Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Patriots being investigated after Colts game (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter HobbesAB
- Start date
Oh, now this I've got to get a load of.
Let me guess, yourteamcheats.com is BS because... it was made by New England fans? The whole thing is one gigantic lie because the people bringing you the information have a rooting interest?
yourteamcheats.com is BS because... out of hundreds of examples, a few of them are probably not worth mentioning? They haven't done a 100% perfect job with their compilation, so the entire thing should be ignored?
yourteamcheats.com is BS because... (this was one particularly hilarious argument)... it pretends all cheating is the same, for instance treating a technicality like having a cameraman in the wrong place as if it is equivalent to a Super Bowl champion circumventing the salary cap? Even though they have scale, "awarding" x amount of video cameras per incident (which shows that if they're dirty New England fans, at least they're dirty New England fans with a sense of humor)?
Some haters are just haters, but others hate because they lack the context to properly judge New England`s alleged transgressions.
For them, yourteamcheats.com... because your team cheats, her team cheats, his team cheats...
I was just commenting on the bizarre need of people like you to write these authoritative declarations about the Patriots and their supposedly tarnished legacy.
Of course it`s just your opinion. It`s cool that you make that clear, albeit in a subsequent post.
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction
Footballguy
Uh, the Patriots cheat
/Just taking the antithesis of the Pats fans' arguments
/Just taking the antithesis of the Pats fans' arguments
No, it's BS because it's BS.
They call any story about anything cheating. They have the Bengals as part of "deflategate" b/c Blake says all teams let air out of the footballs when he played. That's not against the rules. What is against the rules if letting air out AFTER the officials have approved the ball. Only one team has been found guilty of doing that...NE, but "yourteamcheats" says Cincy is guilty of that. Wrong.
They also charged Cincy as cheaters because of "challengegate." Cincy threw a challenge flag inside of two minutes. Cincy was penalized a timeout, and the play was reviewed by the review booth. "ytc" says this was cheating. Wrong.
It calls every team a cheater because of "tampergate," because "every team" talks to potential FAs. This is a ridiculous stretch, but they don't have any proof/examples for individual teams, but they just label all teams as cheater. Wrong.
It calls every team cheaters because of "headsetgate," again without any proof/examples for individual teams (also another ridiculous stretch). Wrong.
It labels teams as cheaters for each instance a player gets popped for PEDs. This is moronic, because this is obviously the player, not the team. Wrong.
It labeled NYG as cheaters because LT said in his book that he would hire hookers and send them to the room of opposing RBs. Are you freakin' kidding me?
It cited Denver as cheaters because of "uniformgate," when they brought the wrong uniforms to an away game. Please.
It labeled Denver as cheaters during "spygate" for having people trying read the lips of the opposing coaches. This wasn't illegal, but they call it cheating. Wrong.
It cited Jax as cheaters because of "arrowgate," because they happened to paint their field wrong once. Right.
It labeled Pitt as cheaters because of "Steroidgate" because they used steroids in the '70s (when it wasn't banned), and a team doctor got caught selling steroids in 2007. He was fired, & there was never any connection between him and any Steelers buying/using steroids.
I could go on, but to all but those with red and blue-colored blinders on, I don't need to. The website is a joke.
So you decided to cherry-pick a few bad examples of cheating out of 500+ and you pretend the site posits that every incident/allegation listed is equal in seriousness. Of course, because that isn't nearly obnoxious enough, you have to begin your post by quoting mine that refutes everything you're about to say.
On top of that, you screw up what little gold you think you have.
You're clearly unimpressed with the page on Denver. Any comment on the proven fact that they deliberately cheated the salary cap twice in their Super Bowl years and tried to cover it up? I mean, it's not like they were taking 0.5 psis out of footballs or anything, but still...
Jeff Blake stated that ball boys were instructed to let air of the balls "just before the start of games". It's perfectly reasonable to presume that this was after the inspection process, which occurs hours before kickoff, and therefore include it as an example of cheating.
If Marvin Lewis throws a challenge flag when it isn't legal to do so for the perceived benefit of his team, that's cheating, whether he was ignorant of the rule or not.
(LT wasn't cheating, fair enough, but that's some pretty scuzzy #### and it certainly doesn't tarnish the credibility of the site to include it. Ditto for the Pittsburgh 'Roid Boys, who, according to Jim Haslett, were the first to get serious with steroids in the late 70's).
And screwing with how your field is painted can absolutely give you a competitive advantage, which NFL.com writer Dan Hanzus pointed out.
I could also point out that this deflategate nonsense is about as paper-thin as several of the examples you list there, but you're such a rational and unbiased judge I'm sure I don't need to bother (but how paper-thin would some of those cases be if the NFL had followed each of them up with a $5,000,000 investigation?)
Now remember, the next time you pollute this thread with your ridiculousness, throw in some qualifier about how Tom Brady will go the the Hall of Fame so we can all pretend you have credibility.
Last edited by a moderator:
moleculo
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Hmmm, this is moronic, but isn't only Brady (and maybe the equipment managers) that supposedly did something wrong here?
Yourteamcheats is completely useless for this thread.
95% of people in here have said that if there is nothing else to come out about the deffations, and Brady raised his hand and admitted his tacit knowledge back in January...then this should have been a slap on the wrist like any of the other cheaters listed on that irrelevant website.
But he didnt. Brady willingly chose the wrong path and so instead Brady has proven to be:
A degenerate liar
A bad cover-up artist
A poor leader- who lets these guys get suspended without pay. The night after their suspensions were announced as a result of the Wells' report, both of these guys' wives waited anxiously for Brady to defend them publicly and save their families from financial ruin . Finally, Brady sits before Jim Gray and instead of defending his poorly paid fall-boys, he *laughs* and says he hasnt even read the report. What a shameful act by a supposed-hero. That moment for me and for my family that lives in Boston...was the one where we saw Brady's true colors. Sad.
The cheating? It means next-to-nothing now.
satch
Footballguy
Don't you get it? It's a proven fact that most, if not all, teams bend and break rules. But it's only "cheating" when the Patriots do it because their infractions are so much more devious than the others. And besides, the hundreds of examples of other teams bending/breaking rules are irrelevant to the discussion because that's deflection. And the fact that Tom Brady played great in the second half of the AFC Championship and set a new record for completions in the Super Bowl vs the vaunted Seattle defense using perfectly inflated balls is completely irrelevant when determining the significance of Deflategate.
This argument doesnt matter anymore. If the Pats admitted it in January, then the above post would have relevance. Instead they covered up and lied repeatedly.
The cheating is not the central issue anymore and hasnt been since the Wednesday before the Super Bowl.
Last edited by a moderator:
That site notes 779 "team cheats," but if you look at each individual team, they acknowledge that much of their cheating examples are ridiculous, by noting the “real cheats.” For example, Washington is noted as having cheated 32 times, but on their individual page, they have 10 “real cheats.” So, they are acknowledging that much of what they are putting online is BS. They’ve noted 779 “team cheats,” but only 204 “real cheats.” So, from the jump, they are admitting that 74% of what they are posting is BS.
They are including PED violations as “team cheats.” As previously posted, these are examples of 1 player cheating, not a team. Furthermore, they aren’t even consistent. In order to try to support their weak accusations of cheating, some cases of PEDs only go back to 2005, some go back to the 1970's. In any event, calling those instances of teams cheating is just wrong. There were 122 PED "cheats" listed & included as “real cheats.”
They also cite every team as cheaters 4 times: "tampergate," "headsetgate," "scrapsgate," and "spygate before 2006." 2 of those cheats are considered “real cheats:” “tampergate” & “headsetgate.” In their explanation about these "cheats," they are very vague, saying things like "tampering with FAs is so bad across every team in the league," & "it's a common complaint across the league." They don't cite specific teams, yet they label all teams as cheaters. That totaled 64 of the team "cheats" they cited.
[SIZE=12pt]So the website dismisses 74% of their own “cheating” examples.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Another 16% should be discounted because they are examples of individuals cheating, not teams. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Finally, another 8% of their cheating examples is based on “everyone is doing it,” and doesn’t cite any specific examples of cheating, so those should be discounted.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]So, we’re left with only 2% of what they posted possibly being real examples of cheating. Of those 2%, we have things like “audiblegate,” where Tony Romo blamed the Redskins for making snap noises. There were no punishments levied, and no findings that the Redskins had even done anything wrong. Another example is “mudgate,” where the Dolphins didn’t cover their field before a game with the Jets, making it a slower surface. The Dolphins were not found to have done anything wrong, but the site counts it as a “real cheat.” [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Sure, there are A FEW real examples of cheating on that site, but when over 98% of what you post is ridiculous, made-up nonsense, that site is a BS site.[/SIZE]
satch
Footballguy
So now the anti-Patriot crowd thinks they get to decide which issues are open for discussion too? You say "the cheating is not the issue anymore". Well, to me and some other Pats fans it is. I take issue with people considering the Pats "cheaters" and diminishing their incredible accomplishments for using a slightly under inflated football, even after the Pats proved that the air in the football had nothing to do with their success when Tom Brady went on to set a record for most completions in a Super Bowl against an excellent defense. How do you explain that? If the amount if air in the football played any role whatsoever in Tom Brady or the Patriots success, why was his performance not only unaffected in the Super Bowl, but historically great when using a football that was perfectly inflated to league specifications? One could argue that based on those results in the Super Bowl he may have actually been at a competitive DISadvantage when using under-inflated footballs. The truth is, the slight difference in air pressure inside a football is neither an advantage or disadvantage. It's a riduculous thing to even be discussed, nevermind investigated by the league at the cost of 5 million dollars.
I would appreciate it if you could respond to just this issue please, and not about the fallout after the fact. If you think Brady had a competitive advantage when using underinflated footballs, how do you explain his record setting performance in the Super Bowl? Don't the results of both halves of the AFC Championship and the Super Bowl, using multiple balls with varying psi's, prove that Tom Brady's performance has nothing to do with air pressure in the football and therefore any slight increases or decreases in psi should not be considered a competitive advantage for him?
If Tom Brady plays better with underinflated footballs, why didn't his performance suffer when using properly inflated footballs? If tampering with footballs gives him some kind of mental edge as some have suggested, why was he so mentally unaffected in the biggest game of his life using footballs that he had no control of?
Last edited by a moderator:
CapnJB
Footballguy
I'd love to address your point. I already have multiple times. For example, see this post.
But I'll say it again:
I think many have committed the same crime or worse. Brad Johnson stands up as the best example in my mind, but there are others.
If the deflation includes the web of loose evidence that we have so far, then the underlying crime is seriously no big deal. If it did not go beyond Brady and his equipment guy...no different than many other QB and their guy, then yes that's a real-crime and there should have been some punishment under a scenario where Brady cooperated with the league. Calling him a cheater and diminishing Brady's awesome accomplishments on the field is something I wont do at this point with the evidence we have that it didnt go beyond him, but I do think his behavior and Kraft's behavior through the cover-up has been very sad and revealing. For that behavior he deserves more than a 4 game suspension IMHO.
Last edited by a moderator:
satch
Footballguy
It's actually kind of funny if you think about it this way. Tom Brady is considered by many to be the greatest QB in NFL history, but some people believe he was using underinflated footballs. But then in the Super Bowl against a historically great defense, with footballs inflated to a psi that some people believe was higher than what he was used to, he set a record for most completions in a Super Bowl. Since he performed that well, with those footballs, against that defense, I guess we're left to wonder how much greater his career may have been had he been using footballs inflated on the higher side all along.
He may appear dishonest to some at this point, but in many ways, that Super Bowl, the controversy leading up to it, the added pressure, the adversity, the use of footballs inflated differently than he usually uses, and his subsequent record setting performance under those conditions and under that microscope is further evidence that he is the greatest QB of all time in terms of on-field performance. In a way, Deflategate cemented that status.
He may appear dishonest to some at this point, but in many ways, that Super Bowl, the controversy leading up to it, the added pressure, the adversity, the use of footballs inflated differently than he usually uses, and his subsequent record setting performance under those conditions and under that microscope is further evidence that he is the greatest QB of all time in terms of on-field performance. In a way, Deflategate cemented that status.
DropKick
Footballguy
DropKick
Footballguy
I don't condone cheating, I just recognize that it exists in various forms virtually everywhere. We've seen ringers in the Little League World Series, crooked NBA officials, tanked seasons, corked bats, blood doping, fixed Olympic boxing matches, point shaving, rampant PED abuse, etc.
Moving past that, where does this go from here? I have a real hard time seeing the league and Brady/NE meeting in the middle.
Moving past that, where does this go from here? I have a real hard time seeing the league and Brady/NE meeting in the middle.
ChuckLiddell
Footballguy
Not that this silly argument that one game proves anything is worthy of real discussion, but you have curiously left out the fact that he threw 2 picks in this game as well. Not like he played a perfect game, or even a historically great game. Had he not thrown 2 picks, maybe the game would not have come down to a very fortuitous last minute defensive play to seal the victory. Maybe if the balls were deflated a bit, he would not have thrown one or both of those picks. Possible, or irrelevant from a Pats' fan perspective?
ETA - His QBR in this game was 81.1. Thats not bad, but it is well below his career QBR, right?
Last edited by a moderator:
moleculo
Footballguy
I don't think slightly underinflated balls creates such a benefit that it's effects can be measured in one game. hypothetically speaking, if they make a pass 1% more likely to be caught, or reduce fumble likelyhood by 1%, you wouldn't notice their effects unless you looked over dozens of games. Brady had a 64.1% completion rate last year. Maybe, if he were using properly inflated balls, that would have been 63.1% Maybe instead of 33-50 in the Baltimore game, he would have gone 32-50. Would that change anything?
The answer is, of course, it depends on which of those passes he completed would then be incomplete. Could it have been a 3rd down conversion, keeping a drive alive?
Certainly, over the course of the season, little things add up. It's a game of inches, after all. Every completion matters.
I also believe that the effect of 0.5 psi (or whatever) amplifies in cold weather games. That's when you see an improvement in grip. The fact that NE has been especially dominant in cold weather games is certainly curious. Satch points out that Brady's performance didn't go down in the AFCCG or the SB - well, neither of those games was especially cold, so not really relevant.
The answer is, of course, it depends on which of those passes he completed would then be incomplete. Could it have been a 3rd down conversion, keeping a drive alive?
Certainly, over the course of the season, little things add up. It's a game of inches, after all. Every completion matters.
I also believe that the effect of 0.5 psi (or whatever) amplifies in cold weather games. That's when you see an improvement in grip. The fact that NE has been especially dominant in cold weather games is certainly curious. Satch points out that Brady's performance didn't go down in the AFCCG or the SB - well, neither of those games was especially cold, so not really relevant.
satch
Footballguy
I didn't say or imply that he played a perfect or flawless game. But he did set a record for completions in a Super Bowl against an historically great defense, and did so using whatever footballs the NFL gave him to use. He accomplished this while arguably playing under more pressure and scrutiny than any QB has ever experienced, in the biggest game of his life, with all of the football world watching and wanting him to fail. He showed incredible mental toughness, and led his team to yet another Super Bowl victory and set a record in the process. If he was in the conversation of the greatest QB of all time before that game, and he was, how could he not have earned the title with that performance?
ChuckLiddell
Footballguy
Oh, he is very clearly one of the all time greatest QBs, and I can see the argument for best ever. But he has also earned the asterisks that I believe will follow him forever more.
And for the record you did in fact say "why was his performance not only unaffected in the Super Bowl, but historically great when using a football that was perfectly inflated". His performance in the Super Bowl was not historically great. It was good. He had a lot of completions...he threw a lot of passes. Not historically great by any measure, and certainly should not in my opinion be used in any argument claiming that the PSI is clearly irrelevant. His QBR was 14 points below his career average. If anything, his performance in that game is insignificant to the discussion.
satch
Footballguy
Are you kidding? Of course it was historically great. He set a SB record for completions and led his team to victory under the most pressure imaginable for a QB against a great defense. And you're saying all of that is negated by his QBR being below his average? His performance in that game from a historical standpoint has little to do with QBR.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Not to jump in the middle of this, but ChuckLidell, I think you are mixing it up QBR and passer rating, when you say that his QBR of 81.1 was 14 points below his career average. For one, there is no way anyone could have a career QBR of 95, and for two, the QBR stat is new, so we do not know what his career QBR is (since it has only been measured from 2006 till now).
Technically, Brady's passer rating in the Super Bowl was six points higher than his career average.
On the flip side, it is ######ed for anyone to say that Brady was under the most pressure ever by a QB in this past year's Super Bowl, but what do you expect from 12punch/SIDA/satch/whatever other aliases he is using.
Technically, Brady's passer rating in the Super Bowl was six points higher than his career average.
On the flip side, it is ######ed for anyone to say that Brady was under the most pressure ever by a QB in this past year's Super Bowl, but what do you expect from 12punch/SIDA/satch/whatever other aliases he is using.
Last edited by a moderator:
satch
Footballguy
I'll address the first part of your post by just saying that I could say the same exact thing, but slant all the numbers in the other direction. It's nothing but assumptions, speculation, and hypotheticals. As far as your second point, if the cold air and subsequent psi drop significantly improves grip, and improves performance, wouldn't all QBs benefit and see an increase from their usual performance in the second half of cold weather games? is there a way to see statistically if QBs have better numbers in the second half of cold weather games? If small psi drops effect the grip enough to increase performance, it would only make sense that a large sample size would show that QBs have better stats in the second half of cold weather games when compared to their stats in warm weather games when there is essentially no change in psi.
Last edited by a moderator:
satch
Footballguy
I have no clue why you think I'm using aliases, and it really makes it hard to take you seriously. Anyway, it's obviously subjective, but name a QB who was under more pressure and why.
Last edited by a moderator:
ChuckLiddell
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
The SD towel one is one of my favorites too that Pats fans have brought up to deflect...eventhough the Chargers were found to do nothing wrong...and were fined only for not immediately following instructions of the game official....and the quotes on that one...
Unfortunately for the Colts, as of 2015, we all care a lot more about the integrity of the game and, in particular, the legality of every single game football used to play this beautiful game. So in hindsight, the Chargers' soulless attack on the fundamental competitive integrity of the game must be reassessed in relation to all of the other ball manipulation cheats in NFL history.
"
Totally biased crap. But of course some in here find the site credible.
This is just getting sad. Now you acknowledge the site differentiates between serious and not-so-serious cheats, and then you simply turn around and claim the not-so-serious cheats are BS.
74% in fact. Then you dismiss another 16%... but is any of that included in that 74% you're already ignoring? And how about the 8% after that? Did you ever have a job at Enron friend? Where are these percentages you so casually misuse even coming from anyway?
And of course, what would rank high on that not-so-serious list if not having a guy record defensive signals from the wrong place? Or slightly deflating footballs post-inspection?
And this team vs. individual nonsense... who cares? The team is presumed to be tolerating whatever the individual players are doing, which is why the Patriots are out draft picks and $1,000,000 despite a $5,000,000 league investigation that exonerated everyone except one single player. Ever heard of the Seadderall Seahawks? They got that moniker because a mere five of at least 53 players were caught using PEDs.
This is just totally stupid now, if it wasn't already. All your phony-###, lazy, goalpost-moving BS because you're desperate to avoid the obvious, crystal clear point: Teams cheat! The Patriots are no worse than many other franchises in the frequency and severity of their transgressions. They get crucified for their shenanigans because people hate them, because they win and win and win, and when everyone is desperate to see them lose they still just win.
Once you realize this guy is a Patriots-hater (and obviously a SD fan), this post becomes the single funniest thing on the whole damn thread.
Last edited by a moderator:
treat88
Footballguy
One team in the league has faced singularly severe loss of draft picks and monetary fines for their behavior. Twice. Even tho the powers that be are strongly incentivized not to impose said punishments.
Yet some of their fans still want to believe they simply do what everyone else is doing?
Yet some of their fans still want to believe they simply do what everyone else is doing?
rockaction
Footballguy
Goodell is a Jet and will always be a Jet.treat88 said:
So sayeth the board.
Maybe you try reading what was posted? Everything I'm about to reiterate was in the previous post. The BS site disregarded 74% of their own "cheats" as not real. And, since I specified in my post that the next 16% was from PED violations, THAT THE BS SITE CONSIDERED "REAL" CHEATS, no, none of those were included in that 74% THAT THE BS SITE DISREGARDED. And, I further specified again that the last 8% was the BS site saying "we don't have any proof, but everyone does this, so they are all cheaters."Jercules said:
Your NE fanboy created website on their own admits that 74% of the "cheats" they are identifying are "not real." I noted another 24% that are worthless. Even if you want to count that 24% (you'd be a moron to do so), that means your main defense of NE comes down to a site that has acknowledged that they are making #### up almost 3/4 of the time. If you want to rely on that as a valid source, that's just a sign of your own level of intelligence, I guess.
Last edited by a moderator:
You do realize the 779 upon which you base every goofy number in your argument is the total sum of 'Cheatpoints' for all the teams in the league, not the total sum of incidents/allegations right?
Single incidents, such as Denver's salary cap cheating, are worth as much as 10 points. The idea that 74% of the cases are 'not real' is wildly wrong.
But since I'm absolutely terrified of your red font, I'll spare you the usual vitriol and just reiterate the point... the actually freakin' point to all this, that stands as tall as ever:
Context matters, and in a league where every single team is cheating in one way or another, a guy in the wrong place with a camera here or a few fractions of a psi out of a football there is just no big deal.
So really if you feel that way, its another thing you Pats fans can boast about: of all the teams in the league, your team is the best in cheating evah. Seriously, why not just take that and call it quits?
You assume there are no strong incentives to impose these punishments, and you assume the NFL's first and foremost concern is the competitive integrity of the league.treat88 said:
If one accepts those assumptions, the conclusion is obvious. However, many of us don't accept either assumption, hence the 262 pages and counting of this thread.
I don't see how any of that makes any comment on how good or bad the Patriots may be at cheating, sorry.
Last edited by a moderator:
Clearly the Pats are above and ahead of the league on everything, pointing to rule book and such, why not own the "best in cheating" too?
Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?
This is a very good point. They might actually be the WORST at cheating, given how much more often they get caught and penalized harshly compared to all the other teams.
I am new to this forum and this has probably been debated to death, I read the wells report and find that 3 of the 4 balls that belonged to indy were underinflated and now they cant find any of the pressure guages that tested any of the balls. Does this seem strange to anybody but me? I really dont care either way but I just get the feeling that there is something bigger here that isnt being discussed. Could there be something here that if it comes into public view will put the league into a bad light? Something like maybe that the league has known for a long time that teams are doing this and have chosen to ignore it? Its just too strange....you mean to tell me that you take the time to set up an investigation at the colts/patriots halftime, even going as far as having troy vincent there to observe, but you all of a sudden cant find the pressure guages that you used for the tests of all the pre-game balls? All this talk about a broken phone? One call to the phone company and the owner of the account can pay for every text that was sent or received.....If they want the texts then brady just makes the request...what do you guys think?
Second reminder to knock off the insults. This includes belittling others by labeling them as haters.
If you can't limit yourself to addressing others points in a civil fashion without attacking the user, don't post.
If you can't limit yourself to addressing others points in a civil fashion without attacking the user, don't post.
Even if this were true (it's not-it's already been established that the website you are basing this on is a NE-created BS website), the one team that has been repeatedly punished, severely, for their cheating is NE. That is the only context that matters.
The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.
