Deflategate

[Rhody31]

If THE MEDIA thought it hurt Luck and Indy, they are idiots. I'm not sure what you read, but I didn't hear or read anything about it impacting Indy.

The original report - Kravitz source: NFL investigating if Patriots deflated footballs - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

And had LTL always been a childish douche or am I just noticing it now? Did someone from New England violate a member of his family?

 

[schiezainc]

The original report - Kravitz source: NFL investigating if Patriots deflated footballs - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

And had LTL always been a childish douche or am I just noticing it now? Did someone from New England violate a member of his family?

Nah. He just suffers from deflated balls.

 

[Rhody31]

Gross. You sound like a Yankee fan.

He's right Schieza. That's super douchey. I spent years hearing Yankee fans talk like that and have done my best to avoid doing it when the teams I root for got good.

 

[SnarkShark]

The original report - Kravitz source: NFL investigating if Patriots deflated footballs - 13 WTHR Indianapolis

And had LTL always been a childish douche or am I just noticing it now? Did someone from New England violate a member of his family?

But that story doesn't say anything about deflated footballs hurting Luck or the Colts offense, so....

 

[schiezainc]

He's right Schieza. That's super douchey. I spent years hearing Yankee fans talk like that and have done my best to avoid doing it when the teams I root for got good.

Of course that's douchey. That was the point. I was being a douche.

 

[Rhody31]

Rhody, did you listen to that clip you posted about Rodgers? Simms was saying Rodgers was the exception because he wants the ball overinflated -- "Everybody wants it smaller and soft so they can dig their fingers into it."

Did you miss where Simms said Rodgers said "I like to push the limits of what they allow, even go over?"
If you're calling the Patriots cheaters - and I'm not saying you, specifically, are - then you have to lump the Packers in because Rodgers admitted he broke the rules.
Sanctions for everyone!
This whole discussion is stupid.

 

[Rhody31]

But that story doesn't say anything about deflated footballs hurting Luck or the Colts offense, so....

Listen to it. Kravitz says it early, IIRC.
I'd get an exact time in the video but their site is awful and every time I start the video, I get a pop up ad.

 

[SnarkShark]

Listen to it. Kravitz says it early, IIRC.
I'd get an exact time in the video but their site is awful and every time I start the video, I get a pop up ad.

Yeah, he's got it backwards, and if he actually covers the NFL on a regular basis, he's an idiot for not knowing how it works. But still, one guy has it wrong and THE MEDIA is perpetuating some sort of falsity? Give me a break.

 

[Rhody31]

Yeah, he's got it backwards, and if he actually covers the NFL on a regular basis, he's an idiot for not knowing how it works. But still, one guy has it wrong and THE MEDIA is perpetuating some sort of falsity? Give me a break.

I'm just saying the original story presented itself as the Patriots were deflating balls to hurt the Colts - a story likely fed by someone tied to the organization. Yesterday morning, that was the storyline - deflating balls hurt the passer.
Then around lunchtime, someone smarter reported that a deflated ball would help the QB, and that the Patriots benefitted from it.
I don't actually believe in any conspiracy or media bias, just pointing out that it took a good six hours before everyone could agree on a simple fact without finding facts - like how many balls were underinflated, could this have been a result of a faulty product or could the weather have done it.
Instead, it was THE PATRIOTS ARE CHEATERS. Is that good journalism?
(PS - I'll be off SJ for a few hours; not dodging anything. Ballet class is over, gotta take the little one to dinner, then have to take some photos. Hate when I leave a convo because of life and idiots like LTL start screaming about me disappearing because I'm wrong.)

 

[LongTimeListener]

He's the guy who got the scoop -- I'm not sure why he is an "idiot." He made a bad assumption about what the effect would be, and he corrected it when he got better information. (As the Rodgers clip shows, it isn't cut-and-dried about why a team would want to do this.) The next reporter to be 100 percent correct for his career will be the first, but he was pretty upfront about the difference between the info he was passing along (the investigation, word from a good source) and the erroneous conclusion he drew.

Belichick has been notably non-denial-denial-ish about it.

 

[SnarkShark]

He's the guy who got the scoop -- I'm not sure why he is an "idiot." He made a bad assumption about what the effect would be, and he corrected it when he got better information. (As the Rodgers clip shows, it isn't cut-and-dried about why a team would want to do this.) The next reporter to be 100 percent correct for his career will be the first, but he was pretty upfront about the difference between the info he was passing along (the investigation, word from a good source) and the erroneous conclusion he drew.

Belichick has been notably non-denial-denial-ish about it.

If he covers the NFL, he should know that an opposing team can't reasonably be able to deflate another team's balls.

 

[SnarkShark]

I'll take Michael Rosenberg over some CBS Boston online clown trying to make a name for himself every single time.

For the record, both pieces were terrible. Rosenberg put together a **** sandwich of speculation and rumor, CBS Boston provided a fanboy counterpoint.

 

[cranberry]

For the record, both pieces were terrible. Rosenberg put together a **** sandwich of speculation and rumor, CBS Boston provided a fanboy counterpoint.

It wasn't Rosenberg's best work.

 

[da man]

It wasn't Rosenberg's best work.

This was my favorite part: "Maybe some of this is overstated. But the perception is real, and it is not totally unfounded."

 

[DanielSimpsonDay]

When caught, remember the standard playbook:

1) Everyone else does it
2) We did it, but it didn't help
3) HATERS!!!

 

[outofplace]

I'm just saying the original story presented itself as the Patriots were deflating balls to hurt the Colts - a story likely fed by someone tied to the organization. Yesterday morning, that was the storyline - deflating balls hurt the passer.
Then around lunchtime, someone smarter reported that a deflated ball would help the QB, and that the Patriots benefitted from it.
I don't actually believe in any conspiracy or media bias, just pointing out that it took a good six hours before everyone could agree on a simple fact without finding facts - like how many balls were underinflated, could this have been a result of a faulty product or could the weather have done it.
Instead, it was THE PATRIOTS ARE CHEATERS. Is that good journalism?
(PS - I'll be off SJ for a few hours; not dodging anything. Ballet class is over, gotta take the little one to dinner, then have to take some photos. Hate when I leave a convo because of life and idiots like LTL start screaming about me disappearing because I'm wrong.)

Sorry Rhody, but it is a bad argument. That a reporter initially got the details wrong in no way exonerates the Patriots from possible wrongdoing.

 

[JackReacher]

When caught, remember the standard playbook:

1) Everyone else does it
2) We did it, but it didn't help
3) HATERS!!!

You have "HATERS!!!" a couple spots too low.

 

[outofplace]

No, I get it. The Pats have a reputation for "cheating" and so they're never given the benefit of the doubt nor should they be. But that being said, enough is enough.
Regarding the Spygate stuff, the basic premise is every coach in the league was videotaping sidelines to get an advantage by stealing signals. This includes the Patriots. The NFL told coaches to stop it. The Patriots didn't. They got caught. They got hammered. Rightfully so.
Fine. Hammer New England on it. Pretend is made some big difference. But did it really? Really?
Do you think without "stealing" (and I put it in quotes because everyone did it) opponent's signals, the Pats wouldn't have made Kordell Stewart look like the garbage QB he was? Did "stealing" have anything to do with the Rams forgetting they had a running back in that first Super Bowl? Did "stealing" force the Panthers to kick the ball offsides, thereby giving Brady and company a chance to run down the field to win a second SB? Did "stealing" make Donovan McNabb throw up all over himself when it counted? Did "stealing" cause Peyton Manning to play horribly in various playoff games at Gillette?
Nope.
And even after the "stealing" crap was exposed, the Pats came within one miraculous catch of beating a VASTLY superior Giants team in SB42 and going perfect on the season. And they were within one defensive stop of beating that same Giants team four years later for another ring.
My point is, I get the hate for New England. You win long enough, people will hate you (See: Bulls, Chicago, NBA).
But anyone who is dumb enough to really thing these ticky-tack BS scandals actually impacted the game itself and determined who won or lost should never be treated seriously in a sports discussion. It's insane.

Quite the fanboy rant there, schiez. Remember, I'm the one who was actually suggesting that it is possible the Patriots are innocent this time. I'm just putting some fair context around it.

Also, I assume you meant that the Giants were vastly inferior, not superior, right?

Sorry, but this stuff is going to follow the Patriots at least as long as Belicheck is running the show and for good reason. He cheated. The NFL told him, and everybody else, to stop and he kept doing it anyway. Goodell made it worse by destroying the evidence and never really saying why he did it.

And just as we don't know for sure that the Patriots cheated this time, you don't know that what they did with Spygate didn't alter any game results. You may be right, but there was so much talk at the time about the Patriots knowing everything an opposing offense was going to do before the snap. We don't know what information they got from the video, in part because the tapes were destroyed, so we can never really be sure exactly how much it helped them.

 

[Rhody31]

Sorry Rhody, but it is a bad argument. That a reporter initially got the details wrong in no way exonerates the Patriots from possible wrongdoing.

No argument here. If they did something wrong, punish them. But let's not pretend like if the allegations involved any other team it would get anywhere near the same reaction. I mean, the Browns admitted to using cell phones to communicate with the sidelines and I didn't see that lead the national news.

 

[JC]

They're the Browns.