Tom Brady's Suspension Appeal News
- Thread starter TheLostBigBoss
- Start date
- Status
Fumbles on average occur more often when kicking balls are used. Insignificant eh?
Alligatorjandro
Banned
Tom swore under oath here didn't do anything wrong.
CrocMother
Banned
He has said he prefers footballs to be deflated and the guy who handles his balls has a nickname of the "deflator".
True but in rebuttal his dad and Teddy Bruschi both said he is innocent.
Alligatorjandro
Banned
He also swore he never thought about the air pressure in his balls until this controversy sprung. Big lie.
LowlySmokeGuy
Banned
Couldn't that be chalked up to cold weather. Look at some of the other teams in the top 5 of each lists: Bears, Packers, Ravens, Giants, Seahawks. They all play in freezing weather halfway through the season.
He said he didn't care about pressure until the Jets over inflated the balls in a game a year ago. If you're going to troll at least use well documented facts.
Isn't there a quote where he says he loves when Gronk deflates his balls?
Sounds like he did more than think about it...
Alligatorjandro
Banned
Roger Goodell said he wouldn't suspend him for not turning over his phone. Big lie.
Exactly. And the video camera and tripod the Pats set up in the Rams' practice facility had no film in it.
Goodell, Brady, and the Pats are perfect together.
Let's check the tapes..
Oh wait that's right the guy who sleeps over at Krafts house (the guy who helped get and keep him the job where he gets paid 20 million a year to be a moron) and is now supposedly out to get the Pats for reasons destroyed them without letting anyone else see them!
Alligatorjandro
Banned
True. He was an honest man (though fuck him just for the AFC Championship). Probably why they dumped his ass ASAP.
Tebow lasted like 5 minutes there. The quality and character tests they have in Foxboro gave us gems such and Gronk and Hernandez...
And they didn't give Donovan food poisoning during the Super Bowl. Remember that game? Good times.
That AFC Championship was pretty much a perfect storybook goodbye for the best QB in our franchise's history.
There's very little correlation in those charts between fumble rates and weather. I mean the team with the highest fumble rate is Buffalo ferchrissake. The fact is, fumbling has next to nothing to do with ball pressure. Anyone who tries to argue otherwise is suffering from a deflated brain.
Give us Pete back, and I'll FedEx your tears back to you overnight.
Also, pardon Dave Megget while your at it.
No shit? K balls are slick as fuck and brand new. That has nothing to do with the fact that on the offense, the Pats are extreme statistical outliers in regards to fumbling. Way, way, beyond the NFL norm.
I'm sure you'll tote out that they are better than the rest of the league on special team fumbles when K balls are used. I'm willing to wager they are much more in line with the rest of the league in that regard. Not like they are when using their doctored balls on the offense.
Most NFL teams operate under that same MO. John Fox is notorious for sending RBs to the dog house for fumbling. It's not something special the Pats do. Fastest way to get benched in the NFL? Start losing the ball.
CrocMother
Banned
Ball grip has nothing to do with fumbling? That's a correlation of common sense
He never saw the Ray Rice tape either. Dude did arguably the shittiest commish job in the last 30 years in any sport last year and is using deflategate in an attempt to make his incompetence forgotten.
Goodell, ex Jet employee. Mike Kensil, ex Jets employee. Dave Gardi is the son of Joe Gardi who was a coach for the Jets all involved in this. What a coincidence.
Banjo-Kazooie
Member
Ya I'm only half joking
. He wasn't really worse than the average RB in that department. I think it just stood out more because the Pats rarely run, so when they did, if he fumbled, it was an uproarAre you going to accuse every team or player of cheating just because they have great statistics for a particular aspect of the game?
The Patriots numbers only look extreme if you only look at numbers from 2007 to 2014, only look at the rolling average, and exclude dome teams. If you look at their numbers from when Belichick became coach it is nothing special - some years they are outstanding other years they are average. It also helps that Ben Jarvus Green-Ellis never fumbled while with the Patriots.
He passed every test!
The accusations that followed him his entire career all stemmed from jealous and his success!
Yeah sounds pretty damn similar!
Lets never talk of that game ever again.
The ending of the game is what it sounds like, when doves cry.
I have my own stat about the fumbles. They cut the fuckers who fumble, no matter who they are. Unlike the crappy teams out there who use a first round draft pick, the Pats adhere to the Parcells school of 4 yards and a cloud of dust.
You fumble, your sit. You fumble again, your gone. That is why the stats are so low.
To quote you, no shit. Explain why they're also outliers on kicks.
What exactly is wrong with gronk's character? He's a dumb oaf but he's never done anything.
Almost all backs who fumble or can't block are out of a job very quickly. Not sure how this is a Patriot thing...
Patriots do it after 2 fumbles, not 3 or 4 or 5. You fumble, you sit or loose your job. Pretty simple. They kept Ben Jarvis around because he did not fumble, not because he was good. The second he was let "loose" he started fumble. It's called good (strict) coaching.
Well theres some stats on this page that would show it is a Patriots thing.
It's really not hard. Teams just need to suck less. Not sure why the rest of the league finds it so difficult.
No, it's those statistical outliers combined with recent history of manipulating the game to their advantage. If it was just the stat alone, that might raise some eyebrows. Combined though, it certainly is smoke pointing out a fire.
It's one of those situations where if it's too good to be true, it probably is, even more so when it's been proven that it's ingrained as the "Patriot Way".
Even I was shocked that Lance Armstrong (an outlier himself), cheated. I was totally in denial that America's golden boy would do such a thing. Looking back though at all the evidence and how well he did, it was obvious that we put on the blinders because we were intoxicated by his success. We essentially had beer goggles on. I'm sure the Pats fans will always have the beer goggles on. The rest of the world has taken them off though, and now we know what we've woken up to. It's unfortunate, because the Pats were once lovable losers. Now they are the guy who took shortcuts to get on top and now that they are exposed nobody respects them.
We could argue till we are blue in the face, but you've still got the beer goggles on so you are going to see things for what they really are.
The Patriots' balls (weren't deflated by 2 PSI).
Even it they were, the 2 PSI difference reduces the ball's mass by about the weight of a dollar bill and Brady would've only gained less than 1 millimeter in his grip. Some of you people need to take off the fanboy goggles and pay attention to the science and facts.
not psycho
Member
538 also checked it out and debunked it:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/your-guide-to-deflate-gateballghazi-related-statistical-analyses/
What you linked to was a conversation where benm mentions it (on the day the Wells Report came out too, which he also praises here since he didn't have time to check it out carefully), instead of linking to the actual article 538 did on it. I'm guessing benm realized later that most of what he said in this conversation was wrong.
Also, the Patriots were not even the best over the span chosen. Atlanta was. But dome teams were excluded for no reason.
Keep in mind you can make statistics say what you want a lot of the time.
Yes, the Patriots were the 2nd best in the league at not fumbling in outdoor games over the span 2010-2014. But in 2013 they were 21st in the league. So what you're doing is cherry picking a time span that makes them look as good as possible.
Statistically, that doesn't work. As 538 points out in the bolded section, you would then have to look for the probability of any team being good at any skill over any time span.
There is no need to go into the fact that fumbling isn't random in the first place... it's something a team can genuinely be better at (or design their strategy around, perhaps even by sacrificing something else). A cherry-picked span in which Atlanta was the best doesn't really mean anything.
Banana Aeon
Member
I see what you are doing, and it is an excellent post to debunk this fumbling rate bullshit, but who you are replying to doesn't care about the facts.
Rabbi_Vole
Banned
Exactly. What's the motive? You're all treating Goodell like Dick Dasterdly.. Should we expect him to tie Gisele to the train tracks next?
The article you posted is older than the article Bionic posted, which happens to go back and reevaluate the article you are relying on for your data.
The author who posted your first link Neil Payne, was quoted as saying the following in the follow up:
So he doubles back after the fact, and then the others also agree that Sharp's analysis (while flawed) was heading in the right direction. Which led others to generate Poisson Models, which show that odds are Pats fumbles rates aren't really due to chance alone.
You posted to the earlier article unless I am missing something?
Edit: thanks Godslay I thought I was going crazy for a minute. Well obviously the whole damn calendar system must be biased.
The Albatross
Member
Patriots fumble numbers are not an extreme outlier, in fact they're behind at least one other team in fumbles, but here's a few things:
- Patriots bench players who fumble. Remember when Stevan Ridley ran for 1,000 yards in his second season and was the best RB the Patriots have had in a decade? Yeah, he was benched the next season for 4 fumbles. He started last year strong, fumbled, and was benched, and then injured for the year. Belichick has zero tolerance for players who put the ball on the ground.
- The Patriots run less than other teams and typically run in situations that result in fewer fumbles, like 3rd downs, using plays like draws and delays.
- The idea that a football that is 12.2 PSI vs. 12.5 PSI being statistically relevant to fumbling is ridiculous, because then you'd see Green Bay at the top of all fumble categories every year, given that Rodgers admittedly prefers balls at the highest allowed amount. As far as I know, the Packers do not have some fumbling curse above any other teams.
- A team with a worse passing attack is more likely to rely on the run, and more likely to fumble than a team with a historically very effective passing attack, like the Patriots.
- The Patriots fumble statistically far less on special teams than other teams, and those balls are strictly controlled by refs
- The Patriots fumble less on the road than they do at home, where they are not able to, allegedly, alter balls before games
The most likely explanation is obviously that Lance Armstrong naturally has the lung capacity of 2 race horses. He is just a real life superhero obviously. We can ignore the less likely and improbable reason that he obviously doped and cheated like a motherfucker.Once again:
and for your specials teams comment, at least know your own team:
lol it's always the same story.
It was damn fun watching Lance just kick ass. I'm sure Pats fans felt the same way. Once it's all over though, I'm guessing it's just feels hollow.
not psycho
Member
The first 538 article discusses statistics and posts statistical rebuttals.
The one you posted is a conversation. At best it can suggest that the statistics deserve a second look. It does not, in itself, count as the second look.
Neil Payne does not "double back" either. All of the rebuttals in the earlier article, both his and those he links, are valid. Kind of seems like he is trying to be polite by saying they deserve a second look instead of pointing out that benm has not addressed any of the reasons the statistics were trash.
As a side not, benm was completely fooled by the Wells Report:
Anyone know if he wrote an article acknowledging this?
Still haven't answered the question of why they fumble less in away games. Same story indeed.
- Status