Robert Kraft talks to Peter King

Rob0729 said:

I firmly believe that Goodell never wanted this to happen and it was his underlings who did this. But once this became a major national story, Goodell needed a fall guy and a rouge ball boy wasn't going to cut it. It had to I am sure he would have much rather gotten Belichick, but all he could get was Brady.

For Goodell, making Brady the fall guy is better for him than spending $5 million and four months and not have any proof of anything or even worse showing that people working for him worked to set up the Patriots and then smear their names afterwards. This was easily the best case scenario especially after he looked like a hero for seriously over penalizing the Patriots and Brady.

Click to expand...

I do not agree that Goodell did not want this to happen.
Not for nothing but this is the SECOND SUPER BOWL IN A ROW THAT THE PATS HAVE HAD A CRAP STORM OF LIES FOISTED UPON THEM AND THIS ONE IS THE MOTHER OF ALL CRAP STORMS.
IMO this is not an accident, it is not coincidence or Karma, this is Mr Goodell and his park ave stooges doing there very best to destroy TB12 and the NE Patriots. This was a highly organized and planned attack over several months which could have been short circuited early with out any large repercussions.
All they had to do was come out with a statement dispelling Mortensen's report of all the Pats balls were 2Lb under the 12.5 Lb limit.
But they did not refute this gross error. The reason they did was not because they couldn't refute it but because they wanted the bonfire to rage out of control.
Initially they even sent Kraft an official Email stating one of the balls was only 10.1 Lbs and then fed the fire for another 80 some days before sending Kraft an Email that had all the actual measurements but only after he committed in writing not to release the real #s to the media.

The corporate mind set at NFL HQ is that the Pats must be cheating. Why you ask are the Corporate stooges all convinced that the Pats cheat. Because of Institutional Bias. In the NFL Corporate mind we do not have the horses to be as successful as we are. Therefore we must be Cheating!
There whole system of parity is based on #1, #2 and #3 draft picks with #1 being the Gold standard. We have never been loaded with high draft pick players yet we continually win therefore we must be cheating. The corporate stooges believe this because if the Pats are not cheating then there entire reason for existing ceases to be. But But they say to themselves it worked so well before BB and TB12 came along and after all TB12 is a mere sixth round pick. Thus TB12 is but a Nag and not a thoroughbred in their Minds and Nags do not win 4 Super Bowls and three Super Bowl MVP awards unless they cheat, ERGO the Pats Cheat. To them it is simple logic.

reflexblue said:

Thank you, but i just want to know how the ideal gas law got its name?
We think we know a lot of ideal things which are subject, so how did the Ideal Gas Law get its name. Was it an Ideal formula, or was the person who came up with the formulas name 'Ideal' or was it ideal because it worked with all gases? Or is it ideal because its easy to use and remember. So many questions, so little time.

Click to expand...

All of those words, and you are correct that I didn't really directly answer the question, my apologies.

The Ideal Gas Law is a simple formula PV=nRT, where P is absolute (not gauge) pressure, V is volume, n is number of molecules of gas measured in moles, R is the Gas Constant, and T is temperature. It is essentially "exactly true" only for "Ideal Gases" which have no interaction between the molecules. Actual gases (such as the air pumped into a football) DO have interactions between the molecules, but those interactions are negligible under the circumstances I described previously (no ultra-low temperature, no ultra high pressures, no condensation).

Thus, the behavior of actual gases like the air in footballs can be very, very closely approximated by the very simple Ideal Gas Law, PV=nRT.

Hopefully I haven't put another 1000 Patsfans.com readers to instant sleep

Rob0729 said:

What is the difference if they had the IGL when they interviewed Anderson? It wasn't like Exponent was waiting on the other end of a telphone waiting for Wells to ask Anderson which gauge he used to start their experiments. The Exponent study was independent from the interviews.

Click to expand...

If Exponent was independent and not waiting on the other end of the line to provide what was needed to support what ever came to light. THEN EXPLAIN HOW THE DATE OF THE REPORT AND THE DATE OF EXPONENT'S STUDY HAVE THE SAME EXACT DATE!

Bella*chick said:

Wow. When asked about his current relationship with Goodell, Kraft responds, "You'll have to ask him."

Yiiiiikes. Someone is PISSED.

Click to expand...

"You'll have to ask him."

If someone put a gun to your head and asked you to correctly identify who said that about his current relationship with the Commissioner of the National Football League: Tom Brady, Bill Belichick or Bob Kraft, I am certain that 100% of you would have said Bill Belichick. Fortunately or unfortunately, that would have been the last thought to cross your mind.

Welcome to the Dark Side, Mr. Kraft.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

Negotiate in way? What is there to negotiate?

Click to expand...

The negotiation is about firing Roger Goodell for setting himself up as Emperor of the NFL.

Owners would love to be in the media as much as the Patriots and Robert Kraft. These are extraordinarily wealthy big ego guys. They have a lot of business they can do amongst one another outside football and within the NFL.

Let the games begin.

AndyJohnson said:

To clarify, I am discussing the right thing for Goodell to do, and specefically avoiding the 'Goodell hates us, will screw us, the world is out to get us' approach.
Perhaps Goodell has a motive other than getting it right, but I'm not leaning on that, nor do I see any logic in why he would.
Not the paranoid conspiracy type.

Click to expand...

I "get" where you are going with this.... there's plenty of reasons to invalidate the Wells Report without having to jump right to the "Goodell hates us"

And yet, taking an objective look at the "evidence" it's almost impossible not to draw that conclusion

FACT: Someone in the NFL offices (Kensil perhaps?) has been leaking mis-information from Day One of this "scandal" and that continues even now. That can't be denied and many of us (well, me) thought/hoped that Wells would include the potential NFL Front Office bias as a matter of investigation in his report

For SOME reason, he completely ignored those facts as an issue worthy of investigation - but I submit, IF there is someone with an Anti-Patriots bias, as the misinformation leaked by League sources indicates there is than THAT is something that MUST be investigated

The fact that it wasn't - combied with the choice that Wells made (and Goodell happily accepted) to accept ALL of Anderson's "best recollection" except for the ONE most critical recollection, should make any logical rational person question whether Goodell, Kensil and Wells have the ability to be objective

There's plenty of other instances in which we've seen anti-Patriots bias from the League office - including the inception of a new rule in 2006 that seemed designed to target the Patriots sideline taping.

That rule just happened to be instituted just after Kensil joined the NFL - and it just so happened to be enforced (ignoring Belichick's use of a gaping loophole) when the Patriots played - you guessed it - the Jets the following season.

So while I appreciate you trying to avoid what most other NFL fans would consider a conspiracy theory, anyone who rationally views the facts really HAS to accept the evidence of an Anti-Patriots bias in the NFL front offices

Wax Frog said:

This, for me, is probably the most painful thing to get my head around. Though I had a fair interest in science, it was never my focus growing up, yet I honestly cannot recall ever having known of air pressure without also knowing the influence of environmental factors on it. I don't remember when I learned this, or what I thought of it at that age, but the two just seemed to go together so naturally I don't think it ever occurred to me to believe otherwise.

Click to expand...

You don't even have to know anything about science! All you need is to ever kept a basketball in an unfinished porch and picked it up on your way to shoot some hoops on a cold day and noticed it was dead. Or played outside in the cold with a ball that was kept inside and noticed that after a while it's not bouncing so well.

I really am shocked at the number of morons, especially morons who live in the north, that apparently haven't noticed this. Not sure how anyone who has ever played basketball, soccer, or football in the cold didn't instinctually know this, even if they had never heard of any of the science.

Fencer said:

I don't think the name is common; I don't recall having heard it before, and I was a physics major for most of college

Click to expand...

But you did hear of PV=nRT or PV=NkT, right?

QuantumMechanic said:

But you did hear of PV=nRT or PV=NkT, right?

Click to expand...

Let's just say I knew that pressure was related to temperature, and my first guess would have been that they were directly proportional to each other assuming a fixed volume.

But why there are 5 variables instead of 3 I don't know without more thought; at a guess, it probably has something to do with Avogadro's Number and, more precisely, that this all depends on the number of molecules with little concern for what kind of molecules they are.

reflexblue said:

I knew that air would condense when the tempature dropped, but i had never heard of the Ideal gas law. For the last couple of weeks i have wondered why its called the 'ideal' gas law. I'm just to lazy to look it up, besides by now the reason for the name has been buried by deflate gate.

Click to expand...

Because it only exactly applies to ideal gases -- gases where the molecules do not interact with each other at all, other than bouncing elastically off each other. For non-ideal gases it is only an approximation. Luckily, for standard temperature and pressure conditions, most gases are very good approximations to ideal gases.

Fencer said:

Let's just say I knew that pressure was related to temperature, and my first guess would have been that they were directly proportional to each other assuming a fixed volume.

But why there are 5 variables instead of 3 I don't know without more thought; at a guess, it probably has something to do with Avogadro's Number and, more precisely, that this all depends on the number of molecules with little concern for what kind of molecules they are.

Click to expand...

Well, R and k are constants, so there are only 4 variables. In the R version, n is the number of moles of gas and in the k version N is the number of molecules of gas Anyhow, here's more than anyone probably wants to know and that's the end of this bit of a thread hijack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law

QuantumMechanic said:

You don't even have to know anything about science! All you need is to ever kept a basketball in an unfinished porch and picked it up on your way to shoot some hoops on a cold day and noticed it was dead. Or played outside in the cold with a ball that was kept inside and noticed that after a while it's not bouncing so well.

I really am shocked at the number of morons, especially morons who live in the north, that apparently haven't noticed this. Not sure how anyone who has ever played basketball, soccer, or football in the cold didn't instinctually know this, even if they had never heard of any of the science.

Click to expand...

When i was a kid Iused to put the basket ball in the oven for a few minutes, the air expanded and the ball regained its bounce. The longer it was in the oven the better the bounce. One time i forgot though, it resulted in a smokin basket ball. My parents wondered 'what the hell that smell was' I thought it was common knowlage that when something is heated it expands, when its cooled it contracts. But i guess not.

and NOW..it's time for Professor Joe Kerr's explanation of the Ideal Gas Law...

Beans + Cabbage + Prunes = A Helluva Lot of Gas!

I find no coincidence in the fact that Kraft talked to King last night and tonight a "back room deal" is being discussed. King has been objective lately and if the public turns on Goodell AGAIN it would be the end of him. He's trying to stop the bleeding.

Douchebag Peter King was on the Rich Eisen show today. I just listened to it and have to go take a shower.

None of these idiots can get their arms around the fact that Tom Brady is not interested in accepting guilt in exchange for a reduction to 2 games. They just don't get it.