No I think the question is whether the Patriots deflated the balls after 2007. If you are talking just about the rule change, that's different. Brady testified how they prepare the footballs and it'll amaze you, even as it amazes me, how much preparation and planning goes into preparing the footballs. They look at weather, they look at what chemicals they are going to use on the balls. So is it possible the rule change gave the Patriots an advantage? Sure. It's possible they are the most particular about preparing their footballs I have no idea. They have balls they break in over weeks like an incubator. Tossing them around until they are ready for game day. But the question is, did they deflate footballs for 8 years after 2007. I find that notion a little silly.
OK.. that's two separate issues then. 2007-onwards something happened that caused an abnormal decrease in fumbling rate for NE over other teams. What was it? The rule change (+ deflation) actually does make sense in terms of a plausible cause and effect relationship. What's your hypothesis on what they did (but other teams didn't do) from 2007 that they didn't do before?
I'd say it is, yes. 3.7 more per year, throwing 50 times less, is significant. ESPECIALLY if there's only roughly 30 to 50 opportunities to fumble...the % there is significant IMO.
