PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Seriously...why is it taking so long?


Did anything interesting come out of it?
 
2099, mars is colonized and NFL fans are still waiting for an answer about ballghazi
 
it's time, d%#*!@t.

I'm running outta air.

10284200718.jpg
 
In looking at a few articles on the proposed rule changes for next season, I did not see any mention of changes to the preparation, measurement or security of footballs.

If the league is working on something like that, is that going to be part of the Wells report? If it is, do those sort of changes have to go through the competition committee or to some sort of vote? Or can the commissioner just declare that this is the new process now?

Just thinking about what changes can be made to the process, I'm not sure if it will eliminate concerns or issues. For example, if the officials check the PSI of the footballs pre-game on the field (to eliminate pressure changes due to temperture fluctuations from the locker room to the field), what do they do with the balls after they have been checked? Do they leave them under guard on the field? Do they bring them back to the officials locker room and then back out for the game?
 
What if the temperature drops 10 degrees or so during the game? Balls now out of spec.
The whole thing is ludicrous, fighting physics. And WHY BOTHER? The game has done fine for decades with every single football ever obeying the laws of physics.
 
Koma, As PWP notes, the changes that you're discussing - checking the pressure of the balls & compensating for the temperature changes that happen during a game - represent a real change to the way that the balls have been prepared for a century or so.

This is a bad course to take. And there is no reason to do so.

A quick & easy calculation shows that the misguided effort of the league official to re-inflate the Pats' balls at halftime during the Pats/Colts game resulted in over inflated balls for the 2nd half. The balls that the Pats used during the 2nd half of that game were EQUIVALENT TO balls that had been pressurized at 75°F to 14.6 psi.

This condition was obviously not the Pats choice, but was forced on them by league officials, who were ignorant of simple gas laws.

You DO NOT want to take this path.

The pressure drop in the cold that makes the ball slightly softer is actually counteracted by the increased stiffness of the leather in cold weather. As it is now, in really cold temperatures, they describe the ball as being "hard as a rock". This tells you that the increased stiffness of the leather overwhelms the decreased stiffness due to the lower pressure. If you now go back to re-pressurizing cold balls to 13 psi, then the balls will become significantly harder still.

For example, at 0°F, a ball that is inflated on the field to 13.0 psig is EQUIVALENT TO a ball that was inflated in the standard way that we've been doing it (i.e., at room temp, let's say 75°F) to 17.5 psig. This is a drastic difference.

There is a simple process to address this. It merely requires the measurement of the temperature inside the balls when they are being inspected. Then you look up the allowable pressure range on a chart that shows you the proper temperature compensation.

This approach is easy, non-intrusive & the measurement has to be done only once.

As 2nd side benefit is that - under the current system - there is an easy way to cheat the system. If you want stiffer balls (like Aaron Rodgers), you use cold air to inflate them. If you want softer balls (like Brady), then you use hot air. Measuring the temperature of the air inside the balls eliminates this loophole.

With this chart, one can also check the inflation state of the balls at any time, and at any temperature. If one side squawks the other side's balls, the refs would be able to immediately check the balls at any time during the game, at half time, or after the game, etc., and know whether they had been tampered with. More important, the refs would know the exact right amount of air to put back into the balls to return them to the proper inflation state, and not repeat the half-time inflation error that happened during the Pats/Colts game.

Right now, it is not possible to do this, unless the game is being played at right around "room temp".

But, hopefully, this lunacy will never again darken our doorsteps.!

The key is this:
The inflation state of the balls depends on BOTH the pressure & the temp of the air inside the balls. If you don't measure both, you have no idea about its inflation state.

To date in the NFL, the "inflation state" has been inadequately defined, because the temperature inside the balls has never been measured. The unstated, uncontrolled assumption has been "13.0 ± 0.5 psig, at some undefined room temperature". This ain't good enough once you start to try to measure the inflation of balls significantly above or below this undefined temperature.
 
Last edited:
The ridiculousness of this situation should become clear to you when I suggest in all earnestness that if the NFL wants to achieve what they claim they want to achieve, it is not the pressure of air inside the balls that they should be checking, but the number of moles of air.
 
Just thinking about what changes can be made to the process, I'm not sure if it will eliminate concerns or issues.

That depends on what the "concerns or issues" are. If the NFL is concerned with teams tampering with the ball, the NFL could certainly change the ball-handling protocol. For example, they could mandate that after check-in the balls are kept in a locked room with an NFL-paid employee sitting in the room with the balls. They could mandate that outside the field of play balls could only be handled by NFL-paid employees. They could put small tamper-resistant seal over the valve (and the refs could "sign" the ball on top of the seal to help ensure the seal doesn't get removed and replaced). And so on.

If the concern is over a ball falling outside the 12.5-13.5 PSIG range during play, then they could do something like:
  • Live with it and change nothing (the best approach, IMHO).
  • Provide teams and refs with a table that adjusts the 12.5-13.5 PSIG check-in standard to the on-field temp and require balls to be inflated to be within the adjusted standard at check-in. For example, it may say (note: this is made up; I did not bother to do the real math) that for an on-field temp of 35F the ball at check-in needs to be 14.0-15.0 PSIG or for an on-field temp of 100F the ball at check-in needs to be 11.0-12.0 PSIG.
 
Last edited:
The irony of the whole thing is that having the refs just do it based on feel is honestly the best approach. The point at which there becomes a competitive advantage is the point at which the ball feels noticeably differently. Naturally. That's the whole point of presumably wanting a softer ball with less PSI. That's probably below 9 PSI based on my own tests.

And that's part of the stupidity of the whole thing. Nobody could tell the difference between a 12.5 & 10.5 ball without squashing the f**k out of it, so what is even the point of regulating that pressure difference?

If the NFL is good at one thing, as we've found out the hard way, its arbitrarily enforcing arbitrary rules. Hooray.
 
I loved it when Phil Simms stated that he could immediate literally tell the difference of a football to 1/10 of a PSI. He should have been laughed out of the goddamned building but instead obviously people believed him. That is so objectively full of s**t I don't know what to begin. The most accurate gauges available would not be able to definitively tell the difference between two footballs that are just .1 PSI apart. It is, in the most literal sense, physically impossible to tell the difference to that fine a degree. It is like claiming that your eyes can tell the difference between 60 and 61 frames per second. You cannot do it. It is impossible.
 
Well, seems all of us that had "March Madness Friday" were wrong. This is just insane that its still going.

If we had a poll up, guessing the likeliest release date for the Wells report, I think we'd have blown by all the poll answers.

My new guess: July of 2020...at least that way I should be able say 'hey, they released the report sooner than I expected!'
 
What's that sound? The sound of another week flying by?

What a joke.
 
That depends on what the "concerns or issues" are. If the NFL is concerned with teams tampering with the ball, the NFL could certainly change the ball-handling protocol. For example, they could mandate that after check-in the balls are kept in a locked room with an NFL-paid employee sitting in the room with the balls. They could mandate that outside the field of play balls could only be handled by NFL-paid employees

Uh, step back and remember.
An "NFL employee" was caught in this very game tampering with footballs.
 
I loved it when Phil Simms stated that he could immediate literally tell the difference of a football to 1/10 of a PSI. He should have been laughed out of the goddamned building but instead obviously people believed him. That is so objectively full of s**t I don't know what to begin. The most accurate gauges available would not be able to definitively tell the difference between two footballs that are just .1 PSI apart. It is, in the most literal sense, physically impossible to tell the difference to that fine a degree. It is like claiming that your eyes can tell the difference between 60 and 61 frames per second. You cannot do it. It is impossible.

The problem with all the "tests" we heard about or saw on TV back in January was that the people were told there was a difference between the two footballs, like one is at 10 PSI and the other is at 13 PSI, so they are naturally going to try and detect some minute difference.

I wish one of the football shows would have Phil Simms or Cris Carter on to demonstrate some plays, either throwing or catching passes. After everything is finished, tell them they were using a ball at 11 PSI the whole time.
 
That depends on what the "concerns or issues" are. If the NFL is concerned with teams tampering with the ball, the NFL could certainly change the ball-handling protocol. For example, they could mandate that after check-in the balls are kept in a locked room with an NFL-paid employee sitting in the room with the balls. They could mandate that outside the field of play balls could only be handled by NFL-paid employees. They could put small tamper-resistant seal over the valve (and the refs could "sign" the ball on top of the seal to help ensure the seal doesn't get removed and replaced). And so on.

If the concern is over a ball falling outside the 12.5-13.5 PSIG range during play, then they could do something like:
  • Live with it and change nothing (the best approach, IMHO).
  • Provide teams and refs with a table that adjusts the 12.5-13.5 PSIG check-in standard to the on-field temp and require balls to be inflated to be within the adjusted standard at check-in. For example, it may say (note: this is made up; I did not bother to do the real math) that for an on-field temp of 35F the ball at check-in needs to be 14.0-15.0 PSIG or for an on-field temp of 100F the ball at check-in needs to be 11.0-12.0 PSIG.

That would be great. In an attempt to prevent a pressure change that will happen when the footballs go from the officials locker room to the outdoors, the NFL will pay someone to watch the balls while they are inside.

The tamper-proof seal isn't a bad idea, but will the seal stay on over the course of a game? What if one comes off, is the ball removed from play and is there an investigation to determine why? Could the seal itself be a "slick spot" on the ball leading to fumbles or incompletions?

I can't think of any obvious solutions the NFL should enact. As you, PWP, and Tom.Kordis point out, there are a lot of variables to consider. I'm holding out hope, that as part of the Wells investigation, when they are trying to think up changes they can make and additional safeguards, someone points out that the current system worked fine and maybe it doesn't need to be changed. I imagine that, as part of the investigation, they have interviewed people who could have tampered with the footballs, people who might have witnessed any tampering and reviewed security and game footage for any unusual activity. If that's a dead end, then they are left with the scientific explanation, which could be applied to any cold weather game in league history.

It would be great if the fallout from the report is that people all learn a little about physics, media overreaction, and teams that cry wolf.
 
Literally nothing has to be changed except making sure that the NFL's own employees don't steal balls from the game.
 
I was sure it was going to happen today.
 


TRANSCRIPT: Patriots QB Drake Maye Conference Call
Patriots Now Have to Get to Work After Taking Maye
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf and Jerod Mayo After Patriots Take Drake Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/25: News and Notes
Patriots Kraft ‘Involved’ In Decision Making?  Zolak Says That’s Not the Case
MORSE: Final First Round Patriots Mock Draft
Slow Starts: Stark Contrast as Patriots Ponder Which Top QB To Draft
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/24: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/23: News and Notes
MORSE: Final 7 Round Patriots Mock Draft, Matthew Slater News
Back
Top