DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> DeflateGate
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 251 - 275 of 340, (reverse)
AuthorThread
05/20/2015 03:57:44 PM · #251
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Maybe it IS unfair to penalize Brady alone -- it is after all a team sport, and the center (at least) must have known something was up (or down) ... perhaps instead of suspending the QB for four games, the Patriots could simply be assessed a 15-yard Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty at the start of each possession....

(do you think I needed to include the <sarcasm> tags?)


If it wasn't Brady, there would be little, if any uproar.
05/20/2015 04:33:01 PM · #252
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

When one takes into consideration the financial impact that this will have on both Tom Brady and the Patriots ...

The financial impact on Tom Brady will be about what I make in ten years -- if he can't withstand that, then he's been getting pretty poor investment advice. The Patriots make a profit. This year they'll make a slightly smaller profit. Tough.


Someone mentioned that the four games of Brady not playing saves the Patriots $1.8 million so they will actually save money...
05/20/2015 04:43:49 PM · #253
Sorry, I miscalculated -- then it's what I make in about 45 years ... so boo-hoo even more, just suck it up and live like an ordinary American for a month ...
05/20/2015 05:10:01 PM · #254
Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Maybe it IS unfair to penalize Brady alone -- it is after all a team sport, and the center (at least) must have known something was up (or down) ... perhaps instead of suspending the QB for four games, the Patriots could simply be assessed a 15-yard Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty at the start of each possession....

(do you think I needed to include the <sarcasm> tags?)


If it wasn't Brady, there would be little, if any uproar.


It would seem that if it wasn't Brady there would be little, if any penalty.
05/20/2015 05:12:25 PM · #255
Originally posted by GeneralE:

The Other Sacred Thing Tom Brady Squashed: Sportsmanship

Originally posted by Linked article by Frank Deford:

So even if it was no more than an illegal puff of air that was willfully, with foresight, removed from the Patriot footballs ó with Tom Brady's direction or mere acquiescence ó Brady is guilty of purposely defiling the very artifacts that make the game fair and square. It is not enough to say that everybody cheats a little or, 'Well, gee, there wasn't all that much difference in the balls,' or that people are picking on the poor Patriots.

Games are played by naturally gifted people using authorized equipment. If either is illegally distorted, it's not just a crime against the game but a wound to the whole essence of sport.


Rather interesting that the author would state unequivocally that Brady is guilty of "purposely defiling the very artifacts that make the game fair and square" but in reference to certain doping activities said: "When successful athletes use drugs, like Lance Armstrong allegedly did, ..."

Perhaps one was written without a full knowledge of the facts... no wait... maybe both were written with the same degree of facts being made available.

Sorry, not buying it.

Ray

Message edited by author 2015-05-20 17:36:12.
05/20/2015 05:16:28 PM · #256
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Sorry, I miscalculated -- then it's what I make in about 45 years ... so boo-hoo even more, just suck it up and live like an ordinary American for a month ...


The issue at hand is not a comparison between you and Brady, but rather that they are taking money from him for something that has not been proven.

Let's us not confuse supposition with facts... they are most definitely not the same.

Ray
05/20/2015 05:18:53 PM · #257
Originally posted by DrAchoo:



Someone mentioned that the four games of Brady not playing saves the Patriots $1.8 million so they will actually save money...


If someone accused you of wrongdoing in your practice and suspended your licence for say 4 months... do you honestly believe that all you would have lost is 4 months worth of salary.\

Is it conceivable that there would be other costs involved that are not that readily discernable?

Ray

Message edited by author 2015-05-20 17:36:53.
05/20/2015 05:30:45 PM · #258
Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:

You've repeatedly confused the legal system with the league rules. They're different.


Trust me when I say this, I most definitely am not confusing league rules with the legal system, but as things currently stand, the decision rendered in this instance would definitely be worthy of something one would find in a "Kangaroo Court".

When one takes into consideration the financial impact that this will have on both Tom Brady and the Patriots, I would not be surprised in the least if this matter does not land in a "Real" court of law.

Time will tell.

Ray


If you know the difference, what continually compels you to conflate them?

Boo Hoo for poor Cheatin' Tom Brady...he got caught and he'll lose a few dollars.


Best you go back and check your definition of "Conflate" as I am most definitely not engaging in that process.

While you are at it, do look up ``Kangaroo Court`and tell me that this is not what we are witnessing in this instance. Someone renders a decision based on a flawed investigation, renders a judgement and then has the ability to determine whether or not to grant an appeal.

Pronounce it slowly....K...A...N...G...A...R...O...O...

Ray
05/20/2015 06:02:41 PM · #259
Honestly, Ray, what I see is a stubborn bull dug in so deep that unless we had live video shot by the Pope himself of Brady sucking the air out of the balls with his very own lungs there is no case.

HAD there been such evidence, the penalties, I suspect, would have been much more drastic.

Tom's four games will possibly be reduced to two because that's the way things work in sports appeals (plus he's white and married to a supermodel). The patriots probably lose more than a million dollars in the couch cushions. The draft picks sting, but they are good drafters. Whatever. Life goes on. The Patriot's name will now be associated with cheating, but, you know, it already was.

Sometimes we don't have all the information we wish and we have to make our best guesses. It happens to me every day. In this case I honestly think the investigation made their best guess and I don't smell ulterior motives. I thought they were forthright to say up front that the results were more probable than not but not assuredly correct. They chose the best course of action based on this.

Message edited by author 2015-05-20 18:12:31.
05/20/2015 06:14:24 PM · #260
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Honestly, Ray, what I see is a stubborn bull dug in so deep that unless we had live video shot by the Pope himself of Brady sucking the air out of the balls with his very own lungs there is no case.

HAD there been such evidence, the penalties, I suspect, would have been much more drastic.

Tom's four games will possibly be reduced to two because that's the way things work in sports appeals (plus he's white and married to a supermodel). The patriots probably lose more than a million dollars in the couch cushions. The draft picks sting, but they are good drafters. Whatever. Life goes on. The Patriot's name will now be associated with cheating, but, you know, it already was.

Sometimes we don't have all the information we wish and we have to make our best guesses. It happens to me every day. In this case I honestly think the investigation made their best guess and I don't smell ulterior motives. I thought they were forthright to say up front that the results were more probable than not but not assuredly correct. They chose the best course of action based on this.


Hit the nail on the head.
05/20/2015 06:17:35 PM · #261
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I thought they were forthright to say up front that the results were more probable than not but not assuredly correct. They chose the best course of action based on this.


Who says we can't agree.

If indeed they earnestly believe that, then there is no reason whatsoever why they would not welcome and independent review by an outside party.

If that was done, I would readily accept the results. I could possibly be disappointed, but at least I would have the satisfaction of knowing that an independent arbitrator reviewed all of the available data and rendered a decision based on facts and not mere speculation.

Ray
05/20/2015 06:19:03 PM · #262
Originally posted by chazoe:


Hit the nail on the head.


Why, because it lines up with your perception of reality?

Why not have an independent review?

Ray
05/20/2015 06:35:12 PM · #263
I usually save my debating for voting threads but Iíll jump in hereÖ.

IF Brady directed or merely acquiesced it was wrong. I have a little trouble buying that that can be described as ďdefiling the very artifacts that make the game fair and square thoughĒ. That sounds like a bit of hyperbole to me. But then again I am a Brady and Patriots fan and may be a little biased.

Why I struggle with the authorís statement is that I think it is the nature of sport to push and sometime cross limits in attempting to maximize your advantage. Wherever variation is allowed, even with defining specifications, the limits will be pushed. For example take NASCAR. Ok, some of you are already saying thatís not a sport. Weíll save the debate for another time. In NASCAR there are tons of rules on every aspect of the vehicle, the aerodynamics, the motor, the suspension, etc. Do you think that those limits are not pushed by every race team every week? Is it wrong? The purist will say yes. The realist will say it is just part of the sport.

There is pushing limits and then there is ignoring limits. Using my NASCAR analogy you may push the limit with a minor suspension adjustment. You may blow away the limit by tampering with aerodynamics at Daytona. The heroes of NASCAR are often lauded for bending the rules or for aggressive on track performances that may seem unsportsmanlike to some. Think about Dale Earnhardt. Some fans loved him and others loved to hate him but almost all respected the Intimidator. Do you think he ever drove a car that was outside the limits? Did he destroy the fabric of the sport by doing so? I think not.

So back to Brady. It appears that he was involved with what equates to a suspension adjustment. I've seen no proof that it really created any advantage. If he did, he should be penalized but not defiled as a cheater. He did, what I suspect, all of the greats before have probably done but his entire legacy is being questioned now. That seems excessive to me. And I canít help but agree with Ray. This very severe blow to that legacy is based on a pretty low standard of proof. The penalty to the team affects a quarter of the next season and their ability to build their team for the future by limiting their draft picks. That also seems excessive; it feels like a ploy to prevent them from repeating. Goodel has really shown them I guess.

Now, in my opinion, if the NFL wantís to protect the sanctity of the game, then state that from this point on, any given violation will have a defined standard penalty and enforce it consistently. Donít ignore a violation on one team and penalize the next a million dollars for the same thing. In the specific case of the football inflation donít let the teams touch the balls until theyíre in play if the condition of the ball is sacrosanct.

The NFL lets teams prep the balls to the liking of the quarterback which already gives them a perceived advantage, i.e. one quarterback liked them rough another likes them smooth. Thatís ok with the league but step outside of the inflation specification by a pound or two and they have defiled the game. Really?

Message edited by author 2015-05-20 18:37:01.
05/20/2015 06:46:14 PM · #264
Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by chazoe:


Hit the nail on the head.

Why not have an independent review?

Ray


Why, when someone else put it so succinctly and correctly? I'm a fan of brevity.
05/20/2015 08:24:03 PM · #265
Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:

You've repeatedly confused the legal system with the league rules. They're different.


Trust me when I say this, I most definitely am not confusing league rules with the legal system, but as things currently stand, the decision rendered in this instance would definitely be worthy of something one would find in a "Kangaroo Court".

When one takes into consideration the financial impact that this will have on both Tom Brady and the Patriots, I would not be surprised in the least if this matter does not land in a "Real" court of law.

Time will tell.

Ray


If you know the difference, what continually compels you to conflate them?

Boo Hoo for poor Cheatin' Tom Brady...he got caught and he'll lose a few dollars.


Best you go back and check your definition of "Conflate" as I am most definitely not engaging in that process.

While you are at it, do look up ``Kangaroo Court`and tell me that this is not what we are witnessing in this instance. Someone renders a decision based on a flawed investigation, renders a judgement and then has the ability to determine whether or not to grant an appeal.

Pronounce it slowly....K...A...N...G...A...R...O...O...

Ray


con·flate

verb
combine (two or more texts, ideas, etc.) into one.
"the urban crisis conflates a number of different economic and social issues"

That's exactly what you're doing (or wishing to do) with the legal system and the system of rules governing the NFL.

You've said over and over that you expect the rules and standards found in the legal system to apply to the relationship between the teams, players and the NFL. They don't.

Message edited by author 2015-05-20 20:24:37.
05/20/2015 08:26:09 PM · #266
Originally posted by DJWoodward:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Maybe it IS unfair to penalize Brady alone -- it is after all a team sport, and the center (at least) must have known something was up (or down) ... perhaps instead of suspending the QB for four games, the Patriots could simply be assessed a 15-yard Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty at the start of each possession....

(do you think I needed to include the <sarcasm> tags?)


If it wasn't Brady, there would be little, if any uproar.


It would seem that if it wasn't Brady there would be little, if any penalty.


The Pats would still cheat, that's evidently their culture
05/21/2015 04:22:29 AM · #267
Originally posted by chazoe:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by chazoe:


Hit the nail on the head.

Why not have an independent review?

Ray


Why, when someone else put it so succinctly and correctly? I'm a fan of brevity.


Succinct it is...correctly is debatable.

Ray
05/21/2015 05:41:41 AM · #268
Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I thought they were forthright to say up front that the results were more probable than not but not assuredly correct. They chose the best course of action based on this.


Who says we can't agree.

If indeed they earnestly believe that, then there is no reason whatsoever why they would not welcome and independent review by an outside party.

If that was done, I would readily accept the results. I could possibly be disappointed, but at least I would have the satisfaction of knowing that an independent arbitrator reviewed all of the available data and rendered a decision based on facts and not mere speculation.

Ray


Ted Wells is an outside party. You want them to have the outside party review reviewed by an outside party? What if the second outside party comes up with the same results as the first outside party? Do they get a third outside party to review the second outside party?
05/21/2015 06:02:56 AM · #269
Originally posted by LN13:

Ted Wells is an outside party.


Mr Wells has been payed $45 million dollars by the NFL in the investigations in Miami and now New England. When an attorney acts on behalf of a client he is rarely independent of the client that pays him. When he investigates, he assembles a good case for his client. Then he often will argue the case he puts together in front of a judge or jury; they are considered to be independent. Because they are not being payed by either side. Sometimes a defense is even mounted.

From what I have read Mr. Wells cherry picked among the differing pieces of evidence and expert testimonies, discounting evidence that hurt a prosecution and highlighting evidence that helped one. His saying ""no set of credible environmental or physical factors ... completely accounts for the Patriots halftime measurements or for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls." when several studies show that a PSI drop of 1.82 could be expected given the conditions, shows a slanted viewpoint was adopted.

At the half"Clete Blakeman and Dyrol Prioleau tested the air pressure in each of the 11 footballs used by the Patriots. Richard Farley recorded the measurements generated by Blakeman and Prioleau. Then, Blakeman and Prioleau tested four of the Colts balls."

Why only four? The Wells report explains that the rest of the 12 Colts footballs werenít tested due to time constraints.

ďHalftime for the game was scheduled to last thirteen minutes and time was running short before the scheduled start of the second half,Ē

Some believe that the testing of the Colts footballs ended not because time was running short, but because the air pressure readings from one of the two gauges showed that three of the four Colts balls tested under 12.5 PSI. As the theory/hypothesis goes, one or more people supervising the process at that point didnít want to know the results for all 12 Colts footballs, once it appeared that 75 percent of those tested had moved from at or above 13 PSI before the game to less than 12.5 PSI at halftime.
Link

So 13 minutes was too short to measure all the game balls with a crew of 3 people, but it is creditable that a single Patriot's employee deflated all the Patriot's game balls in a 90 second bathroom break?Could the employee have fished 12 balls out of a fairly large bag, deflated each of them by two pounds, put them back into the bag, and exited the bathroom in roughly 90 seconds? Is that the conclusion that that probably did happen the opinion of a person looking for a case or of someone looking for an impartial weighing of all evidence?

I know people have their minds made up largely based on how much they love/hate the Patriots, but this investigation is offensive in and of itself. The handling of the gathering of evidence was beyond sloppy (especially since the NFL had had complaints and were in theory looking for a violation so they should have been ready to gather decent evidence of tampering) and the Wells report did nothing to make matters clear.

As to the change in the outcome of the game; in the first half when the balls may have been tampered with the score was 17-7. After the Patriots balls were inflated by the refs to 13 PSI at halftime, the Colts failed to score, and the Patriots scored 28 more points. Some cheat eh?

Message edited by author 2015-05-21 07:10:32.
05/21/2015 07:59:31 AM · #270
Originally posted by LN13:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I thought they were forthright to say up front that the results were more probable than not but not assuredly correct. They chose the best course of action based on this.


Who says we can't agree.

If indeed they earnestly believe that, then there is no reason whatsoever why they would not welcome and independent review by an outside party.

If that was done, I would readily accept the results. I could possibly be disappointed, but at least I would have the satisfaction of knowing that an independent arbitrator reviewed all of the available data and rendered a decision based on facts and not mere speculation.

Ray


Ted Wells is an outside party. You want them to have the outside party review reviewed by an outside party? What if the second outside party comes up with the same results as the first outside party? Do they get a third outside party to review the second outside party?


Try reading the part in bold. The answer is right there.

Ray
05/21/2015 11:24:38 AM · #271
Originally posted by BrennanOB:


So 13 minutes was too short to measure all the game balls with a crew of 3 people, but it is creditable that a single Patriot's employee deflated all the Patriot's game balls in a 90 second bathroom break?


Brennan, you can't be comparing some "official" measurement and recording of PSI with a possible clandestine procedure? It was probably one person doing the measuring and two people watching. Or two people recording. Or who knows. And they had an interest in getting it right so were probably being deliberate about it.

I can tell you it is VERY easy to let the air out of a soccer ball. Get a needle, insert until you hear air, remove. Just did it this weekend when we decided the ball was too inflated for our game. Took a few seconds.

My guess is the guy was good at it because he'd done it before. That's speculation, but no more than any counterargument I've heard.

I know you are smart enough to be able to glace but a second at this chart and know something is different between the sets:

' . substr('https://simmqb.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/graph-2.jpg?w=600&h=359', strrpos('https://simmqb.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/graph-2.jpg?w=600&h=359', '/') + 1) . '

Message edited by author 2015-05-21 11:27:03.
05/21/2015 01:59:40 PM · #272
In the court of public opinion we the people are the jury, with the evidence we have before us it isnít hard to connect the dots here.
You hardly ever get a smoking gun thatís why we have jury duty.
If you donít think that Brady had any involvement in this you either have Patriot fan blinders on or you donít believe the evidence.
Maybe you think some whoople equipment guy took it upon himself to deflate the balls before the 2nd biggest game of the year?
Maybe you think is was sabotage?
Maybe you think the NFL was trying to give itself another black eye?
Maybe you think Brady had the equipment guy deflate the balls because itís easier to throw, catch, & hang on to?

Just for the record IF I was going to play lawyer and IF I was going to defend Brady and company I would go after the pressure gauge.
If they can find any fault or discrepancy in the gauge like a calibration issue or something then everyone can walk backwards and this whole thing could go away.
I would deny all of the NFLís allegations and talk about the pressure gauge until everyone was sick of hearing about it.
05/21/2015 02:09:24 PM · #273
Originally posted by nygold:

In the court of public opinion we the people are the jury, with the evidence we have before us it isnít hard to connect the dots here.
You hardly ever get a smoking gun thatís why we have jury duty.
If you donít think that Brady had any involvement in this you either have Patriot fan blinders on or you donít believe the evidence.
Maybe you think some whoople equipment guy took it upon himself to deflate the balls before the 2nd biggest game of the year?
Maybe you think is was sabotage?
Maybe you think the NFL was trying to give itself another black eye?
Maybe you think Brady had the equipment guy deflate the balls because itís easier to throw, catch, & hang on to?

Just for the record IF I was going to play lawyer and IF I was going to defend Brady and company I would go after the pressure gauge.
If they can find any fault or discrepancy in the gauge like a calibration issue or something then everyone can walk backwards and this whole thing could go away.
I would deny all of the NFLís allegations and talk about the pressure gauge until everyone was sick of hearing about it.


if the needle doesn't fit..

Message edited by author 2015-05-21 14:09:30.
05/21/2015 04:58:23 PM · #274
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I can tell you it is VERY easy to let the air out of a soccer ball. Get a needle, insert until you hear air, remove. Just did it this weekend when we decided the ball was too inflated for our game. Took a few seconds.

Really? Some day I'm going to come up to Oregon. I will bring a nice bottle of wine and a bag of 20 inflatable balls. We will run an experiment. You think you could walk into a room, shut the door, open up the bag of 20 balls, select out 10 of them, deflate them those ten, put them back in the bag and walk out the door in 90 seconds. I don't think it is possible. There would be a bottle of wine in it for you if you could. I'm certain I could measure all the balls in that bag in less than 13 minutes.

Of course the NFL could have done a time and motion study to see if it was possible. If they had tested it (as it would have been in any real investigtion) they certainly did not make it part of the report. You imagine it is possible, I imagine it is not.

Yes it is clear that there was a discrepancy between the subsets of measurements. You are a man of science Doc; do you see anything wrong with the chart? Does the inability to get an accurate reading on the actual PSI on the balls bother you? Does the fact that there was no record of the order that the measurements were taken in seem odd? If it turned out that the curve of the rise of the PSI was in direct correlation to how long they had been in the warm dry environment of the locker room, would that be important?

Prioleauís measurements were, in PSI: (1) 11.8; (2) 11.2; (3) 11.5; (4) 11.0; (5) 11.45; (6) 11.95; (7) 12.3; (8) 11.55; (9) 11.35; (10) 10.9; and (11) 11.35.

Blakemanís measurements were, also in PSI: (1) 11.5; (2) 10.85; (3) 11.15; (4) 10.7; (5) 11.1; (6) 11.6; (7) 11.85; (8) 11.1; (9) 10.95; (10) 10.5; and (11) 10.9.

We do know that the Clots ball were measured last since those were the ones that were being measured when they "ran out of time". But the rest is guessing.

The spread between measurements of the same ball is enough that I thought it would make a case very shaky, and the fact that we have a subset of 4 Colts balls even measured (75% of which were underinflated by one gauge) makes the case that much weaker. Further complicating matters for the NFL is the lack of clear evidence that the starting point for each ball was 12.5 PSI. Given that the NFL was aware of the issue before the game began, itís stunning that a record of the measurements wasnít made.

The entire case is speculation, and there probably was an intent to gain an advantage. We all know Belichick is willing to flat out cheat to gain an advantage, But the Wells report did nothing but gather up all the speculation and cast a prosecutorial light on the speculation in the most slanted possible way.

Lastly there is the question of cheating. Cheating is defined as "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." When New England is alleged to have been cheating they gained a 17-7 advantage, after that alleged cheat was removed they gained a 28-0 advantage.

I understand that I would probably want to see the Patriots taken down if they had beaten my team on the way to the Superbowl win, but this sloppy form of justice is bad for football.

Message edited by author 2015-05-21 17:07:51.
05/21/2015 05:04:44 PM · #275
Originally posted by BrennanOB:

Cheating is defined as "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination."

I think it's an attempt to gain an advantage -- if cheating succeeded in gaining an actual advantage 100% of the time we'd see even more of it.

Speaking of cheating, how 'bout those banks ... anyone boo-hooing over their (cumulative) $5 BILLION fine?
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 11/30/2020 07:22:46 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/30/2020 07:22:46 AM EST.