If You Read One Article About Gauges Today...

eom · May 27, 2015

in addition, let's just bear something in mind ----- I think it's highly improbable anybody involved understood a football loses psi due to temp, how long it takes to warm up when brought indoors, and all the rest of it.
I also doubt they realized the gauges were reading 0.4 psi apart until they got through a good chunk of the balls.

so, basically, from their pov, there were at least a couple balls that had 'magically' lost around 2 psi of air, and that seems to indicate some kind of chicanery post inspection.
who knows what they were thinking once the colts' balls started coming in light, but I notice they cut that short pretty quick without much concern for any 'unfair advantage' that might be gained by the colts by these magic footballs.

somebody leaked the phoney leaks, however that happened, and the league must have realized what weather does to a ball at some point, as I assume they refused to correct things in order to avoid looking like clowns.

that's one of the most damning bits of evidence in all this, to me, is the league deliberately 'obstructed justice'.

TheBostonStraggler · May 27, 2015

Tony2046 said:
Yeah I admire your hope but after listening to these guys stumble over the basic principles of the ideal gas laws for the last 3 months I highly doubt they are going to grasp onto this.

Agreed. The media has completely made its mind up about the science.
The general media take is (according to what I have seen): While the underlying foundation of the science may not be completely agreed upon, the Colts' footballs didn't deflate to the same PSI level as the Patriots' footballs. Therefore the Patriots' footballs must have had air released from them.

Unfortunately even this well stated article and the fine underlying work done is not going to change the media perception. Any reply that would change the perception must contain (A) the 'Colts' footballs vs the Patriots' footballs' difference are explained because of X and (B) X must be something easily understood to a simple mind (little reading required, very little reasoning power needed). X must neatly fits into the thought process of a simple mind (X not being particularly scientifically sound is less important than it fitting neatly into the thought process of the simple mind).

"sad but true"...

Aßßynormal · May 27, 2015

2 pre-season games
8 regular season games
2 post season games

In how many of these games did McNally take a detour to a toilette or otherwise. Is it mentioned in the report anywhere? The cameras had to be running in all cases or were the files deleted?

eom · May 27, 2015

Aßßynormal said:
2 pre-season games
8 regular season games
2 post season games

In how many of these games did McNally take a detour to a toilette or otherwise. Is it mentioned in the report anywhere? The cameras had to be running in all cases or were the files deleted?

the cameras overwrite every 10 days.
I believe the claim from the tinfoil hats is that there is a period of time when the refs are on the field and 'the deflator' is alone with the balls and his playboy mags, or whatever.
I mean, besides some special teams guy who hangs out in there to watch tv, according to the report.

who knows how deep the rabbit hole goes........

Off The Grid · May 27, 2015

I'm afraid you lost me somewhere around the "If You Read One Article About Gauges Today" part.

TouchDown Patriots · May 27, 2015

JUST ****IN BRILLIANT!

Tony2046 · May 27, 2015

TheBostonStraggler said:
Agreed. The media has completely made its mind up about the science.
The general media take is (according to what I have seen): While the underlying foundation of the science may not be completely agreed upon, the Colts' footballs didn't deflate to the same PSI level as the Patriots' footballs. Therefore the Patriots' footballs must have had air released from them.

Unfortunately even this well stated article and the fine underlying work done is not going to change the media perception. Any reply that would change the perception must contain (A) the 'Colts' footballs vs the Patriots' footballs' difference are explained because of X and (B) X must be something easily understood to a simple mind (little reading required, very little reasoning power needed). X must neatly fits into the thought process of a simple mind (X not being particularly scientifically sound is less important than it fitting neatly into the thought process of the simple mind).

"sad but true"...

I still think you are giving some of them too much credit. I think a lot of them are hanging on one word, "Deflator", of a 243 page report and use the rest of the report or tid bits from here and there to support the meaning of that one word. Hopefully this goes to court.

Tony2046 · May 27, 2015

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:
"Are we now saying that Jim McNally only tampered with three footballs, and even then only took tiny amounts of air out of each?"

this is a point that is undeniably true, very important, and inconsistent with tampering

why would TB want three levels of FB pressure? he wouldn't

Here is where Tom Brady is right now. If you take the Wells report verbatim it looks like McNally went into the bathroom and checked those footballs to ensure that they were at 12.5 and not the 16 psi as they were after the Jets game. If you look at the Wells report as flawed, and it is, it looks like the only thing that happened was a failed sting operation that is now in process of being covered up. Hope this sees the court room.

Patsfanin Philly · May 27, 2015

You read the article and if you have any science background at all ( down to the level of taking an advanced class in high school) you 'get' it and realize that even with Wells' low alleged standard of "more likely than not" was not met in this case....Unfortunately I doubt any of these high priced lawyers have any science background at all.
If this was a true investigation and not an agenda-driven prosecution to achieve Park avenue goals, they might have realized this. Instead they went to a hired gun firm that gives their clients what they want
( see "second hand smoke doesn't cause cancer" for the tobacco industry and there's no problem with asbestos for the paper industry). The word rigged doesn't begin to cover this sham...
If there was any integrity on Park Avenue, they would realize that they dug themselves a huge hole and need to get out. Instead they dug in and doubled down. Like the Duke Lacrosse case, the Centennial Park bombing case, there was a rush to judgment and facts be damned......
On a macro level, as a society, we have attacked success and find a need to knock down those who are successful. The Patriots are the personification of success in the NFL over the last 15 years and those harboring jealousy enjoy the schadenfreude of watching the Pats get disciplined. They better enjoy it because I have a feeling it may be akin to " they have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with rage"....

Rant over......

Tony2046 · May 27, 2015

eom said:
just read the article and wanted to give myself a little shout out on this point ^^
I had pulled that error range out of my ass after talking to a mechanical engineer buddy of mine who has used and calibrated gauges.

turns out there was actually a portion of the exponent appendix that tested this, and found about 75% of these gauges were within +/- 0.1 psi with the other 25% just a tenth or 2 outside that range.
I think +/- 0.2 is pretty close for a made up number.

as for the guy's article, it's pretty long, and he put a lot of effort into it, so I don't want to detract from it in any way, but I think it's just a rehash of the argument over gauges, which I find fairly irrelevant.
there's another point made further down that's just a rehash of something already covered in the exponent appendix starting around page 42, which he apparently says he hadn't seen --- the bit explaining why the colt balls lost less pressure (they had warmed up).
to answer the guy's question, about 10 min indoors accounts for the discrepancy, according to exponent.

the guy argues for the logo gauge to be the original gauge based on the premise that the pat's gauge showed certain readings on the intercepted ball, but the problem with this theory is I don't think it mentions the conditions that ball was measured under -- ie was it brought indoors?

anyway, as I mentioned in my quoted post above ^^ this all becomes entirely irrelevant and bordering on crazy homeless ranting when you really look at it, as the 'worst' case gauge (non-logo) apparently asks us to explain a discrepancy of about a third of a pound on something like half the balls, which would be a pretty insane rant for you to accuse me of sneaking off to the bathroom to let a third of a pound of air out of these balls, and this is with gauges that might read 0.15 psi light on one read and 0.15 psi over the next, for a net difference of 0.3 psi of uncertainty in just normal gauge to gauge usage out of the factory, before we even get into a gauge that's established to be 0.4 psi 'off', and before we get into measuring under conditions that are rough estimates and approximations of actual conditions.
I understand people see numbers in a report on the internet, but these are made up approximations that have a greater degree of error than what we are actually measuring.

if anybody ever gives you any crap about this nonsense report just challenge them to tell you exactly how much air 'the deflator' was letting out --- all the measurements are right there in the report.

ps

there was one interesting takeaway I got from the couple pages of the exponent index I just browsed --- apparently, colts balls were kept in garbage bags, while pat's balls were out and exposed to the rain.
they then go on to say that the wet balls not only show around a 0.2 psi (yes, I'm an ******* for making a 0.2 psi distinction) drop from the dry balls, but they also take longer to re-acclimate to the warmer indoors.
so, the point remaining that all these little 0.2's here and there add up, and the entire range of numbers is insignificant.

You hit the nail right on the head. That is what the Wells report does it neglects those little 0.1 here and 0.2 there. They also do not account for evaporation nor do they know the actual temperature of the rain that was falling that day which could have been 10 degrees colder or more which have further reduced the pressure of those footballs on the field.

Marko · May 27, 2015

Not always true. Depending on the capacity of the server and the number of cameras servers will often have 3 months recording time before they start to rewrite. In a high end install like Gillette this is probably the case.

TruthSeeker · May 27, 2015

eom said:
as for the guy's article, it's pretty long, and he put a lot of effort into it, so I don't want to detract from it in any way, but I think it's just a rehash of the argument over gauges, which I find fairly irrelevant.

The crux of the matter of deflated footballs is whether or not they were deflated. Since we have the half-time numbers and know what gauge was used, we have the pre-game recollection of the PSI number and gauge used and we have the Ideal Gas Law. When the math is done, the evidence is clear that there was no deflation of footballs - except for several things
- the Wells report rejects Walt Anderson's recollection of what gauge was used
- the Wells Report also makes mistakes and uses bad investigative technique when using this information in their calculations

This report goes a long way to correcting both of these issues - and you find it irrelevant?

Admittedly, the Wells report may have decided to find the Patriots guilty if zero (instead of the actual 2-4) balls were actually found to be under-pressurized since it was written by Wells. That being said, the correct evidence strongly supports a verdict of innocent and the Wells Report HAD to distort the evidence in order to have any chance of a credible finding of guilty.

This wasn't just a rehash since it laid out the evidence and the flaws in the Wells methodology in a clear manner leaving little wiggle room for other explanations. Sorry, I hadn't read something like this before (although I had certainly heard and read pieces of this information elsewhere).

Oftentimes the best articles aren't those that include new information (even though this one had new information for me), they simply take existing information and put it together, sometimes in new ways, to make a thoughtful, coherent, logical chain which is easy (easier) to understand and draws logical conclusions from the best data. That's the value of this article and that makes it the opposite of a "rehash".

Patsfanin Philly · May 27, 2015

Marko said:
Not always true. Depending on the capacity of the server and the number of cameras servers will often have 3 months recording time before they start to rewrite. In a high end install like Gillette this is probably the case.

But it doesn't fit the narrative of "repeat offender". Keep in mind what Anderson said that the Colts game was the first time the balls were out of his sight after inspection when McNally used the rest room. Assuming this is true for all the other refs, it would mean that the only time it was ever out of their sight was the Colts game which means he would never have had an opportunity to allegedly deflate it before any other home game. If the video showed that he never had the opportunity, then he couldn't have done it before but it wouldn't fit Wells' narrative....

seven · May 27, 2015

Patsfanin Philly said:
Unfortunately I doubt any of these high priced lawyers have any science background at all.

The Ideal Gas Law was a newsflash to everyone concerned at first.
This allowed the early momentum, over reaction behind the scenes.

Then came the IGL newsflash. news to us all. Few understood it.
Roger got it.

What to do? A choice.
Admit error, write it off to new info?
They told me there would be no math and science..
Everyone laughs, wow Roger actually said something funny.
On to the Super Bowl!

What do they do?
Hire The big time scandal atty, and Pro Number Crunchers.
Wells and Exponent.

Bury under 243 pages of smoke and noise.
******
Wells:
clients Philip Morris, Merck, Johnson and Johnson, Michael Milken, Michael Espy.
Defended former Queens Congressman Floyd Flake and wife from embezzlement charges,
protected former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer from an indictment in his prostitution scandal,
helped Former New Jersey Senator Robert Torricelli avoid prosecution on alleged campaign-finance violations.

Exponent Proved second hand smoke was not a cancer issue.

Older Florio:
NFL should release all communications between Wells, Exponent
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...se-all-communications-between-wells-exponent/

Drewski · May 27, 2015

Great article.

Has anyone sent this to the Fraternal Order of the Flat Earth Society chairs Squeeks and DoucheNozzle?

Didn't "Bob from Easton" get ripped apart by Squeeks because it wasn't that the PSI in the Colts balls didn't drop, but rather the "% change was different"?

BTTA · May 27, 2015

Bobsyouruncle said:
How am I supposed to limit myself to one article about gauges a day?

This is the funniest post I've read on this board in months. Thanks.

Zeus · May 27, 2015

An interesting, well thought out and clearly stated article.

One that thing jumped out at me was the point about the league officials meassuring the D'Qwell Jackson interception ball using the Patriot ball gauge. The three measurements averaged 11.49.

The pressure of the Patriots ball that had been intercepted by the Colts was separately tested three times and the measurements—11.45, 11.35 and 11.75 psi, respectively-- were written on athletic tape that had been placed on the ball for identification.

Again, the key is that the measurement was taken by a league official using Jastremski's normal ball gauge.

We believe that [NFL Director of Game Operations James] Daniel located and used the pressure gauge supplied by the Patriots [to measure the football intercepted by D’Qwell Jackson]. We further believe that this is the gauge that [Patriots Equipment Manager]John Jastremski considers his normal gauge. It has not been located since the day of the AFC Championship Game. It should be noted that we have not relied upon the air pressure measurements of the intercepted ball in any respect in reaching any conclusions set forth in this Report

And the Ideal Gas Law predicts that the balls on the field at a temperature of 48 degrees "should have measured between 11.52 and 11.32".

…using the Ideal Gas Law, or variations thereof, different calculations can be generated on the basis of different assumptions about the starting pressure, and starting and ending temperatures of a football. For example, using the most likely pressure and temperature values for the Patriots game balls on the day of the AFC Championship Game (i.e., a starting pressure of 12.5 psig, a starting temperature of between 67 and 71°F and a final temperature of 48°F prior to the balls being taken back into the Officials Locker Room), these equations predict that the Patriots balls should have measured between 11.52 and 11.32 psig at the end of the first half, just before they were brought back into the Officials Locker Room.

So measurements taken by a league official using the Patriots equipment manager's "normal gauge" (and therefore, presumably the one used to set pressure in the first place) show the average measurement of the Jackson interception ball falling on the high end of the range and all measurements within the range predicted by the Ideal Gas Law.

As seen above, the Wells Report states that "... we have not relied upon the air pressure measurements of the intercepted ball in any respect in reaching any conclusions set forth in this Report." Why not? If Jastremski used this gauge to set the balls at 12.5 before the game, this would provide a direct comparison using the same gauge of the pre-game pressures and a ball measured and recorded by league officals on the field nearly halfway though the second quarter. Is this yet another example of Wells disregarding evidence that does not fit his argument?

eom · May 27, 2015

Marko said:
Not always true. Depending on the capacity of the server and the number of cameras servers will often have 3 months recording time before they start to rewrite. In a high end install like Gillette this is probably the case.

They said 10 days, dude

hambone1818 · May 27, 2015

Zeus said:
*snip*
So measurements taken by a league official using the Patriots equipment manager's "normal gauge" (and therefore, presumably the one used to set pressure in the first place) show the Jackson interception ball falling on the high end of the range predicted by the Ideal Gas Law.

I've been beating this drum since I first read the report. The intercepted ball, as measured by the Patriots gauge, measured where you would expect it to measure (even on the HIGH end). If the officials taking the measurements had any knowledge of the IGL this sting would have ended there, it just doesn't support any claim of tampering. Further, knowing what we now know about the IGL, and about the 'feel' of footballs, why would the Colts have even 'suspected' the Pats of anything with a ball measuring 11.5 PSI?

But that aside, this very simple fact should be the one used when people say 'he called himself "deflator"!' I don't care if McNally told Jastremski that he was excited to deflate footballs in the bathroom before the game, the science rules the day: the intercepted football measures exactly where it should. And if you use basic logic (i.e. Anderson saying he recalls using the non-logo gauge, and the Pats gauge lining up with Andersons recollection) you realize that the other 11 footballs measure, on average, 11.49 PSI which is right where they should be. The facts fully support a conclusion of 'no tampering', pouring through months of text messages doesn't matter when the measurements PROVE there was no tampering. Wells and Exponent had to jump through hoops and fudge data to conclude 'the science is inconclusive', that alone should make everything in the rest of the report highly suspect.

Anyway, this was a great read, thanks for the link OP.

Marko · May 27, 2015

eom said:
They said 10 days, dude

Who says 10 days? This is what I do for work and have only done one install that was ever less than 30, most of them are ninety. They are dependent on the amount of hard drive space on the server, and only extremely low budget installs do less than 30 with the majority of high end installs 90. If the Pats said 10, I'd be disappointed because I doubt it.

If You Read One Article About Gauges Today...

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Practice Squad Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

GVoR

He/Him

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Similar threads