Spreadsheet: Actual vs Expected PSI Drop Based on Wells Report Data

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

I read it, all 200+ pages.

Over and over and over the report says:

"the data alone does not provide a basis to determine whether there was or was not tampering"

But they make all sorts of assumptions and conclude "more likely than not" they did, or a 50.01% chance.

That is NOT good enough

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Their ideal gas law calculations match mine PRECISELY.

A football should drop in psi by 1.13 psi based on temperature, with their temp assumptions.

One gauge has pats ball dropping 1.38, one 1.01.

Colts drop was less than 1, violating the laws of the universe. No comments on THAT at all.

 

[BlueThunder]

Wells gets paid whatever the result....His report comes down probably about in the middle with about a 50/50 probability that somebody maybe possibly might have done something to affect the deflation of the footballs and Brady might have probably known about it !!

GREAT analysis by an overpaid lawyer....probably.

 

[juny]

good comment by a reader, mr texas on deadspin
http://regressing.deadspin.com/the-...this-was-them-stating-thes-1702694833/+kylenw

 

[OldEngland]

The most revealing part of report is the appendix - in particular pgs 41 onwards

The transient pressure change is key! Balls brought in from the cold to a warm environment increase in pressure quickly. The difference between measuring balls immediately and after 6mins is about 0.5Psi.

Most of the data they are supposing presumes they start measuring the colt balls at 8 mins, hands up who thinks they panicked and measure the Colts balls at 10mins plus.

Also Colts balls as controls? What? Is that pressure machine in any way similar to "normal" football pressures?

Bad science and too many gaps. Hope they nail the NFL with it.

 

[Danger Zone]

The most revealing part of report is the appendix - in particular pgs 41 onwards

The transient pressure change is key! Balls brought in from the cold to a warm environment increase in pressure quickly. The difference between measuring balls immediately and after 6mins is about 0.5Psi.

Most of the data they are supposing presumes they start measuring the colt balls at 8 mins, hands up who thinks they panicked and measure the Colts balls at 10mins plus.

Also Colts balls as controls? What? Is that pressure machine in any way similar to "normal" football pressures?

Bad science and too many gaps. Hope they nail the NFL with it.

We KNOW the officials measured the Colts footballs last because they ran out of time. They couldn't even measure them all.

Patriots are being prosecuted over exactly the difference between footballs measured immediately (will have less psi naturally) and those measured later (will have gained psi naturally).

 

[TomPatriot]

I read it, all 200+ pages.

Over and over and over the report says:

"the data alone does not provide a basis to determine whether there was or was not tampering"

But they make all sorts of assumptions and conclude "more likely than not" they did, or a 50.01% chance.

That is NOT good enough

They were heavily influenced by the "tweet" evidence and weighed it heavily. The seven figure paycheck might have influenced them too.

 

[OldEngland]

We KNOW the officials measured the Colts footballs last because they ran out of time. They couldn't even measure them all.

Patriots are being prosecuted over exactly the difference between footballs measured immediately (will have less psi naturall) and those measured later (will have gained psi naturally).

Exactly right. The difference between measuring immediately (Pats) and 10 mins after being back inside is approximately 0.5Psi. Which is "more probably than not" the reason between the difference between Colts and Pats balls. If the Pats balls were wet and Colts dry, even more so.

Plus the total confusion regarding which gauge was used is a total screw-up.

 

[OldEngland]

Anyone who makes it past the introduction will have major doubts about this report. I hope at least some of the more respected media will read it all with a fine tooth-comb.

 

[Deus Irae]

Guys, here's something else to play with:

With the exception of the final pre-halftime kneel down snap, the Colts balls would have been packed away in their bag at the end of the first half, whle the Patriots balls would have been out in the elements from 4:48 to 0:13.


Enjoy.

 

[PatSunday]

I did a calculation on my own:

Higher measurement per ball (1 to 11): 11.80 11.20 11.5 11.0 11.45 11.95 12.30 11.55 11.35 10.9 11.35

Lower measurement per ball (1 to 11): 11.5 10.85 11.15 10.7 11.10 11.60 11.85 11.10 10.95 10.5 10.9

Highest possible average: 11.49

Lowest possible average: 11.11

Exponent calculated the number should be between 11.32 to 11.52. The bounds of the measurements are spot on. Since the balls released air with every insertion and removal of the needle, that accounts for the remaining 0.2 psi discrepancy of the lowest possible average.

Also, we don’t know if each ball started at 12.2 or 12.5 since different gauges are different and the actual starting number and corresponding gauge used to measure was not written down before the game. That also explains the remaining 0.2.

Finally, the needle kept going in and out of every Patriots ball at least 3 times for every ball by the time of the half-time measurement. If the Patriots range matched the calculated range even more closely than it did, it would be very suspicious.

P.S. the gauges are not exact, and I doubt the manufacturer of the gauge supports writing down fractions of a PSI or even calibrates them before heading out. Or has any kind of maintenance instructions. The same $7 Made-in-China ball gauge that NFL uses is used all over the world at all levels of play to make sure the balls are not ridiculously under- or over-inflated. The ball gauge is not a scientific instrument. The Wilson manufacturer instructions on recommended PSI range are also not scientific as best or most fair. The NFL also doesn't care, just using the manufacturer recommendations. The only reason they even put the PSI in the rulebook (based on Wilson's recommendations) is to prevent home teams bringing balls that are off by 3 PSI and giving them to the visiting team. When the PSI was written down, visiting teams played with balls provided by the home team. That's why there's a specific PSI rule. The manufacturer and nobody else really cares if a team uses their own ball at 11.5 PSI or 16 PSI now that each team uses their own.

Heck, if the NFL knew that a higher or lower PSI could improve the passing the game, they would have removed the restriction or widened it years ago to increase the scoring. Nobody simply cared. Some quarterbacks like it at 16, some at 12.5. It would make NFL more fun and competitive. Nobody cared. The fact the rule is there is just an artifact.

**** this. I can't believe we're talking about a rule that was only in place so that teams don't giving visiting teams stupidly under-inflated balls, and to provide a recommendation for quarterbacks and officials because the internet and Wilson.com did not exist 40 years ago. The manufacturer pulled a very narrow 13 PSI plus or minus 0.5 range out of their ass 40 years ago, that ball gauges cannot actually measure reliably -- not today, and especially not 40 years ago when the NFL copied that recommendation into a rule. Nobody cared to update it for the modern NFL after Brady helped create the rule in 2006 to allow teams to bring their own footballs. Nobody cared since, either.

 

[Danger Zone]

THE TWO GAUGE HYPOTHESIS:
Every time two uncalibrated gauges are used to measure footballs, there is a chance that the variance in the psi "chain of evidence" grows larger and faultier.

Fact: Wells Report has stated that according to the head official's recollection:
-the Patriot footballs were at least 12.5 psi (except for two)
-most of the Colt footballs were set to 13.0 or 13.1 psi (except for two)


Supposition: If there were two officials of record that day each taking their own separate readings, it is plausible to assume there may have been two different gauges being used as well.


Gauge A is +.20 psi above accurate (change the + to account for what you think is a more normal variance)
Gauge B is -.20 psi below accurate (change the - to account for what you think is a more normal variance)


Pregame: there was a 25% to 50%* chance of:
- the Colts footballs were set to "13 psi" using gauge B
- the Patriot footballs were set to "12.5 psi" using gauge A

If the above scenario happened what we really end up with is this:

-the Patriot footballs are actually 12.3 psi to start the game
-the Colt footballs are actually 13.2 psi to start the game.

Even now, if a third and highly accurate gauge was brought in at halftime, because two uncalibrated gauges were used to initially set the psi of the footballs, someone could test the footballs and come away with the conclusion that there is somehow an unexplained .4 variance between the two sets of footballs.

Halftime: we once again have a 25% to 50%* chance of:
- The Colts footballs being measured with gauge A
- The Patriot footballs being measured with gauge B.

The footballs could not have changed a single tenth of a psi, but because the officials are using the same two uncalibrated gauges between them, they could very conceivably now believe there is an unexplained .8 variance between the two sets of footballs at halftime.

Gauge B being used to test the Patriot footballs (psi 12.3) would come up with a finding of 12.1 psi

Gauge A being used to test the Colt footballs (psi 13.2) would come up with a finding of 13.4

The fact that cold weather accounts for at least a 1.0 drop in actual psi of the footballs would mask the inaccuracy of their readings and make the problem look even worse.





* The 50% chance comes from whether once one official picked up a random gauge that act meant the other official simply used the other available gauge.

The 25% chance comes from whether each official testing had the chance to pick from either gauge before they began their testing and that one official's use of the gauge he chose did not preclude the other official from using the same gauge.

 

[woolster22]

I read it, all 200+ pages.

Over and over and over the report says:

"the data alone does not provide a basis to determine whether there was or was not tampering"

But they make all sorts of assumptions and conclude "more likely than not" they did, or a 50.01% chance.

That is NOT good enough

Google Exponent, or whatever that garbage CaliHacks firm is. They haven't had rain in years, what would they know about actual new England, winter, steady rain with dropping temps and high humidity (was warm that part of winter, mist coming up off roads due to high ground temps).

Due to the data, from a highly questionable firm (I hope local mediots rip wells for their use, lost the link where Cali professors slams Toyota for using them after they successfully helped the tobacco industry "prove" 2nd hand smoke doesn't cause cancer) and their findings, the only evidence left were the texts. Were many of those in jest? Most likely. Was the significance in the jets and 16 psi, followed by and uptick in jovial texts ignored? Absolutely.

Obviously, one gauge was way off. The "scientific" report seems to ignore it. Assume Colts balls are measured with low gauge pregame and pats vice versa? all of a sudden the nfl has to run around finding a not so independent "scientific source" to explain the hoopla.

 

[PatSunday]

Correction: Dean Blandino said the 12.5 - 13.5 recommendation was made by Wilson in 1940. So that's 75 years of "nobody cared" until Tom Brady was *possibly* found with possible knowledge of a possible act of a possible deflation for a possible benefit. I only started caring because I was hoping it didn't distract the Patriots like Spygate did. This is the least important rule in all of the NFL. Teams use their own balls! If half of the NFL quarterbacks improve because they can choose their own range, isn't that the best for the game? The NFL didn't even know the rule existed, as far as improving offensive production and television is concerned, for 75 years. If the NFL realized there was even a 1% chance of improving skill for 1% of quarterbacks by letting them set their own PSI, they would have already removed the restriction!

And why is it okay for their referees/employees to choose whatever PSI they want, often much different than the rulebook, with no repercussion? Teams cannot ask for ball checks or adjustments after pre-game. The only reason they checked the balls was because the Colts GM told an NFL VP the day before about a competitive issue, the head referee was alerted before the game, and the Colts alerted the NFL VP again during the game. That's a really out-of-the-way and once-in-a-decade process for verifying the balls are inflated properly for an "important rule" such as this!

 

[Fencer]

Bottom line:

• The equipment guys tried to please Brady.
• Brady was not aware of the details of how they did it.
• In particular, Brady didn't know of any illegal steps they took to do it ...
• ... in part because illegal steps were in fact not necessary to do it.
• On the other hand, Brady wasn't confident that all the steps they took were legal ...
• ... and probably wasn't too concerned one way or the other, in part because ...
• ... this all fits into the level of seriousness of "it's only a penalty if the refs call it".
• It's human nature for the equipment guys to take illegal steps if they think that will help them be more effective ...
• ... if we recall what "illegal" means in this context (which is very different from, for example, breaking the law of the land) ...
• ... so the suspicions directed at the equipment guys are not stupid.

 

[luuked]

good comment by a reader, mr texas on deadspin
http://regressing.deadspin.com/the-...this-was-them-stating-thes-1702694833/+kylenw

Further down (http://regressing.deadspin.com/yeah-i-brought-that-up-in-another-post-that-exchange-s-1702734004) he made an even better point:

And since these two idiots seem more than happy to bring up every little gripe that Brady has you would think they would have talked about any other time he said the balls were too hard. But that was it. Just once. And the balls were over 3 psi off from where he prefers them (more than double the largest drop of any of the game balls).

The texts do seem incriminating but they never actually say anything incriminating, and these two guys seem dumb enough to not be able to keep anything like that in. Hell, they brag and lie to each other and friends to make themselves look cooler and tough. The whole episode with the 50000 yard game ball is ridiculous. The guy was bragging and bragging and then when he gets pressured about it he totally waffles. He could have said the balls should have been at 12 or 11 for the Jets game, but he didnt, he said 13.

The only positive to take from all of this, is that it will help you to filter out which reporters to take serious. So far Howe is the only Pats beat reporter that actually has shown critical thinking. So far I have been very, very disappointed with Reiss and Curran.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

The most important facts are these:

1) The scientists hired to study the issue properly calculated the expected pressure drop that occurred due to temperature, assuming an inflation temperature and a halftime temperature. There result was that footballs will lose 1.13 psi in pressure due to the temperature drop.

2) The officials measured the drop in pressure of the Patriots footballs. Using one gauge they measured a drop of 1.39 psi. Using another gauge they measured 1.01 psi. Average: 1.20

3) We have no way of knowing which of the two gauges, used interchangeably, was used in the pregame analysis where they were set to 12.5 psi. Based upon the fact that one gauge always reads 0.4 psi below the other one, and that we don't know which one (if either) was accurate, then the Patriots footballs, pregame, may TRULY have been set at anywhere in the range of 12.1-12.9 psi.

4) The officials measured the drop in pressure four of the Colts footballs. Using one gauge they measured a drop of 0.37 psi. Using another gauge they measured 0.56 psi.

5) The drop in pressure of the Colts footballs is thus inconsistent with the scientific prediction that footballs will lose, 1.13 psi in pressure, just due to the temperature drop.

6) For some reason, the fact that the Colts footballs apparently did not obey the laws of physics has not concerned anyone. It should. But it is easy to explain! The officials didn't even have time to test all of the Colts footballs because the 13-minute halftime was ending. The Colts footballs had been in the heated room for at least 10 minutes before they were ever tested. They warmed up, maybe halfway to room temperature, which would explain a measurement of about half of the drop that was expected: 1.13/2 = 0.515.

7) The Colts warmed-up footballs were used as the "control" for the Patriots footballs. A huge importance was placed into the fact that the difference in the drop in pressure of the Colts footballs vs. the drop in pressure of the Patriots footballs was statistically significant. The difference in the order in which the two groups of footballs were analyzed, as they were of course warming up toward room temperature, could fully account for this statistical significance.

8) The most puzzling evidence is the relatively higher variability of the Patriots footballs. That looks suspicious. But possible explanations, such as that perhaps some footballs were used in a heavy downpour and some of them never even left the bag, were never considered. They never consider the "wet football factor" at all, for that matter.

9) Pressure gauges used varied in accuracy by 0.4 psi. The Patriots footballs dropped in pressure in the range of 1.01-1.39 psi. This range encompasses the expected number, based only on temperature, of a 1.13 psi drop. The accuracy of the gauge is +0.4, so saying that 1.13 is truly different than 1.20 (or even 1.39) is shaky at best. I do not see grounds for saying that the Patriots footballs were, on average, outside of expected norms, just based upon the data provided.

 

[BobDigital]

My overall thoughts on the report and this whole thing

#1 The Pats were not acting properly and probably skirted a rules... at least some people did.
#2 The drop in the balls falls within general expectation of what they would be so any tampering was minor if it did take place which is still very much in doubt based off the key piece of evidence (the actually football PSI measurements)
#3 There is no reason to think the balls were actually deflated this game based on the hard evidence.

The Pats IMO should be punished for breaking procedure. That was clear cut on McNally and the organization needs to be held to accountant.

I would say the same punishment the Falcons got is fair.

 

[upstater1]

Their ideal gas law calculations match mine PRECISELY.

A football should drop in psi by 1.13 psi based on temperature, with their temp assumptions.

One gauge has pats ball dropping 1.38, one 1.01.

Colts drop was less than 1, violating the laws of the universe. No comments on THAT at all.

Unless it was blown up to 13.5

 

[upstater1]

The most important facts are these:

1) The scientists hired to study the issue properly calculated the expected pressure drop that occurred due to temperature, assuming an inflation temperature and a halftime temperature. There result was that footballs will lose 1.13 psi in pressure due to the temperature drop.

2) The officials measured the drop in pressure of the Patriots footballs. Using one gauge they measured a drop of 1.39 psi. Using another gauge they measured 1.01 psi. Average: 1.20

3) We have no way of knowing which of the two gauges, used interchangeably, was used in the pregame analysis where they were set to 12.5 psi. Based upon the fact that one gauge always reads 0.4 psi below the other one, and that we don't know which one (if either) was accurate, then the Patriots footballs, pregame, may TRULY have been set at anywhere in the range of 12.1-12.9 psi.

4) The officials measured the drop in pressure four of the Colts footballs. Using one gauge they measured a drop of 0.37 psi. Using another gauge they measured 0.56 psi.

5) The drop in pressure of the Colts footballs is thus inconsistent with the scientific prediction that footballs will lose, 1.13 psi in pressure, just due to the temperature drop.

6) For some reason, the fact that the Colts footballs apparently did not obey the laws of physics has not concerned anyone. It should. But it is easy to explain! The officials didn't even have time to test all of the Colts footballs because the 13-minute halftime was ending. The Colts footballs had been in the heated room for at least 10 minutes before they were ever tested. They warmed up, maybe halfway to room temperature, which would explain a measurement of about half of the drop that was expected: 1.13/2 = 0.515.

7) The Colts warmed-up footballs were used as the "control" for the Patriots footballs. A huge importance was placed into the fact that the difference in the drop in pressure of the Colts footballs vs. the drop in pressure of the Patriots footballs was statistically significant. The difference in the order in which the two groups of footballs were analyzed, as they were of course warming up toward room temperature, could fully account for this statistical significance.

8) The most puzzling evidence is the relatively higher variability of the Patriots footballs. That looks suspicious. But possible explanations, such as that perhaps some footballs were used in a heavy downpour and some of them never even left the bag, were never considered. They never consider the "wet football factor" at all, for that matter.

9) Pressure gauges used varied in accuracy by 0.4 psi. The Patriots footballs dropped in pressure in the range of 1.01-1.39 psi. This range encompasses the expected number, based only on temperature, of a 1.13 psi drop. The accuracy of the gauge is +0.4, so saying that 1.13 is truly different than 1.20 (or even 1.39) is shaky at best. I do not see grounds for saying that the Patriots footballs were, on average, outside of expected norms, just based upon the data provided.

Can you please send this to Donald Yee?