Deflagate Will Have MAJOR impact on NE's level of play this year

[JohnnyLV]

The NE Patriots* will not be as good a team this year because of Deflategate. 

 

And not because of the possible suspension of Brady. 

 

Instead it will be because it will end one system long term institutionalized form of cheating that they have done, which of course is the deflation of footballs.And interestingly even though it is a benefit to Brady, the far bigger advantage that it gave them is in preventing fumbles.

 

What drives me nuts about the DG coveage is that the media is 100% focused on the one game as if it is an isolated incident. But it is 100% not isolated it is systemic.

 

Lets look at some facts and statistics:

 

1. It is NOT the first time NE got in trouble for deflating footballs. It also happened it 2004 and the NFL issued a warning because the NFL did not believe the Patriots explanation

 

2. An author, Gray Timothy wrote a book on "The Science of Football" in which one of the topics was how much easier it was to control underinflated footballs. It also blows up BBs claim that he never thought of the pressure of a football because BB actually wrote the forward.

 

3. Since the NFL enacted the current ball handling rules (because Brady lobbied for it), the fumble rate for the Patriots has been statistically almost IMPOSSIBLE relative to the rest of the NFL. 

                a. Since the rule change the Patriots have fumbled 1 in 187 plays over 2010-2014. The rest of the NFL averages 106. The odds of this being natural is .0000616

                b. In the 5 years before the rule change they were at 91 plays per fumble, so they became over twice as good

 

4. Also, they are statistically impossibly good at playing in wet weather since the change, and below average before

 

This will have a huge impact on the Patriots this year. They will probably lose 10 more fumbles this year which could be a multiple game swing.

 

They are systemic cheaters and the field in this area will be levelled this year.

 

References:  http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-prevention-of-fumbles-is-nearly-impossible

 

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-patriots-and-tom-brady-suspiciously-out-perform-expectations-in-wet-weather

[AFJF]

 

 

 

Until they fail to win the division, I will assume they're going to win the division.

[AFJF]

The NE Patriots* will not be as good a team this year because of Deflategate. 

 

And not because of the possible suspension of Brady. 

 

Instead it will be because it will end one system long term institutionalized form of cheating that they have done, which of course is the deflation of footballs.And interestingly even though it is a benefit to Brady, the far bigger advantage that it gave them is in preventing fumbles.

 

What drives me nuts about the DG coveage is that the media is 100% focused on the one game as if it is an isolated incident. But it is 100% not isolated it is systemic.

 

Lets look at some facts and statistics:

 

1. It is NOT the first time NE got in trouble for deflating footballs. It also happened it 2004 and the NFL issued a warning because the NFL did not believe the Patriots explanation

 

2. An author, Gray Timothy wrote a book on "The Science of Football" in which one of the topics was how much easier it was to control underinflated footballs. It also blows up BBs claim that he never thought of the pressure of a football because BB actually wrote the forward.

 

3. Since the NFL enacted the current ball handling rules (because Brady lobbied for it), the fumble rate for the Patriots has been statistically almost IMPOSSIBLE relative to the rest of the NFL. 

 

That being said....I hope you're right.

[AFCEastFan]

The properly-inflated balls were like greased watermelons for the Patriots in the Super Bowl, so I can only imagine what that will do to their fumble numbers over the course of a full season.  The pig is definitely ripe. 

[SoFlaJets]

You're all just jealous-the Pats will win the division, win the AFC and then the Super Bowl again as Brady plans on making it 9 in a row because he's playing until he's 45

[ghost_in_pads02]

ha ha they're play and success hadn't changed with spygate but NOW because of deflated football it will all of a sudden..ha ha ok, the secret to their dominance was deflated footballs all along...lol

 

on man, i'm gonna bust a gut with this!!

[JohnnyLV]

ha ha they're play and success hadn't changed with spygate but NOW because of deflated football it will all of a sudden..ha ha ok, the secret to their dominance was deflated footballs all along...lol

 

on man, i'm gonna bust a gut with this!!

 

Look at the links, the statistics are extremely compelling. You don't have to believe it, but the evidence is there.

[DeanPatsFan]

Another preseason Patriots demise thread....

What's this, fifteen years in a row now?

[AFCEastFan]

Look at the links, the statistics are extremely compelling. You don't have to believe it, but the evidence is there.

The stats do not seem to account for the fact that in the two games post-2006 we KNOW the Patriots were either using over-inflated balls (2014 Jets at NE) or balls inflated to regulation (2015 SB), the Patriots had a grand total of zero fumbles.

[DoubleDown]

ha ha they're play and success hadn't changed with spygate but NOW because of deflated football it will all of a sudden..ha ha ok, the secret to their dominance was deflated footballs all along...lol

 

on man, i'm gonna bust a gut with this!!

 

It was a secret.  That's no longer the case. 

 

If it's so inconsequential, then why do it at all and risk getting caught/exposed?

 

Personally, I think the Pats are going to move on from this ordeal and continue being one of the best teams in the league.  However, that doesn't mean that properly inflated footballs won't impact their rate of turnovers from a high level.

[Jet Fan RI]

The stats do not seem to account for the fact that in the two games post-2006 we KNOW the Patriots were either using over-inflated balls (2014 Jets at NE) or balls inflated to regulation (2015 SB), the Patriots had a grand total of zero fumbles.

 

Two games is a minuscule sample. Let's check the stats after the season, and over the next several seasons.

[AFCEastFan]

Two games is a minuscule sample. Let's check the stats after the season, and over the next several seasons.

 

I realize it is not statistically significant.  Still, it is not great anecdotal evidence for the "deflated footballs make a significant difference" express train that two excellent defenses could not force a single measly fumble in the only two games we know for sure that the footballs were at regulation psi levels or above. On the other hand, there would have been a lot of sticky messes to clean up in the trousers of Patriots haters if the Pats had, say, 3 fumbles in each of those games (in which case any claims of statistical insignificance would fall on mostly deaf ears).  

[ghost_in_pads02]

It was a secret.  That's no longer the case. 

 

If it's so inconsequential, then why do it at all and risk getting caught/exposed?

 

Personally, I think the Pats are going to move on from this ordeal and continue being one of the best teams in the league.  However, that doesn't mean that properly inflated footballs won't impact their rate of turnovers from a high level.

 

 

You;re asking a question that I cannot  answer cause i didn't do it. I agree their play will remain the same, I do not think statistically  anything is gonna be any different. A lot of you are blinded by your hate to think this issue really made a significant difference. I'm hearing countless people come out now and state how this will not impact the pats in ways some jets fans(and the author of this article) feel it will.

 

at the end of the day beat em' and you won't be so bitter at their success. (that's not directed toward anyone in particular) and save the "well if they dont cheat blah blah.."

[DoubleDown]

You;re asking a question that I cannot  answer cause i didn't do it. I agree their play will remain the same, I do not think statistically  anything is gonna be any different. A lot of you are blinded by your hate to think this issue really made a significant difference. I'm hearing countless people come out now and state how this will not impact the pats in ways some jets fans(and the author of this article) feel it will.

 

at the end of the day beat em' and you won't be so bitter at their success. (that's not directed toward anyone in particular) and save the "well if they dont cheat blah blah.."

 

Agree to disagree.  I think it made a measurable impact (as pointed out in the original post) especially in wet, cold, and snowy game conditions.

 

How many times have we heard players, coaches, and announcers claim that the ball is "hard as a rock" on very cold days?  Deflate the ball by a few PSI, and sudden it's much easier to grip, catch, etc.

[Jet Fan RI]

I realize it is not statistically significant.  Still, it is not great anecdotal evidence for the "deflated footballs make a significant difference" express train that two excellent defenses could not force a single measly fumble in the only two games we know for sure that the footballs were at regulation psi levels or above. On the other hand, there would have been a lot of sticky messes to clean up in the trousers of Patriots haters if the Pats had, say, 3 fumbles in each of those games (in which case any claims of statistical insignificance would fall on mostly deaf ears).  

 

Several fumbles over just two games proves nothing as well. But you can compare the fumble rate for several years before the rule change with that afterward. It shows a precipitous drop at the point the rule was introduced. After 2-3 seasons we will see whether a precipitous jump occurs. A graph from a few years before the rule change to a few years from now, if it shows a fumble rate valley, would be rather compelling.

[AFCEastFan]

How many times have we heard players, coaches, and announcers claim that the ball is "hard as a rock" on very cold days?  Deflate the ball by a few PSI, and sudden it's much easier to grip, catch, etc.

 

[Larz]

I think they deflate them mostly for rain and bad weather games

 

 

 

I would expect them to turn it over more in the rain now but not a major impact, no

[AFCEastFan]

Several fumbles over just two games proves nothing as well. But you can compare the fumble rate for several years before the rule change with that afterward. It shows a precipitous drop at the point the rule was introduced. After 2-3 seasons we will see whether a precipitous jump occurs. A graph from a few years before the rule change to a few years from now, if it shows a fumble rate valley, would be rather compelling.

 

Yes, and it also shows a precipitous drop at the point that the Patriots replaced Reche Caldwell and Troy Brown's corpse with Randy Moss and Wes Welker, giving rise to the pass-heavy offense the Patriots have had ever since.  So it will be interesting to see what the next few seasons will show.  

[Jet Fan RI]

Yes, and it also shows a precipitous drop at the point that the Patriots replaced Reche Caldwell and Troy Brown's corpse with Randy Moss and Wes Welker, giving rise to the pass-heavy offense the Patriots have had ever since.  So it will be interesting to see what the next few seasons will show.  

 

But not even close to the drop associated with the rule change.

[thshadow]

Yeah, that Pats are going to totally suck this year - just like that year after spy gate!!!  What'd they end up, 1-17?  I mean, yeah, knowing the defensive play calls is clearly a bigger advantage than a slightly deflated ball, but still, they'll be lucky to win 4 games IMO.

[AFCEastFan]

But not even close to the drop associated with the rule change.

 

I don't follow.  The rule change went into effect at the exact same time that Moss and Welker arrived.  

[CaliforniaJet]

I'm sure they are already working on new ways to cheat, is what they do and have been doing for over a decade. Twice a cheater always a cheater. 

[WWWWombat]

Objective analysis of the data in the Wells Report does not show significant deflation, yet the Pats' fumble rate is statistically significantly lower than normal.  We can therefore fairly safely assume that something the Patriots do causes them to fumble less, but jumping to the conclusion that it has to be illegal ball deflation is not supported by the statistics.  There is also the wear that is intentionally put on the pigskin to make it easier to grip.  Perhaps the Patriots' equipment guys are better at that than the other teams'.  Ultimately, the data from this next season and the new NFL ball handling/measuring procedures will probably shed a lot more light on this.  I would like to think that my team isn't cheating, but I wouldn't be surprised by either an innocent or a nefarious explanation of the situation.

 

Given that teams like the Chargers, Vikings, and Panthers essentially got slaps on the wrist for confirmed behavior that is just as illegal as deflation, the large fine and confiscation of draft picks from the Patriots for unconfirmed allegations was out of line and I'm still pissed at Kraft for accepting it.  The suspension of Brady is totally without precedent and should be thrown out, but I don't know how much faith I have in that given the CBA the NFLPA negotiated.

[#27TheDominator]

You;re asking a question that I cannot  answer cause i didn't do it. I agree their play will remain the same, I do not think statistically  anything is gonna be any different. A lot of you are blinded by your hate to think this issue really made a significant difference. I'm hearing countless people come out now and state how this will not impact the pats in ways some jets fans(and the author of this article) feel it will.

 

at the end of the day beat em' and you won't be so bitter at their success. (that's not directed toward anyone in particular) and save the "well if they dont cheat blah blah.."

 

Their play won't be the same.  Their secondary has significantly downgraded.

[WWWWombat]

Pats will probably win 10+ games this year regardless of a potential upholding of Brady's suspension.

[JerryK]

balderdash.

 

They'll just do something different.  And don't count on employees ratting them out next time either.  Give most humans a chance to work next to a celebrity and they'll say *nothing*.  We all suck.

[ghost_in_pads02]

Their play won't be the same. Their secondary has significantly downgraded.

1st. Secondary down grade has nothing to do w deflated balls.

2nd. They went to a superbowl with a down graded at secondary. See their 2nd appearance w the giants.

The rest of you all gonna be real upset when u see their numbers stay the same.

Cool w me.

[rillo]

Believe it when I see it.

[Jet Fan RI]

I don't follow.  The rule change went into effect at the exact same time that Moss and Welker arrived.  

 

I meant the overall decline in team fumble rate as compared with the decline in fumble rate associated with just those two players.

[Jet Fan RI]

Objective analysis of the data in the Wells Report does not show significant deflation, yet the Pats' fumble rate is statistically significantly lower than normal.  We can therefore fairly safely assume that something the Patriots do causes them to fumble less, but jumping to the conclusion that it has to be illegal ball deflation is not supported by the statistics.  There is also the wear that is intentionally put on the pigskin to make it easier to grip.  Perhaps the Patriots' equipment guys are better at that than the other teams'.  Ultimately, the data from this next season and the new NFL ball handling/measuring procedures will probably shed a lot more light on this.  I would like to think that my team isn't cheating, but I wouldn't be surprised by either an innocent or a nefarious explanation of the situation.

 

Given that teams like the Chargers, Vikings, and Panthers essentially got slaps on the wrist for confirmed behavior that is just as illegal as deflation, the large fine and confiscation of draft picks from the Patriots for unconfirmed allegations was out of line and I'm still pissed at Kraft for accepting it.  The suspension of Brady is totally without precedent and should be thrown out, but I don't know how much faith I have in that given the CBA the NFLPA negotiated.

 

Disagree. It is statistically significant. It just isn't so many sigmas off that the case is overwhelmingly definite. But it definitely falls within "more likely than not," which is the standard for cheating established in the rules.

[AFCEastFan]

I meant the overall decline in team fumble rate as compared with the decline in fumble rate associated with just those two players.

 

My point is that, for all we know, the overall decline in team fumble rate is caused entirely by the way the Patriots' offense changed upon Moss and Welker's arrival -- changes which remain in the Patriots offense today (and did not exist prior to 2007) long after Moss and Welker are both gone.  

[Jet Fan RI]

My point is that, for all we know, the overall decline in team fumble rate is caused entirely by the way the Patriots' offense changed upon Moss and Welker's arrival -- changes which remain in the Patriots offense today (and did not exist prior to 2007) long after Moss and Welker are both gone.  

 

Yes. My point though is that we will have to wait for the accumulation of data over the next few seasons before coming to a conclusion. And, by the way, if I recall the Pat fumble rate is equivalent to about one fumble every three games. This shows even more dramatically that two games is far too small a sample to show anything.

[AFCEastFan]

Yes. My point though is that we will have to wait for the accumulation of data over the next few seasons before coming to a conclusion. And, by the way, if I recall the Pat fumble rate is equivalent to about one fumble every three games. This shows even more dramatically that two games is far too small a sample to show anything.

 

Agreed and hopefully there will not be confounding factors in those upcoming seasons (e.g. injuries make Josh Boyce the team's #1 WR, Foxboro experiences a heat wave/drought during the entire regular season, Jimmy G. becomes the full time starter leading the OC to close up the offensive playbook, etc.) that will make it more difficult to draw conclusions.  

[WWWWombat]

Disagree. It is statistically significant. It just isn't so many sigmas off that the case is overwhelmingly definite. But it definitely falls within "more likely than not," which is the standard for cheating established in the rules.

 

 

If you correct for the faulty assumptions exponent made, 8 of 11 balls are above the relevant threshold:

 

http://deadspin.com/here-is-the-transcript-from-tom-bradys-appeal-hearing-1722113452

 

Update (9:20 p.m.): After a lunch break, the NFLPA questions one of their expert witnesses Edward Snyder, Dean of the Yale School of Management. His role was to evaluate the findings of Exponent, the company used by Ted Wells’s team for scientific and statistical analysis of the deflation of the footballs. Snyder gets straight to the point, and identifies a number of errors he says Exponent made:

Q. Okay. So let’s go, let’s start with your slide deck. The first slide shows your three key findings. And if you could just sort of walk the Commissioner through each of the three key findings that you made and that we will elaborate on.

A. So first finding is that their analysis of the difference in differences, the analysis of the pressure drops and the difference in the average pressure drops is wrong because Exponent did not include timing and the effects of timing in that analysis.

Secondly, Exponent looked at the variation and the measurements between the Patriots’ balls and the Colts’ balls at halftime. They compared the variances. And despite conceding that there was no statistically significant difference between the two, they went ahead and drew conclusions, but those conclusions are improper.

And, last, and this goes to the issue of alternative assumptions, as well as error, if the logo gauge was used to measure the Patriots’ balls before the game, then given what the framework that Exponent provides us with scientifically, and if the analysis is done correctly, eight of the eleven Patriots’ balls are above the relevant scientific threshold.

Update (9:30 p.m.): Man, Snyder absolutely lays waste to the report Exponent prepared for the Wells Report. For instance, here he is explaining how quickly the PSI of a football changes when being brought into a warm room after spending a few hours out in the cold, and how Exponent didn’t even bother to account for timing in their report:

Q. So let’s go to our Slide 12. And what is this showing?

A. This takes the earlier Figure 22, and I will refer to that again. It takes the top schedule, what Exponent calls their transient analysis, that’s their scientific framework.

It says, okay, you bring in a Colts’ ball. It was pre-game at 13. It’s brought right into the locker room. It’s going to be 11.87. This is, like, so 2:40 is, like, in locker room terms, it’s minute zero. And then 12 minutes later, it’s warmed up and it’s roughly 1.1 psi greater in 12 minutes.

Q. The same ball?

A. The same ball.

Q. What did Exponent do in its difference in difference analysis to account for time?

A. Nothing.

Q. How do you know?

A. Absolutely nothing. If you look at their difference in difference equation in their appendix and you look at Table A3, where they report their results, they have explanatory variables for their difference in difference analysis and time is not an explanatory variable.

You can read the Exponent report forwards, backwards, upside down. You see time referred to again and again and again and again. However, you have to look at what they actually did, the statistical analysis that they actually did. They left time out of the analysis that they said was the most important.

Update (9:45 p.m.): One of the issues in the halftime measurement of the footballs’s PSI is that two different pressure gauges were used, and one of them consistently came back with readings .3 to .4 PSI higher than the other. The Exponent report used a “master gauge adjustment” to be able to use readings from both gauges, and found that there was funny business going on with eight of the 11 balls. But Exponent made, according to Snyder, “a very basic mistake.” They used the master gauge adjustment for the halftime PSI readings, but not the pre-game PSI readings. If they had done so, they would’ve had very different findings:

Q. Let’s go to the next slide. And were you able to correct for that inconsistency that you described in Exponent’s master gauge conversion?

A. Yes. Now, the effective starting value is not 12.5, it’s 12.17.

Q. How do you get the 12.17?

A. You apply the master gauge conversion consistently to both halftime measurements, as well as the starting value.

Q. Okay. And let’s go to the next slide. And what is the impact of making that correction on the results?

A. Now eight of the Patriots’ balls are above the critical threshold predicted by Exponent, three are below.

Update (9:56 p.m.): Things got testy when Snyder was being cross-examined by the NFL:

Q. And your criticism is that Exponent didn’t take into account timing appropriately, right?

A. When they tested — when they did their difference in difference analysis, you look at the equations. If I could refer you to the appendix.

Q. It would be better if you could answer my question.

MR. GREENSPAN: And I would ask you to just let him answer the question.

MR. LEVY: Knock it off.

Update (10:13 p.m.): The Snyder cross-examination by the NFL goes in circle after circle for page after page, with Snyder and the NFL’s lawyer unable to even agree on basic terms and interpretations of the Exponent report. Eventually, Snyder gets fed up and basically calls the people that prepared the Exponent report morons:

Q. It says, “It is unlikely to have occurred by chance and further study is warranted.” And timing was studied, right?

A. And why not include timing in the original model? They have a list of variables that they include in their original model, but they excluded timing. Isn’t that the key thing here?

Why go to a side analysis and say timing is sufficient to explain everything? Put it in your original model. Come on. And, yes, I’m a member of the Econometrics Society in the past. Any graduate student in statistics or econometrics would know this is wrong. This is a restriction. This is saying timing is unimportant despite reading the Exponent report. It’s timing all over the place.

Q. Well, I would move to strike if this were in real court, but I won’t move to strike. But I’m sure Exponent will not describe their other work as a side analysis and would describe their work quite differently than you are describing it. And I think we will have the opportunity to hear from them.

Update (10:24 p.m.): I realize that in the grand scheme of this 457-page hearing transcript this is small potatoes, but I can’t get over how contemptuous Ted Snyder is of Exponent and, increasingly, the NFL’s lawyer:

Q. It says “timing.” It says, “To account for any time effect in our statistical analysis, we incorporated an order effect into our statistical model to determine whether any portion of the observed ball-to-ball variation in pressure was explained by the order of measurements.”

A. Are you just asking me is that what it states?

Q. Well, is that what it states?

A. It is. That’s what they’ve stated.

Q. And that incorporated the concept of timing into their statistical model, didn’t it?

A. No. Here’s what this did.

Q. That’s fine. I will just leave it right there.

A. I would like to explain. It’s an important point. It’s not timing. It’s order of ball measurement. That’s the so-called explanatory variable. And the variable that they are trying to explain, the so-called dependent variable, is not the difference in average pressure drop.

It’s not the difference in difference analysis. It’s ball-to-ball variation, which we know is subject to so much measurement error that I’m not surprised it doesn’t explain that.

Granted, this is an expert witness for the NFLPA, and I haven't been crunching the numbers myself, but his reasoning is sound, and it certainly sheds a little more light on why Ted Wells chose to use a firm that once claimed that secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer to do the analysis, rather than the Physics Department of an Ivy League university.

[Jet Fan RI]

Agreed and hopefully there will not be confounding factors in those upcoming seasons (e.g. injuries make Josh Boyce the team's #1 WR, Foxboro experiences a heat wave/drought during the entire regular season, Jimmy G. becomes the full time starter leading the OC to close up the offensive playbook, etc.) that will make it more difficult to draw conclusions.  

 

Yes, as Mark Twain said, there's lies, then there's damned lies, and then there's statistics. But it is suspicious that players who had extremely low fumble rates while with the Pats revert to normal stats after leaving the Pats. And it's hard to believe an offensive strategy that reduces fumble rates so effectively as you suggest would remain opaque to all other teams for so many years.