Earlier today, a federal judge overturned the four-game suspension of Patriots quarterback Tom Brady. This reverses NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s ruling to bench Brady because of a dispute over underinflated balls in an AFC championship game. Although the NFL can still appeal, the judge’s decision found “significant legal deficiencies” in the NFL case. Judge Berman ruled that the agreement between the NFL and the players union did not give Goodell the authority to suspend Brady.
This June, an AEI report by economists Kevin Hassett and Stan Veuger, found flaws in the independent investigation known as the Wells Report, upon which the NFL based its case (and punishment).
Among the AEI report’s key points:
- Replication of the Wells Report’s analysis reveals that it relies on an unorthodox statistical procedure at odds with the methodology the report describes.
- The Wells Report focuses narrowly on the difference between the Colts and Patriots pressure drops. This difference can be caused either by the pressure in the Patriots balls dropping below their expected value or by the pressure in the Colts balls rising above their expected value, with the latter of these scenarios being more likely based on the absolute pressure measurements.
- The difference of the pressure in the Patriots balls can be explained by the fact that sufficient time may have passed between halftime testing of the two teams’ balls for the Colts balls to warm significantly, effectively inflating them.
Read the full report, “On the Wells Report.”
Read their op-ed in the New York Times, “Deflating ‘Deflategate.‘”
For an interview with Kevin Hassett or Stan Veuger, please contact AEI media services at mediaservices@aei.org or 202.862.5829.
from AEI » Latest Content http://ift.tt/1FlBGuM
0 التعليقات:
Post a Comment