Yeah, but he still doesn’t get it. He mentions Goodell was killing an ant with a sledgehammer. He then points out that Brady’s passer rating on the road was close to his rating at home.
Saying there was an ant suggests there was a minor violation. Wrong, there was no ant.
It was unnecessary to compare Brady’s home road splits.
The pressure of the balls changed exactly in line with the temperature and game conditions. The were dozens of science and engineering professors that pointed this out. An MIT professor even made an hour or so long video explaining it in detail.
King never understood that. He talked about it, but as though it was a possible theory. He is an idiot. This is middle school science and he never fully grasped it.
I don’t care that he reported the inflation levels inaccurately initially. NFL executives lied. That’s on them. I cared about reporters like him not believing or being skeptical of the ideal gas law. If he and others reported that with the same gusto they did the original report, the story would have ended and with Goodell looking like the liar and moron that he is.
There's another aspect of Peter King not getting it that stood out to me: King says it bothers him that he got the story wrong, but he was simply repeating what trusted sources told him. He didn't interview any Colts or Patriots personnel that evening. He didn't test the PSI in any footballs. What should upset him is who lied to him, why they did, and why he didn't do anything as a result.
King said "
It doesn't matter who I talked to, it doesn't matter who told me anything. It's my rear end on the line when I say something, when I confirm a story. And I was wrong." It absolutely DOES matter who he talked to. It's logical to conclude that King's sources were higher-ups at NFL HQ. They would have been the only party that had access to the PSI data or been able to confirm it.
A highly decorated, multi-time Super Bowl champion and the most successful franchise this century being accused of cheating right after they earn a spot in another Super Bowl is a huge story. I can't fault King for reporting what he was told and then making the rounds on TV and radio to discuss it. When he found out that the story he was told was wrong his reaction was "
Golly gee, I feel terrible about getting it wrong." How about this? The NFL feeding false information to journalists to make a team look guilty is also a huge story and King completely ignored it. He feels ashamed that he got it wrong? Then he could have written an article in 2015 asking why the NFL misled him and his audience.
The league knew Mortensen's report was wrong. By mid-week after the AFCCG, when everyone had calmed down a bit, they could have issued a statement saying the "11 out 12 balls" report was incorrect, but they'll conduct a full investigation. Instead, the league let that narrative gather momentum. Even when the Patriots legal department wrote a letter to the league, requesting they clear up the false reports, the NFL responded that they didn't see the need to do so. King had zero curiosity about why any of this happened, probably because if he made an issue of it, he wouldn't be able to have chili with Goodell, his sources may not return his calls, or his appearances on Sunday Night Football might disappear. Peter King regrets his deflategate reporting? Not as much as he should.
www.si.com
