Merged: Ahahaha. Once a cheat, always a cheat / DeflateGate

Is that data fumbles lost, or total fumbles? Because if it is total, the data he uses implies the Falcons cheated too. And possibly the Saints. Improvements after 2006:

1. Patriots - 73%
2. Falcons - 69%
3. Saints - 59%

 

Falcons and Saints are dome teams. Fumble rates for games played in domes is much lower than the fumble rates for games played outdoors.
Dome teams are apples, teams that play outdoors at home are oranges. The Pats fumble rates after '07 are a haddock.

 

Those are improvements from pre/post rule change. Are you saying the Falcons and Saints only moved into a dome in 2007? Or the preferential effect of playing in a dome didn't kick in until 2007?

 

Fumble rates for dome teams are stable. No significant changes pre and post 07.

The better analysis is the one at another site which compared team fumbles against opponents fumbles. That way gives a control against different teams having different environmental factors. The other 31 teams are apples and oranges and the post 07 pats are still a haddock.

 

According to that link they were not. You can check it yourself. I'm not saying his data is ironclad, I'm saying using his data you have two other teams who significantly decreased their fumbling rate almost as much as the Patriots. The issue was raised in one of the comments. Towards the bottom of the article is a link to the excel sheet with his data. I can't verify his data is good however (and I'm not about to spend hours verifying it).

According to his data Patriots had a really crappy year (their standards) in 2013 by the way. Probably looking for a new deflater that year.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/29/nfl-didnt-log-the-psi-of-each-patriots-football/

Anyone else see this article?

So classic. No hard numbers for either team, not even the one accused of cheating. Nothing is going to happen to then, guys. Patriots will probably demand an apology from the league...and get it. Maybe Goodell will give them an extra first-rounder for their troubles.

 

You've gotta be kidding me. Gillette officiating...

http://www.csnne.com/blog/patriots-...uchdown-play-was-illegal?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 4

 

Disturbing.

 

Its the cheating Patriots, would anybody be really surprised if we found out they had the refs on payroll? I wouldn't.

Spygate/Deflategate/Ineligiblegate... how are they still an NFL team? Lol

 

**** the cheating Patriots. I hope they get blown out today.

 

So NFL Network is reporting that only one of the Pats balls was seriously underinflated(1 lb) while the rest were "a few ticks under".

 

Hehe. Predictably trying to put the worms back into the can instead of doing his job, is Goodell.

The cleanup commences, and then it's bu$iness as usual.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 4

 

A bit off topic but not that much.. Falcons being investigated for piping in fake crowd noise haha!
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...atlanta-falcons-fake-crowd-noise-georgia-dome

 

I'm not sure that really gives an advantage to any team that tries it. But if it's illegal they outta be punished.

 

So quick to Judge

Eleven of the 12 footballs used in the first half were judged by the officials to be under the minimum of 12.5 PSI, but just one was two pounds under. Many of them were just a few ticks under the minimum

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...-investigation-of-patriots-deflated-footballs

 

It's all about protecting the shield, bro.

 

No rain. You just haven't read all of the articles here so you're kinda lost.

 

OK, so you're defending the study you linked to.

First, explain to me why he starts in 2006 and not in 2000? I see no valid justification for this. Like I said, 2 games in one condition and 15 in the other is usually something that requires extra justification in science (there are some cases where I've seen that, but there's always a good reason, most commonly that it was just not possible resource-wise to obtain any more samples). In his study, it seems like cherry-picking because he has a previous study that looks at 2000-2006 vs 2007-2014 periods (approximately equal), so he has that data.

And once again, how do you defend his inclusion of 4 games where no rain occurred under the "wet weather" games category?

Sorry, this is a shoddy study, and that can be determined independently of any other studies.

Finally, if you think I'm lost, tell me what I'm so lost about. I did acknowledge this had nothing to do with the bigger picture of the Pats' favorable turnover stats since 2007.

 

What are you going on about? He ran stats from 2000-2006, and 2007-2014. Those are the years BB has been coaching NE, separated when the rule change went into effect.

 

Dude, seriously, at least take the time to see which post it is I responded to!

Check out his post #1169. OK, since you're too lazy, here's the link to the study:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.co...ously-out-perform-expectations-in-wet-weather

As you can see, that is since 2006!

 

Thanks for ridiculously snarky response. So sorry I didn't go back almost 100 posts to search it out. Regardless, his overall data is looking at 2000-2014. The guy welcomes any questions about his work, so feel free to contact him.

 

Snarky yes, ridiculous no. It's absolutely not ridiculous to ask someone to know what I was responding to before telling me, "what are you going on about?" And the overall data doesn't include the "wet weather" category, which is what I was critiquing.

 

Um...hence I asked, "What are you going on about?"

I'm not going looking through the haystack. Seriously, though, go to the Sharp analytics sure, and pose your question to him. I'm sure he'll answer you.

 

Well.. I took that "what are you going on about?" as a critique of my post instead of a genuine question, and I think many others would do the same in that situation. If it truly was a genuine question, then we just had a misunderstanding.

As far as asking Sharp about it, I would do so if it was that important. Right now it's not. I just categorize that one study of his as shoddy and leave it at that.

 

^^ So true

Patriots = classless organization as a whole.

 

And in other news

Patriots win super-bowl with balls properly inflated - what a surprise (sarcasm)

Ladies and Gentlemen your 2014 Super bowl Champions - New England Patriots

Looks like the AFC East has its work cut out for it in 2015 - Again

 

Ask Charles Haley how he feels about those Championships

 

oh you mean those rings when Jimmy Johnson admittingly taped coaches signals before he went to Miami?

 

Link?

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/199345-the-truth-about-spygate-punishing-success-and-promoting-parity

 

Can't find the link...but here is part of a transcript of an interview on WFAN with Jimmy Johnson:

 

Most low information fans don't know that, but most of us in here know it was widespread amongst the league. Jimmy's been saying it for years, and he's actually name dropping so that adds credibility to his story.

New England wasn't the first or only. They're just the most arrogant, enough to continue doing so after the NFL told each team to stop it. There's a reason why the memo was sent to the league and not just to NE.

 

What does Jimmy Johnson cheating have to do with the Patriots cheating?

 

I think it has to do with everyone associating Spygate with cheating by filming, and associating the Patriots with that, as if they were the only ones doing it. People arguing that there should be an asterisk next to them in the record books, and BB/TB should be banned from the HoF, for something that was rampant in the league. Just the Patriots got caught after the memo went out.

 

because the guy who is calling brady out was on the team that JJ coached that "cheated" and won.

I mean, it's pretty easy to win a defensive player of the year award if you know what play the offense is going to run

 

We have no idea if it was rampant. We have a few anecdotal examples of people claiming to have done it.

 

Yeah, I forgot, we shouldn't believe that guy that was coaching in the league, or any of the people who have come out and said it was rampant.

If it wasn't going on, the NFL wouldn't bother sending out a memo to all the teams to tell them to cut it out.

 

Jimmy Johson says it was pretty rampant. But what does he know right??? What Belichick did was not break new ground on the cheating. What he did was continue to do so in spite of a specific memo telling the league to cut it out. And he was punished for it.