or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NFL 2016-17 Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NFL 2016-17 Thread - Page 175

post #2611 of 4980

I'm glad Tom Brady cleared the air that this ball thing is not ISIS. It must have been AQAP then, huh? 

post #2612 of 4980
Quote:
Originally Posted by archibaldleach View Post

I think we can discuss this issue without trying to pretend that footballs slightly below regulation weight are in any way morally analogous to rape. I'm very disappointed to see that sort of thing brought up on a thread that is ultimately about a game. A game played by professionals with a lot of money riding on the outcome, but nonetheless still a game.

Nice job at not actually doing that.
post #2613 of 4980
baldy[1].gif
post #2614 of 4980
There appears to be three main lines of defense of Deflategate:

1. Claim ignorance;
2. Blame the weather; and
3. Argue that it doesn't matter because a. everybody does it, and b. it didn't affect the outcome.

To the Patriots' credit, they are availing themselves of 1., which is the most viable, if not entirely persuasive.
post #2615 of 4980
Back in my sports playing days we played with under inflated balls all the time (twss)

I know this is a totally different level of sports, but does it really make that big a difference?
post #2616 of 4980

I am 100% for any type of cheating that does not involve prescription medication or injury to other players.

post #2617 of 4980
Quote:
Originally Posted by archibaldleach View Post

It's a fair qustion and one that should logically be asked. If the same thing happened with the Colts, either both teams did something shady or there's another explanation. It's only a story if only NE's balls were different and there is evidence of wrongdoing.

If the Patriots had challenged the Colts' footballs, and it turned out that they were underinflated to the same level, the Patriots could point to weather as the culprit. That the Patriots didn't mount such a challenge suggests to me that they knew that the results of the challenge would be incriminating, not exculpatory.
post #2618 of 4980
Quote:
Originally Posted by archibaldleach View Post

baldy[1].gif

QFI
post #2619 of 4980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambulance Chaser View Post

There appears to be three main lines of defense of Deflategate:

1. Claim ignorance;
2. Blame the weather; and
3. Argue that it doesn't matter because a. everybody does it, and b. it didn't affect the outcome.

To the Patriots' credit, they are availing themselves of 1., which is the most viable, if not entirely persuasive.

I'm not entirely sure exactly how you're using "viable" and "persuasive" in this context, but 3b is pretty clearly a true statement, no? What bearing that does or doesn't have on what the fall-out should be is a different question, of course.
post #2620 of 4980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambulance Chaser View Post

If the Patriots had challenged the Colts' footballs, and it turned out that they were underinflated to the same level, the Patriots could point to weather as the culprit. That the Patriots didn't mount such a challenge suggests to me that they knew that the results of the challenge would be incriminating, not exculpatory.

Maybe. Also seems like poor form to challenge the acceptability of the other team's balls after crushing them on the field. News about the investigation would not have broken until after the game and I don't see a reason for the Pats to have mounted a challenge during.
post #2621 of 4980
It seemed really unlikely that Brady wouldn't notice the balls were not inflated properly if D'Qwell Jackson noticed after intercepting the ball. However, D'Qwell Jackson now denies having noticed or said anything about that.
post #2622 of 4980
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/?p=2932
Quote:

The New England Patriots Prevention of Fumbles is Nearly Impossible

Fumble-Chart-1.png
One can CLEARLY SEE the Patriots, visually, are off the chart. There is no other team even close to being near to their rate of 187 offensive plays (passes+rushes+sacks) per fumble. The league average is 105 plays/fumble. Most teams are within 21 plays of that number.

I spoke with a data scientist who I know from work on the NFLproject.com website, and sent him the data. He said:

Based on the assumption that fumbles per play follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten over this period, once in 16,233.77 instances”.

Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0000616 probability to win. Which in other words, it’s very unlikely that it’s a coincidence.

Much more data analysis at the link.
post #2623 of 4980
^ Interesting link. Worth noting that the chart posted refers to fumbles lost and not total fumbles (gathered from reading the article linked to). NE still does well with the total fumbles stat, though.
post #2624 of 4980
It will be interesting to track the data if the NFL starts providing all the footballs next season. If the Patriots continue to hold on to the ball at their current rate, we'll know that it's the players. If they return to the norm, something is rotten in Foxboro.
post #2625 of 4980
Quote:
Originally Posted by archibaldleach View Post

^ Interesting link. Worth noting that the chart posted refers to fumbles lost and not total fumbles (gathered from reading the article linked to). NE still does well with the total fumbles stat, though.

He did it with total fumbles also a little further down at the link and came up with similar results.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NFL 2016-17 Thread