I know this is last week’s game which is irrelevant, but it’s still pretty funny to watch.
Isn’t this exactly the same way that The Bus reacted after his epic fumble in Indianapolis in 2005?
No, I’m not serious. That’s some smarmy sarcasm there. In case you weren’t sure.
Bengals 2016 Draft Class: Maintaining the Tradition
Two rhetorical zen questions for the day. The first one: which ass did the most damage to the Bengals? The second question is below the fold.
StarGate: NE
Much has been written about ball deflation helping Tom Brady in his throws. Some has also been written about deflation helping the Patriots with their fumble statistics. What about fumbles specifically by Brady?
Brady allegedly has smallish hands that can make it more difficult to grip and hold onto a harder football. In fact, as reported at Steelers Depot, Brady testified that he lost sleep over this issue. While lobbying in 2006 for the NFL to allow teams to supply their own balls, Brady said “there’ve been nights before road games when I have had trouble sleeping because I’m thinking about what kind of footballs I’ll be throwing the next day”. Partly thanks to Brady’s lobbying, teams were allowed to supply balls from 2007 onward.
How did this rule change impact Brady’s ability to hold onto the ball? Other than Brady and perhaps “The Deflator”, nobody can say for sure that balls were systematically underinflated going back to 2007, but Brady’s fumble statistics are certainly eye popping.
From 2001 to 2006, Brady fumbled 59 times in 94 starts, or 0.63 times per start. From 2007 to 2014, he fumbled 37 times in 112 starts, or 0.33 times per start. In other words, his fumble rate was almost exactly cut in half coincident with the rule change. This is a huge statistical disparity that cannot be random chance.
As a point of comparison, Ben Roethlisberger has fumbled 78 times in 158 starts, or 0.49 times per start. In other words, despite playing behind a frequently porous offensive line, and despite his freewheeling style that famously includes holding the ball too long and taking big hits, Roethlisberger fumbled significantly less frequently than pre-rule-change Brady but significantly more frequently than post-rule-change Brady.
Turnover rate is usually considered the most important correlation with winning percentage. Historically, teams that win the turnover battle win about 75% – 80% of the time. Further, a team’s most prolific fumbler is almost always the quarterback. Brady is the biggest fumbler for the Patriots, even with his current lower fumble rate. It seems clear that if the quarterback’s fumble rate can be cut in half, the team’s chance of winning will increase accordingly, making this particular statistic the single most impactful component for team success. About this, there can be zero doubt.
The only open question is whether Brady’s amazing 50% reduction in fumble rate is purely coincidental, or due to his improvement as a player, or due to other factors such as…. (a) having a significantly better grip on an under-inflated ball, (b) having league rules making it difficult to touch him, (c) having league rules such as the Tuck Rule to make fumbles more difficult to call, and maybe (d) having surveillance-assisted advance knowledge of what the defense is planning to do. There does seem to be a pattern of evidence that the Patriots have been systematically working to alter or evade the rules specifically to reduce Brady’s turnover rate.
Is there anyone who thinks that if the Steelers could somehow cut Roethlisberger’s fumbles in half, this would not present a substantial advantage in the win column? Indeed the Steelers have tried to improve this aspect of the game by building a better offensive line, improving the OL coaching, and the Haley system that encourages Roethlisberger to not hold the ball as long. The difference is that the Steelers approach, as with most teams, is to work within game rules while the Patriots approach seems to rely heavily on either getting the rules changed, skirting the rules entirely, or in the case of Deflategate, both.
ADDENDUM
Oh, it gets even more interesting when we look at broader QB stats for Brady.
| Before Rule Change | After Rule Change | |
| Fumbles / Start | 0.63 | 0.33 |
| Ints / Start | 0.83 | 0.58 |
| Comp. Pct | 61.9 | 64.7 |
| Yards / Start | 229.4 | 282.3 |
| Throws / Int | 39 | 63 |
| Rating | 88.5 * | 99.4 ** |
* #9 among active quarterbacks, #13 all-time
* #2 among active quarterbacks, #2 all-time
Tom Brady agent Don Yee has a remarkable take on the Deflategate report and punishment. Yee claimed innocence, which is not suprising, but let’s deconstruct his logic quickly.
“There is no evidence that Tom directed footballs be set at pressures below the allowable limits.”
True and admirably word-smithed like a lawyer. There is evidence that footballs were deflated below limits. There is evidence that Tom directed deflation. There is evidence that he pressured or bribed to get it done. There is evidence that it was not an isolated event to the point that the Deflator had the nickname “the Deflator” and at least indicated fatigue at the job. There is evidence that this deflation was done intentionally after the balls had been officially checked which would only be done to avoid detection, which in turn would only be necessary if the deflation was below allowable limits. There is evidence that Tom knew who was responsible before any investigation took place (he texted the perpetrators to make sure they were not folding under pressure of the deflation being discovered). There is evidence he lied because he had claimed he didn’t even know the names of those people. There is evidence that Tom likes deflated balls and has the experience to know when they are deflated and how much they are deflated. Can it be that the greatest quarterback in the history of mankind is unable to tell when a ball is deflated below standards? I’m willing to bet that the average high school player could get it right in a blind test a majority of the time.
But yes, there is no evidence that Tom directed footballs be set at pressures below the allowable limits.
“In fact, the evidence shows Tom clearly emphasized that footballs be set at pressures within the rules.”
I must have missed that bit of evidence. So…. huh?
“Tom also cooperated with the investigation and answered every question presented to him.”
True, he cooperated by physically being there. True he answered every question, just deceptively or incompletely, and acted like a diva who was insulted to even be questioned.
Most damning, he refused to provide his phone and text records, evidence that could have theoretically exonerated him.
The reason given for his refusal is that he didn’t want to “set a dangerous precedent for all players facing disciplinary measures”.
Because, you see, Tom has always worried about other players first and because of his strong moral compass he is ready and willing to sacrifice himself, his team, and his fans for the greater good of all mankind.
The man just gives, and gives, and gives.
The man is a saint.
Well, not really. If he were a Saint, he’d be sitting for a year.
