-
[QUOTE=sweetwater;542388]I did some checking, there are no parameters as to where the footballs are to be inflated at. Isn't it conceivable that if the footballs were inflated within the set parameters while inside of an 80 degree locker room and brought outside into upper forty degree temps that they could have lost a fair amount of air pressure due solely to the simple scientific principle of air shrinking in volume as it cools? If the Pats used that lack of parameters to their advantage they could've intentionally inflated the footballs inside of a 100 degree room with full knowledge that the air pressure would be significantly lowered when the footballs were taken out in the cold. If this is the case it would not be cheating but instead would be playing smart by taking full advantage of a hole in the rules. Notice I always used the word football instead of ball as I didn't want anyone to make a joke about Brady playing with underinflated balls.[/QUOTE]
The proper nomenclature is shrinkage
-
Here is the mystery folks. When the Colts balls were checked they weren't under inflated however 11 of 12 of the Pat's balls were.
Make of it what you will I hate the Patriots and I think they are cheaters. Belicheat is a complete Prick and I wish somebody would body slam Brady.
-
While not evidence here are a couple of statistical anomalies that could possibly be explained if the Patriots have been underinflating the ball as common practice both benefiting the grip in bad weather and also benefiting the players when holding the ball with a surer grip resulting in historically low fumble rates.
[quote]
Over the past 12 seasons, the New England Patriots have played so well in wet conditions that their margin of victory in those games has exceeded the betting spread — set by a global market that tries to take all known advantages into account — 80 percent of the time
[The analysis suggests that the Patriots have an edge in wet weather that neither the general public nor professional bettors have taken into account. But the analysis sheds no light on what that advantage, or those advantages, might be. The Patriots exceeded the spread 56 percent of the time in their other games during that period, the analysis shows.[/quote]
[URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/sports/football/patriots-do-notably-well-in-wet-weather-analysis-shows.html?ref=football&_r=1[/URL]
[quote]I looked at the last 5 years of data (since 2010) and examined TOTAL FUMBLES in all games (as well as fumbles/game) but more importantly, TOTAL OFFENSIVE PLAYS RUN. Thus, we can to determine average PLAYS per FUMBLE, a much more valuable statistic. The results are displayed in the chart below. Keep in mind, this is for all games since 2010, regardless of indoors, outdoors, weather, site, etc. EVERYTHING.
(click on link if you wish to see chart)
One can CLEARLY SEE the Patriots, visually, are off the chart. There is no other team even close to being near to their rate of 187 offensive plays (passes+rushes+sacks) per fumble. The league average is 105 plays/fumble. Most teams are within 21 plays of that number.
I spoke with John Candido, a Data Scientist at ZestFinance who I know from work on the NFLproject.com website, and sent him the data. He said:
"Based on the assumption that fumbles per play follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten over this period, once in 16,233.77 instances”.
Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0000616 probability to win. Which in other words, it’s very unlikely that it’s a coincidence."
I actually went back and researched 5 year periods for the entire NFL over the last 25 years. The Patriots ratio of 187 plays to 1 fumble is the BEST of ANY team in the NFL for ANY 5 year span of time over the last 25 years. Not was it just the best, it wasn’t close:
1.2010-2014 Patriots: 187 plays/fumble
2.2009-2013 Patriots: 156 plays/fumble
3.2006-2010 Colts: 156 plays/fumble
4.2005-2009 Colts: 153 plays/fumble
5.2007-2011 Patriots: 149 plays/fumble
6.2008-2012 Patriots: 148 plays/fumble
7.2010-2014 Texans: 140 plays/fumble
8.2004-2008 Colts: 139 plays/fumble
9.2006-2010 Jets: 135 plays/fumble
10.1999-2003 Chiefs: 134 plays/fumble
There are a few key takeaways. First and foremost, the 187 plays/fumble dwarfs even the rest of the best seasons the last 25 years. Second, the Patriots have been at the top of the NFL since 2007.[/quote]
[URL]http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-prevention-of-fumbles-is-nearly-impossible[/URL]
-
Oh don't get me wrong they are crazy good I won't ever take that away.
-
[QUOTE=mhall;542444]Oh don't get me wrong they are crazy good I won't ever take that away.[/QUOTE]
I didn't post those links attempting to dispute your contention that they cheat, but instead to support it.
While they don't prove anything, the best explanation for them is that there is a pattern of cheating.
-
[QUOTE=SLP;542463]I didn't post those links attempting to dispute your contention that they cheat, but instead to support it.
While they don't prove anything, the best explanation for them is that there is a pattern of cheating.[/QUOTE]
My bad I should have paid it more attention. Yes there is a pattern there I agree.
-
News flash, the locker room attendant took the footballs into the bathroom with him for 90 seconds.
