How much of Belichick's success is because of Brady ? ? ?

[ghost_in_pads02]

3 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

what ?

What are you saying? You said the numbers in the article support what you are saying...what are you saying??? Because their  fumble rating has not changed majorly this year as oppose to any other year..so how were they able to benefit from "softer" balls? When most nfl teams per the QB pefer the balls at different levels. That's been discussed and documented?

[nyjunc]

16 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

I'm not sure what you mean since the numbers below support exactly what I'm saying

 

So what happened in 2015?

• The Patriots had the fewest fumbles of any NFL offense.
• The Patriots had the best fumble rate of any NFL offense.
• The Patriots had one of their best fumble rates of the past decade.

 

yes and they did so w/ "properly inflated" footballs.  

[Smashmouth]

Just now, ghost_in_pads02 said:

What are you saying? You said the numbers in the article support are you saying...what are you saying, because there fumbling rating has not change this year as oppose to any other year..so how were they able to benefit from "softer" balls? When most nfl teams per the QB pefer the balls at different levels. That's been discussed and documented?

I'm not sure WTF you are reading but maybe you should do a little research before mouthing off.

1 minute ago, Charlie Brown said:

As one poster in the article pointed out the Pats fumble rates for this last year while the league best actually prove that they had been cheating!

To Quote him:

"The fact is that the Patriots had one fumble every 187 plays during the deflatgate years, which was almost double what the second best team had every year. Now they have a fumble rate that is consistent with the rest of of league leaders.  You can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig.  And the fact that the fumble rate per play dropped by almost 50% proves beyond a reasonable doubt that something was funky in Patriot land.  The patriots have a great team without cheating.  The fact that they have to cheat to get that little bit or in this case huge edge shows the Pats and Brady to be GUILTY!"............................

It was typical Pat behavior.  They had a good team but always tried to do more than is needed...

Disgraceful...

 

[nyjunc]

14 minutes ago, no psls said:

No Mo Lewis hit , No Brady , No Belicheat !!!!!

Brady was going to start sooner than later, BB knew his HC career was on the line.  it may have delayed the dynasty a year but they still would have become great w/ Brady.

4 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

One thing Parcells accomplished was to get his 2 teams to 3 Bowls won 2 without a HOF QB.. 

Gibbs won 3 w/o a HOF QB

 

oh and Parcells got to a 3rd w/o a HOF QB

3 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

As one poster in the article pointed out the Pats fumble rates for this last year while the league best actually prove that they had been cheating!

To Quote him:

"The fact is that the Patriots had one fumble every 187 plays during the deflatgate years, which was almost double what the second best team had every year. Now they have a fumble rate that is consistent with the rest of of league leaders.  You can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig.  And the fact that the fumble rate per play dropped by almost 50% proves beyond a reasonable doubt that something was funky in Patriot land.  The patriots have a great team without cheating.  The fact that they have to cheat to get that little bit or in this case huge edge shows the Pats and Brady to be GUILTY!"............................

It was typical Pat behavior.  They had a good team but always tried to do more than is needed...

Disgraceful...

these are all excuses, NE players don't play if they fumble.  it had nothing to do w/ a slight underinflation of footballs.  Stevan Ridley was a fumbling machine in NE when they were supposedly defalting balls.  how does this happen? In 2012 and 2013 he fumbled 8 times in 468 attempts(one every 59 attempts) and was benched.  his last 2 seasons(while injury plagued) he didn't fumble one time in 130 attempts.  By his old rate he should have fumbled twice.  

[Savage69]

2 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

As one poster in the article pointed out the Pats fumble rates for this last year while the league best actually prove that they had been cheating!

To Quote him:

"The fact is that the Patriots had one fumble every 187 plays during the deflatgate years, which was almost double what the second best team had every year. Now they have a fumble rate that is consistent with the rest of of league leaders.  You can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig.  And the fact that the fumble rate per play dropped by almost 50% proves beyond a reasonable doubt that something was funky in Patriot land.  The patriots have a great team without cheating.  The fact that they have to cheat to get that little bit or in this case huge edge shows the Pats and Brady to be GUILTY!"............................

It was typical Pat behavior.  They had a good team but always tried to do more than is needed...

Disgraceful...

Victory feels better when you cheat..

[ghost_in_pads02]

5 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

I'm not sure WTF you are reading but maybe you should do a little research before mouthing off.

 

oh that same article that wrote this..

 

There are several explanations for their continued success of hanging on to the ball, none of which have to do with deflated footballs. As explained here, the Patriots have consistently led the league in plays that are associated with low fumble rates, including kneel downs, plays in opponent territory, and plays when holding a lead. Related, the Patriots, Broncos, and Panthers—three teams that went a combined 39-9 in 2015—finished first, fourth and fifth, respectively, in plays per fumble. 

 

 

 

Am i still "mouthing off" ?

[Smashmouth]

While speculation exists that Deflate-gate was a one-time occurrence, data I introduced last week indicated that the phenomena may have been an ongoing, long-standing issue for the Patriots.  Today, that possibility looks as clear as day.

Initially, looking at weather data, I noticed the Patriots have performed extremely well in the rain, much better than projected.  I followed that up by looking at the fumble data, which showed regardless of weather or site, the Patriots' prevention of fumbles was nearly impossible.  Both studies saw the same exact starting point: 2007 was the first season where things really changed for the Patriots. 

 

Data also shows that the same players have fumbled with far less frequency when playing for New England than when playing for other teams.

I wanted to compare the Patriots’ fumble rate from 2000, when Bill Belichick first arrived in New England, to the rest of the NFL.  I found in my prior research that dome teams fumble substantially less frequently, given they play eight-plus games out of the elements each year.  To keep every team on a more level playing field, I eliminated dome teams from the analysis, grabbed only regular-season games and defined plays as pass attempts+rushes+times sacked.  The below results also look only at total fumbles, not just fumbles lost.  This brought us to the ability to capture touches per fumble.

To confirm something has been dramatically different in New England, starting in 2007 through present, I compared the 2000-06 time period (when Belichick was the Pats head coach and they won all of their Super Bowls) to 2007-14.  The results speak for themselves:

The data is jaw dropping, and this visual perfectly depicts what happened.  From a more technical perspective, John Candido, a Data Scientist at ZestFinance who is a colleague of mine over at NFLproject.com and was also involved in the development of this research, comments:

“Based on the assumption that plays per fumble follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten since 2007 once in 5842 instances.

“Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0001711874 probability to win. In other words, it’s very unlikely that results this abnormal are only due to the endogenous nature of the game.”

Many of the arguments giving the Patriots the benefit of the doubt are evaporating.  While this data does not prove they deflated footballs starting in 2007, in 2006, Tom Brady (and Peyton Manning) lobbied in favor of changing an NFL rule, and the league agreed to change policies. Brady wanted the NFL to let every team provide its own footballs to use on offense. Prior to that year, the home team provided all the footballs, meaning the home quarterback selected the footballs the road quarterback would play with on offense.

(This is something I found out after I performed the first two analyses, both of which independently found that something changed starting in 2007.)

When pushing for the change, Brady said, “The thing is, every quarterback likes it a little bit different. Some like them blown up a little bit more, some like them a little more thin, some like them a little more new, some like them really broken in.”

This information, when combined with the data above, is compelling.  Not only can you see the change when aggregating the data into periods of 2000-06 and 2007-14, you can also clearly see how it occurs on the following two graphs.  The data is the same, but details are added in the second graph to provide additional information and context:

Once again, a key takeaway is obvious: prior to 2007, the Patriots were in line with league averages across the other non-dome teams.  They were literally in the middle of the pack for most seasons, as the histogram in the very first graphic at the top of this article shows.  But starting in 2007, the similarities vanish.

The statistical jump the Patriots made in the 2006 offseason, from one fumble every 39 plays to one fumble every 76 plays, is nothing short of remarkable.  Their trendline over this period is not even close to that of the rest of the NFL.

The 2013 season is an oddity in that the Patriots were actually slightly worse than the rest of the NFL.  A likely reason: of the Patriots’ 23 fumbles that season, six (over 25 percent) occurred in a Sunday night game vs. the Broncos played in 22 degree weather, with 22 mph winds and a wind chill of 6 degrees.  Cold conditions of this nature cause more fumbles than usual.  They fumbled a total of five times in 11 of their 16 games in 2013, and the Week 12 game vs. Denver and Week 17 game vs. the Bills -- in which they fumbled four times -- skews that season’s fumble rates.  This is exactly why looking at small sample sets, such as single seasons, is not the preferred manner to investigate this analysis.

There are many arguments which have been raised about why the Patriots don’t fumble as often as other teams.  Many of them are simply factually incorrect.  If it was coaching, former players should be able to tell us that Belichick suddenly and drastically changed the way he instructed players to carry the football in the 2006 offseason.  But the data shows that if mysterious trade secret was delivered, the players forgot about it when they left New England, as their individual fumble rates became drastically worse when playing for other NFL teams.

Something happened in New England just before the 2007 season, and it changed this team.  While NFL teams apparently are complaining to the league that they felt the Patriots played with deflated footballs during the 2014 season and postseason, investigations into those allegations would be wise to reference my research herein and begin the investigation in the 2006.

I reiterate, this analysis cannot say it was, undoubtedly, illegal football deflation that caused the data abnormalities.  But it does conclude that something changed, and it was not the result of simple random fluctuation.

[ghost_in_pads02]

Ha ha...the NFL should use this articles' data and investigate and arrest the New England Patriots for deflating footballs...oh man this stuff is too funny.

 

Goodell get on it!

[Smashmouth]

and FWIW the NFL should provide the footballs for games not Peyton Manning Tom Brady and the rest of the NFL prima donna QB's .... Peyton and Brady changed a rule that should never have been ruled in their favor .... The NFL should have taken control of the situation and inflated every ball to the same PSI across the board and provided the footballs for each game each week  

[Smashmouth]

1 minute ago, ghost_in_pads02 said:

Ha ha...the NFL should use this articles' data and investigate and arrest the New England Patriots for deflating footballs...oh man this stuff is too funny.

 

Goodell get on it!

the article makes total sense and TBH I'm not sure if you even read it, or could read it and fully understand it.

[JustInFudge]

26 minutes ago, ghost_in_pads02 said:

??? what exactly is your question. I think you are fishing for something that is not there. I do not or can't remember if it's the SI numbers or some place else. But those numbers came out and there was no difference in rating any other year prior or post. So once again blowing situation way out of proportion. 

 

 

and BB and Brady's success goes hand and hand..they both benefit off of each other, just like any other Great QB with a great coach.

 

 

[Smashmouth]

19 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

yes and they did so w/ "properly inflated" footballs.  

nyjunc I didn't pay attention to the date but that was not the article I referring too. My mistake

 

[ghost_in_pads02]

14 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

the article makes total sense and TBH I'm not sure if you even read it, or could read it and fully understand it.

Yes..because I'm not like you asking for handcuffs on the pats I now can't comprehend what i read....got cha.

 

if you are looking for sh*t, you are going to find it. I'm sorry, i'm just not going be like you and scream out AHH  THIS ARTICLE proves the pats cheated, when soooo many factors play into fumble ratings (as the article also states)...you and like almost every other jet fan will NEVER be unbiased to that....soooo i'm just gonna continue to shrug my shoulders and laugh at how mad you guys gets.

funny thing is...i believe Brady knew about the balls being tempered with...BUT overall it wasnt as big as certain folks make it out to be....oh well.

[Klecko73isGod]

Percent owed to Brady - 60%

Percent owed to cheating - 40%

Next question. 

[The Crusher]

3 minutes ago, Klecko73isGod said:

Percent owed to Brady - 60%

Percent owed to cheating - 40%

Next question. 

Been waiting for you since I saw the thread title.  So far so good. 

[Klecko73isGod]

3 minutes ago, The Crusher said:

Been waiting for you since I saw the thread title.  So far so good. 

I answered the question. There's really nothing left to discuss, unless you are drunk, bloated Ben Affleck. 

[RutgersJetFan]

Patriots success:

Belichick: 0%

Brady: 0%

Cheating: 99.9%

Profits from Wahlberg franchises: .1%

[Larz]

the real question is where is bill "league's highest fine for cheating" belicheat without ernie adams

[jett]

All of it and I don't care who thjnks otherwise. Belichick is a defensive guy right? How come his defenses have sucked since 2004. His drafts stinks to. 

[PatsFanTX]

All of it and I don't care who thjnks otherwise. Belichick is a defensive guy right? How come his defenses have sucked since 2004. His drafts stinks to. 

Yea, all those lousy defenses and terrible draft picks have only led to 8 straight AFCE titles and 5 straight AFCCG appearances.

Pats should fire this loser tomorrow.

[Villain The Foe]

I remember this. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DjCANMvs-Y

[Jet Nut]

30 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

Yea, all those lousy defenses and terrible draft picks have only led to 8 straight AFCE titles and 5 straight AFCCG appearances.

Pats should fire this loser tomorrow.

Which would back his claim that its all Tommy boy

[PatsFanTX]

Which would back his claim that its all Tommy boy

You mean the guy BB drafted and developed?

[PFSIKH]

9 hours ago, nyjunc said:

I saw the excuse making cleveland 1995 thing.  He was terrible in cleveland and started off terrible in NE, there were already rumblings about job security in 2001.  they started 0-2 including losing to a bad Bengal team then magically Brady steps in and they win 11 of 14 en route to a SB.

he had a plan? what was it a 15 year plan? he was there 5 years w/ 1 playoff app and 1 WC playoff win.

the team stunk long before the announcement was made, that was an excuse.

in cleveland the plan clearly was NOT working, if it was working he never gets fired.  5 seasons in, took 4 seasons to make playoffs, missed the playoffs again the following year. It only took Bruce Coslet 2 seasons in a much WORSE situation to get to the playoffs.  he was an awful HC, Brady stepping in allowed him to grow into becoming a great HC.

I forgot.  Everything operates in a vacuum with you.  Everything is equal.

Ignoring the fact he took over a horrible team in Cleveland.  The Cleveland team he took over had less wins (3 < 4), gave up more points and scored less than the Jets team Coslett took over.  And Coslett backed into the playoffs with an 8-8 record.   That was the high water mark and never won a playoff game.   Yeah, his job was easier.  Did the Jets hang a Wildcard banner?

"Rumblings about job security", according to who?  The interwebz?  Is this the same media that said he lost the team after cutting MIlloy?  Again, if you actually paid attention to the "Cleveland 1995", there was a plan.  It is in the show, but whatever. 

[Larz]

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, PatsFanTX said:

You mean the guy BB drafted and developed?

You have no proof that mr. Defense developed him.  Still it's on the QB

[PatsFanTX]

You have no proof that mr. Defense developed him.  Still it's on the QB

That's pretty funny.

[Jet Nut]

20 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

That's pretty funny.

Not as funny as a Jets fan who switches to a Pats fan and spends his every waking moment trolling a Jets board.  

Now that's funny. And maybe the case of the worst fan ever.  Says a lot on many levels. 

[Jetsplayer21]

I think they will retire together.. Afraid to chance their legacy without one another 

[devland]

10 hours ago, no psls said:

No Mo Lewis hit , No Brady , No Belicheat !!!!!

Not so.  I has been reported many times that Belichick wanted to start Brady from the start of the season.  He was hesitant because of the backlash he took in Cleveland over replacing local boy Bernie Kosar and also was pressured by Patriots management to give Bledsoe some more time because of his salary and stature as former high draft pick.  Parcells has even said that Belichick raved to him about Brady and told him he wanted to start Brady when they talked in the preseason.  BTW What has Parcells won without Belichick on his staff?

[devland]

2 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

You have no proof that mr. Defense developed him.  Still it's on the QB

Belichick did keep him on the active roster, as a fourth string QB, his rookie year to avoid other teams claiming him (an unprecedented move).   The knock on Brady coming out of college was his lack of body mass.  The Patriots spent his rookie year building him up.

[Tinstar]

6 hours ago, devland said:

Belichick did keep him on the active roster, as a fourth string QB, his rookie year to avoid other teams claiming him (an unprecedented move).   The knock on Brady coming out of college was his lack of body mass.  The Patriots spent his rookie year building him up.

what with

[sourceworx]

Bill Belichick: Norv Turner with a QB. 

[PatsFanTX]

Bill Belichick: Norv Turner with a QB. 

Maybe Norv should have drafted one like BB did.

[sourceworx]

1 hour ago, PatsFanTX said:

Maybe Norv should have stepped in sh!t like BB did.

Fixed