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.
"There you go - fake science!" She gets points for being honest about itSection15Box113 said:First time I've seen a media talking head actually attempt to verify anything:
12 footballs in the bathroom... for science!
I think we're adding a certain polarizing Massachusetts resident to the whitelist.
Couldn't you take the ball and gauge with you?? Where's the dedication!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.
Ha! It would be more interesting than work, that's for sure.Gagliano said:Couldn't you take the ball and gauge with you?? Where's the dedication!
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:I was just going to post the same thing? WTF?
This shows how news media would rather run with the sensational story of the ball man deflating the ball rather than a real science experiment to see atmospheric conditions change the PSI...
Devizier said:
Or they could just conduct an experiment. Christ on a cracker, what a bunch of maroons.
crystalline said: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.
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.
jimbobim said:This is a joke right ? Lets break down how "bad" this is going to be once the mouth breathers who are convinced they are guilty reads this article. It's almost too perfect right ?
Lorin L. Reisner, a partner in the litigation department of the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison, called the physics department on Monday, according to notes taken by an administrative manager.
“He would like to consult with a physicist on matters relating to gas physics,” the notes said
I mean what serious lawyer allows a leak with his name explicitly on it to the goddamn NY TImes via administrative notes on the countries latest who dun it ?
Then another non performing name grabbing nerd speculating in legal terms for some excellent yellow journalism
William Zajc, another Columbia physicist who was aware of the request by Reisner, said that he was tempted to field the questions because of all the flawed physics discussions he had seen in news media reports.
“I’m amused,” Zajc said of the query. But in the end, he said, “I didn’t do it.”
Zajc said he believed there was little chance that atmospheric effects alone could account for the discrepancies in the football pressure.
“I think it’s more likely than not that they were manipulated,” Zajc said.
And then just for good measure
The records obtained by The Times show that Reisner followed his phone call with an email to the physics department.
“Just to confirm our call, we represent the N.F.L. in connection with the investigation into the footballs used during the A.F.C. championship game and would like to discuss engaging a professor of physics to consult on matters relating to gas physics and environmental impacts on inflated footballs,” Reisner said. “Please let me know whether there is a Columbia professor who may be interested in and appropriate for this assignment.”
If I'm Kraft I see Roger the Dodger is now trying to assemble a pliant group of "experts" to win over his public mob. I also see his attorneys are complete headline sharks and seem determined to keep this going through to the Super Bowl.
I'm livid if i'm Kraft but what's the next move ?This whole scandal has been ginned up and perpetrated by very little actual information. I also can't fathom how the league can just continue to sit in NY while clearly operating publicly through the press like an overeager DA.
Cant we just send someone over from the SoSH Intern Program?Gagliano said:Couldn't you take the ball and gauge with you?? Where's the dedication!
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:
I'm super curious to see DDB's results on this tonight. The air bladder is urethane and shouldn't expand any more once it's full. But it's possible that the leather cover is actually constricting it in which case there would be some change. Isolating that change from temperature-induced differences due to wetness could be difficult, though.
OilCanShotTupac said:FWIW I have had Mike & Mike on in the background for over an hour and Ballgazi has not been mentioned once.
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:
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.
DrewDawg said:
And speaking of that, do we really think Brady would lie to his teammates in the locker room about this?
Clearly not an expert, but I do believe Kraft has some recourse if Goodell attempts an arbitrarily severe punishment:Ed Hillel said:Wouldn't a court throw it out in like 5 seconds based on the text of the bylaws? Another option is that Kraft just goes nuclear. I'm sure there's a lot he knows that others don't want made public.
I have no doubt that many of the NFL owners and many in the league office feel exactly as Florio does. That said, Florio's wants and desires are, thankfully, irrelevant.
crystalline said: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.
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.
CantKeepmedown said:Florio was on D&C this morning. You could hear in his voice how badly he wants the Pats to be nailed for this. He basically said, he didn't care what Kraft said and the NFL does not need to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Circumstantial evidence is enough.
Gerry asked what happens if/when they spoke to the ball boy about what he was doing in the bathroom, and the ball boy said he was taking a leak? Florio said all the NFL has to do is say, "I don't believe you." He thinks that the reason Brady looked so rattled last week was because deep down, he realized that somebody could have done something to the footballs.
BroodsSexton said: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.
lexrageorge said: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.
He serves as the chairman of the NFL's powerful broadcasting committee, and received considerable credit for helping bridge the gap between players and owners in the divisive 2011 labor negotiations.
For Goodell, Kraft's public offensive signals a potentially troubling twist in a relationship I explore deeply in GQ's February issue. In the piece, I quote one veteran league executive telling me Kraft is "the assistant commissioner."
While reporting the piece, I heard many stories of Kraft receiving preferential treatment. One executive noted how Goodell seemed to jump to answer his cell whenever Kraft called. "Sure there's special rules," one league source said. "It's the unwritten secret." At a golf tournament last year, one source told me, Kraft is said to have called NFL headquarters and requested to be interviewed on the NFL Network. Within minutes, NFL producers in the broadcast truck were told to put Kraft on television. "Nobody else would have pulled that card," the source said.
(re the Zajc and the PW partner's request for expert consultation)PedroKsBambino 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.
simplyeric 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?
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/static/html/careers/pdf/co_.pdflexrageorge said:Clearly not an expert, but I do believe Kraft has some recourse if Goodell attempts an arbitrarily severe punishment:
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.
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: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.
DrewDawg 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
BroodsSexton said: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.
BroodsSexton said: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.
PedroKsBambino 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.
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: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.
There is no specific data on that because no one cared until a week ago.Rovin Romine said: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.
BroodsSexton 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, because "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.
Mark Schofield said:Isn't today Roger's "State of the League" speech?
PedroKsBambino 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.
The communication by Reisner appears to show that the N.F.L. is taking seriously the question of whether physics could explain the deflation. Reisner’s call to the Columbia physics department first became known when Brian Metzger, a physicist at Columbia, mentioned it in a Facebook post.
In a bit of physics humor, Metzger then asked in the post whether Brian Greene of Columbia — one of the world’s best-known cosmologists — would “step up to the task."
SumnerH 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.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:Ha! It would be more interesting than work, that's for sure.
Rosey Ruzicka said: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.
BroodsSexton said:
OK, so your theory is that the sophisticated Paul Weiss partners know that the Columbia physics faculty will drop a dime on them to 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
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) 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?
TheoShmeo said: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.
"Lorin L. Reisner, a partner in the litigation department of the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison, called the physics department on Monday, according to notes taken by an administrative manager.
'He would like to consult with a physicist on matters relating to gas physics,' the notes said."
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:This whole thing with separate kicking balls, separate balls for each team, QBs can prepare them, but 12.5-13.5 required, etc. is stupid, and leaves the door open for exactly this kind of bullshit.
Play with the same ball from kickoff to 0:00. Kickers, QBs, etc. Both teams, everyone. if it's not lovingly prepared to your exact specs, tough titty. If it loses air and gets beat up over 4 quarters of guys falling on it... No different than the turf getting torn up over the course of the game.
This is football, not show dogs.
Shelterdog 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.