standards or stayed within range but they don't indicate exact numbers. Let me know if I need to go into the nexis database pull some articles and link them all here. I can do that if your insistent.

No, and we probably won', at least til the nfl releases its findings, and maybe not then.

But, you know, they are looking. They are investigating. Would they still be if they didnt have some sort of reason to? Maybe they dont know why...which is pretty much where i stand, so....

I was using the other article links as an example of the varying reports this incident has given us over the last week. I have read far too much about deflating footballs rather through SI.com and Peter King, Pro-football Talk, Yahoo news, ESPN, Boston Globe, Herald and other sources.

But not one of them contradicted the piece of info we are alking about..thus, not really relevant. Unless you want to discount all media reports, as a whole, in which case there is no issue, because thats how we found out in the first place.

Of course as a Patriot fan I want them to be vindicated and start with the premise they are innocent. That doesn't change the fact that the only thing we have right now is conjecture as to what happened. The majority of the public is using the conjecture to convict the Patriots. 

I am not convicting anyone. I just would like a plausible explanation for what happened, so it can be fixed/prevented going forward. Or get the rule changed.

If its deemed the Patriots purposely deflated footballs, I agree the Patriots should be punished. The rulebook has a $25,000 fine. Some reports indicate that they could be fined and drafts taken away. My feeling is, that if the advantage of a deflated football is neglible, as in it doesn't exist, give them the minimum fine and change the rule. If its found to give a bigger advantage, give them a bigger punishment. Like most punishment is done. It should fit the crime. That was my point on that.

I'd be fine with the 25k, especially if its a "lone gunman".  If there was institutional conspiracy to break rules, thats handled differently,with different punishments (loss of draft picks, etc). I'm not sure they could prove that. Again, this isnt a huge operation, necessarily, with lots of moving parts to find.

Edit: sorry for the typos....ipad!