Well, AH fan???? Who is it?
-
AH_Fan — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 08:43 PM)
Even you have to admit that the NFL should at least reveal what the Steelers pregame PSI measurements were and what the post game measurements were.
No, if the PSIs are within the legal limits, then the NFL doesn't need to reveal what the PSI measurements were because everybody knows what the maximum and minimum limits are so if the PSIs are within the legal limits then we know that the PSIs were between the minimum and maximum limits. As for how close they were to the limit, that would be irrelevant as long as the PSIs are on the correct side of the limit.
Even you have to admit that the NFL should at least reveal what the Steelers pregame PSI measurements were and what the post game measurements were.
No, if the PSIs are within the legal limits, then the NFL doesn't need to reveal what the PSI measurements were because everybody knows what the maximum and minimum limits are so if the PSIs are within the legal limits then we know that the PSIs were between the minimum and maximum limits. As for how close they were to the limit, that would be irrelevant as long as the PSIs are on the correct side of the limit. -
ctown28 — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 08:53 PM)
So we are just to take their word for it despite their claim of transparency? If they are within the legal limit, prove it.
Now let's use your previous speeding ticket analogy, if someone is within the limit, the results of the radar gun are not revealed. That is, of course, unless there is reason to suspect that a violation occurred. That's the case here. There's reason to suspect it, so if the NFL had any integrity, they would release the measurements. -
AH_Fan — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 09:41 PM)
So we are just to take their word for it despite their claim of transparency? If they are within the legal limit, prove it.
If the NFL provided the PSI measurements and the PSI measurements were within the legal limit, you pats fans wouldn't accept that as factual anyway. So there's no point in the NFL releasing the PSI measurements.
if someone is within the limit, the results of the radar gun are not revealed.
That's correct. And if the PSIs are within the legal limit, there's no need to release the exact PSI measurements because everybody knows what the minimum and maximum limits are so if the PSIs are within the legal limit then we know that the PSIs are between the minimum and maximum limits. -
AH_Fan — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 09:59 PM)
The story is a complete fabrication. The Giants didn't even make a complaint.
So the Pats fabricated the whole story so that they could use their old excuse that other teams cheat too? That's as bad as Ryan Lochte's fabricated story about being held up at gunpoint. -
-
DamnGumby — 9 years ago(December 12, 2016 09:49 AM)
I didn't say it was the Pats that fabricated the story.
AH_fag can't get
anything
right. It's just one fail after another.
It was the news agency that reported that the Giants made a complaint.
From what I have read, the Giants
informed
the NFL of the deflated footballs but the league said they didn't submit a
formal
complaint which, apparently, gets them off the hook from going full retard on the Steelers, like they did with the Patriots.
The integrity of the league is safe! because the Giants didn't fill out the proper paperwork?
Why does a rough and tumble sport of men have such whiny pantywaists for fans? -
ctown28 — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 10:03 PM)
If the NFL provided the PSI measurements and the PSI measurements were within the legal limit, you pats fans wouldn't accept that as factual anyway. So there's no point in the NFL releasing the PSI measurements.
So now you are gonna resort to the you wouldn't believe me if I showed you defense?
if someone is within the limit, the results of the radar gun are not revealed.
That's correct. And if the PSIs are within the legal limit, there's no need to release the exact PSI measurements because everybody knows what the minimum and maximum limits are so if the PSIs are within the legal limit then we know that the PSIs are between the minimum and maximum limits.
How about quoting my entire post in context. I notice you left out the part where an accusation is made.
The NFL claims they record it all now since deflategate. So why not release the recordings. Or are those recordings estrogen once they determine everything is on the up and up since there's no reason to keep them -
PatriotsRchamps — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 10:47 PM)
As for how close they were to the limit, that would be irrelevant as long as the PSIs are on the correct side of the limit.
Obviously, the NFL is withholding PSI information because it doesn't want to address the issue of how much a football naturally deflates during the course of a game in cold weather. If the Steelers footballs started at 12.5 and showed no decrease at all, then something would definitely be wrong because in last week's cold weather there should have been some deflation.
It's mind-bogglingly stupid that the NFL asserted in the Wells Report that footballs deflate in cold weather and yet the NFL rules remain the same so that if a football starts at 12.5 and is used in a cold weather game THEN ALL OF THOSE TEAMS are in violation because there would be some deflation below the legal limit.
Either the NFL lied in the Wells Report about cold weather causing deflation, or the NFL is lying now about all teams being in compliance. Certainly, some teams inflate their balls at 12.5 and in doing so must be in violation during cold weather games if deflation occurs as described in the Wells Report. -
PatriotsRchamps — 9 years ago(January 01, 2017 10:24 PM)
it's not who has the #1 seed now. It's who has the #1 seed after Week 17.
Well, what do you have to say for yourself now, AHfan? Week 17 is over and the Pats have the number 1 seed. When this has occurred in the past, the Pats usually have gone to the Super Bowl. Do you want to revise your SB prediction?
Brady for MVP!! -
AH_Fan — 9 years ago(January 01, 2017 10:30 PM)
the Pats have the number 1 seed
LOL!!! You seem to be under the delusional impression that the AFC's #1 seed is relevant. It isn't, because the Cowboys will just demolish whichever team comes out of the AFC, just like the Cowboys did when they went to the Super Bowl in the 1990s.
When this has occurred in the past, the Pats usually have gone to the Super Bowl.
Except 2010, when the Pats were (wait for it ) 14-2 (same as this season) and went 1-and-done in the playoffs.
Do you want to revise your SB prediction?
Nope. I've had the Cowboys for a couple of months now and I see no reason at all to revise that. -
AH_Fan — 9 years ago(January 01, 2017 10:41 PM)
Lol Brady and the Patriots are on the way to #5
LOL!!! The Cowboys are on the way to #6.
To quote LeBron: "Not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5". 6! Going to need both hands to keep count of the Cowboys' Super Bowl wins. -
PatriotsRchamps — 9 years ago(February 10, 2017 11:02 AM)
LOL!!! The Cowboys are on the way to #6.
To quote LeBron: "Not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5". 6! Going to need both hands to keep count of the Cowboys' Super Bowl wins.
I love the irony in your erroneous Super Bowl prediction.
Actually, AHfan, it's Tom Brady and the Patriots who are on their way to #6 next season. They will need both hands to count their Super Bowl wins. -
AH_Fan — 9 years ago(February 10, 2017 06:04 PM)
the Patriots who are on their way to #6 next season.
Nope. The Patriots were just lucky this season that they didn't have to play against the Cowboys because the Cowboys wouldn't have collapsed like the Falcons did. And even with a weak opponent like the Falcons, the Patriots still needed help from the refs to miss an obvious facemask call that would've allowed the Falcons to kick a game-clinching FG and put the game out of reach late in the 4th quarter.
Next season, the Cowboys will win their 6th Super Bowl and tie the Steelers. -
PatriotsRchamps — 9 years ago(February 11, 2017 02:14 PM)
And even with a weak opponent like the Falcons, the Patriots still needed help from the refs to miss an obvious facemask call that would've allowed the Falcons to kick a game-clinching FG and put the game out of reach late in the 4th quarter.
The Falcons had the number one offense in the NFL, so how can you describe them as a weak opponent? Also, the Falcons demolished Seattle and Green Bay so clearly they cannot be described as a weak Super Bowl contender.
You are so biased! You're cherry picking bad calls by the referees. Why don't you mention the two defensive holding penalties in the fourth quarter against the Falcons that Joe Buck and Troy Aikman described as obvious missed calls by the referees? The bottom line is that the Patriots overcame mistakes by the referees and the Falcons failed to do so. You can keep making excuses but we all know that the Patriots showed more resiliency than the Falcons.
BTW. When the Patriots win the Super Bowl next year, that will make it 3 SB championships in 4 years. And you will have to live with everyone calling it "another Patriots dynasty". LOL. -
AH_Fan — 9 years ago(February 11, 2017 03:01 PM)
how can you describe them as a weak opponent?
The Falcons were #25 in the NFL in yards allowed and #27 in the NFL in points allowed. That's really weak. The Falcons were 1 of the worst defensive teams to ever play in a Super Bowl. It's a mystery how the Patriots were so inept that they were held without a TD in the 1st half against such an atrocious defensive team.
You are so biased! You're cherry picking bad calls by the referees. Why don't you mention the two defensive holding penalties in the fourth quarter against the Falcons that Joe Buck and Troy Aikman described as obvious missed calls by the referees?
Because those defensive holding calls didn't affect the game. The Patriots still scored on those 2 drives so there was no negative effect from those 2 defensive holding calls not being called.
But the easy and obvious facemask that wasn't called changed the outcome of the game. If the refs had called the obvious facemask penalty, then the Falcons would've had a chance to kick a game-clinching FG to put the game out of reach late in the 4th quarter. By not calling the obvious facemask penalty, that had a negative effect on the game by changing the outcome of the game and helping the Patriots win.
we all know that the Patriots showed more resiliency than the Falcons.
It's not resiliency at all when the refs help you win. Great teams don't need help from the refs to win the Super Bowl. The Cowboys never needed any help from the refs to win their Super Bowls. The Cowboys won on their own merits, winning each of their 5 Super Bowls by double-digit margins.
The average margin of victory in the Cowboys' 5 Super Bowl wins was 20 ppg. That is just incredible domination. The Cowboys didn't just squeak out 1-possession wins. The Cowboys dominated and destroyed their opponents in those Super Bowl wins.
Like I said in my previous post, the Patriots got a lucky break by not having to play against the Cowboys this year because the Cowboys would've destroyed both of this year's Super Bowl teams.
will have to live with everyone calling it "another Patriots dynasty".
Nope. Next season will be the beginning of another Cowboys dynasty. This season's Cowboys team is like the 1991 Cowboys, who lost in the divisional playoffs and then went back to the postseason in 1992 and knocked off the Super Bowl favorite 49ers and began the most dominant 4 years by any single franchise in NFL history.