Posted on 01/23/2015 1:50:05 PM PST by Colofornian
Under his oversized ski cap, Tom Brady could not hide from the fact he was convicting himself in the court of public opinion. The quarterback of the New England Patriots admitted that footballs pumped up to 12.5 pounds per square inch are "a perfect fit for me," yet swore he did not notice a difference in the AFC Championship Game when most of the balls had significantly less pressure.
Brady's story Thursday was harder to believe than the story of the 199th pick in the NFL draft becoming one of the greatest players of all time...
"I would never do anything outside of the rules of play," Brady said.
But his own words told a different tale, and as soon as he was done talking, a 17-year veteran of the quarterback position, Mark Brunell, said on ESPN that he was among those who didn't believe Brady. Earlier Thursday, even before Bill Belichick seemed to be throwing his franchise player under a triple-decker bus in his own news conference, Hall of Famer Troy Aikman said on a Dallas radio station the following:
"It's obvious that Tom Brady had something to do with this."...
(Excerpt) Read more at espn.go.com ...
The pressure isnt 12.5, it’s 27.2 at sea level...so your answer is about half what it should be.
The football pressure isnt 12.5, it’s 27.2 (14.7 + 12.5) at sea level...so your delta is about half what it should be.
Brady looked like “Where’s Waldo” in that hat and sweatshirt
“And when you look at some of the older comments, Bostonians are calling for him to be fired, saying he was wrong, etc.
If he felt his first conclusion was wrong, it should have been mentioned in the new story with reasoning and clarification as to why it has changed. It wasn’t. His entire opinion was swept away.”
I looked at the comments and they quoted his original calculation. Seems he forgot to use PSIA. I recently corrected DIPLOMAT a few posts earlier.
I am reluctant to jump into your discussion regard the relative merits of the NFL “inflation” rules, but the physics (or chemistry) remain the same.
The rules are unenforceable because the inflation of the footballs is dependent on the temperature on the field. A ball (or in this case 24) submitted for review and approval in the refs’ testing area may very well pass muster at room temperature. Footballs subjected to game conditions of lower or higher temperatures will affect the internal pressures in the ball. It is as likely that a ball tested and approved at 13.5 psi at 72 degrees F in the refs’ locker room will become overinflated when subjected to the 92 degree F conditions in Miami. Similarly, the footballs measured and approved at 12.5 psi at 72 degrees F will become underinflated when subjected to game temperature 25-30 degrees F colder than the temperature when tested.
The point is that the footballs were tested and approved AT GAME TIME BY THE REFS. After that, the footballs are subject to whatever the forces of temperature are at work.
I noted in this thread that Green Bay Rodgers likes his footballs overinflated. Could this be because he knows that they will lose pressure during game time conditions? Just askin’.
If the footballs were notably lower pressure, then the only way it could have happened was if someone went in and stuck a needle in the ball and let two-thirds of the gas out,
If they let 2/3 of the gas out, that much gas wouldn’t leave and the ball would be trying to implode.
I don’t have a source...that was what the first statement from the NFL was about...it is common knowledge by now...
“Being that it has been filtered through journalists, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt though.”
I looked at the comments. One noted that he had looked at the prof’s original calc and he had mistakenly used PSIG instead of PSIA.
I am sure he is taking a big ribbing from his fellow professors and students.
And I stand accused of false reports.
“And I stand accused of false reports. “
I never accused you of false reports. I said you were a victim.
Fair enough...
Since I hadn’t read that, I reserve the right to be a little skeptical about ‘common knowledge’.
But your point is well taken. I would love to see the data from the refs’ testing procedures. Is there any mechanism to identify which footballs were under-inflated and by how much? As many Freepers have identified here, the natural performance of a gas (in this case air) is to “lose” pressure as it cools and “gain” pressure as it is heated. There is a range of normal expectations that can be fairly easily calculated. If the footballs in question, albeit under-inflated, fall within this range of expectation, then so what? It is irrational to expect that a football will maintain air pressure in colder temperatures.
And as for the statement that all 12 Colts footballs remained within the NFL acceptable ranges, this information is only useful if we know what the pressure in these balls was at the time of the original testing.
“I can’t remember if he actually stated the formula he used in the original article. I’m not really sure that he did. Maybe.”
According to a comment, it was in the original photograph.
“Sure you did...”
OK. I got carried away when you posted a short statement with no reference. My original post to you was:
“Sorry. You are the victim of another’s lies.”
Turns out professor screwed up royally.
All good then. While we’re in a magnanimous mood, I’m willing to admit that you’ve probably forgotten more about physics than I ever learned.
Of course I still think they cheated.
FReeper lepton and I were discussing this on another thread. The game pressure can be calculated (I did so on the other thread), but IMHO not with certainty.
And that's for two reasons, as I now see it. One, the calculations rely on this being an "ideal gas" situation, and it's not. Two, there are other variables besides temperature and pressure at play here. For example, the football's volume probably changed at least a little bit.
For what it's worth, I strongly suspect that the Pat's cheated. But to prove it, you'd have to repeat the process. Fill another ball up to 12.5 psi, then subject it to the same variables as the originals experienced. Not a trivial thing to do!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.