Stephanie Stradley

Discussion in 'Sports' started by Jon, Feb 26, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jon

    Jon Official Thread Killer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Posts:
    16,140

    -Return to Top-

    So I was reading an article today from a well respected lawyer in Houston who wrote in response to the Peter King article Monday about how the NFL should return the draft picks from the Deflategate punishment to the Patriots.

    http://www.stradleylaw.com/patriots-draft-picks/

    That's the article if you're interested. It's incredibly well written and formed. Easy to follow and hits home on nearly every point. While I agree with both her an Peter King's standpoint (that they should be given the picks back, but won't), I find the real gold to be in one of her replies to comments. Stradley takes the time to reply to most all comments on her blog... which I find amazing in and of itself. Thing is, I could regurgitate everything as to why I feel that she is right, but you'll see it should you choose to read the article. Here's what one of the comments said, that I found particularly powerful:

    Q: "At the risk of stating the obvious and re-hashing old ground, I think it's clear that this exercise was planned and designed to end in a guilty verdict right from the start. NFL declares that the found evidence of cheating on Sunday. By Monday it's obvious that nobody in the NFL FO understands gas laws.
    A fair response would be to admit there is no evidence and withdraw accusations.
    A fair response would get Mike Kensil, Troy Vincent, and possibly even Roger Goodell fired.
    The entire exercise reeks of "Wag the Dog" behavior. A commissioner with record low approval ratings points the majority of NFL fans at the Patriots and says "Hate them instead! They cheated again!"
    A year later there's only so much we can do in terms of damage control.

    Thanks for writing this - it's much more effective than Peter King. Sadly the mainstream media writers are simply unwilling to address the fact that the text messages here really do not constitute a meaningful amount of evidence, not when weighed against the scientific evidence. And the text message saying that the footballs should be at 13 psi. And Brady's testimony under oath. Etc."

    A: "1. I don't think of organizations as monoliths. There are people of varying ablities, all trying to do their job the best they can within their own abilities without getting fired or yelled at too much. I hate to second guess this stuff because I know how difficult it is during a public controversy to figure out what is what. The "fog of war" is a real thing but not just during war.

    It may be further complicated by Roger Goodell's reported leadership temperament. He is reputed to be attentive to his bosses but very angry and demanding in dealing with underlings. That leadership style, if true, has a tendency for people being afraid to tell the truth or do things they think the boss won't like, even if it is the right thing to do.

    I know I keep going back to process. Process issues aren't interesting to people. But when you have a bad process, it doesn't matter how well intentioned people are, there aren't the sort of checks that stop a bad result from happening. In this case, if you have a process where it is impossible to prove your innocence, well then, you are going to punish people based on poor to no evidence.

    I would love to know more about Mike Kensil's involvement with this situation, specifically regarding leaks. NFL personnel are not supposed to leak information. I doubt we ever get a good explanation of the internal failures of how Deflategate was handled. Goodell said it would be covered by the Wells Report, but not really. We got more than we thought we would when Judge Berman opened up the arbitration records.


    2. I do not think my writing is more effective than Peter King's. He has much greater reach and more influence. He is also writing as a generalist, which is very difficult to do. And he wrote his piece to an audience that is very skeptical to this subject.

    His argument is basically, okay there's all this blurgh out there that people debate about. Even if you believe all that blurgh, it is unconscionable that the NFL had the ability to know what happens to ball pressure in cold weather in practical terms and chose not to measure that or share that information. How can you punish a team for something that may not have happened? It is consistent with his earlier argument that the science evidence was poor, so why not postpone punishment until you have better information?

    And I'm glad he raised that issue. Because pretty much most people are acting like punishing teams/fans/players this severely based on no or poor evidence is a totally normal thing to do. And likely people are acting that way because they know Roger Goodell will do nothing about it.

    I wrote my piece because I thought he raised good points but that I had a more specialized background to construct a better argument for his point of view. I don't think my point of view is easily debateable, and if someone debated me on it in a fair setting, they would lose. I specialize in writing common sense things that are aren't commonly articulated but are difficult to argue with. Mostly because I enjoy finding common understandings between people who disagree on things.

    I also think that the fan dynamic works against fanbases who think they were hosed. It is difficult to even raise Deflategate issues on social media because the anger is so bad, and so overwhelming, that some journos would prefer not to mess with the subject. They don't want to write about lawyer bleeblah stuff and go through lots of documents. That, isn't a fact, just a theory.
    "

    Good stuff. If you don't enjoy legal things, probably not an article or comments section for you. But I do, and the legality of things is why I've believed what I have about Deflategate all along. Not due to being a homer like I'm accused of. I'd have the same feeling if this were any other team. And I fear that this is the precedent the NFL/Goodell is trying to set in motion. If this were to happen to any other team other than the Patriots, would there be as much vitriol? I sincerely doubt it. Personally, I am excited for March 3rd. :shrug:
     
  2. Fool's Requiem

    Fool's Requiem Is that a pro Genji?! Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2003
    Posts:
    14,292

    -Return to Top-

    [​IMG]

    Seriously though, even if Brady wasn't involved (unlikely), those balls were still deflated by people formerly attached to the team and they allowed it to happen.

    It's one pick, it's not like they're going to draft anyone that can help their running game anyways, as they seem to not give two shits about a running game.
     
  3. Jon

    Jon Official Thread Killer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Posts:
    16,140

    -Return to Top-

    Also...

    Q: "Thanks, Stephanie,

    The next team that is accused (hopefully not yours) should attack back -- saying the NFL has a history of releasing fall information, lying in issuing punishments and paying for the science results they want.

    Just like the Patriots were accused of pattern, so will the NFL."

    A: "OK, how do you "attack back" when Goodell has no guidance for punishment other than how he feels about the situation? If he seems to punish folks worse when they "do not acknowledge their actions," "do not show meaningful remorse," "substantially" or "fully" cooperate but in the judgment of his mind it is not enough, how do you push back from this? The Patriots did a "Wells Report in Context" and the NFL ignored the whole thing. There are also rules against taking certain disputes public between teams and the NFL.

    When looking at a legal subject, I often put myself in the shoes of the various parties. I don't know what good legal advice you can give a team when dealing with a powerful entity that has no true governors other than how he feels that day. No approach has seemed to work if things start revving up into a -Gate."

    Hammer, meet nail. I like this woman.

    Anyway...

    No, you don't have to read it. It was just perspective on my end.

    The balls were not proven tampered with, that's the issue. If the balls were inflated to 12.5 PSI, every one of them fell within the ideal gas law numbers, save for one, which was around .2 PSI too low. And it's more likely that one ball was an outlier than manually deflated. As long as you look with an open mind, the evidence was circumstantial at best. But I don't want to devolve this into a circumstantial evidence argument. Everyone can believe what they want. I just wanted to post what I thought was a very good article.

    As for the pick, take a look at the Patriots 1st rounders under Belichick and tell me which ones were not serviceable NFL players of better for multiple years? There's one or two (I personally think Brandon Merriweather was serviceable, others do not). That first rounder doesn't need to be a RB, and should not be. Get someone in FA (like Matt Forte). I'd rather the pick be used on a big, strong outside receiver (I'm of the ilk that really wants Josh Gordon here and think a change to a place like NE will change him dramatically; and he fills a major need on that team), DB or LB... By the time the Patriots pick, there won't likely be an impact player there (though Belichick finds gems in the 2nd and 3rd rounds). Don't delude yourself to thinking the pick isn't important. It really is. As is the 4th rounder next year.
     
  4. shortkut

    shortkut idea man Moderator Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Posts:
    34,799

    -Return to Top-

    i think bill nye proved they didn't follow the ideal gas law
     
  5. Jon

    Jon Official Thread Killer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Posts:
    16,140

    -Return to Top-

    That makes me smile every time. For a scientist (and one whose show I enjoyed as a kid), he really looked foolish.
     
  6. Fool's Requiem

    Fool's Requiem Is that a pro Genji?! Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2003
    Posts:
    14,292

    -Return to Top-

    So because he refutes the "scientific" bullshit that Billichek spewed out, Nye looks foolish? Seems legit...
     
  7. Jon

    Jon Official Thread Killer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Posts:
    16,140

    -Return to Top-

    Considering the "science" Nye spewed out was scientifically wrong, I'd say yes, it's legit. Nye didn't debunk anything. He, too, completely ignored the ideal gas law. He basically said that the only way footballs lose air pressure is by sticking a needle in them.

    Had he refuted it using real science (and no one has been able to do so, not just Nye), then I'm happy to listen. Until then, his closing "Go Seahawks" spoke more to his agenda than any "facts" he stated.
     
  8. shortkut

    shortkut idea man Moderator Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Posts:
    34,799

    -Return to Top-

    if you believe that then you're an idiot. the needle comment was in response to bellishit claiming rubbing the footballs artificially raised their pressure. the only way for the ideal gas law alone to lower the pressure by that amount would be if the patriots inflated the footballs using air that was 90°F. If they did that, then it was done deliberately to have the balls deflate in the 50°F temperature the game was played at.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-nye-and-neil-degrasse-tyson-on-deflategate-2015-1

    Neil degrasse tyson: "Using the (correct) gauge pressure in the calculation reduces the needed inflation temperature to about 90-degrees for that effect"
    "neither temperature absolves the NE Patriots even as we all know that the NE Patriots, in their 45 to 7 victory over the Colts, would have won the game no matter the ball pressure."

    "Rubbing the football won't change the pressure, Nye said. You would need an inflation needle to do that."
     
  9. Fool's Requiem

    Fool's Requiem Is that a pro Genji?! Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2003
    Posts:
    14,292

    -Return to Top-



    It may be Funny or Die, but still... Basically, the temperature change from the locker room to outside wouldn't have made a difference over a matter of a couple hours. A couple months, then maybe. Belichick tried to use science mumbo-jumbo to catch the journalists and all of the dumb jocks out there but didn't take into account people who actually know this stuff calling him out on his bullshit.

    Then you've got people like Jon here who think that a football coach knows more about science than someone who actually graduated college with a Bachelor of Science.

    BTW, Belichick graduated with a degree in economics.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2016
  10. Alu

    Alu Alu sucks Super Moderator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2000
    Posts:
    31,577

    -Return to Top-

    And this is an MIT professor (starts the video off by saying he's an Eagles fan who does not enjoy the Patriots) who walks it through start to finish showing it never actually happened.



    Pretty sure he's more qualified than Bill Nye. Also that's the 15 minute version of it, the full 90 minute lecture is also online.


    Edit: anyone who said the pressure of the ball wouldn't change as dramatically as it did in that environment was using the original numbers that were "calculated" where the ideal gas law was used incorrectly (which is stated in the link kut posts) in combination of the incorrect values on the pressures of the balls being released (where it was originally stated as "more than 2 lbs on every ball" which was very much so not the case). Tyson actually needed to correct his original tweet (in kut's link) because he did the math wrong, and even then it was months before the actual numbers were released. Anything showing math that was done prior to the official investigation report (not for months after the Super Bowl, and therefore well after the article) was using incorrect numbers and needs to be thrown out.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2016
  11. Fool's Requiem

    Fool's Requiem Is that a pro Genji?! Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2003
    Posts:
    14,292

    -Return to Top-

    I stopped when he started talking about the Ice Bowl and about how no one else noticed anything. No one noticed anything because those balls were rock solid because it was -13 fucking degrees.

    Also, maybe the reason the Colts' balls didn't follow this so called "ideal gas" law like the guy claimed is because maybe they realized the balls were close to that limit and didn't want to risk the wrath of the NFL. I really doubt the balls would have had such a dramatic change in PSI simply because they took the balls from a 70 degree temperature room to 50 outdoor weather for only a couple hours.
     
  12. The Eye in the Sky!

    The Eye in the Sky! That guy eating pie Moderator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2001
    Posts:
    24,798

    -Return to Top-

    Why is this still a thing? It needs to stop. Hurry, baseball, distract everyone!
     
  13. shortkut

    shortkut idea man Moderator Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Posts:
    34,799

    -Return to Top-

    because jon is still trying to prove belichick knows everything and does everything for a reason, like throwing that game earlier this season
     
  14. Jon

    Jon Official Thread Killer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Posts:
    16,140

    -Return to Top-

    Wait, when did I ever say that here? I said that Bill Nye claiming the ideal gas law wasn't real was flawed science. I never even mentioned Belichick here other than to say he has made serviceable NFL picks in the first round! I never once said anything about Belichick or his science being right about Deflategate in this topic.

    I know what you all think of me, but seriously, what's the point in chastising my every word and now starting to put words into my mouth? I may cheer for the Patriots, but I'm capable, and do, look at things objectively, whether you choose to believe it or not.

    I know Deflategate is a sensitive subject and every single non-Patriot fan is just BRUTAL to every Patriot fan when they even remotely support their team, but I did say I had no desire to turn this into another argument, and all I wanted was to post about an article I found interesting. You guys are devolving this into another "let's get Jon and post how stupid he is" thread.

    As much as I would love to reply to the responses regarding the science here, I won't because of what I said above. Since I foolishly thought I could make a post about deflategate and not get lambasted for it, @Apollo can you or any other mod please close this thread. Obviously, I thought wrong about the potential civility here...
     
  15. Alu

    Alu Alu sucks Super Moderator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2000
    Posts:
    31,577

    -Return to Top-

    Because I can post in closed threads...

    Maybe you should actually watch the video. He goes through the reasoning behind the Colts balls too and show how those also follow the ideal gas law. Literally all the math behind everything is shown in the video. This was an actual lecture given more than once where everyone in the room was asked to do their own calculations.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.