#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Someone, someday, could explain to me why each argument appears to be repeated 2-3 times in this document. I'm curious.
Do you mean why are all the arguments listed in the first couple of pages and then repeated in greater detail later? That's the standard format for legal writing (you clearly summarize what you're going to say, then you say it in greater detail).
If you mean something else maybe an example would help .
You give a narrative overview and then you return to flesh out the arguments in depth with the legal standard. It's like giving a speech and saying today im going to discuss A, B, and C and then doing so full on.
Have not read the brief, but did glance at it. These briefs require a Summary of Argument, and then a detailed Argument section, so there is bound to be some reinforcement -- even though a well done Summary of Argument should not be a mere skeleton outline of the Argument. Here, there also is a lengthy Introduction, so you're probably seeing the same points three times rather than two.
Truth be told -- and that is not a criticism of this brief, which I have yet to read -- everyone is better off with briefer briefs. Judges love them -- they don't need to be hit over the head 3 times, and it spares their time and eyesight.
Agree With King. I thought the NFL would release some PSI numbers by now. But all we hear from them is crickets. I wonder why.
“@SI_PeterKing: NFL talked transparency on Wells Report, then hides PSI levels of football now. It’s just wrong. Should be public. https://t.co/jhP8ro8fUh
“@SI_PeterKing: Well, that was my thought. They should have deferred any Brady/Pats sanction till doing PSI testing thru ’15 season. https://t.co/o5tnCXfHCX
Look... the NFLHQ leaks like a sieve when it suits them.
So we are left with a couple of choices as I see it.
There are no readings at all. Of any type. They just aren't doing them.
The readings are happening and they fully vindicate the Pats.
or
The readings don't vindicate the Pats and they've somehow kept the information from axe-grinders like Kensil to keep it from getting ou... lollol... sorry I just couldn't keep a straight face typing that.
So we are left with a couple of choices as I see it.
There are no readings at all. Of any type. They just aren't doing them.
The readings are happening and they fully vindicate the Pats.
or
The readings don't vindicate the Pats and they've somehow kept the information from axe-grinders like Kensil to keep it from getting ou... lollol... sorry I just couldn't keep a straight face typing that.
I think if King/Reiss/others start writing this more frequently and stating that the only logical conclusion is that the data supports the science and the Patriots that the NFL will eventually be forced to deal with it.
What I suspect is going on now is that the data is what we all here expect it to be, and the NFL is trying to figure out what to do about that reality. I eventually decided that while there was plenty of malice and ill-intent in NFL headquarters, a huge part of the problem was that they made a bunch of public statements before they learned the underlying science here. Even Goodell isn't dumb enough, I don't think, to take the position they did if they knew what the science here looks like. But they did not until it was too late for them to change course, and then it became about image, ego, and perception.
It's hard to imagine that the NFL wouldn't want to get any info that makes the Pats look bad out in the open immediately. However, with the Pats locking up another playoff spot, I could certainly see them wanting to wait and release it during a more important time period. Say, the week leading up to a divisional playoff game, conference championship, or dare I say it, during their flight to Santa Clara the first week of February.
The natural time for pressure from King, Reiss, et al. to reach a crescendo is when the ruling comes down from CA2 on the appeal. Especially if Brady loses (anything less than an affirmance). If he wins, it's more of a moot point, at least as far as whether Brady will be punished.
It gets pretty interesting if the case is reversed or vacated and remanded, and there is a hue and cry for the PSI data, and it supports Brady/the Patriots position. Does the media grow a spine and call for reversal of the draft pick forfeiture in addition to reversal/abandonment of the Brady suspension? Do they go after Goodell for compounding his initial error by covering it up? Is there a Nixonian inquiry into what he knew and when he knew it? One can dream...
I'm really not sure what this exercise is supposed to prove. By adopting the Wells Report wholesale the NFL has already acknowledged that the Ideal Gas Law is, like, a thing. Their argument is that the Ideal Gas Law couldn't account for the extent of the deflation of the Pats footballs.
The one thing this will prove is that they are too stupid to have realized that by allowing 12.5 as the lower limit for pregame inflation, they are virtually guaranteeing that "underinflated" footballs will be used in games this season. The incompetence is staggering.
The more I think about this this more depressed I become.
The one thing this will prove is that they are too stupid to have realized that by allowing 12.5 as the lower limit for pregame inflation, they are virtually guaranteeing that "underinflated" footballs will be used in games this season. The incompetence is staggering.
The more I think about this this more depressed I become.
I actually had wanted to set up a collection to measure balls, on webcam, around the stadium. If we set something like that up and were able to demonstrate some level of deflation, would the NFL's hand be (at least a little) forced?
Candidly, I don;t know how to set up an experiment like that, nor do I live around the stadium - but I'm betting we have members here who could cover off both requirements.
Anyone interested? I've got a URL (PSIFoxborough, or something like that) and am happy to set it up and/or donate it to someone who has a clearer vision of how this should work...
Candidly, I don;t know how to set up an experiment like that, nor do I live around the stadium - but I'm betting we have members here who could cover off both requirements.
Anyone interested? I've got a URL (PSIFoxborough, or something like that) and am happy to set it up and/or donate it to someone who has a clearer vision of how this should work...
I think if their numbers show temperature-related apparent deflation of footballs this year after all the hullabaloo over proper inflation, it undermines their reliance on the bad conclusions in the Wells report a lot more directly, and in a way the public would hopefully understand, than any argument that relies on the ideal gas law alone for the proposition that temperature-related apparent deflation is the cause.
I totally agree with you--from our perspective it's potentially useful. But why is the NFL doing it? That's what I don't understand. I mean, their own five million dollar report says that footballs deflate in cold weather. What great revelation do they think is going to come out of this?
Here is my prediction: if they go to a cold-weather game with precipitation and measure the indoor/outdoor and early/late psi of all the balls they will "discover" that the psi does of course drop in the winter air but there is variability between balls in the degree of decrease. For example, if all the balls started at 13.0 some might drop to 12.0 and some might drop to 12.3 and some might drop to 11.7 because of storage, wetness, ball prep, time of measurement, whatever. And then they (not just the NFL but Exponent, who tried to very precisely measure things without actual data) will really look even stupider (but only to people who aren't stupid; it's sort of like the jingle bell in Polar Express).
Not a problem. All the ball measurements have been done in Miami, Indianapolis, New Orleans and San Diego.
The timing for the crescendo is after the season in the lead-up to the draft. Probably about a month before.
Everyone's mock draft will be out there showing the Patriots' forfeited pick.
And if enough of the right people push for proof, the league might be forced to respond.
That said, I am not holding my breath as I don't think any of us will see a single ball pressure reading. And New England's first pick will be in the second round.
I'm kinda surprised one of the networks hasn't done some live on-air testing during a game of similar conditions as a kind of fluff piece. People would definitely be interested.
Of course, they may have been told not to do such a thing.
Of course, they may have been told not to do such a thing.
Come on guys, thinking there's any chance of a data release or draft pick return is pure sharks of Vegas fantasy.
If anyone asks hard enough, the league will cite national security or some bs.
If anyone asks hard enough, the league will cite national security or some bs.
I think the most surprising thing is the NFL has not leaked "data" demonstrating that there is simply a negligible change in PSI due to weather and environmental conditions. Everyone begging for the NFL to release the "data" makes this Pats' fan a nervous wreck.
EDIT: Put simply, if Kensil is in charge of collecting such "data," does anyone here want to know the results or have those results made public?
EDIT: Put simply, if Kensil is in charge of collecting such "data," does anyone here want to know the results or have those results made public?
But they can't. Because there's way too much info out there now about it. Every single experiment done by reputable sources on camera shows that.
The league only agreed to start measuring PSIs to look conscientious and shit. They don't want to fight any battles on the terrain of hard science and why would they? It's the only realm where they can't apply their own subjective readings of intent and guilt. Those PSIs are going in a locked drawer.
It has been warm so far this year. There don't seem to have been a lot of games where the Ideal Gas Law would act in a dramatic way. January games should be more indicative. I'm not suggesting that the league is waiting for more data before releasing it, but perhaps we should be thankful that they haven't released the data so far because it might not show much.
Actually, Judge Berman's courtroom was another. Hopefully, Second Circuit Appeals will be a third...
I think, actually, the logical time for it to reach crescendo would be Super Bowl week if the Patriots are participating again. It would be like a return to the scene of the crime, and the media has 2 weeks of stories with just 2 teams of subjects. With Brady winning his appeal (for now), and the Patriots continuing to be great despite unprecedented scrutiny, I think you'd see tons of articles re-hashing deflategate, with a large number of references to current PSI measurements.
If they get knocked out, then yeah, the next event after that would be the appeal.
This is my worry, too. You can easily fudge the data - just alternate measurements between each team's balls, and have the officials take their sweet time doing it. So, measure one ball from team A, then measure one ball from team B. Chat for a bit. Measure ball two from each team. And so on. The data will show that there's no difference between two team's balls and that they warm up and gain pressure really "quickly". Of course they won't keep track of time or temperature, so it will all make the Pats look guilty.
The NFL can't be trusted to act honorably or competently. If they don't fail in one regard, they will in the other, but probably both. We've seen what lengths they will go to to have the last word. The best you can hope for is silence from them. Anything more will be orchestrated to protect their position.
The Patriots have already played at least one game at a temperature colder than the Colts game. I think it was the Monday Nighter when it was like 32 degrees or something.
Packers at Vikings was also sub 30 degrees.
No wet conditions that I can recall off the top of my head, but plenty of cold games already.
The AFCCG wasn't insanely cold night at all. It was mid 40's if I recall correctly.
I understand the concern, but given the way that the WR was picked apart and exponent's analysis called into question, I think the scientific public who are following this case (i.e. those that understand how to do controlled experiments) will call bullshit on the NFL if all of the variables for which the WR was destroyed are not competently set up this time. This may very well be why the NFL isn't releasing any data (and may never release any data), because their methodology/process is probably flawed. This is a losing proposition for the NFL, and they likely just want it to go away (the appeal is different....they're not litigating the science, but rather the power of the commissioner under the CBA)
My suspicion is that the NFL told the refs to pump up the footballs to 13.5 PSI so they can say at the end of the season: "no balls were below the minimum threshold at any time during the season, thus proving the Patriots balls were irregular."
During a tv close up this week, it looked as though the markings on the balls were more formal and official looking than I saw last year. The balls seem to have team logos on them and numbering. So, they seem maybe to be doing something formal for sure. I would really like to believe the reason there is no news is that they are taking this seriously and want a full season of data before having it neutrally analyzed. (Or maybe Clement has enough concern about perceptions of his integrity to have said that if there are any leaks while he has the case, he's out of there and mean it.) On the other hand, every bit of precedent we have tells us they would not be able to restrain themselves if they had something to embarrass the Patriots with.
In the end, the league has a problem here. It's almost irrelevant whether the data show the Patriots' pressure drops are of the magnitude that happens in other nearly identical games. That issue will bring us back down the rabbit hole of "which gauge" did they start with, and the problem of measuring 4 balls against 11, etc. and can be debated endlessly. What they simply cannot avoid and which any fan can understand is that even if every ball in the league is inflated to the same pressure this year, there will be a huge variability in how they are played. Unless they do the testing dishonestly by letting all of the balls equalize at halftime, it is unavoidable they will find balls played in San Diego in September have 2.5 to 3.0 lbs. of psi difference from balls played in Green Bay in December. And while they can pretend the rate of drop doesn't comport with the measurements in the AFCCG, or make silly arguments about the Patriots' balls versus the Colt's balls, once they concede that balls are and always have been played in the NFL well outside the 12.5 to 13.5 range, it becomes impossible to pretend that range is some magical standard that fairness requires in all NFL contests. The ice bowl was played with 9.5 psi balls. With no malfeasance from anyone.
In the end, the league has a problem here. It's almost irrelevant whether the data show the Patriots' pressure drops are of the magnitude that happens in other nearly identical games. That issue will bring us back down the rabbit hole of "which gauge" did they start with, and the problem of measuring 4 balls against 11, etc. and can be debated endlessly. What they simply cannot avoid and which any fan can understand is that even if every ball in the league is inflated to the same pressure this year, there will be a huge variability in how they are played. Unless they do the testing dishonestly by letting all of the balls equalize at halftime, it is unavoidable they will find balls played in San Diego in September have 2.5 to 3.0 lbs. of psi difference from balls played in Green Bay in December. And while they can pretend the rate of drop doesn't comport with the measurements in the AFCCG, or make silly arguments about the Patriots' balls versus the Colt's balls, once they concede that balls are and always have been played in the NFL well outside the 12.5 to 13.5 range, it becomes impossible to pretend that range is some magical standard that fairness requires in all NFL contests. The ice bowl was played with 9.5 psi balls. With no malfeasance from anyone.
Well, that goes against their new policy. It would be a bad look for them to immediately ignore it after all of the DFG finger pointing this past year.
I though the consensus on this board before the season was that the half time measurements would never see the light of day. I'm surprised people are still wondering if we'll ever see them. And MarkSullivaFan is right - it wouldn't matter anyways because the Wells Report doesn't dispute the Ideal Gas Law.
The NFL put the half time measurements in the new policy for show and to justify past actions - "the integrity of the game is at stake, and we'll be watching!" Of course, the data can't really prove anything unless they run a more sophisticated experiement to control for all variables. So they must keep the data under wraps so that they cannot be questioned.
While there have been some cold weather games to gather data, there has not been a large enough sample size with enough variance in conditions to say with any certainty how PSI is impacted.
I agree with those that do not expect to see all of the data released by the NFL. If anything, I expect the NFL to cherry pick data points that would support their argument as was done with the Wells report.
My quick analysis shows there was potential for a temp change during the game that there have been 55 games where the game time temperature could have deviated by +/- 15 degrees this season. Within those there have 32 games where it is +/- 20 degrees, and there has been 11 games where it has deviated +/- 30 degrees.
This is assuming a indoor start temp of 70 degrees.
There is even 3 games with a +/- 40 degrees change. Den vs Chi W11, Buf vs NE W11, and NE vs Den W12
The majority of those are negative deviations, but there are 2 or 3 20 degrees upwards from earlier in the season.
So NFL could have some pretty decent readings to pull from if they wanted. The only thing truly missing is the rain, only 2-3 of those cold games had some precipitation in them.
Given the immense scrutiny they know for sure they'll receive, and given their pending court case, I'll bet the NFL has gone through all the scenarios as far as what they should report, and decided silence is by far the best policy for now.
Guaranteed, though, if this was last year I'm sure some nasty (for the Pats) innuendo would have been floated by now on those numbers. Difference is now they realize if any numbers leak out they'll be hammered until all the numbers come out. And they aren't going to risk that yet.
Guaranteed, though, if this was last year I'm sure some nasty (for the Pats) innuendo would have been floated by now on those numbers. Difference is now they realize if any numbers leak out they'll be hammered until all the numbers come out. And they aren't going to risk that yet.
Because it's really bad back of envelope stuff using the nflweather.com websites data which I can't vouch for the accuracy of totally. Thus the whole "potential temp" change.
That and some really quick excel work.
That and some really quick excel work.
Edit: Huge chunks of my post got lost.
Attention: Do we have any HBS first years among the BBTL faithful?
Apparently HBS is teaching a deflategate case study to all first year students. They won't reveal the outcome of the case because they want to preserve it for future years but it's abundantly clear from the article (in particular the use of the word "data") that they side with the Pats.
Attention: Do we have any HBS first years among the BBTL faithful?
Apparently HBS is teaching a deflategate case study to all first year students. They won't reveal the outcome of the case because they want to preserve it for future years but it's abundantly clear from the article (in particular the use of the word "data") that they side with the Pats.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/hbsworkingknowledge/2015/12/14/harvard-business-school-takes-on-the-nfl-in-a-new-case-about-deflategate/
The case is available for purchase on HBSP website for $6.93
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/616008-HCB-ENG
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/616008-HCB-ENG
Just noticed Brady has a very legit shot to eclipse 5,000 yards passing for just the second (2011) time in his career.
This is what still makes me practically throw shit around angry at the draft pick loss. Just a fubar decision, and that should be reversed but never will due to complete incompetence at the league office that is universally laughed at now by all fans without specific agendas. But alas, not a damn thing to be done but skip the draft or make it into a bourbon taste test night.
From the article:
one thing Iansiti does reveal is that their analysis pointed to “a complete lack of understanding” of the actual physics involved with football by those who make their living off the game.
Boy, it's one thing to be bad at your job. It's another thing to be so bad at your job that Harvard Business School teaches all their students about it.
posted elsewhere
Quote from: bankshot1 on July 21, 2015, 09:53:45 AM
Being semi-serious for a second, IMO a book with an NFL deep throat insider delving into reign of RG and the Goodell--Brady DFG battle could be a good read, or at least an compelling case study for The Harvard B School in how not to manage a manageable problem.
Quote from: bankshot1 on July 21, 2015, 09:53:45 AM
Being semi-serious for a second, IMO a book with an NFL deep throat insider delving into reign of RG and the Goodell--Brady DFG battle could be a good read, or at least an compelling case study for The Harvard B School in how not to manage a manageable problem.
Isn't it a reasonable assumption that item one (or, maybe, four) on Bill Simmons' ask list when he was talking to prospective new employers was "massive budget for no-stone-unturned investigation into league handling of DFG and corruption/mismanagement under RG more generally"?
the way he let klosterman or whoever that was on his first podcast walk all over him and not contradict some of the guys bigger leaps, I highly doubt it.
He was insanely underwhelming in his grasp of any of the particulars of DFG.
As the self-proclaimed body language expert I'm guessing he was never able to let go of his first impression of Brady's initial press conference.