What to do about underinflated footballs?

Perks · Jan 21, 2015

There's been all this chatter about the New England Patriots possibly underinflating the footballs they supplied for the AFC championship game on Sunday.

11 of the 12 balls tested each proved to be two pounds light. What I'm hearing is that the underinflated balls would have afforded better grip, but that the bigger problem is that the balls would behave slightly differently than expected by the players who had been practicing with (and expecting) standard footballs.

So, what do we think AW NFL watchers?

I don't feel like I understand the issue well enough yet to light the fuse on my sports-outrage cannon. I mean, I'm working on it...

Jcomp · Jan 21, 2015

Thing is, far as I'm aware (and I could be way, way off base here), the Pats under-inflated footballs were pretty much used only by them on offense. It's a violation and it should be punished, but given how badly they blew the doors off the Colts in the Championship game, it doesn't seem like a deciding factor in the outcome of the game.

I also tend to be of the mind that most teams engage in some form of cheating or at least rule-bending if they can get away with it, so I don't see it as that big of a big deal.

With THAT said, if the NFL decides to take away draft picks to punish the Pats, I'd like to see some new system set up where those lost draft picks aren't just skipped over on draft day, as they are now, but instead put up for some kind of auction or bidding process, or awarded to another team through one of the NFL's infinite tie-breaker scenarios. Just to make things that much more interesting...

Perks · Jan 21, 2015

Yeah, that seems to be what I'm getting out of my reading, too. Watching the game, it's kind of hard to see how the Colts could have beaten the Patriots.

I guess what I don't understand is why both teams don't play out of the same ball pool? It just seems like that makes it too easy for tampering.

ElaineA · Jan 21, 2015

This feels like a tempest in a teapot, and that's coming from a Seattle fan. I blame the NFL more than the Pats. Why would they give game balls to the teams to potentially mess with? In baseball, the umpires control the game balls all the way until first pitch. And after. They're constantly removing scuffed baseballs. The NFL refs should have control of the game balls until kick off, and there should be an official responsible to keep an eye on the spares throughout the game.

cornflake · Jan 21, 2015

It's just how it works.

Teams keep pucks too - they need to be frozen. Balls need to be inflated. The league itself checks them pre-game but then each team has a stash of their own.

Tom Brady cheating would not be shocking - they know the punishment; I'd wager they decided to take the punishment.

mirandashell · Jan 21, 2015

That's what I think too. Losing draft picks ain't much a of punishment compared to the reward of getting into the Superbowl.

And I think the worse thing about it is that the Superbowl this year is now tainted with the doubt.

No wonder everyone but the Pats fans hate the Pats.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 21, 2015

This isn't the first times the Patriots have cheated.

I was think the Pats should be suspended, starting now, and they have a round robin between Green Bay, Indy, and Seattle for the Superbowl title.

Shadow Dragon · Jan 21, 2015

I doubt the NFL acts quickly enough for any decision to effect the upcoming Superbowl. However, this being the Patriots' second major scandal during a postseason run, the punishment needs to be harsh. I'd say, give them the same punishment the Saints got for the bounty scandal. Take their top draft pick and suspend Belichick for all of next season.

chompers · Jan 21, 2015

I don't understand why they should be penalized. I mean, I understand they were cheating, but doesn't the onus fall on the people who check the balls? The balls are checked before the game and were allowed. Unless they were deflated during the game?

Btw, I say this as someone who can't stand the Pats.

cornflake · Jan 21, 2015

chompers said:
I don't understand why they should be penalized. I mean, I understand they were cheating, but doesn't the onus fall on the people who check the balls? The balls are checked before the game and were allowed. Unless they were deflated during the game?

Btw, I say this as someone who can't stand the Pats.

They were deflated during the game (presuming the ESPN report is correct).

The league checked the balls before the game and they were within regulation limits. After, apparently 11 of 12 were about 2lbs of pressure short. That'd indicate nothing but that someone had the equipment guy deflate the balls to someone's (*ahem*Brady*ahem*) specifications.

poetinahat · Jan 21, 2015

I don't think it matters whether "everybody does it", or whether it affected the outcome of the game. Is it allowed, or not? And is it certain that the Patriots did it, or not?

Having said that, it sounds like the deflation issue is... overblown. (HA!) Apply the law and be done with it. The question for me is: Why?

This reminds me of millionaires who shoplift. I don't think it's so much about the benefit, but about hubris - and getting away with it. The Browns, for all we know, could have been doing this all year, but who would check?*

The whole Spygate thing was years ago now, but... the extra ineligible receiver thing is still warm - and probably more likely to cast a shadow.

With coaches, players and referees having to check every play to see who's eligible and who's not, an already-confusing game will become a complete tangle. More confusion, more penalties for technicalities, longer games. THAT... will suck.

For me, it just makes the Patriots that much harder to like - I'm a fair-play guy, not a loophole guy. I won't holler about them being cheats, but I don't have to like their style.

--

*: For the record, the LeBrowns wouldn't. I just know in my Ohio heart.

chompers · Jan 21, 2015

cornflake said:
They were deflated during the game (presuming the ESPN report is correct).

The league checked the balls before the game and they were within regulation limits. After, apparently 11 of 12 were about 2lbs of pressure short. That'd indicate nothing but that someone had the equipment guy deflate the balls to someone's (*ahem*Brady*ahem*) specifications.

Oh, then that makes sense. Every article I'd read never mentioned WHEN the deflating happened.

Burn them at the stake! (Okay, a bit dramatic, but...)

cornflake · Jan 21, 2015

poetinahat said:
I don't think it matters whether "everybody does it", or whether it affected the outcome of the game. Is it allowed, or not? And is it certain that the Patriots did it, or not?

It is decidedly not allowed (again, presuming the ESPN report is correct). It's at least one rule violation, period, and likely more (the balls being under regulation is a violation - engineering them, lying, etc., could be others).

I don't see any possibility besides the Patriots (at least someone within the org.) did it. The balls are theirs, on their sideline and within their possession before, during and after the game. Unless the idea is that someone from the opposition snuck over, unnoticed, to deflate the Pats' balls to Brady's preference (which makes less than no sense), or a very specific fan had a lot of time, expertise, and an invisibility cloak, the Pats did it.

Having said that, it sounds like the deflation issue is... overblown. (HA!) Apply the law and be done with it. The question for me is: Why?

Brady likes them soft. Some QBs do, some don't. If you do, and they are made that way for your offensive plays, that can be a decided advantage. It can also provide a psychological boost in the form of hubris, in the form of knowing the balls are 'better' for you, etc.

This reminds me of millionaires who shoplift. I don't think it's so much about the benefit, but about hubris - and getting away with it. The Browns, for all we know, could have been doing this all year, but who would check?*

If there was suspicion, someone would check. If there's not, regardless, there are random equipment checks all season.

The whole Spygate thing was years ago now, but... the extra ineligible receiver thing is still warm - and probably more likely to cast a shadow.

With coaches, players and referees having to check every play to see who's eligible and who's not, an already-confusing game will become a complete tangle. More confusion, more penalties for technicalities, longer games. THAT... will suck.

For me, it just makes the Patriots that much harder to like - I'm a fair-play guy, not a loophole guy. I won't holler about them being cheats, but I don't have to like their style.

--

*: For the record, the LeBrowns wouldn't. I just know in my Ohio heart.

I don't think this is a loophole thing. It's a clear violation, designed to benefit a player and team.

Equipment violations aren't new to any sport - there have been tarred balls, bats, curved sticks, broad pads, etc. This level at this game is kind of an extreme flout - so very Tom Brady.

poetinahat · Jan 21, 2015

Agree the ball issue is not a loophole thing. That's the first thing I said in my post.

When I asked, "why?", I meant, "why risk getting caught, punished, shamed for such debatable upside?"

The loophole comment was related to the eligible-receiver thing. More generally, though, it refers to my view of letter-of-law vs spirit-of-law.

I can't comment on what would be "so very Tom Brady".

Shadow Dragon · Jan 22, 2015

poetinahat said:
Agree the ball issue is not a loophole thing. That's the first thing I said in my post.

When I asked, "why?", I meant, "why risk getting caught, punished, shamed for such debatable upside?"

For the why, I think it's just the way Belichick is. He wants to leave nothing to chance and will take any advantage he can get.

cornflake · Jan 22, 2015

poetinahat said:
Agree the ball issue is not a loophole thing. That's the first thing I said in my post.

When I asked, "why?", I meant, "why risk getting caught, punished, shamed for such debatable upside?"

The loophole comment was related to the eligible-receiver thing. More generally, though, it refers to my view of letter-of-law vs spirit-of-law.

I can't comment on what would be "so very Tom Brady".

The punishment is negligible, especially when compared with the potential upside in this game, though they've apparently felt that way in other games as well.

I don't think shame factors into it at all - it's not the first (or second or third, or...) time they've been accused of cheating. It wouldn't be the first time they were caught cheating. I don't think some of the people we're talking about have the basic capacity for shame, heh.

ElaineA · Jan 22, 2015

Yes, the risk/reward equation is in favor of the deflator. *heh, ahm a writer so I can make up new uses for werds*

Consider that before the Seahawks/GB game, the NFL threatened to suspend Marshawn Lynch for wearing "non-league-sanctioned" shoes. SUSPEND. From that very game. For gold shoes. But you can manipulate the game balls (which may, in fact, actually affect the outcome of the game--if only in a small way) and the punishment is losing a draft pick the following year. If you're willing to step over the "rules" line to find an edge, clearly the risk here is minimal. Fine, punish me after I've won the SB. *shrug*

Personally, I still think the competitive gain was minimal to the Pats and the brouhaha is a big media construct, but clearly it WAS a rules violation so, YAY, distractions!

As has happened so many times this year, what this incident really points out is the ridiculous inconsistency of the NFL's fine and punishment system. That's where the spotlight should be.

robeiae · Jan 22, 2015

poetinahat said:
I don't think it matters whether "everybody does it", or whether it affected the outcome of the game.

Agree. Whether or not the Patriots would have still have beaten the Colts with properly inflated balls (and yeah, I think they would have too) is inconsequential, imo.

Rules are rules. They're either enforced or they're not. And this isn't supposed to be professional wrestling. Both teams in a game are supposed to be playing by the same rules. If one of them is intentionally breaking rules and gets caught doing so...screw 'em. They should forfeit the game. That's the only way they'll ever learn.

Richard Sherman actually made a good point on this, though maybe he was too subtle for some of the reporters covering the story.

ElaineA · Jan 22, 2015

OH MY GAWD, I'm dying here! :roll:

NFL just announced Marshawn Lynch was fined $20,000 for an "obscene gesture" on Sunday when after his TD he...you guessed it!...GRABBED HIS BALLS!

This league......at least it keeps me laughing.

jimmymc · Jan 22, 2015

Maybe they deliberately deflated the footballs and maybe they didn't. Air pressure changes with ambient temperature. Inflation pressure would decrease from warm indoors to cold outdoors.

Shadow Dragon · Jan 22, 2015

jimmymc said:
Maybe they deliberately deflated the footballs and maybe they didn't. Air pressure changes with ambient temperature. Inflation pressure would decrease from warm indoors to cold outdoors.

Air pressure and temperature doesn't cause a lose of two pounds, and it didn't effect the Colts' footballs at all.

robeiae · Jan 22, 2015

Maybe the Patriots were keeping their balls on ice...

mirandashell · Jan 22, 2015

Then it would have affected all the balls. Not just the Pats

PorterStarrByrd · Jan 22, 2015

As an ex -official, While I can appreciate the value of a severely underinflated ball as regards handling it, I'd defy you to detect on underinflated one that is short 1 ot 2 lb's from one at the lower edge of legality. I'd also doubt it has much real effect to the game.
Yeah, the QB has a little better control of it and the runner is a little less likely to drop it, but in the hands of pros, not enough to make a difference. It is also a little harder for the receiver to catch.
The rule was established back when everyone used the same ball, and one team could gain advantage (the home team who supplied them) by having practiced with a very soft or very hard ball that would be used in the game without the other team doing so.
Should they punished? Yes, a heavy fine should be levied, only to reinforce intolerance of rule violations.
Is it relative to the result, especially in that game. No.

Perks · Jan 22, 2015

ElaineA said:
OH MY GAWD, I'm dying here!

NFL just announced Marshawn Lynch was fined $20,000 for an "obscene gesture" on Sunday when after his TD he...you guessed it!...GRABBED HIS BALLS!

This league......at least it keeps me laughing.

Ha! I saw him do that and my husband didn't. He ended up rewinding, because he couldn't believe that he'd done something that flagrant.

What to do about underinflated footballs?

delicate #!&@*#! flower

delicate #!&@*#! flower

All about that action, boss.

practical experience, FTW

Court Jester

practical experience, FTW

say it loud

practical experience, FTW

say it loud

practical experience, FTW

All about that action, boss.

Touch and go

All about that action, boss.

Benefactor Member

Touch and go

nutruring tomorrows criminals today

delicate #!&@*#! flower