Was deflating balls intended to distract from ineligible WRs
Jan 20, 2015 18:58:38 GMT -5
jetstream23 likes this
Post by quantum on Jan 20, 2015 18:58:38 GMT -5
Is it possible that the Fagtriots are trying to distract everyone from their last-second ineligible WRs and irregular line-ups vs. Baltimore by deflating the footballs vs. Indianapolis to have such a convincing win that no one would go back and continue the discussion about how they cheated against the Ravens to squeak out the game?
It's obvious that NE couldn't keep up with Baltimore, falling behind by 14 points not once, but twice. I believe it was the 2nd half when they first pulled out the ineligible WR lineup and had the officials let them do the quick snaps. They knew it was very dicey so they only pulled this out as a last ditch effort in a game they were trailing in big time. That's when you get desperate and resort to the cheating. Obviously there was a big firestorm over it so they needed to change the conversation. Enter...deflated balls!
So why resort to cheating for the second week in a row? I think the Pats**** were tired of hearing people talk about how they barely won vs the Ravens, how they were down convincingly twice, and how the only reason they won was because of some shady, gimmicky last-second ineligible WR line-ups just before snapping the ball gave them an unfair advantage. The Pats**** wanted to make people believe they are a dominant team, that their win vs. Baltimore wasn't lucky, and that they don't need to resort to gimmicks and irregular formations to win. So, they didn't just need to win the game, they NEEDED a convincing win in the AFCCG.
But why deflate the footballs? A few reasons: 1) There's a good chance it won't get noticed, especially in the weather conditions 2) Early in the game guys like Edelman were dropping passes so this was a solid and applicable cheating tactic out of all the ones on the Pats**** list. 3) You could blame the weather, rain, temperature for possibly causing the air to condense inside the ball and try to claim ignorance. 4) The risk/reward premium was there in terms of something like this resulting in a $25K fine but not losing draft picks or forfeiting the game (if caught).