Ted Wells' Assistant: Doesn't Matter Which Gauge Was Used

[Beethree]

The problems with using the Colts' balls as an ersatz control group:
The Colts' balls were not measured. Only 4 of them were.
Were these 4 balls in play, or from an equipment bag?
Where were they stored prior to INITIAL testing by the refs. In a bus compartment? In a bag outdoors? What was their internal temperature?
You can only have a control group when the conditions are the same between the control and experimental groups.

The two things they should have done if they wanted to prove a misdimeanor, would have been to allow the Pats' balls to fully warm up to the environmental conditions where they were inflated, and to put the back-up balls out in the cold rain and see what they measured. They didn't. Sadly, these are the 2 tacts that could have COMPLETELY and undeniably exonerated the Pats, as opposed to mostly exonerating them, but leaving enough doubt for intentional obfuscation.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

So what's being stated here is that the difference between the Pats and Colts balls is statistically significant, which could just as likely point to Colts tampering as it does Pats tampering.

The difference was indeed statistically significant, between

1) 11 Patriots footballs,
and
2) 4 Colts footballs, selected by... we don't know how, and tested 5-8 minutes after the Patriots football began to be tested, thus having warmed up to a far greater extent, permitting pressures that would be inconsistent with the ideal gas law had those 4 footballs been at the temperature of the Patriots footballs, when the testing on them was started.

 

[chasa]

Questions for Ted Wells since he was so thorough.

How long after the refs got into the locker room did they measure the patriots balls?
Did they measure the colts balls at the same time or afterwards?
The colts only had 4 balls measured why?
So they ran out of time?
So the colts balls were measured AFTER the patriots balls?
And each ball was measured twice?
How long did it take to measure all of the patriots footballs?
What did the patriots backup balls measure after the game?
What do you mean you filled the first set of balls and used those?
You are saying the referees destroyed the only piece of evidence that could have proven that the patriots balls were at 12.5 room temperature by not letting them readjust, and instead filling them with new air?
Why didn't you start redirecting your investigation in how many times the league screwed up?
Is it fair to say that the amount of time it took to measure the patriots balls could have led to an increased psi reading in the colts balls, as your own report states that if the patriots balls were measured within x amount of time? After the game the patriots balls all measured over 13PSI, what did the Walt Anderson fill them to at halftime?
If the patriots requested 12.5 why did Walt Anderson fill them about 13PSI?
You said that Walt Anderson remembered that the patriots balls were all 12.5, and that the colts were all 13, and you took him at his word, but then reject is recollection of which gauge he used, why?
You understand that changing a scenerio to fit a story where the team you are investigating is guilty makes it seem like an unbiased report?
Is that a real law degree or a crackjack degree?

 

[Ross12]

Ross, the post you quoted by Lorin Reisner goes entirely against what the Wells report says.

I quoted the Wells Report in the very first post in this thread.

It entirely debunks what Reisner said.

Which begs the question: why in the world doesn't a member of the Wells team even know what the Wells report said??????

This is beyond beyond beyond comprehension.

Reisner is contradicting the Wells report.

And his explanation about Anderson and the non-logoed gauge is incomprehensible. Can anyone explain what he is saying?

Indeed. The report says switching gauges would essentially show no tampering, Reisner says it makes no difference which gauge was used. Their reasoning for disregarding Anderson's memory of which gauge was used basically boils down to "we didn't like the numbers the other one gave."

 

[Mr. Plow]

Let me simplify this.

If you're measuring something twice, and you come up with two completely different measurements, you're doing something wrong.

 

[Ross12]

Wells also says in the beginning of his call that Reisner is his partner and worked with him in writing the report. So it's really inexplicable how these guys write one thing and say something completely different.

That extreme inconsistency probably helps Brady quite a bit.

 

[Mr. Plow]

Indeed. The report says switching gauges would essentially show no tampering, Reisner says it makes no difference which gauge was used. Their reasoning for disregarding Anderson's memory of which gauge was used basically boils down to "we didn't like the numbers the other one gave."

But they liked those numbers just fine when they cleared the Colt's footballs. Funny how that works...

 

[Rob0729]

If it didn't matter which gauge was used, why not just take Walt Anderson's word and use the logoed gauge for testing? Or better yet, test and report on both gauges?

 

[neuronet]

This caveat is the concern:

but only if the testing of the Patriots balls began immediately once the footballs arrived in the Officials Locker Room at halftime and took no more than 4 minutes, and only if the majority of the Patriots game balls were wet.

Did the report go on to mention if they were measured immediately etc.?

 

[Ross12]

But they liked those numbers just fine when they cleared the Colt's footballs. Funny how that works...

Exactly! They say don't worry about the Colts footballs because "they all fell within range on one of the two gauges used." But when all of the Patriots footballs fall within range based on one of the two gauges, well, he must have misremembered, he used the other gauge.

 

[Ring 6]

So what's being stated here is that the difference between the Pats and Colts balls is statistically significant, which could just as likely point to Colts tampering as it does Pats tampering. But as we all know the fix was in.

I also appreciate their reasoning for why they disregarded Anderson's recollection on which gauge was used: "Well, the Pats wanted their balls at 12.5 and the Colts at 13.0 and Anderson says that's what he measured, but the Logo gauge would have been incorrect so then he definitely used the Non-Logo gauge"... WTF? So basically they're saying that the Logo gauge couldn't have been used because it would've given incorrect numbers. This reasoning makes zero sense.

This is SCIENCE right?

Not accounted for:
1) Were balls at equilirium when measured. ie were Colts balls already stored outside before being brough to the refs? This would account for their psi dropping less than the IGL says it would.
2) How much of the psi in the colts balls were due to the time they sat in the ref room and warmed up?
3) THEY ONLY MEASURED 4 COLTS BALLS. There are 4 Patriots balls that would be an identical match in how they changed.

 

[chasa]

This caveat is the concern:


Did the report go on to mention if they were measured immediately etc.?

"walt anderson remembers the refs measuring the balls as soon as they got into the locker room(around 2 minutes) however I think it is far more likely that they didn't measure them for 40 minutes into the halftimeshow" -Ted Wells

Ted there was no 40 minute halftime show, halftime was only about 20 minutes in total

"It doesn't matter how long the halftime was it doesnt change the science. My report says they waited 40 minutes, and then measured with the non logo gauge"

 

[upstater1]

We need to stick to the fact here though: one of the writers of the report says the exact opposite thing that the report states.

In other words, we don't need to contest the science at all. We dont even need to talk about 4 Colts balls, etc., especially since one was thrown out of contention (i.e. an anomaly).

I'll say this again: Using the logoed gauge, there is no inconsistency between Pats and Colts balls. This is what the report states.

Why would we even bother contesting the science?

 

[upstater1]

This is SCIENCE right?

Not accounted for:
1) Were balls at equilirium when measured. ie were Colts balls already stored outside before being brough to the refs? This would account for their psi dropping less than the IGL says it would.
2) How much of the psi in the colts balls were due to the time they sat in the ref room and warmed up?
3) THEY ONLY MEASURED 4 COLTS BALLS. There are 4 Patriots balls that would be an identical match in how they changed.

Andy, Andy, Andy--all these factors were accounted for. Look at my very first post. They did extensive studies.

 

[Ross12]

It's all truly a mockery of pretty basic science. Middle schoolers can complete this task. Multiple labs have fully cleared this level of PSI loss when considering all factors. But the report picks and chooses which factors to consider and which to completely ignore, to suit it's own agenda.

 

[upstater1]

This caveat is the concern:

Did the report go on to mention if they were measured immediately etc.?

They were measured within a minute or two of going into the room. BUT, given the impossibilities of knowing exactly what happened, to me this caveat is meaningless.

 

[neuronet]

"walt anderson remembers the refs measuring the balls as soon as they got into the locker room(around 2 minutes) however I think it is far more likely that they didn't measure them for 40 minutes into the halftimeshow" -Ted Wells

Wait...what?! Are you sure Wells said this, again contradicting someone who was actually there? If you are reporting this correctly (I have no reason to doubt you, I'm just trying to give the benefit of the doubt to both sides, which is becoming increasingly apparent is stupid on my part) this is ****ing ridiculous!? WTF? Brady, please please please fight this.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy, Andy, Andy--all these factors were accounted for. Look at my very first post. They did extensive studies.

You initial post ignores the part that says ONLY if they were measured in the first 4 months and the majority were wet, which they then say was not the case.

They also did not conduct proper tests on the wet factor.

 

[neuronet]

If this was a sting operation (and it was) it is the most poorly thought out sting I have ever witnessed. The refs must have not been taking it seriously...

 

[Ring 6]

"walt anderson remembers the refs measuring the balls as soon as they got into the locker room(around 2 minutes) however I think it is far more likely that they didn't measure them for 40 minutes into the halftimeshow" -Ted Wells

Ted there was no 40 minute halftime show, halftime was only about 20 minutes in total

"It doesn't matter how long the halftime was it doesnt change the science. My report says they waited 40 minutes, and then measured with the non logo gauge"

Can we please stop making things up, and placing them in quotes and attributing them to be funny?
It really screws up the discussion.