NFL Releases Deflategate Report 225
_xeno_ writes: You may remember back in February that Slashdot covered the NFL asking Columbia University for help investigating Deflategate, a scandal where the New England Patriots were caught deflating their footballs in order to make them easier to catch. The Patriots claimed this was simply a result of the weather, while their opponents disagreed. Well, it's been months, but we finally have our answer: the balls were, in fact, knowingly deflated by the Patriots (to no one's surprise). And while science can explain a little deflation, it cannot explain the amount of deflation seen during the game. Which isn't stopping Boston fans from attacking the science. The report stops short of certainty, though, concluding rather that deliberate underinflation was "more likely than not." Not everyone agrees that a conspiracy is necessary to account for the measured pressure readings.
Boston fans... (Score:5, Funny)
No surprise they can't understand science. Have you met the average football fan?
Re:Boston fans... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, anyone who can afford $10,000 a year for season tickets is obviously dumb
Re: (Score:3)
Anyone whose salary is less then a half million a year ( give or take ) who is willing to pay $10,000 a year is dumb.
Re:Boston fans... (Score:5, Insightful)
The average football fan is not an NFL player.
Re: (Score:2)
The average football fan is not an NFL player.
Although they act like they should be one...
Re:Boston fans... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No surprise they can't understand science. Have you met the average football fan?
Have you met the average football player?
The overall college graduation rate of about 80% among retired NFL players is much higher than the general population rate of 30%
Of those degree holders, how many ex-players have degrees in Communication or Business?
Your point? (Score:2)
Of those degree holders, how many ex-players have degrees in Communication or Business?
What is wrong with a degree in communications or business? Are you implying something snide? Do you think someone interested in those topics is somehow inferior?
Re:Boston fans... (Score:5, Insightful)
"The overall college graduation rate of about 80% among retired NFL players is much higher than the general population rate of 30%" - Oh please. Let's not try to compare the "diplomas" that football players get with real diplomas that are, you know, actually earned. Yes there are some notable exceptions. Steve Young and Andrew Luck come to mind as football players that also excelled academically. I'm sure there are others but they are in the vast minority.
College football is a big money business. Players bring in big money for their schools. The players have to keep up a minimum GPA or they are not allowed to play. If they don't play the school doesn't do as well and loses money. So the schools "help" the players by making sure they keep up their GPA. Help meaning they steer them towards fluff courses. At the end of it they give them a diploma, basically as payback for all the money they helped the school earn.
Claiming that they have earned the diploma in any real academic sense is laughable.
I'll never forget seeing that press conference with Dexter Manley, the former Washington Redskins player. That poor guy could barely read or write and yet somehow he had "earned" a college diploma. I blame the NCAA and the schools for allowing this to happen. It was really sad to see him struggling to read a few simple sentences. He didn't fail college. College failed him.
Re: (Score:3)
Non-native English speaker here: is there such a thing as a "vast minority"?
Re: (Score:2)
Majorities are big, minorities are small ...
So, by convention (not by rule AFAIK), we have vast majorities and small/tiny minorities.
Vast implies big or far reaching. But, oddly, you can have a vast emptiness ... which is a whole lotta nothin'.
For some real fun, google for how many times you can use "had" in a sentence and still have it be correct. Or that sentence made purely out of the word buffalo.
Those will really hurt. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
What I really meant to say was a large minority. In other words, very few people. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
Re:Boston fans... (Score:5, Informative)
It was really sad to see him struggling to read a few simple sentences. He didn't fail college. College failed him.
If someone cannot read a few simple sentences, it was not "college" that failed.
Re: (Score:3)
If someone who cannot read a few simple sentences got into college then the college - or its admissions process - could be said to have performed sub-optimally. And that's putting it mildly.
Now if that someone actually graduates ...
Broad brush (Score:3)
College football is a big money business. Players bring in big money for their schools. The players have to keep up a minimum GPA or they are not allowed to play. If they don't play the school doesn't do as well and loses money. So the schools "help" the players by making sure they keep up their GPA. Help meaning they steer them towards fluff courses. At the end of it they give them a diploma, basically as payback for all the money they helped the school earn.
You are painting with an awfully broad brush there my friend. The real picture is FAR more complicated than you paint it. How do I know? I was a Division 1 college athlete. (wrestling if you care) Yes there are some schools that in football and basketball seriously bend or just plain ignore the rules in the pursuit of wins. Others do quite well and actually do have high academic standards. I can assure you that you won't find players at schools like Northwestern or Stanford getting cut a lot of slack
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Were I feeling a trifle sinister, I'd say AC was justifying 2 using 3.
As it stands, I'm calling it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Here's to the soft bigotry of low expectations!
Re: (Score:3)
You think quarterbacks and wide receivers go into business when they retire? Think again. The people that mostly go into business are the kickers, long snappers, offensive linemen. Positions that tend not to be prone to brain injuries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The proof is the one they left inflated for the kicker.
Game balls (Score:5, Insightful)
The NFL should provide all game balls, selected randomly prior to each use. Bringing your own game balls is a pretty obvious vector for manipulating the game.
Re:Game balls (Score:5, Insightful)
The NFL should provide all game balls, selected randomly prior to each use. Bringing your own game balls is a pretty obvious vector for manipulating the game.
I was actually shocked when I found out the teams supplied the balls and not the league since it makes it so ripe for cheating.
Re:Game balls (Score:5, Interesting)
Guess who pushed that rule through, though.
Did you guess "the New England Patriots quarterback who we now know was cheating using that rule?"
Because, guess what, you'd be right!
Re: (Score:3)
Peyton Manning as well.
Re: (Score:2)
While these two spearheaded the current rule, I've read that more than 20 quarterbacks advocated for the rule. The point of allowing the teams to have the balls the week before the game is to allow equipment managers to massage the balls the week before the game to condition the balls to their quarterback's or wide receiver's preferences, mostly by wearing the waxy cover off the leather so the balls are less likely to slip. They may also be able to soften the leather through some method of their preference.
Re:Game balls (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
That's actually an interesting article. One of the questions I've had throughout the process is why it was such a big deal considering that the opposing quarterback would have had the same advantage. This explains it - each team uses their own balls.
That being said, the cited rule change doesn't really have any impact on this situation and it seems a bit disingenuous to suggest that something underhanded was at play: "All the quarterbacks started communicating, and it was something everyone felt strongly
Ow my Balls! (Score:4, Insightful)
Not that you are guilty of all of what follows, but I have to point out the obvious.
Should a shot put be what ever size and shape someone else wants, or standard? How about a discus? Javelin? Don't want to compare to Olympic sports, how about NBA. Can a team inflate their balls to a different pressure than the other team, or wear them a certain way to gain an advantage? It is all standardized to make the competition as fair as possible.
The lengths that people will go to excuse a lack of fairness is really amazing. The lengths that people will go to in an effort of excusing cheating is just as amazing, but a bit more appalling.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there are standards, and those standards are set out in the rules. If you look at http://static.nfl.com/static/c... [nfl.com] you'll see that the ball has to be inflated to 12.5-13.5 psi, has to be from a specific manufacturer, and has to have specific dimensions.
There seems to be a lot of leeway as to how the ball is 'worn'. But both teams have the same leeway and the starting point is clearly defined.
So I don't think it's unreasonable. I think in any league there is some sort of an agreement as to what the
Re: (Score:2)
I have no confidence you understand the word standard, or standardized.
No, you can not compare Football to Baseball. Soccer or Basketball are fair because the competition is based on the one ball in play.
Re: (Score:2)
Then each football can remain in custody of the officiating crew until needed, and then immediately after use. Neither team has to actually touch the game balls before or after they are put into play.
And they should use ONE BALL per game (Score:2)
And they should use the same ball for the entire game, for all purposes. Any wear the ball takes is "part of the game" and neither team should be able to change out balls on a whim because of any perceived advantage.
The only time the ball should be replaced is if it deflates and cannot be reinflated. I might even throw in checking and re-inflating to standard pressure at the start of every quarter but only if a ball would show anything more than a nominal loss in pressure throughout the game.
Re: (Score:2)
Balls are replaced for various reasons.
If it's raining they want to replace a wet ball with a dry ball. Same if it's muddy. Plus players have stuff on them ( for example glue from tape ) that rub off on the ball. So no.
Besides there is a rule that kickers use totally different balls.
Re:Game balls (Score:5, Funny)
... as them flavoring one team over the other.
Butterscotch, please.
Re:Game balls (Score:5, Informative)
Can we please stop tacking -gate on to the end... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not clever when everyone is doing it, especially with trivial crap like this.
Re:Can we please stop tacking -gate on to the end. (Score:5, Funny)
It's time to put a stop to it, too. We need to organize. #gategate
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention that when people find out that the gate was purposely kept in disrepair... there would be another scandal.
Gatesgategategate!
Re: (Score:3)
Can we please stop tacking -gate on to the end of every scandal?
It's not clever when everyone is doing it, especially with trivial crap like this.
Totally agreed. Gategate needs to stop now.
Re:Can we please stop tacking -gate on to the end. (Score:4, Insightful)
DeflateAnd
DeflateNand.
DeflateOr.
DeflateNor.
DeflateXor
Re: (Score:2)
You can't DeflatePUSH too much because it will DeflatePOP.
Re: (Score:3)
I know right? You'd almost think that the original hotel was named 'Water'...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. Let's call it the War on Gate.
Let it be known that I was for it before I was against it. #warongategate
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly, no, I don't think we can.
-gate has apparently become cultural shorthand for or "scandal". Some people probably don't even know the origins of it any more.
I fear it's cromulency is no longer up for debate, even if it doesn't embiggen the language.
I think we're stuck with at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
The people who name these things also have a real low threshhold for what constitutes a "scandal." I swear, half the time I hear about a new one, I couldn't care less, much less get outraged about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but the people who name these things are usually the press with an interest in selling copy.
There's always someone who will be outraged.
Re: (Score:2)
Can we please stop tacking -gate on to the end of every scandal?
It's not clever when everyone is doing it, especially with trivial crap like this.
Believe me, I'm not keen on corruption of language (see my other posts.) But you have to admit, the "-gate" suffix is kind of useful. And it has some staying-power, as a result of the Watergate scandal.
Eventually it will become an anachronism and disappear. For now, let's not get too worked up about it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not useful if idiots are constantly applying it to things that don't really warrant the label "scandal."
Whenever I hear -gate these days it's a pretty safe assumption it's something that is totally not worth the bother for me to inform myself about enough to realize it's overblown and really doesn't matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Summary of the article:
Truly first world problems.
"More probably than not" is a legal term (Score:5, Informative)
It's a report written by a lawyer. "More probably than not" is a legal term meaning "guilty in the civil sense, but not in the criminal sense." Essentially the lawyers writing the report are saying "yes, they're definitely guilty, but I'm not willing to say this meets the standards of criminal justice."
Re: "More probably than not" is a legal term (Score:5, Informative)
In the American legal system, the analogous state is "guilty."
Wells didn't have to get to "beyond a reasonable doubt," the standard for a criminal investigation, because that would be gilding the lily. The NFL can impose punishment at "more probably than not."
This is all explained on the first page of the Wells Report.
Re: (Score:2)
In the American legal system, the analogous state is "guilty."
No, that actually is much more analogous to the civil versus criminal standards of evidence. While not as bad as a criminal conviction, losing a lawsuit or receiving an administrative fine are not pleasant either.
Re:"More probably than not" is a legal term (Score:5, Interesting)
It sounds a lot like "we don't have incontrovertible direct proof but every shred of circumstantial evidence is in line with our assertion".
I bet they would meet the "preponderance of evidence" standard but not the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, I didn't care enough to pay attention when this "controversy" broke. Given the fact that they scored more points after the balls were inflated properly, not to mention the fact that the outcome of a football game has zero real impact on my life, I found this whole flap to be little more than noise on my Facebook feed. The only reason I even knew about the decision is that a story showed up on the news. And then it showed up here. I still don't care enough to go and read all of the history of t
Re: (Score:2)
"Come on help the deflator" (Score:5, Interesting)
McNally (4:39:40pm): Nice dude....jimmy needs some kicks....lets make a deal.....come on help the deflator
Re: (Score:3)
McNally (a team employee) deflated the balls
Brady knew about the deflation
Bill Belichick did not.
Re: (Score:2)
From chat transcripts, it seems the participants avoided the topic when Bilichick was around, so that sort of thing points to him not knowing.
Re: (Score:2)
The one thing I didn't notice until now is that the balls were often over-inflated by the NFL, they said some of the were 16 psi, where they should be between 12.5 and 13.5. In that case, they were doing the right thing.
WTF (Score:4, Insightful)
Why is this story here?
What is next a Real Housewives story?
Re: (Score:3)
Why is this story here?...
Page hits.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of the greatest minds have been interested in seemingly trivial and popular problems (e.g., Richard Feynman).
This is about science and engineering, and whether or not a phenomena can occur, and it's about public's reaction to something that was proven scientifically.
Plus, a lot of Slashdot's readers are American, and some of us are geeks who like -- wait for this -- football!
Re: (Score:2)
Plus, a lot of Slashdot's readers are American, and some of us are geeks who like -- wait for this -- football!
I am an American and I like football (and I am not a Patriots fan). But the science here is merely measuring PSI on footballs and testing it under different temperatures and pressures. This set of testing could have been done by a 13 year old. It is nothing new, nothing that technological or challenging and it most likely will have little to no impact on anything other than giving news stations and websites something to talk about for a few days. Oh the Patriots might get a fine, or possibly lose a draf
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, the ideal gas law was applied directly to a sports scandal. That's is News for Nerds.
Hear hear!
/. thread.
A rule of thumb for musicians is "someone is going to call out Freebird! at every show you play." Likewise, someone is going to call out "Hey this isn't News For Nerds!" on every
I mean, this isn't the nerdiest story ever, but they did have to do Science(TM) to make this report.
Typical (Score:2)
Patriots (Score:3)
WTF? (Score:4, Insightful)
At least the political stuff, the spying stuff, etc. is 'stuff that matters'. This? Just bandwagon jumping clickbait. Is there no way this story could have been spun to include testing standards, analysis of effect on the game, or something even vaguely, remotely applicable to the audience of this site?
Re: (Score:3)
I know that Slashdot in general loves to follow the stereotypical nerd rage against sports and jocks, but there are some of us who love it all. I love technology and I love athletics--especially when you combine the two. This story actually had the potential for geeking out. They did this over at 538: http://fivethirtyeight.com/dat... [fivethirtyeight.com]
That's the angle that Slashdot should have taken, but not everybody here is an obese, cheetos-loving, basement dweller.
Re: (Score:2)
Did it really matter? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The Patriots only scored 17 points in the 1st half, when the under-inflated footballs were discovered. The patriots scored their remaining 28 points in the 2nd half with normally inflated footballs.
Who knows how the game might've gone without the under-inflated balls in the first half? Maybe the other side were psychologically defeated by the lead the Patriots had thanks to cheating in the first half. Maybe they were forced into some risky tactics which failed to pay off.
I mean, maybe not, I have no idea about the two teams involved. But you can't just extrapolate directly from one half to the other.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the other side were psychologically defeated by the lead the Patriots had thanks to cheating in the first half.
The only reason they discovered a deflated ball was because one of the Colt's players intercepted one of the Pat's passes. The Patriots only had a 10 point lead at the half. I don't think it had any real effect on the game.
Sure it matters. (Score:2)
Football isn't like most other games. Everything about it is designed to be hyper-dramatic -- histrionic even. If you have any doubts, watch a few NFL films with their martial music and moralistically thrilling tales of redemption and damnation.
It starts with the small number of games played. The average NFL player over the course of his entire career is eligible to play in one third the number of regular season games a baseball player does in a single season. So every football game is a big deal. The st
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I understand. But you asked whether it mattered, and my point is that's a very different question than "is it likely to have made a difference."
You can't say, "this would almost certainly have made no difference, so there was in practical terms no harm done," because the whole point of football is to see improbable plays shift the tide of fortune back and forth. It may be highly improbable that Colts fans were robbed of a victory, but it's quite possible that they were robbed of a memorable play. If the
SlashJock? (Score:2)
I very rarely complain that a story doesn't belong on Slashdot, but this time I will, because this is probably the least Slashdot-worthy story I've seen yet.
This is not news for nerds. This does not matter.
Re:SlashJock? (Score:5, Interesting)
I very rarely complain that a story doesn't belong on Slashdot, but this time I will, because this is probably the least Slashdot-worthy story I've seen yet.
This is not news for nerds. This does not matter.
This could be worth of Slashdot if were were discussing the science, the need for proper scientific method, etc. But , much like sports reporters, a lot of people are blowing by this because the bias is that sports and science do not mix.
- It's interesting that the scientific firm used to back up the findings of the report once produced reports that second hand smoke didn't cause cancer
- It's interesting that the report relies on the Refs remembering the starting PSI values. We know just how unreliable memory is
- From a scientific standpoint, it would be trivial to rip apart the findings of the report
We need a name for a rule (Score:3)
"If any reporter adds -gate to a scandal, it means the scandal isn't worth mentioning"
Re: (Score:2)
I think -ghazi is the new suffix for that. Ballghazi!
As a Patriots fan... (Score:2)
With that all said... I was also shocked to find out that the NFL didn't just supply the balls... it seems obvious. Let's let the pitchers bring their own baseballs to the baseball game... what could possibly go wrong....
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that the NFL provides the balls to the team. The team is then allowed to prepare the balls ( ie scuff them up ) the way they like.
BTW MLB lets players bring their own bats.
Re:Older = more experience (Score:5, Funny)
The difference between (+5, Insightful) and (-1, Offtopic) is knowing which thread you're posting on. ;P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Rule 1: Blame the user, not the computer.
Re:Older = more experience (Score:5, Funny)
Not only experience.
Some of the old dudes also lift heavier tasks that might be to abstract for the kid.
But there is balance between flexibility of younger employees and the greater salary of seasoned employees.
It depends a lot on what your company does.
Well, dammit, I clicked the wrong one again. Can one of you kids get over here and show me how to delete this post and put it on the right thread showing that old people know how to use computers as well as young ones?
Re: (Score:3)
Non-trolls recognize that ineffective cheating is cheating nonetheless and fully punishable.
If there's any irony, it's that the Pats cheat so hard when, frankly, they don't have to. They really are that good. But then they cheapen their reputation by being dirty and underhanded.
It's a huge and deep-seated inferiority complex, masked with bravado, but completely unjustified.... they'd be every bit as successful if they chose to really be the nice guys.
I just don't get it.
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't get it.
I think it's top down from the coach. Belichick is the living embodiment of the middle finger. Brilliant guy, but his IDGAFs are through the roof.
Re:Good thing too! (Score:5, Insightful)
Or maybe they cheat 20 different ways, and they only got caught on one. Maybe they really suck when they stop cheating entirely.
Re:Good thing too! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Brady will get suspended for lying to the investigators, not for the underinflated balls. Just like Richard Nixon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stop playing the oppressed "nerd" card (Score:2)
Football, by its very nature, is played by jocks. Jocks who have been scoring with cheerleaders since highschool. Worse yet, these are elite jocks.
Did you REALLY want to date the cheerleaders? Was that an actual goal in your life? If so then I have to say I think that is pretty sad. Personally I'd suggest trying to date someone you actually find interesting.
Do you REALLY think the "jock" versus "nerd" thing is really a thing? If so then you've been watching too many movies. The real world doesn't work that way. I was a D1 college athlete and I also earned an engineering degree. I wore coke bottle glasses, was terribly shy with girls, got genera