Should The Patriots Be Disqualified From The Super Bowl?

[CommissarSpartacus]

Well...right off the bat you misrepresent what I wrote. Where did I say that Peter King was my "expert" and why are you putting that word in quotation marks that is used to indicate what anther poster is being quoted directly?

Where did you say it? Read on...

What I said is (and THIS is a direct quote) "I believe that Peter King has much better connections in the league than you or anyone else here, and I bet a dime to a dollar you do not personally know nor have you talked to one NFL player, official or league employee....ever. Nor do they know you. Peter King talks to all of them, and is known on a first name basis throughout the NFL."

See? He's your "expert". He went to Football Pundit U and I didn't so what do I know, huh? Ever heard of the Appeal to Expertise? Guess what it is?

THAT is why I link to what he writes.

For his "supposed" expertise...

Nonsense. I have read Peter King for quite some time, and he is easily the most credible sports writer in the country with the very best connections. He is ruthlessly honest, and regularly goes back and shows when he wrote something in the past that was wrong. A trait you would be wise to mimmic.

"I trust a man who's proved many times he's willing to admit when he's been wrong more than I trust a man I've never been able to prove has been wrong!"

Makes total sense. Really. Anyone who has never admitted to being wrong can't be trusted, even if he's never been wrong, because I'm wrong sometimes, and no one can be smarter than ME!" LOL!

Mr. King starts out his "argument" (it really is not an "argument"...that is your word...it is reporting facts, saying that "this is significant" because IT IS SIGNIFICANT!!

Saying it's significant is coming to a conclusion, and a set of facts followed by a conclusion is an argument. And I sure hope you understand that an argument is something different than bickering (God, I can't believe I even have to explain this)...Stating your conclusion before making your case is disingenuous, ie pimping your argument.

And he goes on to explain WHY the facts are "significant"...because "it takes weather-as-a-factor out of the possible reasons why New England’s footballs could have lost air while the balls on Indianapolis’ sidelines would have stayed fully inflated."

In fact, the reason that you have to pre-empt the factual reporting of King is because the facts show that your theory was wrong.

I explained quite clearly why Pete's conclusions are not warranted by the facts he presented. Facts followed by a conclusion may be an argument, but it doesn't mean it's a valid one. The conclusion needs to make sense. In Pete's case it doesn't, but it doesn't stop him from saying it does, because he knows guys like you WANT TO BELIEVE the Pats are cheaters.

Again, if you have better sources, we would all love to hear them. Now you are just blustering because you have nothing, except stuff that you pulled out of your ass.

Oooo, Pete has "sources" and I don't. Half a century of watching football and a do2en years writing about it is MEANINGLESS! Because Pete has SOURCES within the NFL!

I'm so ashamed of disagreeing with him. What was I thinking?

You just can't accept the truth and facts simply because they go against your faulty premise, huh. Be a man for once and admit you were, and are wrong.

For the umpteenth time, I'm told I have to admit I was wrong to prove something to the people that are consistently wrong.

Sorry, not gonna do it.

But is is interesting seeing you resort to right-wing debate tactics - tactics YOU quite rightly reject out of hand when they're used on you in the politics forum. What is it about football that triggers the Mr Jekyll in you?

Yes, the Pats cheated.

Why is it that Americans think it's totally okay to believe some things without evidence and not others?

Saddm has WMDs. I bet Peter King thought so too...

The rules are quite clear. The Pats broke them, which makes them cheaters, and the Colts did not.

The rules are the rules and nothing I've seen so far indicates they broke them. If there was, we wouldn't be having this conversation, now would we?

No....you are 100% wrong.

I provided an explanation for my position, you are just making a declaration without an explanation of why I'm wrong. Gotta do better...

No, you have not shown anything except your usual annoying habit of refusing to admit you are wrong even when all the evidence shows you were wrong. So...refuse to admit you were, and are wrong...I don't care. You were still wrong.

The only one suffering from "sour grapes bull****" is you.

"Wah, wah, wah, why won't you let ME win for once? It's NOT FAIR!"

This is the silliest premise of all. Goodell has a very close relationship with the Pats owner, Bob Kraft. It was Bob Kraft who came put strongly, in public, to defend Goodell when the Rice controversy hit. He was by his side in facing the press to defend him.

"How can you say they're enemies when Kraft supports Goodell" Duh. Goodell is the COMMISSIONER of the league and it demeans the league if the Commissioner looks bad. Kraft's allegiance is to his team and the league. If that means he has to shake Goodell's hand and pat him on the back once in a while, he'll do it. Doesn't mean Kraft doesn't think Goodell's a snake...

If anything, Goodell's motivation would be 180 degrees opposite.

Nope.

Listen, if you want to defend the Pats for cheating, now and the last time they were caught stealing signs, that's your business.

If you refuse to acknowledge the reality of what happened with Spygate because you hate the Pats, you are just revealing your agenda to those of us that DO KNOW what happened.

I criticize the Pats, not because they are the Pats, but because they have damaged the integrity of the game.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

(catching my breath....)

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

I don't care what team was found to do this cheating, my message would be the same.

I guess as a salesman, you have experience saying things like this with a straight face, huh?

Your argument is nonsense.

And yours is an embarrassment, but heay, you already have Losmania on your resume, so it's not gonna make a significant blot on your copybook.

We've seen what you're capable of when it comes to issues of love and hate, haven't we?

[notacon]

Jesus Sparky...so much effort just to cover up that you are so wrong.

Your obsession tells the whole story.

Your argument is is for **** and I think you know it.

[Discotrish]

It's a Patriot Conspiracy. No need to believe the "official" story on this one!



Patti

[Strongman]

Jets connection appearing in Deflategate probe

As the Deflategate investigation continues, scrutiny on the Patriots will soon lead to questions about what prompted the investigation in the first place.

Who suspected subterfuge? Who pushed the league to gather evidence? Was the motivation simply a principled, “integrity of the game” platform or was it an attempt to settle old scores?

Earlier this week, we pointed out the possible motivation of the Ravens and Colts. It’s all laid out here.

Those are two of the Patriots most bitter conference rivals, having played against the Patriots in a total of nine playoff games since 2003 with the Patriots going 6-3 in those games.

The only other rival with similar bitterness? The New York Jets.

The NFL man on-site to start the investigation in the AFC Championship was Mike Kensil. He is the NFL Vice President of Game Operations. You may remember him as the gentleman John Harbaugh took his frustration out on during the Super Bowl power outage in 2012. Harbaugh later apologized. He does that a lot.

Before rising to the league level, Kensil was the Jets director of operations for nearly 20 years. His tenure overlapped Bill Parcells (and Bill Belichick’s) time with the Jets and he would have been part of the Jets front office incensed by Belichick’s 2000 resignation as Jets head coach.

Kensil’s tenure with the Jets ended in 2006, the same year Belichick disciple Eric Mangini became head coach of the Jets.

Multiple sources have indicated that Kensil is the driving force behind the investigation and that his interest in deflated balls did not begin in January but actually began earlier in the year.

Kensil’s professional reputation is strong and people I’ve spoken to have described him as having strong integrity.

That Jets connection, though, certainly hints at a preexisting judgment of Belichick and the Patriots that could, conceivably, be a motivating factor in the league’s dogged pursuit.

Just how much do the Jets revile New England?

Former Jets special teams coach Mike Westhoff unloaded on New England in a phone interview with the Toronto Sun this week, saying, “If it’s anybody that walks the edge on the rules, it’s these guys,” Westhoff said. “Sometimes they remind me a little bit of Enron — they’re always the smartest guys in the room, until some day maybe they’re not. That’s how I feel about them.”

Westhoff was the Jets’ special teams coach from 2001 to 2012.

He asked, “Did they do it? I honestly don’t think they did. To tell you the truth, I’m not so sure they’re not sitting around today thinking, ‘I wish we’d thought this up,’ knowing them."

Westhoff doesn’t like even helping New England in this way, however.

“As much as I hate to, I’m going to defend them,” Westhoff said. “And trust me, I hate to defend them. (Spygate) was only a part of it. The number of things that were like this? There’s only a handful of them that have been made public.

“Trust me, what I’m tellin’ you. There are quite a few others. Clock violations. You can go on and on. There’s a whole s---load.”

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-pat...lategate-probe

[SmokeShowin]

[Strongman]

More evidence of Patriots cheating at the AFC Championship game? The game clock goes from 5 second back to 25 seconds.

[gebobs]

Besides the response that showed how Mark Brunell didn't laugh this off. Here's another link that shows you how stupid your argument is, this time from Aikman.

Please. Get a quote from Kelly Holcomb and then we can talk.

[gebobs]

I heard on WGR this morning that if it was 70 degrees where the ball was filled, the temp would have to drop to -17 degrees to lose that much air pressure.

The calculation is pretty easy. P2 = P1*T2/T1 with temperature in kelvins. I haven't seen what the pressure were of the underinflated balls, but the acceptable range is just 1 psi. If the balls were inflated at the minimum when provided to the officials ahead of time, any temperature shift would put them under. A temperature drop from 70 deg F to 35 deg F is going to decrease pressure by about 1 psi.

And as shiva said, they could fill them with warmer air to amplify the effect although it couldn't be too warm that it would be noticeable. Of course, this is just another skirting of the rules by the Patriots. Technically, maybe they didn't break the rules, but they are skirting the intent. Or maybe they are breaking the rules and don't care. $25k per ball is nothing. The benefit outweighs the risk.

Obviously, allowing the teams to provide balls without adequate controls is a mistake.

What's with a lot of commentary saying the balls are "weighed" to check them? What the heck would weighing do? Do these folks think PSI is a weight?

The stats article on fumbles is interesting. They fumble less per play than all but one team, the Falcons, who play at least 9 games a year indoors. In fact, all the indoor teams fare pretty well overall. And there's New England right up there at the top of the list with them. Curious.

[CommissarSpartacus]

Technically, maybe they didn't break the rules, but they are skirting the intent.

Is it the Patriots responsibility to consider the "intent" of the rules?

[gebobs]

I posted a link to the rulebook a page or so back. There is more information in the Game Operations Manual, but I haven't found that posted online.

I went through each page and couldn't find it. Sorry if I missed it. Can you post again?

[gebobs]

Is it the Patriots responsibility to consider the "intent" of the rules?

Responsibility? I think they purposefully look for opportunities to do just that.

[CommissarSpartacus]

Responsibility? I think they purposefully look for opportunities to do just that.

That's not answering the question. I'm not asking what the Pats think, I'm asking what you think...

[gebobs]

That's not answering the question. I'm not asking what the Pats think, I'm asking what you think...

Yes, I think there is always a certain expectation of that as regards sportsmanship. I deal with this sort of in my job too. We provide specifications to suppliers and customers provide them to us. If there is some ambiguity, one doesn't get a free pass to skirt the rules. It is clear in quality standards that one must take intent into consideration.

Each 5 degrees of temperature change is going to drop the pressure by ~1%. If they fill the balls to the minimum pressure at room temperature and the pressure drops a smidge due to the slight drop in temperature, I don't think anyone could fault them for it. That's on the NFL for giving up control of the balls and not clearly providing standards. If however they are filling them at 110 deg F, that would be a more deliberate effort to skirt the rules just as it would be if they filled them with argon for some reason.

Take the example of oxygen doping in endurance sports such as cycling and running. There were no rules against it for years. People will, and still do, train at high altitude to gain a competitive advantage. But then some decided to take shortcuts to give them an advantage without any effort with doping.

And if the Patriots are purposefully loopholes to an an advantage, that's contrary to good sportsmanship which stands on the basis of level playing fields. And it seems to me that they are constantly looking for just such opportunities to give them that edge. Not an edge in their competitiveness through practice and ability, but through subterfuge.

[better days]

Yes, I think there is always a certain expectation of that as regards sportsmanship. I deal with this sort of in my job too. We provide specifications to suppliers and customers provide them to us. If there is some ambiguity, one doesn't get a free pass to skirt the rules. It is clear in quality standards that one must take intent into consideration.

Each 5 degrees of temperature change is going to drop the pressure by ~1%. If they fill the balls to the minimum pressure at room temperature and the pressure drops a smidge due to the slight drop in temperature, I don't think anyone could fault them for it. That's on the NFL for giving up control of the balls and not clearly providing standards. If however they are filling them at 110 deg F, that would be a more deliberate effort to skirt the rules just as it would be if they filled them with argon for some reason.

Take the example of oxygen doping in endurance sports such as cycling and running. There were no rules against it for years. People will, and still do, train at high altitude to gain a competitive advantage. But then some decided to take shortcuts to give them an advantage without any effort with doping.

And if the Patriots are purposefully loopholes to an an advantage, that's contrary to good sportsmanship which stands on the basis of level playing fields. And it seems to me that they are constantly looking for just such opportunities to give them that edge. Not an edge in their competitiveness through practice and ability, but through subterfuge.

It is as I said, the Patriots have a culture of CHEATING on that team.

And from Kraft on down, they have no regard for sportsmanship, welcoming SCUM to the team if they think it will help them win, from Haynesworth to Moss to Hernandez to Blount.

[CommissarSpartacus]

Yes, I think there is always a certain expectation of that as regards sportsmanship. I deal with this sort of in my job too. We provide specifications to suppliers and customers provide them to us. If there is some ambiguity, one doesn't get a free pass to skirt the rules. It is clear in quality standards that one must take intent into consideration.

Sportsmanship? I don't see anything unsporting about this. Anyone with a brain can figure that if you fill balls with warm air to the minimum, then take them outside into colder air, THEY WILL DEFLATE and thus be LESS than the minimum PSI. If the NFL didn't write a rule saying that the balls MUST test at 12.5 minimum at the beginning, half time and ends of games, then it ceases to be a problem. But that's not the Patriots problem. Don't hate them for figuring out a way to get an edge that ISN'T AGAINST THE RULES.

It's pathetic...

[Discotrish]

Maybe the Pats should spike the opposing team's water bottles with a sedative. Or a laxative.

Does the NFL have a specific "rule" against this?

Patti

[Strongman]

Yes. There's a whole field of study devoted to this called ethics. In football, ethics fall under sportsmanship.

The fact that the NFL has awards for sportsmanship and not gamesmanship, should clue you in.

[Discotrish]

Sportsmanship? I don't see anything unsporting about this. Anyone with a brain can figure that if you fill balls with warm air to the minimum, then take them outside into colder air, THEY WILL DEFLATE and thus be LESS than the minimum PSI. If the NFL didn't write a rule saying that the balls MUST test at 12.5 minimum at the beginning, half time and ends of games, then it ceases to be a problem. But that's not the Patriots problem. Don't hate them for figuring out a way to get an edge that ISN'T AGAINST THE RULES.

It's pathetic...

You should hire yourself out to teams who might want to try complicated ways of cheating.

Turns out Occam's Razor was probably right all along.

Patti

[CommissarSpartacus]

...The fact that the NFL has awards for sportsmanship...

They do? is that a consolation pri2e for losers?

[Discotrish]

They do? is that a consolation pri2e for losers?

Not only were your overly complicated theories wrong, but you've managed to acquire an unnecessary taint.

Hopefully this whole subject matter has been fun for you (in a very theoretical, and as it turns out, purely fictional way), but it hasn't served you well.

Patti