NFL "Teams Behaving Badly" Thread: 2015

[Grover]

Originally Posted by molson

Finally listened to that. I think that was a great representation of the kinds of things a lot of Boston sports fans are talking about with each other. A lot of them kind of want to do something else this Sunday, and wouldn't mind if Brady finds himself on another team soon. The Brady press conference was a real game changer for a lot of people.

Well most of those Pats fans weren't really Pats fans until 2002 anyway.

[Fidatelo]

Hey Grover are you the same Grover Simmons and JBug talk about in their podcast?

[molson]

Originally Posted by Grover

Well most of those Pats fans weren't really Pats fans until 2002 anyway.

For Simmons' dad and his friends he talked about, it's more like 1962. He wasn't expressly wishing for Brady to be gone, but his enthusiasm for Sunday is clearly gone. I think that's pretty common. Maybe even more so for older fans who want to watch a game or talk about it at a bar, not try to dissect and defend fumble statistics.

[jeff061]

If our fans can't get up for a Super Bowl game featuring their team, that's a confirmation of the shittiness of our fans.

I hate the lead up. It's always worthless even in the best of years. But how can you not get up for your team in the Super Bowl?

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by molson

Finally listened to that. I think that was a great representation of the kinds of things a lot of Boston sports fans are talking about with each other. A lot of them kind of want to do something else this Sunday, and wouldn't mind if Brady finds himself on another team soon. The Brady press conference was a real game changer for a lot of people.

Huh. I haven't listened to this podcast at all so I don't know the background or reasons they've given, but that's stunning. I have no idea how a fan base gets to that level. What was so awful about the Brady press conference or anything the Pats did or even alleged they did that would make a fan NOT want to watch their team play in the Super Bowl and desire the best player in their franchise history to get the boot? What is going on in Boston?

I have been a lifelong fan of one of the worst franchises in sports, the Lions, and one of the best, the Red Wings. I can't imagine NOT wanting to watch either team play in a playoff game, much less a championship game. And I also can't imagine ever having a desire to get rid of a franchise player - who has already delivered championships - for something as stupid and facile as what's being alleged here. It's INCONCEIVABLE

[jeff061]

Well I haven't seen anyone in the area not up for the Super Bowl and I seem to be in a small minority in being ok with Brady exiting. I did not listen to that podcast.

On Brady, he just doesn't add nearly as much to the success of the team as he has in the past. His accuracy has been going down over the past few years and this year he's added the occasional ill timed, game threatening, kick to the stomach INT to his repertoire. If there is a potential successor available I'd rather work that transition while we have a defense to cover it up. That said, I've also always been on the side of the fence that believes Belichick is way more key to the ongoing success of the Pats than Brady is.

If Garoppolo is looking like a lifer backup, let's keep hanging onto Brady. But we just need someone dinking and dunking while not throwing INTs. We don't need what Brady's been doing since 2007.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Huh. I haven't listened to this podcast at all so I don't know the background or reasons they've given, but that's stunning. I have no idea how a fan base gets to that level. What was so awful about the Brady press conference or anything the Pats did or even alleged they did that would make a fan NOT want to watch their team play in the Super Bowl and desire the best player in their franchise history to get the boot? What is going on in Boston?

I have been a lifelong fan of one of the worst franchises in sports, the Lions, and one of the best, the Red Wings. I can't imagine NOT wanting to watch either team play in a playoff game, much less a championship game. And I also can't imagine ever having a desire to get rid of a franchise player - who has already delivered championships - for something as stupid and facile as what's being alleged here. It's INCONCEIVABLE

I hope I'm not overplaying this too much. I'm sure they'll still watch the game, as I will I. But the tone was so somber, the enthusiasm is gone for them, and me, and I think, lots of others.

As a Patriots fan, you can be either somber and disappointed, angry and defiant, or tune everything out and root for your team like always. I guess the third one would the best, but it's tough if you hang out on the internet, can't talk about the game or the matchup without this coming up, and know that even a win will be seen as tainted. So you gradually slip into #1, or jump into #2. And I'm not wasting too much energy defending this team anymore, (though I'll speak up against the most obvious trolls who are just trying to get a reaction out of people.) It gets exhausting after 10+ years. In 2007 I spent about a million posts here trying to argue that the NFL was not rigging games so the Patriots could be undefeated (that was actually a hot topic here once, as was whether the Patriots were being unethical by winning by too many points). This ball issue obviously has more teeth, but at some point, it just takes too much energy, especially when it seems that the team has at least some blame, and very possibly A LOT of blame. There was a point at the end of the podcast where Simmons was describing all the hate mail he was getting about how he could be a fan of such a team. He was all, "I just grew up in New England and this was the team that played there, I didn't deflate any balls!".

[Zinto]

The fumble research is poorly done. Here is an article leading to more articles and a post from a scientist/sports analyst refuting it.

Forum Post

And the article:

Your Guide To Deflate-gate/Ballghazi-Related Statistical Analyses | FiveThirtyEight

So I think we should pump the brakes on the fumble story. You can make your case the Patriots cheated without using the fumble narrative that has been pretty thoroughly dismissed at this point.

[Grover]

Originally Posted by molson

For Simmons' dad and his friends he talked about, it's more like 1962. He wasn't expressly wishing for Brady to be gone, but his enthusiasm for Sunday is clearly gone. I think that's pretty common. Maybe even more so for older fans who want to watch a game or talk about it at a bar, not try to dissect and defend fumble statistics.

No, I hear you completely.

But there's a totally different class of New England fan born out of the Brady/Belichick era. The numbers really started to swell in Maine after the first SB.

[Grover]

Originally Posted by Zinto

The fumble research is poorly done. Here is an article leading to more articles and a post from a scientist/sports analyst refuting it.

Forum Post

And the article:

Your Guide To Deflate-gate/Ballghazi-Related Statistical Analyses | FiveThirtyEight

So I think we should pump the brakes on the fumble story. You can make your case the Patriots cheated without using the fumble narrative that has been pretty thoroughly dismissed at this point.

Excellent.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by molson

I hope I'm not overplaying this too much. I'm sure they'll still watch the game, as I will I. But the tone was so somber, the enthusiasm is gone for them, and me, and I think, lots of others.

I think people are looking at this the wrong way. I mean yes, as a Patriots homer I could look at this objectively and say that it's disappointing that Occam's Razor kind of indicates this was not above-board and it's on Brady, possibly / probably including actual cheating.

But this is entertainment. And it's far more entertaining for me to deny any possibility that the Pats cheated and push the idea that Brady's a lily-white saint and watch other people devolve into a frothing rage.

So, as you were.

[miked]

Wait, so did we have weeks of press conferences for San Diego's stickem gate? Or the Vikings speakergate? Were people calling for these teams to lose centuries of picks and release players?

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by miked

Wait, so did we have weeks of press conferences for San Diego's stickem gate? Or the Vikings speakergate? Were people calling for these teams to lose centuries of picks and release players?

Welcome to 2015. If you are not outraged, you need to listen to more sports talk radio.

[flere-imsaho]

We've still had no one explain how much inflation really matters (unless I've missed that, which is quite possible). I mean, obviously high inflation doesn't necessarily correlate to high fumble rates or high dropped passes otherwise why would Rodgers stick with it?

I know the explanation, so far, has been that it's easier to catch and easier to hold, but how really by how much? If 1 or 2 PSI made that much difference then, again, wouldn't Rodgers not go for a highly-inflated ball no matter how much he might like its feel?

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

We've still had no one explain how much inflation really matters (unless I've missed that, which is quite possible). I mean, obviously high inflation doesn't necessarily correlate to high fumble rates or high dropped passes otherwise why would Rodgers stick with it?

I know the explanation, so far, has been that it's easier to catch and easier to hold, but how really by how much? If 1 or 2 PSI made that much difference then, again, wouldn't Rodgers not go for a highly-inflated ball no matter how much he might like its feel?

I would think Rodgers himself, as the guy primarily holding the ball, would be the final arbiter on that. It appears that, for him at least, it works better for it to be more inflated. Maybe he has big hands? Regardless, I don't think Rodgers' first concern is whether inflation affects how well it can be caught, thrown or held onto, but how it feels to him.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by molson

I hope I'm not overplaying this too much. I'm sure they'll still watch the game, as I will I. But the tone was so somber, the enthusiasm is gone for them, and me, and I think, lots of others.

As a Patriots fan, you can be either somber and disappointed, angry and defiant, or tune everything out and root for your team like always. I guess the third one would the best, but it's tough if you hang out on the internet, can't talk about the game or the matchup without this coming up, and know that even a win will be seen as tainted. So you gradually slip into #1, or jump into #2. And I'm not wasting too much energy defending this team anymore, (though I'll speak up against the most obvious trolls who are just trying to get a reaction out of people.) It gets exhausting after 10+ years. In 2007 I spent about a million posts here trying to argue that the NFL was not rigging games so the Patriots could be undefeated (that was actually a hot topic here once, as was whether the Patriots were being unethical by winning by too many points). This ball issue obviously has more teeth, but at some point, it just takes too much energy, especially when it seems that the team has at least some blame, and very possibly A LOT of blame. There was a point at the end of the podcast where Simmons was describing all the hate mail he was getting about how he could be a fan of such a team. He was all, "I just grew up in New England and this was the team that played there, I didn't deflate any balls!".

Well, if that's the price I paid for backing a team that won 3 Super Bowls, has been to two more, and has remained at the top of the league for 14 years... BRING ON THE INTERNET HATERS!!!!

I'd bathe in their tears.

Heck, I'd be willing to pay that price for one Super Bowl. Just one. I don't need three (maybe four). I'm not greedy!

What has there been beyond Spygate and now this stupid football inflation thing? Am I missing some?

[Solecismic]

Playoff results are more random than most of us would be comfortable with.

I don't get the Brady hate. He clearly has a lot to do with New England's success. When he was misfiring at times last season and early this season, the Pats were ordinary.

Regular season wins since the Patriots last won the Super Bowl:

New England 122
Indianapolis 110
Pittsburgh 101
Green Bay 98
San Diego 97
Baltimore 96
Denver 95
Dallas 93
...
Average 80
...
Oakland 47

If you look at seasons spread out over time, normally the truly bad teams are a little worse than the truly good teams are good. So the gap New England has notched at the top of this list is an outlier in and of itself.

Of course, wins aren't independently distributed any more than fumbles (you can stress not fumbling as a coach - they all do it yet somehow so many players stretch for that extra foot when they shouldn't).

The Patriots simply put themselves in position to win the Super Bowl every year. For fans of 31 other teams, that's frustrating. So if there's a perception that Belichick and Brady cheat, I can see why people want to burn the place down.

I don't think there's anything in this DeflateGate thing. But I understand the pitchforks and torches.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I don't think there's anything in this DeflateGate thing. But I understand the pitchforks and torches.

As in, you don't think anything nefarious happened? Or you think, even if it did, it doesn't mean they actually have been gaining an advantage for years?

I fall under the latter, FWIW.

eta: Fixed what may have been an inadvertent triple negative.

[JPhillips]

Grabbing Blount after he quit on the Steelers is enough for me to root against the Pats.

[molson]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Grabbing Blount after he quit on the Steelers is enough for me to root against the Pats.

I saw ESPN was trying to push that as the next scandal today, Blount intentionally getting cut so he could join the Patriots. Even though he went through waivers first.

[Grover]

Originally Posted by molson

I saw ESPN was trying to push that as the next scandal today, Blount intentionally getting cut so he could join the Patriots. Even though he went through waivers first.

Jim Rome was big on that today too. What a crock.

[Kodos]

Yeah. That's a non-story.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Logan

As in, you don't think anything nefarious happened? Or you think, even if it did, it doesn't mean they actually have been gaining an advantage for years?

I fall under the latter, FWIW.

eta: Fixed what may have been an inadvertent triple negative.

As in I think quarterbacks pick footballs based on grip and, especially with those quarterbacks with big hands like Brady, the surface of the ball is much more important than inflation.

Second, the rules indicate that the referees are responsible for determining, before each play, whether a ball is legal.

Third, the evidence that the balls were doctored between the inspection and any point of the game doesn't seem evident. So why assume guilt?

Fourth, it's natural for people to latch onto anything negative about the Patriots because they are successful under Belichick and Brady to the point of serious discomfort with the notion of "Any given Sunday..."

Fifth, the fumble study is unconvincing. We've also heard that Belichick likes to wet down and otherwise make the ball difficult to hold in some practices. Maybe that drill works. He obviously stresses holding on to the ball.

Sixth, The one guy who says he likes bigger footballs actually has average/small hands by NFL quarterback standards (his are about 2 inches bigger than the average man). Brady has large hands by quarterback standards. So it's not a matter of simply being able to throw the ball, like it would be for most of us. Our own experiences don't translate well.

I think it's probably that the more worn footballs with the grips Brady prefers don't hold air quite as well. Or that he does slightly prefer less inflation, but there's no directive to under-inflate. I'm guessing that his discomfort at the press conference is worry that his perception of a better grip might have something to do with inflation.

And that it's probably time for better inspections and a locker on the field, because we can't expect the referee to test each ball before putting it in play.

At any rate, unless there's evidence of doctoring after the initial inspection, the Patriots should not be penalized in any way.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

I saw ESPN was trying to push that as the next scandal today, Blount intentionally getting cut so he could join the Patriots. Even though he went through waivers first.

I don't think the Pats orchestrated it, I just don't like how the guy got rewarded for quitting on his team. He should have been left to sit for the rest of the season.

[molson]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I don't think the Pats orchestrated it, I just don't like how the guy got rewarded for quitting on his team. He should have been left to sit for the rest of the season.

He's certainly a low-character guy, but that's an odd place to draw the line where so many NFL teams (including the Seahawks and Patriots) employ or have recently employed criminals.

[JPhillips]

I think both the Pats and Seahawks are extremely unlikable, but the whole NFL seems to be moving in that direction.

Of course that's probably me just aging and griping more.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by molson

I hope I'm not overplaying this too much. I'm sure they'll still watch the game, as I will I. But the tone was so somber, the enthusiasm is gone for them, and me, and I think, lots of others.

As a Patriots fan, you can be either somber and disappointed, angry and defiant, or tune everything out and root for your team like always. I guess the third one would the best, but it's tough if you hang out on the internet, can't talk about the game or the matchup without this coming up, and know that even a win will be seen as tainted. So you gradually slip into #1, or jump into #2. And I'm not wasting too much energy defending this team anymore, (though I'll speak up against the most obvious trolls who are just trying to get a reaction out of people.) It gets exhausting after 10+ years. In 2007 I spent about a million posts here trying to argue that the NFL was not rigging games so the Patriots could be undefeated (that was actually a hot topic here once, as was whether the Patriots were being unethical by winning by too many points). This ball issue obviously has more teeth, but at some point, it just takes too much energy, especially when it seems that the team has at least some blame, and very possibly A LOT of blame. There was a point at the end of the podcast where Simmons was describing all the hate mail he was getting about how he could be a fan of such a team. He was all, "I just grew up in New England and this was the team that played there, I didn't deflate any balls!".

I definitely do not share this perspective. Most Pats fans I know find this stupid "scandal" to be absolutely hilarious (and NONE of them have read some of the amazingly comedic malarky in this thread, which ups the chuckle factor even more for me). On the grand scheme of things, this is about equivalent to a mosquito buzzing around. This is a complete non-issue with everyone I know (Pats fans, that is. Patriot haters have a significant level of butt hurt, as, again is evidenced by this very thread)

now, if you were to say Pats fans have become a little jaded over the years and don't have the same enthusiasm for this one...well, I wouldn't argue with that. Fair or not, it just isn't possible to have the same intensity for your team's 6th SuperBowl appearance as you had for the first. And yes, I definitely am aware of how obnoxious that sounds.

[Suicane75]

I just hope the liquor is strong, the food is tasty and the game is good. Pretty much in that order.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

I definitely do not share this perspective. Most Pats fans I know find this stupid "scandal" to be absolutely hilarious (and NONE of them have read some of the amazingly comedic malarky in this thread, which ups the chuckle factor even more for me). On the grand scheme of things, this is about equivalent to a mosquito buzzing around. This is a complete non-issue with everyone I know (Pats fans, that is. Patriot haters have a significant level of butt hurt, as, again is evidenced by this very thread)

now, if you were to say Pats fans have become a little jaded over the years and don't have the same enthusiasm for this one...well, I wouldn't argue with that. Fair or not, it just isn't possible to have the same intensity for your team's 6th SuperBowl appearance as you had for the first. And yes, I definitely am aware of how obnoxious that sounds.

You haven't won in a decade.

[BishopMVP]

Put me in with the group that has no idea what Molson's talking about. Maybe some of the bandwagon fans feel over saturated but excitement is just as high around here among football fans as it's ever been. And I think the fans would be surprisingly okay if Belichick decided to move on from Brady, and would be willing to turn on him after a few bad games, but very very few are actively trying to push him out the door at this point - really Jeff is the only person I've seen argue that. Fwiw, Luck was obviously a unique scenario, but the Colts moved on from Peyton Manning without an uproar from the fans. Not sure why the Pats are expected to be different IF Garroppolo/whomever are a legit replacement.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

Actually, not very silly at all. The statistical analysis provided in this thread shows that the Patriots have fumbled so few times that it's very difficult to believe this could have occurred without external assistance.

Ignoring the multiple times that's been refuted, why is that so difficult to believe? The Patriots haven't won 80% of coin tosses, they've performed better at (most) football-related activities than the other NFL teams, because they're good at football. I'm not going to do the calculations but I'd guess the Patriots number of wins over the last 10 years is actually more of a statistical outlier than their fumble rate.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Kodos

You haven't won in a decade.

Yeah, I am not sure I buy that either. In 2009, the Wings were in their 6th Stanley Cup finals in about the same stretch of time 1995-2009. And if there was a drop of intensity it was minuscule, and that was after the Wings had won it the year prior. I get it if you're talking just playoffs, but the championship round? No. Especially given how long it's been.

Get it together, Boston.

[Scoobz0202]

God damn the NFL is dumb.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...iots-football/

What was the precise PSI of each of the 12 footballs the Patriots’ offense used in the AFC Championship Game? We’ll probably never know.
NFL head of officiating Dean Blandino confirmed today that the NFL didn’t log the exact PSI of each football. According to Blandino, when officials inspect footballs to see if they’re properly inflated, they simply approve them or disapprove them.

[Danny]

My biggest issue is really just the likely dishonesty, specifically Brady. If he had just manned up and admitted he tried to play the system It wouldn't have bothered me so much as it does appear this isn't an issue with just pats.

Also the NFL is stupid for every allowing teams to do their own footballs anyway. Pick a standard psi and have NFL submitted balls that are standardized for everyone

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

God damn the NFL is dumb.
NFL didn’t log the PSI of each Patriots football | ProFootballTalk

So we're back to referee Walt Anderson didn't really check them.

Nice.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Grover

Jim Rome was big on that today too. What a crock.

I have a couple of friends that are irrational patriot haters that have brought up spy gate every time we start talking football and the patriots. I started talking up belichick calling Blount and orchestrating the whole thing right after his first game back with the pats. I figure that if they want to brand him an evil wizard, I will spin something meaty for them. So I'm only disappointed that he wasn't original enough to proclaim this as news six weeks ago.

On Blount and the steelers. I'm not really bothered by Blount walking, as the team clearly didnt know how to make use of a good player. Blount isn't a class guy but neither are the steelers especially classy nor competent managers of the offensive running game for that matter.

[stevew]

I feel like they should have tried to placate Blount, but their rushing offense was #12 in DVOA.

It'll be humorous when the Pats get a #6 compensation for losing Blount to the Steelers via FA.

No idea why you cut Blount without a backup plan or waste a #3 on a scat back either.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by stevew

So we're back to referee Walt Anderson didn't really check them.

Nice.

Are they stating that the pressure was actually measured or are the referees. Standing in the john squeezing balls? I wouldn't be really surprised if the pressure check didnt always involve a gauge. I think that is how serious the NFL took ball pressure until the team found guilty in "spygate" was involved in an incident.

Seriously if the patriots have slipped under inflated balls past a squeeze test for who knows how long, and sometimes the balls get pumped up and sometimes they don't, then this is as ridiculous a scandal as I can recall. If this is the case then there shouldn't even be a penalty.

If the patriots have physically been deflating balls after an inspection has taken place, then that is actually cheating, and I'll be very disappointed.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by stevew

So we're back to referee Walt Anderson didn't really check them.

Nice.

Not trying to start shit, but how did this leap get made just because we know they didn't write down the measurement of each ball? It's not feasible that each ball was checked, found to be in the required range, and they moved on to the next one?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I have a couple of friends that are irrational patriot haters that have brought up spy gate every time we start talking football and the patriots. I started talking up belichick calling Blount and orchestrating the whole thing right after his first game back with the pats. I figure that if they want to brand him an evil wizard, I will spin something meaty for them. So I'm only disappointed that he wasn't original enough to proclaim this as news six weeks ago.

On Blount and the steelers. I'm not really bothered by Blount walking, as the team clearly didnt know how to make use of a good player. Blount isn't a class guy but neither are the steelers especially classy nor competent managers of the offensive running game for that matter.

So it's okay to quit on a team if you feel you aren't playing enough?

As far as I know the Steelers completely lived up to their end of the contract.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

God damn the NFL is dumb.
NFL didn’t log the PSI of each Patriots football | ProFootballTalk

For an organization whose management structure is populated in majority (I'm guessing here, but still) by lawyers, it continues to surprise that slips like this happen.

I mean, OK, I'm not necessarily expecting there to be a process to govern what a ref should do when he suspects an underinflated ball (though you kind of think there would be one), but given the environment of legalese the NFL generates, you think either the ref would think to a) inform league officials and get guidance on the spot or b) actually record the PSI. I know they have a lot to do (hence option a), but still.

If the evidence ends up being this circumstantial I really don't see how the NFL levels a penalty against the Patriots without seeming to be completely arbitrary which would, of course, be very much in theme with 2014/2015 for the NFL.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Logan

Not trying to start shit, but how did this leap get made just because we know they didn't write down the measurement of each ball? It's not feasible that each ball was checked, found to be in the required range, and they moved on to the next one?

Someone needs the blame in this matter, and there is no 100% proof because there is no documentation. So I can see where steve is coming from, however, unless each ball is uniquely serialized, then writing down the PSI of the balls means nothing because there is no tracability to each specific ball.

This is the reason that Robert Kraft came out and said what he did. He knows that there is no documented proof that there was any wrong doing on his organization's part. So he does what any good leader should do, stick by his men. The only video evidence we have is a person going in the bathroom for 90 seconds and even then we have to make a judgement as to what happened.

Like it was said earlier, in a Civil Court I think you could get a conviction but if this were a Criminal Court, the defense could present enough reasonable doubt to get a not guilty verdict.

[flere-imsaho]

On another topic, I never understood the spygate thing. If you secretly tape a closed-door practice session then yes, that should be an infraction, but anything done in open practice, to say nothing of a game itself, should be fair game.

Was there a rule prior to spygate that said explicitly "no taping of opposing coaches during games"? Asking seriously here.

After all, it isn't as if these teams have a different level of means. This isn't Manchester United sending spies to steal the top secret strategies of an amateur club they're going to play in the FA Cup or something. Every NFL team has the means to tape everything that goes on during a game, if they want to.

Now, if the clubs, as a whole, want to avoid that situation (and the resultant arms race), then pass a rule, which I'm sure they did afterward.

[jeff061]

I forget what the rule was, but yes there was a rule against what they did. Similar to this, it wasn't remotely as big of a deal as it was made out to be, all teams were doing it, but they did break a rule.

[flere-imsaho]

IMO, guys like Simmons' Dad want the Patriots' dominance to be like that of Landry's, Noll's or Shula's teams. But in the salary cap world you can no longer construct those teams that were simply better than everyone. In this world, the way the NFL is constructed now, you need to constantly innovate. And one of the hallmarks of constantly innovating is going right up to the edge of the rules, and even finding loopholes (like the weird formations Harbaugh was complaining about) to exploit.

It can definitely seem like cheating, and in some ways it's breaking the "spirit" of the law/game. But the game evolves, and this is one of the ways evolves.

[JPhillips]

Spygate got the Pats in trouble because they didn't respect the Commish. Initially it wasn't a problem, but after the Commish sent out a letter to all the teams telling them to stop, the Pats continued to tape. That's what got them in trouble, a willingness to ignore the instructions of the Commish's office.

[Kodos]

As it should have.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by jeff061

I forget what the rule was, but yes there was a rule against what they did. Similar to this, it wasn't remotely as big of a deal as it was made out to be, all teams were doing it, but they did break a rule.

The rule was about the location in the stadium from which you filmed, not what you filmed, and yes the Patriots got in trouble because they ignored a league directive to stop filming from that location.

If they had just had a bunch of cameras with good zoom lenses up in their coaching box focused on the opposing coaches, Spygate would never have been a thing.

[Arles]

To go along with Dr. Sak's comments, I'm not sure what everyone's expectation of the refs are for checking the footballs? Did people really think that a ref sits and writes down the exact PSI for all 24 footballs by serial number before each game? That seems a little silly. If the refs did a pressure check and found all 24 balls to be within compliance (maybe even inflating a few that were a little low/hi) - that seems good enough as a baseline. If the head ref says all 24 balls were checked and left his office between the allotted range of 12.5 to 13.5 PSI, then I see no difference in the situation than if they were measured to the exact PSI by serial number.

Now, if the league didn't really check, that's a different story. But, Blandino didn't say that - he just said they didn't document the exact pressure per ball. But, whether a ball was 12.5 PSI or 13 PSI, there's no reasonable way it gets to 10.5 PSI at halftime without some kind of tomfoolery. As much as I lack confidence in the NFL to run a legit investigation, I can't see the distinction between all 12 Pats balls being initial checked between 12.5-13.5 and actually recording that the footballs were 13.1 PSI, 12.8 PSI, 13.2 PSI, .. having any real impact on their penalty.

If the league feels confident that the inspection process had the balls between 12.5 and 13.5 prior to kickoff, the issue remains.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Arles

To go along with Dr. Sak's comments, I'm not sure what everyone's expectation of the refs are for checking the footballs? Did people really think that a ref sits and writes down the exact PSI for all 24 footballs by serial number before each game? That seems a little silly. If the refs did a pressure check and found all 24 balls to be within compliance (maybe even inflating a few that were a little low/hi) - that seems good enough as a baseline. If the head ref says all 24 balls were checked and left his office between the allotted range of 12.5 to 13.5 PSI, then I see no difference in the situation than if they were measured to the exact PSI by serial number.

Now, if the league didn't really check, that's a different story. But, Blandino didn't say that - he just said they didn't document the exact pressure per ball. But, whether a ball was 12.5 PSI or 13 PSI, there's no reasonable way it gets to 10.5 PSI at halftime without some kind of tomfoolery. As much as I lack confidence in the NFL to run a legit investigation, I can't see the distinction between all 12 Pats balls being initial checked between 12.5-13.5 and actually recording that the footballs were 13.1 PSI, 12.8 PSI, 13.2 PSI, .. having any real impact on their penalty.

If the league feels confident that the inspection process had the balls between 12.5 and 13.5 prior to kickoff, the issue remains.

I agree. Some people seemed to have mis-interpreted not writing down exact numbers as not having tested the balls at all. Seem like two different things.