Here's the real culprit behind New England's deflated footballs...
Posted on 01/23/2015 9:26:48 PM PST by Colofornian
Here's the real culprit behind New England's deflated footballs...
Well, what we have here is a microcosmic scenario emblematic of real life.
Somebody cheats. We know which entity, but nobody PERSONALLY takes responsibility. (Kind of like the IRS scandal; yes, we know the IRS as an entity unfairly targeted conservatives, but no one PERSONALLY takes responsibility).
And so people see this as lack of accountability run amok.
No confessions any more for our kids to see; no repentance any more for our kids to see; just passing the buck, stalling, and a hope that those who are pressing to get to the bottom of it all get tired, stop persevering, giving up.
We see this daily in a criminal court system where many perpetrators plead "not guilty" -- hoping the victims will stop coming to the endlessly delayed proceedings.
What we ALSO see -- parallel wise -- is the same thing that happens in society.
Somebody cheats. Others want accountability. Then the relativists step in and claim "everybody does it" -- or "it doesn't matter...it's inane" ... and they become apologists for the cheaters.
When people become apologists for the cheaters, it only reinforces others to get to the bottom of it, or only frustrates others all the more, concluding 'Why bother with ANY accountability?' The cheaters and their apologists win the day, at the expense of our youngest generation -- and truth.
The score was 45-7. I don’t think a few psi in a damn ball made a hell of a lot of difference.
To the ultimate outcome, perhaps not.
But I've seen enough sports, enough liberal politics, enough of life to see the slippery slope play itself out.
Let's review, for example, and say the lower psi impact ONLY one key play in the first half ... Brady's 30 yd completion to Vereen late in the first qtr that was THE key play of the Pats' 2nd TD.
I dont think the lower psi helped Brady per se; BUT it DID aid the Patriot receivers in the first half hold on to a slippery ball in pelting rain conditions.
But let's just say ... for argument's sake ... that the ONLY play it helped was the 30 yd catch by Vereen...and that the Pats wouldn't have scored minus their shenanigans.
How would that have impacted the game?
Well up until the 2nd Pat score, the Colts were running the ball 40 percent of the time & were averaging five yds per carry. Its no secret that in pelting rain conditions, a team's run game is vital.
Once down 14 to 0, the Colts abandoned their run game. They ran it only twice more in first half. Had the Colts been down 10 to 7 at half..they also wouldn't have been passing 10 of 11 times in 3rd qtr.
Bottom line: The Colts would have still been in the game early in the 3rd qtr.... and wouldn't have gone into desperation status where 87 percent of their calls from very late in first qtr to end of 3rd qtr were passes...which, of course, led to an interception like the one setting up a 13 yd Pat TD for its second to last score. Brady didn't pass on that 13 yd drive so whatever condition of the ball on that one didn't impact anything one way or the other.
Trying to recover virtually with the pass alone in pouring rain was football suicide.
(As to those who try to argue that the other 21 2nd half pts scored by the Pats somehow negates psi impact, well, theyve haven't really examined the reality that Brady only threw the ball "downfield" ONCE in the 2nd half...a 22 yarder to Edelman...He dinked & dunked the rest of the time...where psi won't matter on "grip"...and dinking & dunking was not only safe for pouring rain conditions, but hey, once the Pats began increasing their lead, they didn't need to toss it downfield)
So, in review...let's say the early 2nd half score by the PATS put them up 17 to 7 instead of 24 to 7, we might have seen more running plays by the Colts, which in the rain could have sustained some drives and which would have made the game more competitive later in the game...
Now at that point, it goes too far to say the Colts would have won minus the cheating. I don't argue that. I just say the Colts would have still been competitive well into the 3rd qtr as averting "football suicide" could have made their offense more potent than it was in the rain ... and would have relied on the pass less.
I really think in all of the analysis of this, people ignore the rainy conditions' aspect.
I don't think that in better weather conditions that psi makes all tOO MUCH of a difference...but when the weather is wet, and receivers have a tough time holding onto the ball...yes, can make a BIG difference.
I think one of my most disappointed observations in FREEPERs is this argument.
Why?
Well, we're supposedly "conservative" and oppose Democratic ballotbox shenanigans.
Yet what this argument also exposes is that if a Dem candidate "would have won anyway" minus the shenanigans, that we should somehow remain quiet about the dead voting, or people voting multiple times.
It's frankly a utilitarian ethic that is relativist, NOT Christian ... in fact is distinctly UN Christian...militates vs. the truth and elevates falsehood, deceitfulness, etc.
Anyway, those who make this argument should simply "shut up" about Democratic shenanigans from now on...IF that Dem "would have won anyway"...IF they are going to be "consistent" and not hypocritical, that is.
I expect LIBERALS and some LIBERTARIANS to argue that way...NOT conservatives...and NOT Christians.
Yes. They argue that these "laws of physics" are ABSOLUTES and would somehow ABSOLUTELY alter the psi that significantly; yet somehow didn't significantly impact over HALF of the footballs...as if these "Laws of Physics" operated so discriminately to ONLY target the Pats' balls.
Yeah.
Right.
Here's the other thing about Bellicheat the Science guy trying to come across as our resident physicist at his press conference Saturday...
IF, as the Pats say, these "laws of physics" are so CERTAIN to kick in, then why not ensure that the ball is inflated to 13.five psi (the upper end of the legal zone) vs...what the apologists all assume...that ALL of the PATS balls minus one were set at 12.five pregame?
And the answer?
Because the PATS intentionally didn't want the PSI to remain ANYTHING remotely close to the legal psi NOT only for the first half, but if these wannabe physicists are right, hey, the PSI would have dropped another two PSI to 8.five by late 4th qtr...IF the above-freezing air was having THAT much of an impact upon the footballs!!!
Well said.
The over/under is 150 hours at $1500 per hour. /s
“I expect the investigation to take at least several more weeks.”
Wells added that in the meantime “it would be best if everyone involved or potentially involved in this matter avoids public comment concerning the matter until the investigation is concluded.”
That will no doubt suit New England coach Bill Belichick, quarterback Tom Brady and the rest of the Patriots, who were scheduled for their first Super Bowl media appearances later Monday.
Belichick and Brady have insisted they have no idea how footballs used by the team in the first half of the 45-7 rout of the Colts in the American Conference final came to be under-inflated after meeting league inflation requirements in a pre-game inspection.
Less inflated balls in cold and wet conditions such as those during the game with the Colts could make the “pigskin” easier to grip, throw and catch.
Very true but it’s ludicrous to continually give a pass to a team that cheats and everybody knows it. Telling a college team that they didn’t actually win a bowl game means nothing. Cutting an NFL team out of the Superbowl is actually punitive action. Taking away a draft pick and fining them pocket change is worthless. What’s going on now is worse than a joke. Either put some teeth into a real punishment or drop it entirely. The NFL has commissioned a blue ribbon commission that will find nothing and recommend that the ball boy be fired, which just makes them look exponentially worse.
Problem is this is a minor rule that multiple QBs admit to breaking all the time, and multiple teams got caught breaking it earlier this year with no punishment, and there is no actual punishment listed. Add in the fact that Dean Blandino (VP of officiating) said yesterday that there’s no recorded data on the pregame PSI of the balls so they very well could have been submitted under pressured and not detected and really all the kerfuffle is just stupid. IF the Pats did something (which has not been proven) it was negligible and nobody should care. They should drop it entirely, it’s a stupid rule. Many QBs think it should be gotten rid of, there’s really no logic as to why 12.5 to 13.5 is good but 12 or 14 are bad.
I think the blue ribbon commission is going to find that it’s a rule that’s largely ignored and the refs didn’t actually measure the PSI of the balls before the game, and the NFL needs to figure out why they even have a rule that everybody thinks is stupid and nobody even enforces.
Makes sense to me, so the NFL needs to come out and say that. This whole thing is not making the commissioner look competent.
They’ve had too many issues this year. The world has mostly moved on from this, let there be an investigation, some time around the combine it’ll be done, just in time to send recommendations to the rules committee. Really if the whole thing doesn’t involve the Pats, and there is that crowd of obsessive people still whining about spygate this thing blows past with no one caring. Much like when the Vikes and Panthers got caught warming the ball, there were like 2 stories and they got letters and the world moved on. But all those folks who felt they hadn’t gotten enough opportunities to yell “the Pats are cheaters” 8 years ago suddenly found themselves with some soapbox time again.
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.