Just found out I need to go out of town for work tonight through tomorrow. Wet balls experiment will have to wait for Thursday night.
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
The amazing thing (noted before but I'll repeat it since that was literally thousands of posts ago) is that FIFA, the organization so bumbling/corrupt as to have scandals up and down like whack-a-mole, actually got this one right with their rules about a soccer ball. HS matches usually have 3 (1 playing, 1 on each sideline w/ a ballboy/ballgirl). College and up have 5-7 I think. Regardless, the pressure range is big and the referees pick it. Then you play. I'm a ref and our training literally was: you know how hard it should be, thumb test it and make sure it's round by spinning it in the air and looking for lopsided spin.
Now, that was low-level reffing but at least the rules specify a big range. And the pressure of a soccer ball is WAY more important to the game than a football. It also allows for weight at the beginning of the match (thank goodness we don't play w/ leather much anymore...a waterlogged, leather soccer ball is awful to head).
Law 2 - The Ball
Qualities and Measurements
The ball is:
If the ball bursts or becomes defective during the course of a match:
Now, that was low-level reffing but at least the rules specify a big range. And the pressure of a soccer ball is WAY more important to the game than a football. It also allows for weight at the beginning of the match (thank goodness we don't play w/ leather much anymore...a waterlogged, leather soccer ball is awful to head).
Law 2 - The Ball
Qualities and Measurements
The ball is:
- spherical
- Made of leather or other suitable material
- Of a circumference of not more than 70 cm (28 ins) and not less than 68 cm (27 ins)
- not more than 450 g (16 oz) in weight and not less than 410 g (14 oz) at the start of the match
- of a pressure equal to 0.6 – 1.1 atmosphere (600 – 1100 g/cm 2 ) at sea level (8.5 lbs/sq in to 15.6 lbs/sq in)
If the ball bursts or becomes defective during the course of a match:
- the match is stopped
- the match is restarted by dropping the replacement ball at the place where the first ball became defective
- If the ball bursts or becomes defective whilst not in play at a kick-off, goal kick, corner kick, free kick, penalty kick or throw-in the match is restarted accordingly
I wonder if this will tend to open many people's eyes about the way American news outlets really work - spinning their stories to get eyeballs and to hell with the truth in the process.Padaiyappa said:
The way most people here feel about the reporting on deflated balls is the same way scientists feel about the reporting on climate change. Or on Obama's citizenship. In all those cases, facts are as unequivocal as they can be, but the media can always "raise questions" that appear to cast doubt on the facts.
And let's not even get started on media reporting on issues like the Iraq war and Swift Boats where lots of money is being spent by one side to try to influence the media.
Bottom line: broadcast media is worse than useless. Try to ignore what they say. Sad reflection on our culture. But the worst damage they do comes when people believe news media is actually reporting unbiased news. Hopefully this scandal will educate a few more people.
Devizier said:
Do you have any confidence that this group could conduct an experiment without mucking it up bc they're dopes?
jimbobim said:
If the report is true (and I have my doubts) that is incredibly unprofessional behavior from the PW partner. That is a serious firm, and it would be surprising if they actually allowed this kind of public disclosure to occur so casually. If they did, the NFL should fire them immediately and hire a firm more serious about maintaining client confidentiality---there's many out there.
Cant we just send someone over from the SoSH Intern Program?Gagliano said:
(even Kramer had an intern when he was working on his project)
What most of America and the press see, when they look at that picture:hikeeba said:So, has anyone taken Belichick up on the offer and tried this part of the experiment on the effect on PSI?
SumnerH said:
There's gotta be some mechanism for expansion, no? Otherwise the internal pressure wouldn't have any effect on the feel of the ball, above some given threshold? Take the K balls...isn't one of the issues is that the kickers like them harder because they go farther (tighter ball transfers the energy of the kick into motion more effectively), but also that they fly "more true" because they are slighly more round.
Maybe that's not really true?
Or if you picture a mylar balloon...mylar is pretty dimensionally stable, but the assembly expands at the seams and corners, etc. Maybe that's why it's easier to feel the psi difference by squeexing the ends of the balls rather than the middle: because that's where the seams and wrinkles would be, creating an inefficient envelope.
It was mentioned up-thread in the context of the quote by the Washington player, but I think it warrants repeating that the current status for seeing a conspiracy really depends upon a breathtaking level of cognitive dissonance.
On the one hand, Belichick and Brady are such evil masterminds that they cheat on every little detail and part of what makes them so awful is that they cheat in places nobody else even thinks to consider, but on the other hand they are so sloppy about it that they leave it to a ball boy in the bathroom?
They then, knowing they are caught (rather than just quickly lie and say they don't know the stupid rule about something that does not matter anyway and ask for the fine) double down on their innocence and just hope nobody saw the ball boy (in a world of ubiquitous CCTV).
Come on.....
Also, being so detailed in their cheating, and so particular about their contraband equipment, how, again, do the Pats get consistent balls on the road?
On the one hand, Belichick and Brady are such evil masterminds that they cheat on every little detail and part of what makes them so awful is that they cheat in places nobody else even thinks to consider, but on the other hand they are so sloppy about it that they leave it to a ball boy in the bathroom?
They then, knowing they are caught (rather than just quickly lie and say they don't know the stupid rule about something that does not matter anyway and ask for the fine) double down on their innocence and just hope nobody saw the ball boy (in a world of ubiquitous CCTV).
Come on.....
Also, being so detailed in their cheating, and so particular about their contraband equipment, how, again, do the Pats get consistent balls on the road?
Reisner is a serious guy. (http://www.paulweiss.com/professionals/partners-and-counsel/lorin-l-reisner.aspx). But why do you doubt the report? No doubt he assigned an associate to "find an expert," and the associate left a message on behalf of Reisner, because obviously you want a Columbia physics professor, not a real-world product engineer with a degree from Rutgers. This is exactly the mentality of a big law firm. Associate just forgot that everything he might do here would end up on the front page of the Times.PedroKsBambino said:
DrewDawg said:
"He had a baby out of wedlock and dumped his pregnant wife and didn't she also have cancer or am I thinkin of someone else nah I think it was her and he hangs out with that Gronk guy who makes porn and hell I just saw that Gronk guy reading from a porn magazine at Media Day yesterday he is an AWFUL AWFUL human being OF COURSE he would lie he also wears Uggs"
Clearly not an expert, but I do believe Kraft has some recourse if Goodell attempts an arbitrarily severe punishment:Ed Hillel said:
a.) Kraft could start the palace revolt and force Goodell out of office. I do believe the chances of success are really high on this.
b.) Kraft could go nuclear and start a major PR blitz that embarrasses the hell out of the NFL.
c.) I'm not convinced the NFL bylaws give the commissioner powers to inflict arbitrary punishment based solely on rumors and innuendo, which is essentially what the NFL would be doing. Kraft could have a legal route, saying the NFL basically violated their own bylaws in the process of inflicting this punishment.
I don't doubt at least some (maybe many) of the owners feel that way. But why would the league office feel that way? It makes no sense to want to punish your franchisees, especially the successful ones. As in zero sense. A first grade student would know better than that. If true, it's then blatantly obvious that Goodell does not know how to position an organization for long term success.
So every time a player is injured on the field of play, is the NFL going to permanently ban the player who caused the injury for intent to maim?
I mean, there's no way the player can prove he didn't mean to. Circumstantial evidence (he caused injury) is enough.
I mean, there's no way the player can prove he didn't mean to. Circumstantial evidence (he caused injury) is enough.
crystalline said:
It won't. Someone posted it already but I will repost, it's a line from Snatch. "Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity."
CantKeepmedown said:
I think Brady started of looking rattled because he's not used to doing pressers about "scandals". Sure, he's been questioned about in game performance, maybe about some baby mama stuff way back, etc. But this was full jackals and hyenas, and I think it made him nervous.
But by the end of the the thing (from last Tueasday), he was in full form. Confident, calm, self-assured.
It was performance anxiety and nothing else, I think.
As I noted at the time, we can only hope his QB performance on Sunday follows a similar arc, because if it does, the Pats have 3 points at the quarter, 10 at the half, and like 31-38 by the end of the game.
BroodsSexton said:
According to the article Reisner himself left the message and sent the email. Not exactly bang up work there, especially because it looks like the NFL and PW are on a fishing expedition. However the joke is on all the Columbia physicists who are yukking it up on facebook and to the press about the assignment, because they each blew a chance at a thousand dollar an hour gig.
lexrageorge said:
Goodell works for the owners. Robert Kraft is the most powerful owner in the league.
Per this article, (http://www.si.com/nfl/2013/03/06/nfl-power-list) Kraft is #2 in the NFL, behind Goodell, but this last was before the Rice thing came out.
Kraft has helped the owners make a lot of money. And he reminded Goodell 2 days ago about who he actually works for.
And, from GQ: http://www.gq.com/blogs/the-feed/2015/01/robert-kraft-roger-goodell.html
(re the Zajc and the PW partner's request for expert consultation)PedroKsBambino said:
Its reassuring that the investigative process remains neutral, and that Well's request that leaks end immediately, and not for example, end up as a story in the NY Times..
simplyeric said:
Slightly, maybe, but , but you'd think the percentage effect on the volume of a football is going to be virtually nil unless the leather covering is constricting it originally. But the HeadSmart guys seemed to attribute a noticeable difference to the wetness--0.6 PSI, which means the ball would shrink by a half pint in size if that's from volume changes.
I'm curious about whether DDB can replicate that, if so then we start thinking of ways to isolate the effects of water on temperature vs. on volume.
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/static/html/careers/pdf/co_.pdflexrageorge said:
IANAL, but it appears that section 8 (starting on page 28) gives the commissioner pretty wide powers.
I saw the article. I have a hard time believing it was Reisner actually making the call, though his name was probably used by whomever placed te call. It would be unusual for a senior partner to place such calls at the outset of an expert search. But maybe he's been light on hours. It's not a fishing expedition--as has been noted, it's a routine practice to find expert witnesses to assist attorneys in evaluating specialized data. They're just a bit outside here in seeking a Columbia academic for this project. Typical, though.Shelterdog said:
Meanwhile: Where is Roger Goodell?
Is he really going to present the Lombardi on Sunday - potentially to RK - without having uttered a non-anonymous peep about all this beforehand?
How much does this man make per year again? Yet he can't bring himself to make some public statement to provide at least a sense of the league's perspective on Deflategate?
I guess we've grown accustomed to this farce of a leader, but when you stand back for a moment, it really is astonishing, how Roger is essentially allowing the Pats to marinate in the projected bile of millions, the collective outrage of a nation for whom imperceptible variations in a football's air pressure constitute a matter of the gravest consequence...
The cowardice, now (in the wake of Belichick and Kraft's statements) possibly combined with vindictiveness, is just utterly disgusting.
Is he really going to present the Lombardi on Sunday - potentially to RK - without having uttered a non-anonymous peep about all this beforehand?
How much does this man make per year again? Yet he can't bring himself to make some public statement to provide at least a sense of the league's perspective on Deflategate?
I guess we've grown accustomed to this farce of a leader, but when you stand back for a moment, it really is astonishing, how Roger is essentially allowing the Pats to marinate in the projected bile of millions, the collective outrage of a nation for whom imperceptible variations in a football's air pressure constitute a matter of the gravest consequence...
The cowardice, now (in the wake of Belichick and Kraft's statements) possibly combined with vindictiveness, is just utterly disgusting.
Serious question. Apologies if it's already been asked.
Is there any "baseline" data on PSI for other footballs used in the same manner? Meaning, do we know for a fact that footballs actually retain their game-starting PSI after similar games in the cold?
I haven't read every article on this (who could), but it seems to me people (on every side of the issue) are focusing on the mechanics of how the Patriot balls may have lost PSI while just sort of assuming that NFL game balls exit the game at the same PSI they came in at.
Is there any "baseline" data on PSI for other footballs used in the same manner? Meaning, do we know for a fact that footballs actually retain their game-starting PSI after similar games in the cold?
I haven't read every article on this (who could), but it seems to me people (on every side of the issue) are focusing on the mechanics of how the Patriot balls may have lost PSI while just sort of assuming that NFL game balls exit the game at the same PSI they came in at.
DrewDawg said:
All this stuff about Kraft and Goodell being homeboys makes me wonder if Goodell is basically being kneecapped by some yet unnamed party in the league office. It's a $44 million dollar a year job. If Goodell is ousted tomorrow who is on the short list to replace him? The leaks and and undermining of the Patriots could be as simple as a coup driven by someone in the league office that has an incentive to for Goodell to ride into the sunset and assume the big seat.
I know others have said this already, but what the hell.
BroodsSexton said:
I was a biglaw associate, and the way people were taught to look for experts certainly did not include identifying your client, both parties, and the details of the inquiry to an administrative person who could send it to the freaking New York Times. I know in detail how a handful of law firms (both big and boutique) search for experts and it absolutely does not look like this; I checked with a couple friends this morning and none of them would do it this way either. Doing it by voicemails and emails to people you don't know leaves you no control over the info you share, and provides you no way to check for conflicts, protect privacy, or anything else. Now, everyone has their own approach but having actually done the activity we're discussing here a bunch of times, I have no problem saying this is not how it should be done.
I will say this: worth considering the possibility that they knew this would leak and did it to make clear they were trying to find a scientific expert. That is about as likely as this being inadvertent sloppiness, imo.
BroodsSexton said:
It's a fishing expedition in that they appear to be looking to speak to any Columbia physics professor rather than targeting particular ones. Getting an expert witness for a reasonably complex assignment is normal.
PedroKsBambino said:
I agree with everything you just said, which is why I said this is egg on the face for Paul Weiss, and that I doubt Reisner was the guy who placed the call. I do not think it is reasonable to think that this was an intentional leak, to make it look that they were trying to find a scientific expert. That's conspiracy stuff. Simplest explanation is Junior Associate is assigned to find an expert, doesn't know the protocol, starts off by placing a call to the Columbia physics department, thinking "Columbia! Physics!" Leaves message, gets punked. Is getting shat on this morning over his desk, and fearful that he's going to lose his job, which he won't--as long as he keeps the hours up.
We know for a fact footballs do not retain their game-starting PSI after similar games in the cold, because science. Every football ever made ever in the history of football games experiences a decrease when moving out to the cold. I am well aware of the media's ability to manipulate opinion, but I am honestly amazed and depressed at the power of the media to manipulate people to ignore basic known facts of the universe.Rovin Romine said:
BroodsSexton said:
Firms are pretty sophisticated about media issues, especially white collar groups (which it is clear is who is handling this for PW). It really is not a conspiracy theory to believe that they are thinking about media coverage and impact when they make decisions. I do not know that this is what went on here, obviously---I'm just noting it's one of the possibilities to consider. Someone using the partners name is another; the partner himself reaching out is a third, though I agree with you that's a little odd.
PedroKsBambino said:
OK, so your theory is that the sophisticated Paul Weiss partners know that the Columbia physics faculty will drop a dime on Facebook, which would get picked up by the NY Times, and they take that shot to let the world know that they're considering scientific explanations?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oACRt-Qp-s
Article:
Unfortunately, I think it is inevitable that the NFL is going to impose some sort of penalty at the end of all of this. I think it will lean towards the heavy handed side.
The reason is simply dollars and sense. I know the NFL prints money but I still can't imagine Rog telling the other owners that they spent 2 million + on this investigation and that it turned up nothing. I think they will do whatever they have to in order to pin something on the Pats, whether it be circumstantial or whatever.
I also have little faith in the investigative team coming up with a finding that totally exonerates the Pats....they may not have the definitive evidence that Kraft called for but they will throw something out there that feeds the anti-Patriots beast.
As an owner of a large business, we have been subject to may audits over the years...tax audits, wage and labor audits etc. They NEVER find nothing. They always find something....at least enough to justify their time. Usually it is some technicality on an interpretation of some rule/law. I have many times had different auditors from the same municipality or state office give me differing interpretations of the same rule (sometimes while they are together in the same room). You literally cannot win. We dot all of our i's and cross all of our t's but they always hit you for something.
On top of it all, whatever they land on that they want to bust your balls for, they arbitrarily extrapolate that violation out. In other words, they may study a 3 month period within the total time period being audited. They find that one of your employees didn't put the correct date on some form (maybe they wrote 3/15/13 and it was 3/15/14). The auditor will then basically say that since we found that error, we have to assume that is done once per month over the 3 year time period we are questioning so, you now have 36 violations. Our work is done here. You owe us X amount of dollars.
I think the Wells investigation is going to have similar results. Wells/NFL will say...We can't prove that you did anything to the balls for this game but we think it is likely that you did. That leads us to assume that you have done it for every game since 1927 so instead of 25K fine, it will be 3.4 zillion and loss of draft picks for the next 10 years or something totally stupid and over the top.
The reason is simply dollars and sense. I know the NFL prints money but I still can't imagine Rog telling the other owners that they spent 2 million + on this investigation and that it turned up nothing. I think they will do whatever they have to in order to pin something on the Pats, whether it be circumstantial or whatever.
I also have little faith in the investigative team coming up with a finding that totally exonerates the Pats....they may not have the definitive evidence that Kraft called for but they will throw something out there that feeds the anti-Patriots beast.
As an owner of a large business, we have been subject to may audits over the years...tax audits, wage and labor audits etc. They NEVER find nothing. They always find something....at least enough to justify their time. Usually it is some technicality on an interpretation of some rule/law. I have many times had different auditors from the same municipality or state office give me differing interpretations of the same rule (sometimes while they are together in the same room). You literally cannot win. We dot all of our i's and cross all of our t's but they always hit you for something.
On top of it all, whatever they land on that they want to bust your balls for, they arbitrarily extrapolate that violation out. In other words, they may study a 3 month period within the total time period being audited. They find that one of your employees didn't put the correct date on some form (maybe they wrote 3/15/13 and it was 3/15/14). The auditor will then basically say that since we found that error, we have to assume that is done once per month over the 3 year time period we are questioning so, you now have 36 violations. Our work is done here. You owe us X amount of dollars.
I think the Wells investigation is going to have similar results. Wells/NFL will say...We can't prove that you did anything to the balls for this game but we think it is likely that you did. That leads us to assume that you have done it for every game since 1927 so instead of 25K fine, it will be 3.4 zillion and loss of draft picks for the next 10 years or something totally stupid and over the top.
SumnerH said:
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
DDB should sacrifice one of the balls, cut it open, and see what the bladder looks like inside.
I mean, I'd do it, but I can't afford that kind of extravagance, and really, who has the time?
Rosey Ruzicka said:
If we assume that all NFL locker rooms are 70 degrees then is there a specific temperature that we can assume any ball starting at 13.5 PSI would naturally fall below 12.5psi? What I am getting at is wouldn't it be possible to fairly easily come up with the number of games per season in which the outside temperature was cold enough that the ball was without a doubt below the league minimum air pressure while the game was going on? Even giving all teams the benefit of the doubt that they all started at the maximum of 13.5. Is that too simple of a view? Are there other confounders that would make this more complicated?
I've been involved in retaining various experts in connection with bankruptcy cases and litigation. I agree with PSK that best practices are to call. I can also see an over worked associate or partner sending an e-mail in the crush of other work rather than calling. Even one at a top flight firm like Paul Weiss.
BroodsSexton said:
My theory is exactly what I said---we do not know why the information leaked and there are several possible reasons. One of those (not the most likely in my opinion, but certainly conceivable) is that they anticipated the info might leak and that it might be favorable for it to be known that there was exploration of scientific experts. I think what's most likely is that they screwed up here, whether it's the partner or the associate...but I try to stay open to multiple possibilities when dealing with imperfect information.
My experience at firms doing white collar work and (both related and separately) at firms hiring expert witnesses in cases with media scrutiny is that they always consider the possibility of information leaking, both as a 'sword' to get messages out and a 'shield' to protect against messages. Your mileage may vary.
No matter who the "expert" is in the end, if they actually do the experiment, the psi will change. It has to. No credible scientist will be able to do this test, and have it come out publically that the psi didn't change.
We need to stop getting worried at every "leak". They are all coming from one side. Unless they have an admission or some smoking gun, they simply can't do much more than a token fine for this. Owners can bitch and moan about NE all they want, but behind closed doors I would imagine it's different. Every team has things they do that the league looks into. They can't be all for throwing the book at this then when it's their turn cry about the unfairness.
We need to stop getting worried at every "leak". They are all coming from one side. Unless they have an admission or some smoking gun, they simply can't do much more than a token fine for this. Owners can bitch and moan about NE all they want, but behind closed doors I would imagine it's different. Every team has things they do that the league looks into. They can't be all for throwing the book at this then when it's their turn cry about the unfairness.
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
I don't know. If there's no data on football PSI pre/mid/post game, there's just no good way to get a handle on this. I mean, sure we can apply basic science, but a football isn't some ideal constant object that's guaranteed to perfectly hold air in all conditions.
The best way to figure out what factors go into PSI changes is to look at actual NFL game balls from similar games to see if they change PSI, and if so, how much. Then you go looking for explanations as to why.
TheoShmeo said:
Not that it really matters, but they did call. And left a message. The simplest answer is that it was a person trying to get a call back, and who was not careful enough in leaving a message. The import of the call was inferred by Metzger. Maybe he's a sports fan.
What's really stupid is Harbaugh initiating suspicion based on his kickers ' complaints about soft balls.If the league has a history of similar complaints against the Patriots, they better also have a documented record of warning the Patriots to remedy their procedures to eliminate the conditions that led to the complaints.OilCanShotTupac said:
Absent this documentation, serious questions arise about the league office being manipulated by two owners who could be seen as each having a serious ax to grind against Goodell and Kraft.
Shelterdog said:
It does not take tremendous preparation to look at bios on the Columbia website, identify a couple likely targets, and call them directly and ask whether they have the right skills and who they would recommend if not. I haven't searched PW's website, but there are very likely some people there who have science backgrounds and who could, in a three-minute call or email with Ted Wells' project team, tell you what academic focuses would best fit the inquiry. Those kinds of inquiries happen regularly at top law firms.
Calling the 'front desk' is not a good way to do this---you are going to get (at best) what the department chair thinks, and (at worst) whoever the admin likes. Agree with TheoShmeo it could be as simple as someone being overworked and doing it that way; if so, I think it does not speak well of PW.