NFL enabled any cheating by Patriots

[MohRokTah]

This guy pretty much nails it:

NFL enabled any cheating by Patriots

Bob Ford, Inquirer Sports Columnist

Let's start right at the top and say I had no idea that both teams in an NFL game supplied the footballs for their own offenses. The mystery of how a game ball gets from the Wilson factory to its appointed spot on the field never seemed like an interesting subject. There's a bag of balls, and when they need another, some kid tosses one to the official. What could be complicated about that? What could be more elemental to the game than the mere presence of the football?

...

Furthermore, no one believed the NFL would have such a farkakte system in the first place. The officials check the balls two hours before the game to make sure they are legal and then give them back to the teams! ("OK, no foxes in this henhouse. Let's leave the door open and take a nap.&quot

I think Belichick is just as grumpy-evil and Tom Brady just as phony-pure as the next guy, but there's no way to blame the Patriots for this mess that the league constructed. If it is standard procedure for NFL teams to scuff the shine off the footballs and manipulate them in whatever manner they choose before presenting them for inspection, then I suspect every team in the league makes sure its quarterback gets to play with a football he likes. And if that includes later softening it slightly, that happens everywhere, too.

...

When D'Qwell Jackson of Indianapolis intercepted a Brady pass early in the second quarter and, rather than giving it to an official, took the ball to the Colts sideline and flipped it to an equipment guy, he wasn't cracking the Da Vinci code. He had made a big play in a big game, and he wanted the equipment guy to wrap some athletic tape around its middle, write "Jackson, INT" on the tape, and put it away as a keepsake. Happens all the time. But the equipment guy, who must be great at finding the ripe honeydews at the store, thought the ball felt funny, and here we are.

...

Philidelphia Enquirer Link

[Nyc72dem]

1. So IF they did anything

Then pretty much everyone else does it too. And the refs who feel the balls all night let it slide.

[mythology]

2. We know for example the Colts aren't underinflating their footballs

So no, it's not fair to say that every other team is also cheating.

Likewise just because the Seahawks can't seem to stop failing drug tests doesn't mean that players on other teams are resorting to performance enhancing drugs.

[Nyc72dem]

4. We know for example that

Luck likes his balls OVERinflated so I've read that's how they cheat. No reason to underinflate when you prefer it overinflated.

[AgingAmerican]

10. So you are accusing Luck of cheating?

link?

[former9thward]

22. Don't know about Luck but Rogers wants over inflated footballs.

On his ESPN Milwaukee radio show Tuesday afternoon, the Green Bay Packers quarterback said that, while there is an advantage to an underinflated ball (especially for quarterbacks with small hands), he favors a rule mandating only a minimum amount of air. There’s no benefit, he said, to an overinflated football and, because he has big hands, that’s what he prefers. And, he added referees often remove air from balls during games because they prefer them on the flatter side.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2015/01/20/packers-aaron-rodgers-prefers-overinflated-footballs-likes-to-push-the-limit/

If there was any issue the officials who handle on the ball on every play should have caught it -- or as the quote implies maybe they caused it.

[AgingAmerican]

30. Rogers is accused of no wrongdoing

nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

21. How do we know that? I haven't heard all there is about this

but I haven't heard that the Colts' footballs were tested

[Laura PourMeADrink]

24. Scratch that - found this...

ESPN Sports Radio 810 in Kansas City reported that the Patriots' footballs were tested at the half, reinflated at that time when they were found to be low, then put back in play for the second half, and then tested again after the game. All of the balls the Colts used met standards, according to the report.

If the balls were in fact inspected two hours before the game and then again at halftime, the Patriots would have had to go out of their way to circumvent the rules.

[jmowreader]

44. And HOW many times do you intend to bring the PED thing up?

[MohRokTah]

8. Pretty much everybody else *COULD* have done it too. eom

[pipi_k]

23. Yep, especially

if a team should not have won against a better opponent.

The Pats didn't need any outside help to beat the Colts. They were already ahead (of Andrew Luck) in games won 3 - 0


So, could other teams have cheated? It's entirely possible.

I'm reserving judgement on whether NE cheated, or whether it's actually cheating.

But there could very well be other, more egregious wrongdoings going on in other teams.

Just like with, for example, a mouse infestation, though...

Don't freak out over the one mouse you see

Freak out over the 100 more you DON'T see.

[MohRokTah]

26. New England cheated. I am 100% certain. eom

[brush]

3. I'm thinking you're on to something

I felt for quite while there are "favored" franchises that the league wants to do well in the playoffs.

And the Patriots are at the top of that list. Many remember the "tuck rule" game in which an obvious fumble by Tom Brady became an incomplete pass and the Patriots went on to the Super Bowl instead of the hated Raiders.

And then there was spy-gate with the evidence being burned by the league so no one could see it ever.

Yeah, you might be on to something — the league could have been in on it. After all, the refs were handling those under inflated balls all first half and "allegedly" didn't notice? I don't think so.

ESPN had a live demo in studio with an ex-qb and an ex-running back with an over inflated ball, a regulation ball, and an under inflated one. Both ex-players picked out the under inflated ball immediately.

[hughee99]

7. It's funny how many people find the "tuck rule" to be some nefarious conspiracy.

The "tuck rule" existed before Brady even entered the league, it applied to exactly the situation that occurred on the field, and was correctly ruled. Was it a stupid rule? Absolutely. It was one the NFL owners were so concerned with that they waited a full DECADE after the "tuck rule game" to actually get rid of the rule. Putting forward the idea that the NFL did something underhanded in that instance weakens your argument.

I suspect the ball inflation rule is much like baseball's pine tar rule. There's a rule on the books to address how much pine tar you can put on the bat. Even to the casual observer, you can watch a game and find many instances where the rule is violated. The umpires know it, the players on both sides know it, and no one really makes an issue of it... until someone does and then the umpires who are supposed to always enforce this rule act surprised because they don't want to admit that this isn't a rule they strictly enforce.

The refs handle the football EVERY play. Of course the knew they were under-inflated, especially given that they were going back and forth between the Colts balls and the Patriots balls as possession changed. It only became an issue when someone complained.

[brush]

9. You must be a Patriots fan

Everybody know that was a fumble in the tuck rule game.

Everybody but Pat fans, that is.

[hughee99]

11. Maybe that's because pats fans actually

Looked up the rule. Pats fans shouldn't be complaining now about punishment they'll get for the ball inflation, but the rule book supports them for the tuck rule. Apparently complaining about the enforcement of relatively obscure rules isn't just for pats fans, it's for everyone.

[brush]

12. Yeah, an obscure ruled that was never called before . . .

and it took the refs 15 minutes to come up with a rule that they could say applied so the Pats could go to the Super Bowl instead of the Raiders.

Everybody, including Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles could see that was a fumble in the way the game was called at that time.

It was such a bad call they got rid of it as soon as they could so that that highway robbery would never happen again.

[hughee99]

15. They didn't "come up" with the tuck rule. It was in the rule book alraedy...

Last edited Sun Jan 25, 2015, 03:18 AM - Edit history (1)

just like the inflation rule, which also was NEVER CALLED BEFORE. It sounds like your only interested in enforcing SOME rules, but okay with ignoring others.

[brush]

16. Come on, you know how the game was called at that time

Last edited Sun Jan 25, 2015, 10:20 AM - Edit history (1)

That was a fumble clear as day. They took 15 minutes to figure out what rule they could use to keep Pats in the game. Just as they're going to rule "after" the Super Bowl on deflate-gate.

There are "favored" franchises in the league office and the Patriots are at the top of the list.

[hughee99]

19. Yes, just like I said, your issue is that

They didn't ignore a rule and you think they should have. You can reword your argument however you like, and even throw in a "come on", "really?", or "seriously?", but that's still what your argument boils down to.

[brush]

34. Iit was still a fumble and had been called a fumble forever. Ask anybody but a Pats fan.

The so-called tuck rule had never been called and hasn't been called since.

It was a fumble.

[hughee99]

35. Doubling down on your ignorace? The tuck rule has been called several times since.

Last edited Mon Jan 26, 2015, 12:41 AM - Edit history (1)

It was called in a Wash/Denver game in 05 and a Bal/KC game in 2011. You suggested above that they immediately got rid of the rule but you were ALSO wrong about that as well since the rule wasn't repealed until 2013, more than 10 years later. Ask anybody? "Anybody" don't make the NFL rules. They have an actual book for that, and there was an actual rule in the book. You're argument is getting worse and worse the more you post. The people who think it was a fumble are just like you, they're deciding that selective enforcement of the rule book is okay IN THIS INSTANCE or they're just outright ignorant of what the rule is. The reason you're never going to win this argument is because you're wrong. You can bring in the old logical fallacies of "Everyone agrees", "Experts agree", or even "no real fan believes" but none of those things will enable you to get around the fact that there was a rule in the book for this situation and it was applied correctly in this game.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuck_rule

[brush]

41. Okay, I admit they kept it around for a while until finally getting rid of it.

I still say on that play, it was a fumble as Brady's arm wasn't going forward.

[hughee99]

43. That's not what the "tuck rule" is.

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.

You can argue that he already had the ball tucked, because the definition of a "tuck" is somewhat unclear, but you can't really argue that he just wasn't in a passing motion (he wasn't) because that's NOT the rule that was applied. The rule explicitly states he doesn't need to be attempting to pass the ball.

Had it not been for this rule, it surely would have been a fumble, but I think this rule somewhat clearly applies the situation that happened on the field. I agree it was a stupid rule, but it was, in fact, a rule that had been on the books since the 1999 season. The refs didn't "come up" with it, it was already there and had been for 3 years. Should the refs have ignored the rule?

Of course, you can still say it was a fumble. Hell, you can say it was an interception, a ground rule double, or a wicked googly, but that doesn't make it so.

[brush]

45. Ok, you win. But I think we can both agree . . .

it was a bad rule.

I'm glad they got rid of it.

Just an argument about sports, no need for insults.

[Takket]

40. Your claim the tuck rule was never enforced is flat out wrong

In fact the patriots were one if the first teams to have it called AGAINST them.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuck_rule#Jets_vs._Patriots_.282001.29

It was a STUPID rule but called correctly by the refs per the rule book. What would have been an injustice would have been for a rule to be ignored to suit the refs own personal feelings.

[LiberalFighter]

27. Sure they have favored franchises...

whichever ones are making money for them.

[Panich52]

29. Don't forget prison trustee who cleared field f/ Pats' kicker...

[Nyc72dem]

5. ESPN is the Fox of the sports world.

They are not credible in any way.

[frylock]

32. what?!!

[Nye Bevan]

6. It probably never occurred to them that teams would stoop to this level of cheating.

But I guess if any team would, it would be the Patriots.

You can be sure that thanks to their cheating the ball-handling procedures will be tightened up for next season.

[Dreamer Tatum]

13. What else is a Philly sportswriter got to do until July?

Haters: they hate.

[MohRokTah]

14. The only haters I see are the PAts fans.

[NutmegYankee]

17. To be a hater, don't you have to express hate?

Just what are Pats fans hating on? The only thing I see in that map is a whole lot of red America is jealous because their football team sucks.

[frylock]

33. you ever wonder why there are so many haters out there?

it's posts like this, champ. people don't hate the Patriot's organization per se: they hate their rude, obnoxious fans.

[pintobean]

18. Here's some ballroom music to try to help subdue the hate

[Tuesday Afternoon]

20. farkakte = thanks for helping me with my Yiddish. oy vey!

I like grumpy-evil and phony-pure, too

[Laura PourMeADrink]

25. like "grumpy-evil and phony pure" too. Belicheck

definitely needs a stylist. Every time I see him I think
about Tom Landry and how meticulously dressed he was.

Farkakte: An alternative spelling of the Yiddish word verkakte that can mean either goddamn or crappy - the literal translation is "becrapped"

[graywarrior]

28. I prefer this explanation...

http://www.wheb.com/onair/greg-kretschmar-2894/this-news-anchor-destroys-deflategate-finally-13183915#.VMQc09F2G8Y.facebook

[NobodyHere]

31. The blame for cheating lays only with the cheaters.

League-enabled my ass.

[pipi_k]

39. And the cheaters

Were ?????

If you were there and have credible, relevant evidence, I think you should contact the NFL right away so the scuzzballs involved in this horrible crime can be caught and executed in the most cruel and painful manner possible

[rgbecker]

36. D'Qwell Jackson never would have caught it if it were hard.

And where's the link about the Patriots using the Colts balls for the second half?

[ScreamingMeemie]

37. Non-story. Time to move on.

Never thought I'd say that where the Patriots are involved, but get a grip people. (no pun intended)

[Jim Lane]

38. I buy this theory: No cheating, just somewhat careless refs

I've never seen any details about how the balls are stored after the required pre-game testing. An accusation of cheating should, logically, be supported by a plausible scenario about how it was done -- how the balls could be tampered with when there were so many officials and cameras and media people all over the place.

There's a more plausible explanation in this NBC News story (there's a video about past Patriots controversies, but the information about the deflation issue is in the text). In brief, each team prepares its balls the way its quarterback likes them, then submits them for testing. The refs don't always use a pressure gauge during the pregame testing. As a result, unless a ball is grossly outside the permitted parameters, it gets the OK. The Patriots didn't tamper with the balls at all. That would also explain why the refs, handling the balls after just about every play, didn't notice any problem.

According to a former ball boy for the Chicago Bears (who wasn't involved in this game), the process starts when balls are delivered from the factory a few days before the game. The ball boys would inflate them or deflate them somewhat, and scuff up the surface, working with the quarterback to prepare them to his preferences.

Two hours before kickoff, he (the ball boy) would bring the balls to the referees' locker room for inspection.

"I recall them having a pressure gauge in the locker room, but most often they just squeezed the balls, turned them over in their hands a few times each, and inspected the laces. I don't recall them ever rejecting one of our balls," he said.

"My thought process was, 'Let's get the balls exactly the way our quarterback wants them, and if the refs reject one or two before the game, no big deal. But there's no harm giving them our ideal balls and hoping they make it through inspection.'"

He added that he thought post-inspection tampering would have been very difficult.

[Stephen Retired]

42. THE PATRIOTS DIDN'T CHEAT!

Why must you turn this forum into a den of lies? Why? Why? WHY???