|
Italy12246 Posts
On May 15 2015 05:33 Chewbacca. wrote:
If you don't make the assumption that the Ref was wrong about which gauge he used to measure patriots balls then their pressure loss is within the range predicted by ideal gas law.
Ideal gas law doesn't come remotely close to being accurate in this case. I mostly agree with your other points though.
|
|
|
On May 15 2015 05:33 Chewbacca. wrote:
Did you even read the response?
If you don't make the assumption that the Ref was wrong about which gauge he used to measure patriots balls then their pressure loss is within the range predicted by ideal gas law.
Discusses the differences that can easily account for a greater psi drop in Patriots balls vs Colts. Patriots were on offense more so balls were under more stress, Colts wrapped their balls to protect from rain which patriots didn't, Colts balls weren't measured until the end of half time so they could warm up.
Provides more context around the texting string and even shows where the Well's report is misleading stating that the term "Deflator" appears in multiple messages where it only actually appears in one. Provides alternate meanings of deflator in the term of weight loss. Points out how deflating the football is SOP for ball handling, both right after they are received and before use.
It's not just that you can't 100% prove that he did it, it's that there is a significant amount of things which reasonably counter every argument in the Well's report and how the report is misleading in nature from all of the things they left out.
I'm not going to read all 60 pages, but does it provide legitimate reasoning to why Brady withheld his text messages after being offered the deal that he could just give him a printout, on scouts honor, of the texts containing only pertinent information to the investigation and nothing else, without ever physically giving over the phone?
Is there a counter-argument to why the Patriots have indefinitely suspended a pair of Patriots employees when they maintain that no wrongdoing occurred?
Is there a counter argument to Brady maintaining he had absolutely 0 knowledge of any of this in his press conference when the texts clearly show that was incorrect(not that he outright 'ordered the code red,' but you don't text McNally the morning after the news breaks with "Are you good Jonny boy?" when you don't know shit about what is happening) which makes one wonder what else he outright lied about?
I think those are more what people have moved onto. Ted Wells phone-conference brought up a bunch of really shady sounding shit that the Pats have done over the course of this investigation, and clarified some of the common deflections that immediately came about(like the "McNally was interviewed 5 times" one... Wells talked to him once as the second person in his entire investigation and wanted a follow up because he got all sorts of new stories and information. He insisted that he would personally fly to his area of residence and wait there until the best, most convenient time available for McNally, and was still denied the second interview).
I'm also curious what alternative explanations they came up with for McNally's 'not going to ESPN... yet' text.
|
On May 15 2015 06:18 red_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 05:33 Chewbacca. wrote:
Did you even read the response?
If you don't make the assumption that the Ref was wrong about which gauge he used to measure patriots balls then their pressure loss is within the range predicted by ideal gas law.
Discusses the differences that can easily account for a greater psi drop in Patriots balls vs Colts. Patriots were on offense more so balls were under more stress, Colts wrapped their balls to protect from rain which patriots didn't, Colts balls weren't measured until the end of half time so they could warm up.
Provides more context around the texting string and even shows where the Well's report is misleading stating that the term "Deflator" appears in multiple messages where it only actually appears in one. Provides alternate meanings of deflator in the term of weight loss. Points out how deflating the football is SOP for ball handling, both right after they are received and before use.
It's not just that you can't 100% prove that he did it, it's that there is a significant amount of things which reasonably counter every argument in the Well's report and how the report is misleading in nature from all of the things they left out.
I'm not going to read all 60 pages, but does it provide legitimate reasoning to why Brady withheld his text messages after being offered the deal that he could just give him a printout, on scouts honor, of the texts containing only pertinent information to the investigation and nothing else, without ever physically giving over the phone? Is there a counter-argument to why the Patriots have indefinitely suspended a pair of Patriots employees when they maintain that no wrongdoing occurred? Is there a counter argument to Brady maintaining he had absolutely 0 knowledge of any of this in his press conference when the texts clearly show that was incorrect(not that he outright 'ordered the code red,' but you don't text McNally the morning after the news breaks with "Are you good Jonny boy?" when you don't know shit about what is happening) which makes one wonder what else he outright lied about? I think those are more what people have moved onto. Ted Wells phone-conference brought up a bunch of really shady sounding shit that the Pats have done over the course of this investigation, and clarified some of the common deflections that immediately came about(like the "McNally was interviewed 5 times" one... Wells talked to him once as the second person in his entire investigation and wanted a follow up because he got all sorts of new stories and information. He insisted that he would personally fly to his area of residence and wait there until the best, most convenient time available for McNally, and was still denied the second interview). I'm also curious what alternative explanations they came up with for McNally's 'not going to ESPN... yet' text.
1. They have texts to McNally and Jastremsky from Brady, therefore they have all Brady's pertinent Texts
2. This is a case where the integrity of the game issue pretty much mandates they cut ties regardless of whether they messed with anything or not (McNally in particular took the balls into the bathroom).
3. Brady never texted McNally before the issue became public and McNally's first name by the way isn't John, it's Jim. This is another of the misconceptions that website was put out to clear up. That text wasn't sent to McNally but Jas, who Brady had spoken to before. These texts are brought up as a way to console a guy who is caught up in a shit storm which the Patriots and Jas/McNally were made aware of the night of the game (I assume Brady also was but I don't believe it mentions him being told).
4. The way the interviews went the Patriots were frustrated by the lack of investigation into things they felt were important including a sick family member of McNally which provides a different context to another "damning" text. After 4 interviews with 4 lawyers present, reasonable access has been given. That's on the NFL for waiting so long to get Wells involved. Wells did get a chance to interview everyone at least once btw.
The website brings up legitimate points and counter arguments to everything, but the most important thing it states is that depending on which gauge was used there may have been no tampering at all. In which case the Patriots get in trouble for McNally taking a piss with the balls prior to standing on the sideline for half a game.
Kraft has staked his reputation and franchise on the fact that they didn't do anything and this is the start of a possible legal issue the likes of which the NFL can't handle
|
On May 15 2015 06:18 red_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 05:33 Chewbacca. wrote:
Did you even read the response?
If you don't make the assumption that the Ref was wrong about which gauge he used to measure patriots balls then their pressure loss is within the range predicted by ideal gas law.
Discusses the differences that can easily account for a greater psi drop in Patriots balls vs Colts. Patriots were on offense more so balls were under more stress, Colts wrapped their balls to protect from rain which patriots didn't, Colts balls weren't measured until the end of half time so they could warm up.
Provides more context around the texting string and even shows where the Well's report is misleading stating that the term "Deflator" appears in multiple messages where it only actually appears in one. Provides alternate meanings of deflator in the term of weight loss. Points out how deflating the football is SOP for ball handling, both right after they are received and before use.
It's not just that you can't 100% prove that he did it, it's that there is a significant amount of things which reasonably counter every argument in the Well's report and how the report is misleading in nature from all of the things they left out.
I'm not going to read all 60 pages, but does it provide legitimate reasoning to why Brady withheld his text messages after being offered the deal that he could just give him a printout, on scouts honor, of the texts containing only pertinent information to the investigation and nothing else, without ever physically giving over the phone? Is there a counter-argument to why the Patriots have indefinitely suspended a pair of Patriots employees when they maintain that no wrongdoing occurred? Is there a counter argument to Brady maintaining he had absolutely 0 knowledge of any of this in his press conference when the texts clearly show that was incorrect(not that he outright 'ordered the code red,' but you don't text McNally the morning after the news breaks with "Are you good Jonny boy?" when you don't know shit about what is happening) which makes one wonder what else he outright lied about? I think those are more what people have moved onto. Ted Wells phone-conference brought up a bunch of really shady sounding shit that the Pats have done over the course of this investigation, and clarified some of the common deflections that immediately came about(like the "McNally was interviewed 5 times" one... Wells talked to him once as the second person in his entire investigation and wanted a follow up because he got all sorts of new stories and information. He insisted that he would personally fly to his area of residence and wait there until the best, most convenient time available for McNally, and was still denied the second interview). I'm also curious what alternative explanations they came up with for McNally's 'not going to ESPN... yet' text.
1) Something about how they already had the phones and every texting conversation that he had with the two main suspects, so no need to have his phone. Believe there was also some bit in there about the league only being able to demand you turn over your NFL issues phone and they were requesting Brady's personal phone.
2) Doesn't go into anything about this from what I remember, but it seems to only make sense to let them go when they are basically nobodies that the NFL just found guilty and one of them isn't even a full-time Patriot employee but someone who only works on game-days and has a full time job elsewhere. It's not like they gain anything from keeping them around.
3) There is a scandal about manipulating the balls, it only makes sense to check in with your main ball handler to see how he is doing when he is completely unaccustomed to being in the spot light. Continued calls can easily be explained by how this is the mans first time as ball preparer for the Superbowl and wanting to make sure everything was perfect, and to continue to see how he is doing under the pressure of the media/investigation.
4) He had already had 3 interviews with the NFL and a 7 hour long interview with the Wells Investigation (Through which he had to leave his full-time job in NH). There was an explicit agreement that the Wells Investigation would only require 1 interview unless unanticipated circumstances arose. McNally's name had already been leaked to the media and he + his family were receiving personal threats. The Patriots requested to know what unanticipated circumstance had arose to go against the agreed upon interview protocol and the Wells Investigation provided none. Patriots agreed to help set up a phone interview with McNally if the Wells Investigation requested but they opted not to.
5) The not going to espn was s joke related to the conversation of Jastremski giving McNally Patriots merchandise when his supervisor had directed him not to. Related evidence of his boss not wanting to was on page 84 of the wells report where he said it would have to wait until next week unless Dave (his boss) leaves the room.
|
On May 15 2015 06:11 Teoita wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 05:33 Chewbacca. wrote:
If you don't make the assumption that the Ref was wrong about which gauge he used to measure patriots balls then their pressure loss is within the range predicted by ideal gas law. Ideal gas law doesn't come remotely close to being accurate in this case. I mostly agree with your other points though.
Nobel in chemistry
|
On May 15 2015 06:15 JimmiC wrote:
My point was regardless of whether it meets the burden in the court of law he did it, and everyone not blinded by fandum knows that. Protesting so hard is what's making it such a big deal.
Societaly I think it's sad that people care more about whether it's provable in court then whether or not he did it. USA is most litigious country by far!
I'm curious how you know he did it? How you know that he is as guilty as OJ?
I've spent every day since this came out giving reasons as to why I don't think anything happened, let alone that Brady knew. I'm eager to hear your reasons. Yes I'm a fan, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the one blinded.
EDIT: Tone is important here, I'm legitimately asking your reasons that haven't been explained in what the Patriots just put out.
|
I'm also interested in knowing how many of you read the full Wells Report/Patriots response instead of just reading news headline/articles
|
On May 15 2015 07:34 giftdgecko wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 06:15 JimmiC wrote:
My point was regardless of whether it meets the burden in the court of law he did it, and everyone not blinded by fandum knows that. Protesting so hard is what's making it such a big deal.
Societaly I think it's sad that people care more about whether it's provable in court then whether or not he did it. USA is most litigious country by far! I'm curious how you know he did it? How you know that he is as guilty as OJ? I've spent every day since this came out giving reasons as to why I don't think anything happened, let alone that Brady knew. I'm eager to hear your reasons. Yes I'm a fan, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the one blinded.
Your acting as if they weren't doing anything. If you had a position of 'everyone does it' and this is a witch hunt I think you might get less static.
Whether he did it or not isn't really whats preposterous, what's preposterous is suggesting while cheating is essentially part of the game, in this case it wasn't happening.
If someone gets accused of cheating by the NFL they are probably cheating. They wouldn't even make the accusation unless they had enough to satisfy their own burden of what's enough evidence to convict of something whether it's their original allegation or not.
It's not a question of whether the Patriots were cheating or not, any honest football fan knows they were cheating, because every team cheats (or at least has players who do). So arguing over whether they cheated or not is somewhat of a moot point.
If they want to keep getting away with the cheating all the other teams do they should just take their whoopin' and move on. I advise they just let it go, because otherwise they will just end up with the NFL so deep in their ass they'll be coughing up stripes.
EDIT: Put another way, if the Patriots were 100% cleared what would happen would not be the NFL tuckin tail and scamperin off. They would be so in the Patriots business they would know what Brady was eating for lunch before he did.
|
On May 15 2015 07:44 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 07:34 giftdgecko wrote:On May 15 2015 06:15 JimmiC wrote:
My point was regardless of whether it meets the burden in the court of law he did it, and everyone not blinded by fandum knows that. Protesting so hard is what's making it such a big deal.
Societaly I think it's sad that people care more about whether it's provable in court then whether or not he did it. USA is most litigious country by far! I'm curious how you know he did it? How you know that he is as guilty as OJ? I've spent every day since this came out giving reasons as to why I don't think anything happened, let alone that Brady knew. I'm eager to hear your reasons. Yes I'm a fan, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the one blinded. Your acting as if they weren't doing anything. If you had a position of 'everyone does it' and this is a witch hunt I think you might get less static. Whether he did it or not isn't really whats preposterous, what's preposterous is suggesting while cheating is essentially part of the game, in this case it wasn't happening. If someone gets accused of cheating by the NFL they are probably cheating. They wouldn't even make the accusation unless they had enough to satisfy their own burden of what's enough evidence to convict of something whether it's their original allegation or not. It's not a question of whether the Patriots were cheating or not, any honest football fan knows they were cheating, because every team cheats (or at least has players who do). So arguing over whether they cheated or not is somewhat of a moot point. If they want to keep getting away with the cheating all the other teams do they should just take their whoopin' and move on. I advise they just let it go, because otherwise they will just end up with the NFL so deep in their ass they'll be coughing up stripes.
Hold on you of all people assuming that because someone is accused of something they're guilty.
|
On May 15 2015 07:44 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 07:34 giftdgecko wrote:On May 15 2015 06:15 JimmiC wrote:
My point was regardless of whether it meets the burden in the court of law he did it, and everyone not blinded by fandum knows that. Protesting so hard is what's making it such a big deal.
Societaly I think it's sad that people care more about whether it's provable in court then whether or not he did it. USA is most litigious country by far! I'm curious how you know he did it? How you know that he is as guilty as OJ? I've spent every day since this came out giving reasons as to why I don't think anything happened, let alone that Brady knew. I'm eager to hear your reasons. Yes I'm a fan, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the one blinded. Your acting as if they weren't doing anything. If you had a position of 'everyone does it' and this is a witch hunt I think you might get less static. Whether he did it or not isn't really whats preposterous, what's preposterous is suggesting while cheating is essentially part of the game, in this case it wasn't happening. If someone gets accused of cheating by the NFL they are probably cheating. They wouldn't even make the accusation unless they had enough to satisfy their own burden of what's enough evidence to convict of something whether it's their original allegation or not. It's not a question of whether the Patriots were cheating or not, any honest football fan knows they were cheating, because every team cheats (or at least has players who do). So arguing over whether they cheated or not is somewhat of a moot point. If they want to keep getting away with the cheating all the other teams do they should just take their whoopin' and move on. I advise they just let it go, because otherwise they will just end up with the NFL so deep in their ass they'll be coughing up stripes.
Understood, but the main and biggest issue the Patriots have is that science explains the PSI readings. They ate the spygate punishment and BB even publicly apologized (as only he can). They took "their whoopin'". In this case it's entirely possible, and imo probable, that no cheating took place. To ignore this seems not only unfair, but ignorant. A few days ago Kraft was even ready to just accept the punishment for the benefit of the league. Now one of the leagues biggest pillars is on the verge of going Al Davis over this.
|
On May 15 2015 07:50 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 07:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 15 2015 07:34 giftdgecko wrote:On May 15 2015 06:15 JimmiC wrote:
My point was regardless of whether it meets the burden in the court of law he did it, and everyone not blinded by fandum knows that. Protesting so hard is what's making it such a big deal.
Societaly I think it's sad that people care more about whether it's provable in court then whether or not he did it. USA is most litigious country by far! I'm curious how you know he did it? How you know that he is as guilty as OJ? I've spent every day since this came out giving reasons as to why I don't think anything happened, let alone that Brady knew. I'm eager to hear your reasons. Yes I'm a fan, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the one blinded. Your acting as if they weren't doing anything. If you had a position of 'everyone does it' and this is a witch hunt I think you might get less static. Whether he did it or not isn't really whats preposterous, what's preposterous is suggesting while cheating is essentially part of the game, in this case it wasn't happening. If someone gets accused of cheating by the NFL they are probably cheating. They wouldn't even make the accusation unless they had enough to satisfy their own burden of what's enough evidence to convict of something whether it's their original allegation or not. It's not a question of whether the Patriots were cheating or not, any honest football fan knows they were cheating, because every team cheats (or at least has players who do). So arguing over whether they cheated or not is somewhat of a moot point. If they want to keep getting away with the cheating all the other teams do they should just take their whoopin' and move on. I advise they just let it go, because otherwise they will just end up with the NFL so deep in their ass they'll be coughing up stripes. Hold on you of all people assuming that because someone is accused of something they're guilty.
Maybe the edit clears it up? I'm not saying they were messing with the balls or not, what I'm saying is Brady and the Patriots are going to be 'guilty' no matter what, and my experience tells me to just suck it up and deal with it. Pointing out someone with authority over you is wrong almost never goes well for you. Particularly if you as an individual have already made their shit list. Being right isn't enough you need overwhelming public support and the Patriots and Brady aren't going to be getting that any time soon.
|
|
|
Doesn't change the math that was pointed out and anyone can do, nor the fact that the math is done out in the Wells report and you can simply look at the charts. The website has also been updated to reflect that former tie as well, but that was a pretty big mistake to make when putting out something like this.
|
On May 15 2015 06:15 JimmiC wrote:
My point was regardless of whether it meets the burden in the court of law he did it, and everyone not blinded by fandum knows that. Protesting so hard is what's making it such a big deal.
Societaly I think it's sad that people care more about whether it's provable in court then whether or not he did it. USA is most litigious country by far!
I find this statement rather strange. Why is a person's personal opinion relevant? If you can't prove it in court (assuming you aren't an investigator privy to unusable evidence), then your opinion has to have some doubt in it. And even if that wasn't the case, for all intents and purposes, judicially and contractually you must treat them as such.
As for litigiousness, spiritually democratic countries tend to be. Ancient Athens comes to mind.
|
On May 15 2015 08:09 giftdgecko wrote:Doesn't change the math that was pointed out and anyone can do, nor the fact that the math is done out in the Wells report and you can simply look at the charts. The website has also been updated to reflect that former tie as well, but that was a pretty big mistake to make when putting out something like this.
It is a very common mistake from the Patriots team to be neglectful when it comes to play with open cards... But yeah, at least they got that corrected.
What I sincerely missed from your the Laureate was how long time it would take for the air to heat from the reports of 40 F (outside) to 75 F (inside) which would be required for the numbers to make any sense.
According to my napkin math (mind you I last used the formulas during my bachelor degree so my math is likely off - I would much appreciate it if anyone would redo it) that time frame is in the proximity of 9 minutes from the time the balls entered the room (assuming minimal thickness of the leather as well as high air flow both inside the ball as well as in the room they are in (which is obviously a false assumption, but let's give the Patriots the benefit of the doubt)). Now, the break is supposedly 12 minutes from end of whistle to kick. This leaves them with less than 3 minutes to: Collect balls from both teams, walk to their office, measure Colts balls, re-inflate balls, walk back to the field, return balls to teams, and set up for the kick.
I wish I could work as fast as these coaches...
|
On May 15 2015 09:37 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 08:09 giftdgecko wrote:On May 15 2015 07:58 Ghostcom wrote:On May 15 2015 07:28 giftdgecko wrote:On May 15 2015 06:11 Teoita wrote:On May 15 2015 05:33 Chewbacca. wrote:
If you don't make the assumption that the Ref was wrong about which gauge he used to measure patriots balls then their pressure loss is within the range predicted by ideal gas law. Ideal gas law doesn't come remotely close to being accurate in this case. I mostly agree with your other points though. Nobel in chemistry http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/14/roderick-mackinnon-is-scientific-co-founder-of-company-kraft-group-invested-in/"No business or personal relationship with the patriots" This would never have been accepted as a full DOI in any peer-reviewed journal. Doesn't change the math that was pointed out and anyone can do, nor the fact that the math is done out in the Wells report and you can simply look at the charts. The website has also been updated to reflect that former tie as well, but that was a pretty big mistake to make when putting out something like this. It is a very common mistake from the Patriots team to be neglectful when it comes to play with open cards... But yeah, at least they got that corrected. What I sincerely missed from your the Laureate was how long time it would take for the air to heat from the reports of 40 F (outside) to 75 F (inside) which would be required for the numbers to make any sense. According to my napkin math (mind you I last used the formulas during my bachelor degree so my math is likely off - I would much appreciate it if anyone would redo it) that time frame is in the proximity of 9 minutes from the time the balls entered the room (assuming minimal thickness of the leather as well as high air flow both inside the ball as well as in the room they are in (which is obviously a false assumption, but let's give the Patriots the benefit of the doubt)). Now, the break is supposedly 12 minutes from end of whistle to kick. This leaves them with less than 3 minutes to: Collect balls from both teams, walk to their office, measure Colts balls, re-inflate balls, walk back to the field, return balls to teams, and set up for the kick. I wish I could work as fast as these coaches...
Why are we saying that the Colts balls were at 75F when they were measured the second time? The average pressure of the colts balls at the halftime measurement was 12.53, while it was reported at the start of the game to be near 13.1. So it is likely that the hadn't reached equilibrium with the warmer temperature yet?
I also don't understand what you are even trying to prove/show? The point was that in the Wells report they commented on how the pressure drop of the patriots balls was greater than that of the colts balls, but didn't take into account that the Colts balls had time to warm up. Even a 10 degree increase would have had an impact, it didn't need to be the full ~30 degrees for the statement to be valid.
|
On May 15 2015 09:49 Chewbacca. wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2015 09:37 Ghostcom wrote:On May 15 2015 08:09 giftdgecko wrote:On May 15 2015 07:58 Ghostcom wrote:On May 15 2015 07:28 giftdgecko wrote:On May 15 2015 06:11 Teoita wrote:On May 15 2015 05:33 Chewbacca. wrote:
If you don't make the assumption that the Ref was wrong about which gauge he used to measure patriots balls then their pressure loss is within the range predicted by ideal gas law. Ideal gas law doesn't come remotely close to being accurate in this case. I mostly agree with your other points though. Nobel in chemistry http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/14/roderick-mackinnon-is-scientific-co-founder-of-company-kraft-group-invested-in/"No business or personal relationship with the patriots" This would never have been accepted as a full DOI in any peer-reviewed journal. Doesn't change the math that was pointed out and anyone can do, nor the fact that the math is done out in the Wells report and you can simply look at the charts. The website has also been updated to reflect that former tie as well, but that was a pretty big mistake to make when putting out something like this. It is a very common mistake from the Patriots team to be neglectful when it comes to play with open cards... But yeah, at least they got that corrected. What I sincerely missed from your the Laureate was how long time it would take for the air to heat from the reports of 40 F (outside) to 75 F (inside) which would be required for the numbers to make any sense. According to my napkin math (mind you I last used the formulas during my bachelor degree so my math is likely off - I would much appreciate it if anyone would redo it) that time frame is in the proximity of 9 minutes from the time the balls entered the room (assuming minimal thickness of the leather as well as high air flow both inside the ball as well as in the room they are in (which is obviously a false assumption, but let's give the Patriots the benefit of the doubt)). Now, the break is supposedly 12 minutes from end of whistle to kick. This leaves them with less than 3 minutes to: Collect balls from both teams, walk to their office, measure Colts balls, re-inflate balls, walk back to the field, return balls to teams, and set up for the kick. I wish I could work as fast as these coaches... Why are we saying that the Colts balls were at 75F when they were measured the second time? The average pressure of the colts balls at the halftime measurement was 12.53, while it was reported at the start of the game to be near 13.1. So it is likely that the hadn't reached equilibrium with the warmer temperature yet? I also don't understand what you are even trying to prove/show? The point was that in the Wells report they commented on how the pressure drop of the patriots balls was greater than that of the colts balls, but didn't take into account that the Colts balls had time to warm up. Even a 10 degree increase would have had an impact, it didn't need to be the full ~30 degrees for the statement to be valid.
I'm trying to show that there isn't enough time to make the temperature explanation a reasonable one (again, someone please redo my math, I'm an MD, not a physicist/engineer). If you are going to argue that the Colts balls had enough time to warm up a significant amount you are essentially arguing that the refs are so slow at measuring PSI that the Patriots balls that were measured the latest would also have heated up (and then you are really going to have an issue explaining those numbers...). Or that the refs for some reason decided to leave the Colts balls alone for a long period of time following the measurement of the Patriots balls.
|
Ok, I see where you're going now. I just re-read the report and the point wasn't that the additional time to heat up was responsible for the difference in pressure drop. The point was that the ideal gas law could account for the patriots balls. The difference in pressure drop was talked about in a different section of the Patriot's response.
--Patriots pressure drop can be contributed to the IGL if you assume that the original gauge used was the one the referee remembered using.
--The pressure numbers given at the start of game were reported to that most were 12.5 and maybe 1-2 were 12.6, seemingly precise and accurate given that all balls were within 0 - 0.1 psi of the pressure that the patriots reportedly aim for.
--The temperature of balls increasing causing greater pressure during half time would lead us to believe that you'd see a steady increase in pressure in both the patriots and colts balls, however you don't see this. Likely because of a large amount of error in the gauge being used.
--A single ball was measured three times with same gauge and produced a range of 0.45 psi. Again, a large amount of error.
--This is the gauge that the Wells report assumed the patriots ball had been tested with at the start of the game and allowed them to say that the IGL can't account for all of the pressure loss. However, the fact that these gauges are showing large ranges while the gauge used at the start of the game had little error leads him to believe that this assumption was incorrect and the gauge that was actually used was the one the referee recalled using.
It is elsewhere in the original report (Patriot's Response, not the professors statement) where the discrepncies between the Pat/Colt pressure loss is talked about.
--Patriots were on offense more and thus being impacted more.
--Patriots balls were exposed to rain the entire time as they didn't protect the balls on the sidelines.
--Colts were on offense less and when they were on defense they wrapped the balls to keep them dry, leading to less water exposure.
--I don't remember what else was said.
|
Second, the Ideal Gas Law predicts that pressure should systematically increase over time when the balls were brought from the cold field to the warm locker room at halftime, as pointed out in the Wells Report. However, I do not see this systematic change in the sequential measurements of 11 Patriots balls and 4 Colts balls. The pressure in each ball must increase as it warms, but the systematic trend within the data this would produce is apparently obscured by a large measurement error – the kind of measurement error you see in the example of the ball intercepted by the Colts, a case in which the pressure was measured three times.
Finally, the claim of a statistically significant difference in pressure drop between the two team balls regardless of which gauge was used did not account for the fact that the Colts balls were apparently measured at the end of halftime since the officials ran out of time and made only four measurements – in other words, the Colts balls were measured after the Patriots balls and had warmed up more
My point is that the Laureate is apparently underestimating the time-frame it takes for footballs to heat up and consequently these paragraphs are dubious.
EDIT: My underlying point is that I don't understand why he writes absolutely zero about the heat capacity/thermal conductivity of footballs. It is after all very important for his conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
