Off Topic - Deflategate

[wartyOne]

I've seen more and more arguments in society talking about how everybody does it, so you can't punish it or have to be lenient. There's no way of dis-incentivizing it other than punishing everyone who is caught and improving your investigation skills (checking elsewhere, too). Or giving alternatives that accomplish the same thing legally.

All this moral equivalency bull-shit bugs me. Yes, it puts more emphasis on not being caught and there's a negative windfall for those who are caught versus those who don't, but too fucking bad, in my book. Don't cheat. I know, if you're not cheating, you're not trying; if you don't cheat and no one else is caught, you're always losing (or at a significant disadvantage). The answer is to improve ways of catching the others. But NFL is entertainment and money, it doesn't bother me as much as "real world" equivalencies.

The NFL has replaced professional wrestling. It's a joke.

 

[wartyOne]

Scientific science is my favorite kind of science.

Are you really this dumb?

I prefer alchemy.

 

[wartyOne]

I didn't say they'd have lost. Outcome isn't just the result of a win or loss. My point was that some say that the punishment is affected by the fact that NE would have won anyway, and I agree they would have won but only because I think NE is better, not because it was a blow-out, and don't think them winning anyway has any relation to whether they should be punished.

I am seriously saying that if the balls were deflated to be more catchable (intent) and there was a catch on 3rd down, maybe he would have dropped it and then punted instead of catching it for a first - extending a TD or FG drive. Without that TD/FG, what happens then? I don't know. It could have been tied at halftime or worse.

I just said that the goal of cheating is to get an unfair advantage and cheating affects the game.

I am also saying that the Colts played differently being down by 10 than they would have being up by 4 or tied. That doesn't explain 28-0 in the second half, but who knows how they adjusted or what their game plan coming out of the half would have been. Were they more aggressive being down by a lot versus not?

Football is a very connected complex game. One thing affects another. If they had tried to connect and players kept dropping the regularly inflated footballs, would the Patriots have run more? Our 2011 NFCC game might have been different without the ST fumbles, would we say, "no way, did you see how close the game winning field goal was?" One play affects another, whether it's at the start or the end of a game.

The Colts scored 7 points in the game. Regardless of any advantage that the Pats did get, the Colts had no answer for NE's defense. That, of course, was when they were using their own balls. The Pats could have spotted them 21 points, and still won after halftime.

If the Patriots get punished because the NFL's policies are so easy to manipulate, then maybe the answer isn't punishing the Patriots.

 

[wartyOne]

It doesn't matter. They didn't know going into it that they were going to blow out the Colts. If I study my ass off for a test, would have aced it, but I'm super driven so I still cheat on it and get caught, should I get a A on the test anyway?

We're never going to know how much deflating the balls created an advantage. But it's very clear the Pats believed it would create an advantage, or they wouldn't have done it. Breaking the rules while seeking competitive disadvantage is cheating, and should be punished regardless of whether there was a benefit, it was a minor benefit, etc.

Finally, MHSL's point is that football games can turn on single plays. Small events can totally swing things, particularly turnovers. By deflating the balls, the Pats were attempting to reduce the likelihood of a turnover. A single turnover early in that game could have easily meant a 14-point swing.

They scored more with "appropriately inflated" balls. Obviously it didn't create an advantage.

Reaching.

 

[wartyOne]

No, it's not okay as long as you don't get caught. But what are you suggesting, not punishing cheaters because others probably cheated too?

Another school scenario: four college students plagiarize on their end-of-year term paper. They all get As. Two are caught and two are not. Should the two who are caught not be punished because others probably cheated as well? That's just a silly argument IMO.

I'd imagine teams and players bend or break the rules all the time. I don't think that's okay, but the only way to discourage that is to hammer the hell out of them when they are caught. And frankly, the fact that the Pats have been caught blatantly cheating at least twice suggests to me that they have done a lot more that hasn't been caught.

The way to discourage this is to have unbiased personnel in charge of equipment like game balls. It's so ridiculous that teams are allowed access to these kinds of things. It's like in baseball where the fields aren't the same. Can you imagine if Seattle had a field that was only 80 yards long, and their uprights were only 10 feet apart? No, because that would be stupid. So why are teams allowed access to game balls after the officials check them? There's plenty of stupid commercial breaks where the NFL can be making sure that rules are adhered to.

Complete non-story.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

The way to discourage this is to have unbiased personnel in charge of equipment like game balls. It's so ridiculous that teams are allowed access to these kinds of things. It's like in baseball where the fields aren't the same. Can you imagine if Seattle had a field that was only 80 yards long, and their uprights were only 10 feet apart? No, because that would be stupid. So why are teams allowed access to game balls after the officials check them? There's plenty of stupid commercial breaks where the NFL can be making sure that rules are adhered to.

Complete non-story.

Yes, but that only solves this problem. It doesn't do anything to deter future cheating.

It is a story. Even if it wasn't effective - and the reasoning that they scored more with regular balls is pretty thin, IMO - it's still cheating. By a repeat offender.

 

[deep9er]

They scored more with "appropriately inflated" balls. Obviously it didn't create an advantage.

Reaching.

why is this so hard to grasp..............teams cannot break the rules, that is it, that is the issue. Was there an intentional move to break the rule?

So regardless of who won, by how much, it was a play-off game or not, a 'major' rule or not, doesn't matter; teams are not supposed to break the rules....period So based on the NFL's on-going investigation, we'll find out shortly if N.E. intentionally did or didn't?

there are reasons for having NFL rules in place. if the amount of inflation wasn't important, there wouldn't be this rule.

 

[wartyOne]

why is this so hard to grasp..............teams cannot break the rules, that is it, that is the issue. Was there an intentional move to break the rule?

So regardless of who won, by how much, it was a play-off game or not, a 'major' rule or not, doesn't matter; teams are not supposed to break the rules....period So based on the NFL's on-going investigation, we'll find out shortly if N.E. intentionally did or didn't?

there are reasons for having NFL rules in place. if the amount of inflation wasn't important, there wouldn't be this rule.

Outrage for the Seahawks being allowed to PI on every pass play?

 

[wartyOne]

Yes, but that only solves this problem. It doesn't do anything to deter future cheating.

It is a story. Even if it wasn't effective - and the reasoning that they scored more with regular balls is pretty thin, IMO - it's still cheating. By a repeat offender.

Until the NFL decides to make calls objective, this statement is ridiculous. Don't blame the Patriots. Blame the WWF...er...NFL.

 

[optimist4720]

It's ok, I didn't know how to ask. I like reading your posts, it's just sometimes harder... maybe I should stick to working.

All good..my spacing gives me headaches too. Touch screen are nice but they are easy to mis-type especially with single figure typing I use while holding the iPad. Also, I hate wearing my glasses so I can't always read every little letter so well. Thanks for understanding and sorry about the "spaz" posts sometimes.

 

[optimist4720]

Maybe it was the colts that did it. LOL

Think Naked Guy on frozen lake in winter..it's shrinkage...it's science..

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Outrage for the Seahawks being allowed to PI on every pass play?

We've had plenty of that outrage. They are the most penalized team in the league on defense over the past few years. They should be penalized more, perhaps, but it's not like they're getting away with it every time. This isn't a good comparison.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Until the NFL decides to make calls objective, this statement is ridiculous. Don't blame the Patriots. Blame the WWF...er...NFL.

So what do you suggest? We never punish people who are caught cheating because punishments aren't always doled out fairly and some people get away with it? It's really my statement that's ridiculous here, Warty?

 

[MHSL82]

The Colts scored 7 points in the game. Regardless of any advantage that the Pats did get, the Colts had no answer for NE's defense. That, of course, was when they were using their own balls. The Pats could have spotted them 21 points, and still won after halftime.

If the Patriots get punished because the NFL's policies are so easy to manipulate, then maybe the answer isn't punishing the Patriots.

Ehh, a pick six with a regularly inflated football instead of a first down from a deflated football in a TD drive, is 14 points and the game would be tied at half-time. Some of the 28-0 after half-time score was Indy giving up. They don't do that if they are tied or winning.

Don't confuse that with me saying that I thought Indy would win or had a chance to win. I thought New England was going to push Indy out the same way as Indy left last year.

How close is not relevant to whether they cheated or should be punished or rules change, etc. Being a blowout makes me not feel like I'm seeing the wrong team playing in the SB. Detroit and Dallas arguably have better arguments that they could have been in the SB than Indy does.

Don't like Pagano, don't know why. Happy that he beat cancer, don't like his celebrations when they win. Don't know why. Glad that Luck has to wait another year.

 

[wartyOne]

So what do you suggest? We never punish people who are caught cheating because punishments aren't always doled out fairly and some people get away with it? It's really my statement that's ridiculous here, Warty?

How exactly were the Patriots CAUGHT cheating?

There's reams of video evidence to suggest that the Ravens played outside the rules in our SB loss. Where's the punishment? Yes, sorry Crimson, but it's true. Your statement is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[wartyOne]

Ehh, a pick six with a regularly inflated football instead of a first down from a deflated football in a TD drive, is 14 points and the game would be tied at half-time. Some of the 28-0 after half-time score was Indy giving up. They don't do that if they are tied or winning.

Don't confuse that with me saying that I thought Indy would win or had a chance to win. I thought New England was going to push Indy out the same way as Indy left last year.

How close is not relevant to whether they cheated or should be punished or rules change, etc. Being a blowout makes me not feel like I'm seeing the wrong team playing in the SB. Detroit and Dallas arguably have better arguments that they could have been in the SB than Indy does.

Don't like Pagano, don't know why. Happy that he beat cancer, don't like his celebrations when they win. Don't know why. Glad that Luck has to wait another year.

Dallas has NO argument to be in the SB. Detroit has an argument about not getting to play in the next round. Dallas was gift-wrapped the WC win.

 

[Louie26]

Also just throwing this out there people do know cold air takes air out of tires and footballs. It was cold out there.

Yes u are wrong. there are 12 game balls and 11 were screwed up. They all played with the same balls.

Its really not a big deal. Just fine them or take a draft pick away and get over it. Like I said if they did do it shame on them. I still want them to win. Lets Go Pats.

No they do not.
The ONLY time BOTH teams would use the same football, is if the QB throws an interception. Otherwise, (and this is from junior high school on up) the offense uses their own ball. Indy didn't use the NE footballs. If you watch a game, each team has a ball boy, with THEIR OWN footballs.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

How exactly were the Patriots CAUGHT cheating?

There's reams of video evidence to suggest that the Ravens played outside the rules in our SB loss. Where's the punishment? Yes, sorry Crimson, but it's true. Your statement is absolutely ridiculous.

Holding during a play is not "playing outside the rules." It happens on every play. Sometimes you get away with it, and sometimes you don't. It's not the same as filming practices, stealing signals, or using equipment that doesn't meet league requirements.

 

[wartyOne]

Holding during a play is not "playing outside the rules." It happens on every play. Sometimes you get away with it, and sometimes you don't. It's not the same as filming practices, stealing signals, or using equipment that doesn't meet league requirements.

The league can't prove this happened. As of yet.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

The league can't prove this happened. As of yet.

They can prove the balls didn't meet requirements. That's all they have to prove to justify a fairly harsh sanction, IMO. Though there is considerable circumstantial evidence here - Brady's professed preference for deflated balls, the uniformity of the deflation of 11/12 balls, and the equipment guy's potty break. It wouldn't make a criminal case, but it doesn't have to.