NFL statement on Deflate-Gate
Here’s what the league had to say:
“While the evidence thus far supports the conclusion that footballs that were under-inflated were used by the Patriots in the first half, the footballs were properly inflated for the second half and confirmed at the conclusion of the game to have remained properly inflated,” a written statement from the NFL said.
“The goals of the investigation will be to determine the explanation for why footballs used in the game were not in compliance with the playing rules and specifically whether any noncompliance was the result of deliberate action,” the statement went on. “We have not made any judgments on these points and will not do so until we have concluded our investigation and considered all of the relevant evidence.”
Denials from Belichick, Brady
So this is moving apace and they would seem to be aiming to find out who did the under-inflating. It is known that the balls were signed off on by the refs as weighing between 12.5 and 13.5 psi (pounds per square inch) as the rules state they must be, before the game. So it seems certain tampering occurred.
The big names in the Pats organization, coach Bill Belichick and quarterback Tom Brady, who had the advantage of throwing under-inflated footballs in the cold, denied knowing anything about it. Some doubt their claims. Former linebacker for New England Ted Johnson, who won three Super Bowls with the Pats, told a Sports Radio show in Vancouver that the reason Belichick is such a great coach is he knows everything that goes on relating to his team. Johnson said his former-coach would surely have known about the process of how the balls were readied and if they were under-inflated.
With the Superbowl but a week away, the Patriots and the NFL would like to see the whole thing blow over. But it now appears it will not be over in time for the residue to dissipate before the game, unless the reason the balls were underinflated is innocent and it is discovered in the next few days.
Footballs deflated for a reason
At any rate, over the past few days in columns and on sports radio the most prevalent opinion is that it did not make a difference, given the score of the game and given how it was closer at the completion of the first half, when the Pats were up by just 17-7. Former NFL kicker Mitch Berger, who won a Super Bowl with the Pittsburgh Steelers in 2008, went so far as to say the Patriots would have won with Brady throwing a slippery bar of soap.
Others maintain that if the balls were intentionally altered, it was done for a reason. A softer ball, easier to both throw and catch, especially given the cold and rainy conditions that day, is unquestionably an advantage.
Annissa Remirez, a material scientist who wrote the book Newton’s Football about the science of football, said this week that under-inflated balls, from a scientific points of view, does play to the advantage of the team who is throwing and catching them.
“Deflating the ball does give a team an advantage,” she said. “Particularly during that game which was very rainy, it’s hard to hold the ball, it’s hard to catch the ball. So by making it a little softer, it’s easier to catch the ball.”
If it contributed to drives that lead to touchdowns, and arguably it did, then the alteration of the balls is very serious business indeed. After all, one ball thrown with less accuracy, or one catch not made, in one of those first half drives for points could have left the score 10-7 going into the break. That leaves the Colts with a much smaller mountain to climb.
Really though, bottom line, if those balls were intentionally altered then it was done for a reason. To give Brady and his receivers an advantage over Andrew Luck and his receivers. Which means it was done to, through cheating, gain a competitive edge over the visitors.
Shouldn’t that warrant a meaningful punishment?
