Tom Brady, NFLPA Granted 14-Day Extension To File Motion For Rehearing By Second Circuit Court

[juny]

Correct!! Dont get things confused. We agree that the Wells Report and the Exponent Report are hit pieces. I think the small point of disagreement is that you seem to think the Exponent Report PROVES that there was no deflation. I say it PROVES nothing at all. It is worthless. However it does have an experiment in there, represented at Figures 29 and 30, that I have not seen refuted. I find it slightly troubling that it seems that no real study exists that contradicts Figures 29 and 30.

The MIT prof (and others) gave valid reasons why the Figures are flawed. It's been posted and mentioned numerous times when this was discussed months ago. PLease review those posts

 

[NashuaPats]

It works out when you assume facts not in evidence. The default was set at 51 for a reason--that was the widely reported temperature during the first half of the AFCCG. I have never seen 48 reported as the temperature (maybe that was the temp by the end of the game?). The locker room was reported to be between 68-70. Let's say 70--then you are still not matching up and we have a problem.

Then you assume something else without any evidence--wet balls would be .3-.5 lower. Why do you assume that? Schmaltz himself says effect would be "negligible."

Safe to say that the officials were mucking around for a little bit and didn't realize that the psi was time-dependent. So, it probably took them 10 minutes or more to measure all the Patriots balls (also supported by the fact that they only had remaining time to measure 4 Colts balls). So, the Pats balls could have risen more than the .2 you claim.

So, everything works out if you assume everything went the way you want. But, that seems unlikely.

48 was reported all over. Maybe it was 51 before the game.

Why did I assume .3 to .5? because I said I was eyeballing it. Headsmart found water effects the balls by 0.7 but I thought they wet the balls too much. Exponent sprayed the balls with a water bottle which is a joke and found it to have an effect of 0.1. I went for the middle of the two.

10 minutes to gauge the Pats footballs? Now I know you are trolling. You intentionally left out the part of filling them with air and re-gauging them which is a lot more time consuming.

Try reading this http://drewfustin.com/deflategate/ which is another explanation for this by yet another physicist which I just found while looking for the half time temp and this physicist used 48 because that was what was reported.

 

[letekro]

The freaking Wells Report said the footballs should be 11.32-11.52 due to IGL. The average due to one gauge was around 11.5 and the other gauge was around 11.2. I highly doubt a deflation "scheme" aimed to remove tenths of a PSI from every football

To play devil's advocate, it is possible that this happened. It is also possible that Anderson and his team over-inflated the balls before the game and the Dorito Dink took out a significant amount of air. All of this is possible, but no person without an agenda would conclude that it is "more likely than not" to have happened.

 

[letekro]

The MIT prof (and others) gave valid reasons why the Figures are flawed. It's been posted and mentioned numerous times when this was discussed months ago. PLease review those posts

Could you help me? I watched too much of that video and it seemed his issue was with the transient analysis (Figs 22, 24, 26). I didn't see him question the raw data points from the experiment shown in Fig. 29 and 30.

 

[NashuaPats]

Correct!! Dont get things confused. We agree that the Wells Report and the Exponent Report are hit pieces. I think the small point of disagreement is that you seem to think the Exponent Report PROVES that there was no deflation. I say it PROVES nothing at all. It is worthless. However it does have an experiment in there, represented at Figures 29 and 30, that I have not seen refuted. I find it slightly troubling that it seems that no real study exists that contradicts Figures 29 and 30. Why didn't Brady's lawyers commission their own study?? This is the first thing that litigators do when confronted with an expert report.

When correcting for their errors, which many brilliant people have done, it does prove the balls were in line. That there was nothing suspicious about them and there is no reason based on the measurements to suspect tampering. Brady's lawyers had an Ivy league dean give a scientific explanation at the Goodell hearing which should have been sufficient.

 

[juny]

Could you help me? I watched too much of that video and it seemed his issue was with the transient analysis (Figs 22, 24, 26). I didn't see him question the raw data points from the experiment shown in Fig. 29 and 30.

Wells Report Mistakes Affect Outcome summarizes some of the problems. Also exponent calculated the warming effect by placing one singular ball on a pedestal, whereas actual game conditions those balls are bundled together in a bag, slowing the warming effect since they are surrounded by other wet footballs.

 

[letekro]

48 was reported all over. Maybe it was 51 before the game.

Why did I assume .3 to .5? because I said I was eyeballing it. Headsmart found water effects the balls by 0.7 but I thought they wet the balls too much. Exponent sprayed the balls with a water bottle which is a joke and found it to have an effect of 0.1. I went for the middle of the two.

10 minutes to gauge the Pats footballs? Now I know you are trolling. You intentionally left out the part of filling them with air and re-gauging them which is a lot more time consuming.

Try reading this http://drewfustin.com/deflategate/ which is another explanation for this by yet another physicist which I just found while looking for the half time temp and this physicist used 48 because that was what was reported.

OK. According to exponent they assumed a range of temps as follows: 67-71 for pre-game, 48-50 for halftime outside, 71-74 for halftime measurements; hence the 11.32-11.52 range (which I guess includes the .1 for wetness?).

Good point about refilling and regauging.

Not sure about the wetness assumption. A water bottle could be right since ball boys are keeping the balls covered and toweling them off between plays.

At the end of the day, using Exponent's numbers, it still seems unlikely that anything happened, although it can't be completely ruled out. I am still baffled why a dueling report was never commissioned by Brady's team.

 

[NashuaPats]

OK. According to exponent they assumed a range of temps as follows: 67-71 for pre-game, 48-50 for halftime outside, 71-74 for halftime measurements; hence the 11.32-11.52 range (which I guess includes the .1 for wetness?).

Good point about refilling and regauging.

Not sure about the wetness assumption. A water bottle could be right since ball boys are keeping the balls covered and toweling them off between plays.

At the end of the day, using Exponent's numbers, it still seems unlikely that anything happened, although it can't be completely ruled out. I am still baffled why a dueling report was never commissioned by Brady's team.

A dueling report wasn't needed. Most of the work was fine. Their technical work was correct. They just made a couple of illogical assumptions which has been explained by the Dean who testified on behalf of Brady and many, many renowned scholars. When correcting for those errors, the balls measured in line and consistent with the Colts' balls. That should have been enough, but Goodell wasn't interested in the truth.

Regarding the wetness, next time it rains, spray yourself with a spray bottle, change your clothes, and then go outside and roll around in the wet grass. See what gets you wetter.

 

[Ivan]

From everything I can gather here leterko is expecting people to prove Brady is innocent, rather than taking the burden of proof on himself and those who convicted him with no proof. The truth is that the Ravens believed the Patriots were letting the air out of balls because they were somewhat deflated when playing them, when in fact it was the weather that was deflating them. They got angry when Brady told them to read the rulebook and passed their suspicions on to the Colts who then passed them on to the league. The league then never passed those concerns on to the Patriots, which by league bylaws they are supposed to do, and instead tried to sting the Patriots, and when Kensil and Co. Got low resultss they believed they had caught them cheating, never realizing that the laws of nature explained low air pressure in any cold weather game. And once they leaked their false findings to the media there was no turning back and the league went full ****** trying to create "evidence" to support their claims, when in fact nothing ever happened.


And if "the truth" really matters and the air pressure in game balls is, as the league contends, important to the integrity of the game, then why did it take almost 100 years for the league to realize that cold weather causes a loss in air pressure?

The truth is that it doesn't matter, never has mattered, and that this was nothing more than a witch hunt.

 

[IllegalContact]

"Trying to play naysayer" is often how problems are solved. Why don't you run back to the herd so you can live a life of happy ignorance?

Not as often as you think..... I'm not part of any herd....I just like to ridicule the bullshitters

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Gauging the intercepted ball, that had 3 different readings using the two gauges proved what gauge Walt Anderson used, this is ancient ground being discussed. All the studies have been discussed ad nauseum. I think I have some saved, I'll post them if I still have them, I wanted to know the truth too not just the Pats Homer truth and it's apparent the balls weren't touched.
A lot of this assumes all 12 balls were exactly 12.5, which I find really hard to believe.

 

[BradyFTW!]

This is obviously woefully insufficient as a study and therefore doesn't really move the needle (pardon the pun).

It is distressing that the Patriots hired lawyers to do the Wells Report in Context but either didn't try or couldn't find an Exponent competitor to do a proper study. I'm sure a proper study could be conducted in such a way to show the Patriots' balls were in conformity with IGL predictions. Another ball dropped by the team in this sordid affair.

And yet it's far more rigorous and credible than the nonsense that Exponent put together.

Don't get me wrong, I'd agree that it was insufficient... if there was credible, sufficient evidence to the contrary indicating that something did happen. But there isn't; anyone who dismisses the Headsmart study pretty much has to dismiss Exponent's findings as well.

 

[letekro]

A dueling report wasn't needed. Most of the work was fine. Their technical work was correct. They just made a couple of illogical assumptions which has been explained by the Dean who testified on behalf of Brady and many, many renowned scholars. When correcting for those errors, the balls measured in line and consistent with the Colts' balls. That should have been enough, but Goodell wasn't interested in the truth.

Regarding the wetness, next time it rains, spray yourself with a spray bottle, change your clothes, and then go outside and roll around in the wet grass. See what gets you wetter.

Below is a simple experiment by "MIT pats fan" that shows a start-of-halftime psi of 11.1 (assuming 48 degrees) and psi of 11.7 after 5 min of halftime. So here the warming effect is significant. The unanswered questions are 1. How much does wetness affect psi and 2. How wet were the balls.

You assumed that wetness would subtract 0.3 which would leave you at 11.4 for this experiment. Note that these numbers are very close to the Exponent experimental results. Remember that 8 out of 11 Pats balls were 11.15 or lower on the non-Logo gauge. Obviously, the small difference in psi between the non Logo-gauge measurements and those predicted by this simple experiment can be explained away by the Logo-gauge theory, or the theory that the initial measurements were incorrect, but the fact is this experiment leaves room for the possibility of human manipulation of the footballs, however unlikely. This is why I say the "science" is not conclusive in this case.

 

[letekro]

And yet it's far more rigorous and credible than the nonsense that Exponent put together.

Don't get me wrong, I'd agree that it was insufficient... if there was credible, sufficient evidence to the contrary indicating that something did happen. But there isn't; anyone who dismisses the Headsmart study pretty much has to dismiss Exponent's findings as well.

Precisely my point. Neither is reliable. The science is inconclusive because we don't know the inputs well enough (starting psi, exact temperatures, exactly how wet the balls were, exactly when they were measured).

My point to all this is that I don't think it is correct, as many here are now saying, that the "science" PROVES that nothing could have been done to the footballs. That is not the case.

Leonard's presentation frames a dispute over theory. He doesn't know the inputs any better than the rest of us do. Again, those that are pointing to the "science" as being completely exculpatory are just wrong.

 

[letekro]

From everything I can gather here leterko is expecting people to prove Brady is innocent, rather than taking the burden of proof on himself and those who convicted him with no proof. The truth is that the Ravens believed the Patriots were letting the air out of balls because they were somewhat deflated when playing them, when in fact it was the weather that was deflating them. They got angry when Brady told them to read the rulebook and passed their suspicions on to the Colts who then passed them on to the league. The league then never passed those concerns on to the Patriots, which by league bylaws they are supposed to do, and instead tried to sting the Patriots, and when Kensil and Co. Got low resultss they believed they had caught them cheating, never realizing that the laws of nature explained low air pressure in any cold weather game. And once they leaked their false findings to the media there was no turning back and the league went full ****** trying to create "evidence" to support their claims, when in fact nothing ever happened.


And if "the truth" really matters and the air pressure in game balls is, as the league contends, important to the integrity of the game, then why did it take almost 100 years for the league to realize that cold weather causes a loss in air pressure?

The truth is that it doesn't matter, never has mattered, and that this was nothing more than a witch hunt.

Reasonable nonpats fans i have spoken with find the combination of texts and Bradys failure to produce the potentially relevant evidence compelling. Judges could come to the same conclusion (and yes it does inform their decision even though they are supposed to focus on process). It would be one thing if we could say that there was science that PROVES that nothing happened. In that case, all other evidence would be irrelevant. But, i dont believe we can, and that is a significant divergence from the prevailing view here.

 

[Froob]

To play devil's advocate, it is possible that this happened. It is also possible that Anderson and his team over-inflated the balls before the game and the Dorito Dink took out a significant amount of air. All of this is possible, but no person without an agenda would conclude that it is "more likely than not" to have happened.

I don't understand where this idea that they were taking air out back to 12.5 comes from. There's no reason to believe anything like that ever happened.

 

[upstater1]

Reasonable nonpats fans i have spoken with find the combination of texts and Bradys failure to produce the potentially relevant evidence compelling. Judges could come to the same conclusion (and yes it does inform their decision even though they are supposed to focus on process). It would be one thing if we could say that there was science that PROVES that nothing happened. In that case, all other evidence would be irrelevant. But, i dont believe we can, and that is a significant divergence from the prevailing view here.

Anyone who looks at the texts and realizes 3 things (1. Text in May couldn't have been about deflating, 2. text about "deflate" at Packer game was on the road, made a minute after ballboy appeared on TV in a big puffy coat, 3. 3rd text about 16 PSI showed Brady was unaware of the PSI rules in October) knows that the texts can be read any which way.

But, are you saying that the laws of physics didn't apply that night?

Say the balls were tampered with. At most, the ball boy released .1 PSI from each ball in the 90 seconds he was in the bathroom. My question to you is, why would he do that? Any right thinking person would know that this is absurd.

 

[ivanvamp]

Reasonable nonpats fans i have spoken with find the combination of texts and Bradys failure to produce the potentially relevant evidence compelling. Judges could come to the same conclusion (and yes it does inform their decision even though they are supposed to focus on process). It would be one thing if we could say that there was science that PROVES that nothing happened. In that case, all other evidence would be irrelevant. But, i dont believe we can, and that is a significant divergence from the prevailing view here.

If this case was tried in front of a jury, there is no chance Brady is found guilty of anything. There's just simply no evidence that he actually did anything wrong. Like, at all. There is some questionable behavior on his part ("destroying" the phone, which if understood properly poses no problem, but clearly it can be presented in a way that makes it look suspicious), and there is a text that uses the word "deflator", and there is an accusation made by the Patriots' opponent(s) - Ravens and Colts.

And..... that's it.

At best for the NFL, the science is inconclusive. But it clearly leans in favor of Brady. There is zero - as in, absolutely no - history of Brady doing anything wrong. He has a perfectly clean reputation. The NFL admitted they had no idea the IGL even existed. Goodell was documented to have lied on several occasions during this process.

The entire thing is absolutely crazy and the NFL literally stole a million dollars, a 1st round draft pick, and a fourth round draft pick from the Patriots, and (at this point) successfully gave Tom Brady a four game suspension at substantial personal cost to him.

 

[juny]

Below is a simple experiment by "MIT pats fan" that shows a start-of-halftime psi of 11.1 (assuming 48 degrees) and psi of 11.7 after 5 min of halftime. So here the warming effect is significant.

That video shows one ball on its own warming up with no wetness. Again, the situation on game day was much different. Put a bunch of damp footballs in a damp bag and the warming effect would be significantly slowed.

 

[letekro]

That video shows one ball on its own warming up with no wetness. Again, the situation on game day was much different. Put a bunch of damp footballs in a damp bag and the warming effect would be significantly slowed.

I have experience as a ball boy and can tell you that the balls are handled like the Crown Jewels. They had some moisture on them, no doubt. But how wet were they? My expectation is that they were wet but not soaked and the question is what impact that has. Exponent's water bottle resulted in -0.1. The Carnegie Mellon kid, who dunked the balls in water, says -0.7. It is almost 100% certain that the the real effect was somewhere in between that range, but where? I would say -0.3 or -0.4 is most likely given that the water bottle and puddle-dunk are at extremes.