Espn reporting Goodell confirmed Patriots using camera (1 Viewer)

[Marc Levin]

That right there makes me question what ESPN was actually reporting if the league itself provides a different version of what was happening.

I mentioned this a few pages ago, but blowing that story and the Eli Manning story in the space of two days is ruining ESPN's credibility for me.

 

[David Yudkin]

That right there makes me question what ESPN was actually reporting if the league itself provides a different version of what was happening.

I mentioned this a few pages ago, but blowing that story and the Eli Manning story in the space of two days is ruining ESPN's credibility for me.

And let's not forget the "Vick won't be getting indicted" stuff from earlier this year.

 

[Marc Levin]

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to see a very in depth investigation to see how deep the alleged cheating goes.

I'd be shocked if they dwelt too long or deep on this. And, if they do, you and I won't hear about it. What incentive does Goddall have to make a huge issue out of this? It smears the game and smears the best organization the game has had over the last 7 years.He wants this punished swiftly, approproately, and then back to the game of football.

Dispute it and back it up with defense of a better organization.The face of the players is also very good - until last year, they were squeaky clean. Never gave bulletin board fodder, always said the right things, etc.

 

[[icon]]

I think they should split the Pats 3 titles up between the Jets, Raiders, and Browns since those teams have no chance in hell of winning anything on their own anytime soon.

It's only fair

 

[Phlash]

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

"I invented this thing, I call it a jump-to-conclusions mat"

What do you propose they were doing with the stolen signals? Sending them to the center?

Or could it be that the coaches just adjusted their playcalling based on what they saw? Maybe you're just wrong? That might be it.

Or you're wrong. I'm just speculating. I made that pretty clear.

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

Thats not speculating in my book.

 

[1huskerfan]

That right there makes me question what ESPN was actually reporting if the league itself provides a different version of what was happening.

I mentioned this a few pages ago, but blowing that story and the Eli Manning story in the space of two days is ruining ESPN's credibility for me.

You're a staff member and ESPN still had credibility with you??

 

[mad sweeney]

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

"I invented this thing, I call it a jump-to-conclusions mat"

What do you propose they were doing with the stolen signals? Sending them to the center?

Or could it be that the coaches just adjusted their playcalling based on what they saw? Maybe you're just wrong? That might be it.

Think about it, what good is the info unless the guy on the field has it? As fast as the info wuld have to be processed I find it hard to believe that BB waits until the defense calls their play, then decides what formation and pass/run blocking scheme to run. Brady has to be at least marginally involved in passing the info onto his line and making adjustments under center. Thats all IF the allegations are true of course. I'm not saying Brady's involved, only that IF the allegations are true I find it hard to believe he's not. Someone on the field has to implement the info and he's the only one with a headset out there. With :25 seconds, there's not enough time for the coach to utilize the info on his own.People struck me down when I said I find it hard to believe that Vick would have no involvement in dog fighting and they smacked me down when I said the cops had more than just the video evidence to arrest Boston. Use objectivity and reason, don't jump to conclusions, but shutting down an idea with plenty of rationality behind it is just as ignorant as jumping to conclusions in the first place.Personally I hope that IF there is cheating that Brady is not involved, but I find it very hard to believe that IF there was extra info involved that it didn't flow from BB through Brady to the team. Another point to note is that the cameraman, according to previous articles posted, was taken away at half time which means a few things. One, he wasn't looking through his lens and giving hand signals to BB and two, the Jets had to have known (or should've) what was going on and should've changed their signals so that BB couldn't take advantage of it in the 2nd half. If the coaching staff never heard about it then the Jets security did a poor job. If the staff knew about it and kept the signals the same, allowing BB to take advantage of it, then they deserved to lose. So did it affect the breakout second half (IF true)? Hard to say, but to blindly shut down the idea that Brady couldn't possible be involved is blindly ignorant, IMO. And again, I am not saying Brady's involved, just that it's pretty inconceivable that he wouldn't be at some level IF the allegations prove true.

 

[Marc Levin]

That right there makes me question what ESPN was actually reporting if the league itself provides a different version of what was happening.

I mentioned this a few pages ago, but blowing that story and the Eli Manning story in the space of two days is ruining ESPN's credibility for me.

You're a staff member and ESPN still had credibility with you??

:goodpoint:

 

[greenline]

It's all speculation. All of it. The degree of actual filiming. The people with knowledge. The level of impact. The usage. The potential punishment. The public opinion. It all means nothing. Thre Patriots are in violation of improper camera use. That's it. They will be punished according to that violation. If the NFL has any additional proof on how this was being used aside from SPECULATION, the punishment will increase. Until then, it's a violation of one league rule with mounds of speculation. This has mostly been fueled by purists who are unhappy with the tactic, media looking to make a name for themselves, and scorned NFL fans.Converserly, it is being defended and deflected adamantly by Patriots fans reacting out of pure emotion and fear. This is all fueled and flamed but in two weeks it will be an after thought for most.

Don't fool yourself - part of the Commish's investigation wil include talking to the teams that are complaining about the Pats' behavior last year

So what, though? It's still speculation. Nothing was ever proven and nothing formal was ever submitted. Whether it happened or not, it holds no water.

Do you have some knowledge of what holds water for the commish? Or of what evidence he is allowed to/will consider during an investigation? Do you have inside knowledge of the procedures followed under the league's charter?

Do you? It's speculation no matter which way you slice it. He said, she said. They were caught by the NFL filming the Jets. They were never caught by the NFL doing anything else. All we know is what Charlie Casserly has to say, what op-ed columnists think of BB, what this MB thinks is appropriate and what the people hear who wish to be the authority think. It won't hold as much as most you would like.

Nope - though I have good knowledge on how similar situations are played out - the league is a private organization with rules and penalties and procedures of enforcement. How would your job handle an investigation into an emplyee stealing money? Would it punish ONLY for the incident in front of it, or would it consider the evidence of prior deeds of similar misconduct (say, an accusation of stealing office supplies and a fellow employee's complaint of missing money from her purse)? And your company is not even an organization - in an oprganization like the NFL, there are even greater reasons to consider other conduct.Look, you are fooling yourself if you think this punishment and investigation will be centered solely on what happened Sunday. It's not a court of law where the exclusionary rule applies - all relevant information will be considered and used in making a determination and a penalty.

Ok, well. I think I discovered you are the resident lawyer but I'm still going to disagree with you. We'll see how it plays out. You can't punish based on speculation. Prove to me:A. They filmed anyone else. B. They used that film to gain an advantage.

 

[packersfan]

This is from John Clayton's column. Remove second-day pick with third-round pick and this sums up my thoughts about the punishment should the Patriots be found guilty:

What could the punishment be?

Goodell must come down hard on this one because he clearly has evidence. ESPN has reported that Goodell is considering severe sanctions, including the possibility of docking the Patriots "multiple draft picks." That could mean a combination of a second-rounder and something else, maybe a fifth-rounder. The commissioner could push the penalty over two years, but he can't treat this lightly by just taking away a second-day draft choice. The Patriots are good. They had only two draft choices -- a first- and a second-round pick -- make the team this season. Fining them just a fourth-round choice wouldn't hurt them much.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

"I invented this thing, I call it a jump-to-conclusions mat"

What do you propose they were doing with the stolen signals? Sending them to the center?

Or could it be that the coaches just adjusted their playcalling based on what they saw? Maybe you're just wrong? That might be it.

Or you're wrong. I'm just speculating. I made that pretty clear.

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

Thats not speculating in my book.

What is the % you put Brady knowing/not knowing at? Seriously.80% knowing, 20% not knowing, or so.

 

[Banger]

It's all speculation. All of it. The degree of actual filiming. The people with knowledge. The level of impact. The usage. The potential punishment. The public opinion. It all means nothing. Thre Patriots are in violation of improper camera use. That's it. They will be punished according to that violation. If the NFL has any additional proof on how this was being used aside from SPECULATION, the punishment will increase. Until then, it's a violation of one league rule with mounds of speculation. This has mostly been fueled by purists who are unhappy with the tactic, media looking to make a name for themselves, and scorned NFL fans.Converserly, it is being defended and deflected adamantly by Patriots fans reacting out of pure emotion and fear. This is all fueled and flamed but in two weeks it will be an after thought for most.

Don't fool yourself - part of the Commish's investigation wil include talking to the teams that are complaining about the Pats' behavior last year

So what, though? It's still speculation. Nothing was ever proven and nothing formal was ever submitted. Whether it happened or not, it holds no water.

Do you have some knowledge of what holds water for the commish? Or of what evidence he is allowed to/will consider during an investigation? Do you have inside knowledge of the procedures followed under the league's charter?

Do you? It's speculation no matter which way you slice it. He said, she said. They were caught by the NFL filming the Jets. They were never caught by the NFL doing anything else. All we know is what Charlie Casserly has to say, what op-ed columnists think of BB, what this MB thinks is appropriate and what the people hear who wish to be the authority think. It won't hold as much as most you would like.

Nope - though I have good knowledge on how similar situations are played out - the league is a private organization with rules and penalties and procedures of enforcement. How would your job handle an investigation into an emplyee stealing money? Would it punish ONLY for the incident in front of it, or would it consider the evidence of prior deeds of similar misconduct (say, an accusation of stealing office supplies and a fellow employee's complaint of missing money from her purse)? And your company is not even an organization - in an oprganization like the NFL, there are even greater reasons to consider other conduct.Look, you are fooling yourself if you think this punishment and investigation will be centered solely on what happened Sunday. It's not a court of law where the exclusionary rule applies - all relevant information will be considered and used in making a determination and a penalty.

Ok, well. I think I discovered you are the resident lawyer but I'm still going to disagree with you. We'll see how it plays out. You can't punish based on speculation. Prove to me:A. They filmed anyone else. B. They used that film to gain an advantage.

A. and B. are both are totally irrelevant. The rule says no taping on the sidelines, they did it, they will suffer the consequences.

 

[greenline]

A. and B. are both are totally irrelevant.

Are they?

 

[Gr00vus]

IF the illegal taping is true (and it looks pretty clear that it is), and IF there's a connection with the radio frequency irregularities also in question, someone will have to burn for it, and I mean all the way burnt. Otherwise the league as a whole forfeits a large portion of its credibility with the public at large, and that is worth way more than potentially alienating one owner.

I really want to hear more news on the findings in relation to those extra radio frequencies.

 

[David Yudkin]

I'm not saying Brady was or was not involved, but I think it's conceivable that he had no knowledge that the information he was receiving was not obtained within the body of the rules. If they told him to run a different play and look for the safety blitz, that's not exactly indicative of Brady being operational involved in the signal/sign stealing.

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it. And it would take big stones for the league to launch an investigation with Watergate like overtones into another face of the NFL after the Vick debacle.

I agree with others. It is in the best interest of the league to get this cleared up and have people move on as quickly as possible.

 

[Banger]

A. and B. are both are totally irrelevant.

Are they?

all that matters is that they did it this week and were caught doing it. No one needs to prove that they did it in past seasons, it doesn't matter. They did it this season and were busted case closed. Gaining an advantage doesn't need to be proved either (although they wouldn't risk it if there was nothing to be gained).

 

[BigSteelThrill]

IF the illegal taping is true (and it looks pretty clear that it is), and IF there's a connection with the radio frequency irregularities also in question, someone will have to burn for it, and I mean all the way burnt. Otherwise the league as a whole forfeits a large portion of its credibility with the public at large, and that is worth way more than potentially alienating one owner.I really want to hear more news on the findings in relation to those extra radio frequencies.

No more "IFs" needed. BB already apologized for doing it.

 

[greenline]

A. and B. are both are totally irrelevant.

Are they?

all that matters is that they did it this week and were caught doing it. No one needs to prove that they did it in past seasons, it doesn't matter. They did it this season and were busted case closed. Gaining an advantage doesn't need to be proved either (although they wouldn't risk it if there was nothing to be gained).

Right which is my point exactly. The Patriots will be punished for what they were caught doing, not speculation from others, regardless of what anyone wants to believe or wants to happen.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I'm not saying Brady was or was not involved, but I think it's conceivable that he had no knowledge that the information he was receiving was not obtained within the body of the rules. If they told him to run a different play and look for the dafety blitz, that's not exactly indicative of Brady being operational involved in the signal/sign stealing.Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it. And it would take big stones for the league to launch an investigation with Watergate like overtones into another face of the NFL after the Vick debacle.I agree with others. It is in the best interest of the league to get this cleared up and have people move on as quickly as possible.

A %?He likely knew of it. He also does NOT get any penalty from it whatsoever. Except for a stain on his legacy.Its in the best ineterest of this league to make sure nothing like this ever happens again and that teams do not even entertain the thought of doing something like this because the consequences are deathly.

 

[Marc Levin]

You can't punish based on speculation. Prove to me:A. They filmed anyone else. B. They used that film to gain an advantage.

?? I don't have to do anything.If the NFL investigates, they will investigate other allegations that the Pats did similar things last year. You are being obtuse to ignore that and to ask me to prove something to you.

 

[1huskerfan]

this is what happened...they video tape the defensive signals...the pats then go in at halftime compare the video to their eye in the sky Polaroids and then say this signal means this defense...so in the 2nd half they will know this signal means they are blitzing from the right or whatever.then the coach calls in to Brady using the in helmet speaker/mic and gives him the hot play.Brady doesn't have to be in on it...i really think its probably only like 3 or 4 coaches in on the videotaping...something like this you wouldn't want everyone knowing about

There is no real time advantage to recording the signals. Everyone thinks the cameraman magically knows the play and relays it to Brady who calls the proper audibles. This is hardly the case. All this does is allow the coaches to review the signs being used for this game at halftime and make any adjustments to what they have been picking up already. Teams already have extensive databases on one another and this is more of a reinforcement tool. The only rule broken is using video playback during the game. Teams are also not allowed to use game film at halftime to make adjustments. A stupid rule IMO. Teams should be afforded pretty much anything they want to review and prepare for competing. Reminds me of when filming HS games for scouting purposes was considered cheating.

 

[jonessed]

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to see a very in depth investigation to see how deep the alleged cheating goes.

I'd be shocked if they dwelt too long or deep on this. And, if they do, you and I won't hear about it. What incentive does Goddall have to make a huge issue out of this? It smears the game and smears the best organization the game has had over the last 7 years.He wants this punished swiftly, approproately, and then back to the game of football.

Dispute it and back it up with defense of a better organization.The face of the players is also very good - until last year, they were squeaky clean. Never gave bulletin board fodder, always said the right things, etc.

Oh come on, BB has always had a rep for being a jackass and he runs that team his way. Now they are being investigated for cheating over at least part of that span.

 

[BaBastage]

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to see a very in depth investigation to see how deep the alleged cheating goes.

I'd be shocked if they dwelt too long or deep on this. And, if they do, you and I won't hear about it. What incentive does Goddall have to make a huge issue out of this? It smears the game and smears the best organization the game has had over the last 7 years.He wants this punished swiftly, approproately, and then back to the game of football.

You make a good point, and you're probably right. But sometimes "bad press" is still good press, and this has all the ingredients for sensational soap-opera news. The big question is whether or not it would bring eyeballs or divert them... not whether the NFL really wants to enforce the alleged cheating issue.</The Arthurian knight inside me is wounded deeply >

 

[Phlash]

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to see a very in depth investigation to see how deep the alleged cheating goes.

I'd be shocked if they dwelt too long or deep on this. And, if they do, you and I won't hear about it. What incentive does Goddall have to make a huge issue out of this? It smears the game and smears the best organization the game has had over the last 7 years.He wants this punished swiftly, approproately, and then back to the game of football.

Dispute it and back it up with defense of a better organization.The face of the players is also very good - until last year, they were squeaky clean. Never gave bulletin board fodder, always said the right things, etc.

Oh come on, BB has always had a rep for being a jackass and he runs that team his way. Now they are being investigated for cheating over at least part of that span.

Citation needed on that part of your statement. His players love him.

 

[Gr00vus]

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it.

I agree. And I see that as a negative for Brady in terms of how his career would be perceived IF the infractions plumb the lowest possible depths. He'll be forever soiled with the residue of this in the minds of many people. Even if he didn't explicitly know about the cheating, he'd definitely be a primary beneficiary and his accomplishments will be called into question, as will the accomplishments of the Pats in general.

 

[Pittsburgh United]

When there is smoke, sometimes it's fire, but think about it - the NFL makes more money with Angry Bill on the sidelines amping up good matchups than he is getting whacked for a camcorder offense. The NFL will always choose money first. If Michael Vick had won the last five SuperBowls with the Falcons and was the face of the new modern NFL, do you think the dogfighting issue would have played out the same way? Of course not, Roger Goodell would have driven down to Atlanta himself to bury those dogs as deep as possible.

This is at the same time the most absurd and disgusting thing I've ever read on FBG.

 

[jonessed]

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

"I invented this thing, I call it a jump-to-conclusions mat"

What do you propose they were doing with the stolen signals? Sending them to the center?

Or could it be that the coaches just adjusted their playcalling based on what they saw? Maybe you're just wrong? That might be it.

Or you're wrong. I'm just speculating. I made that pretty clear.

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

Thats not speculating in my book.

I said I was "thinking out loud". What do you think that means?

 

[massraider]

I'm not saying Brady was or was not involved, but I think it's conceivable that he had no knowledge that the information he was receiving was not obtained within the body of the rules. If they told him to run a different play and look for the dafety blitz, that's not exactly indicative of Brady being operational involved in the signal/sign stealing.Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it. And it would take big stones for the league to launch an investigation with Watergate like overtones into another face of the NFL after the Vick debacle.I agree with others. It is in the best interest of the league to get this cleared up and have people move on as quickly as possible.

A %?He likely knew of it. He also does NOT get any penalty from it whatsoever. Except for a stain on his legacy.

Not even that. The Brady thing has no interest to me. Never be able to prove it, so why talk about it? His name won't even get mentioned, unless this radio thing somehow ties into the QB helmet receiver, and I doubt that very much.This won't affect Brady at all. Just my guess.

 

[Banger]

A. and B. are both are totally irrelevant.

Are they?

all that matters is that they did it this week and were caught doing it. No one needs to prove that they did it in past seasons, it doesn't matter. They did it this season and were busted case closed. Gaining an advantage doesn't need to be proved either (although they wouldn't risk it if there was nothing to be gained).

Right which is my point exactly. The Patriots will be punished for what they were caught doing, not speculation from others, regardless of what anyone wants to believe or wants to happen.

This is not a court of law so there are no rules as to who will be consulted, what "circumstantial evidence" Goddell will use or what the penalty will be. One thing that will definitely count is if the league did in fact warn the Pats last December as has been reported and then they get busted doing this on opening day I would not want to be in BB's shoes.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I'm not saying Brady was or was not involved, but I think it's conceivable that he had no knowledge that the information he was receiving was not obtained within the body of the rules. If they told him to run a different play and look for the dafety blitz, that's not exactly indicative of Brady being operational involved in the signal/sign stealing.Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it. And it would take big stones for the league to launch an investigation with Watergate like overtones into another face of the NFL after the Vick debacle.I agree with others. It is in the best interest of the league to get this cleared up and have people move on as quickly as possible.

A %?He likely knew of it. He also does NOT get any penalty from it whatsoever. Except for a stain on his legacy.

Not even that. The Brady thing has no interest to me. Never be able to prove it, so why talk about it? His name won't even get mentioned, unless this radio thing somehow ties into the QB helmet receiver, and I doubt that very much.This won't affect Brady at all. Just my guess.

Already he will never be seriously talked about "overtaking Joe Montana" ever again. Too many doubts now.

 

[David Yudkin]

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it.

I agree. And I see that as a negative for Brady in terms of how his career would be perceived IF the infractions plumb the lowest possible depths. He'll be forever soiled with the residue of this in the minds of many people. Even if he didn't explicitly know about the cheating, he'd definitely be a primary beneficiary and his accomplishments will be called into question, as will the accomplishments of the Pats in general.

I think plenty of people hate him already for his ability to date women that the rest of the real world can only hope to see on screen or in lingerie catalogs.I see this entire situation getting blown out of proportion at this stage and like most other things once it is resolved it will go away and years from now this whole story will be nothing more than a footnote to Brady's career.

 

[jonessed]

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to see a very in depth investigation to see how deep the alleged cheating goes.

I'd be shocked if they dwelt too long or deep on this. And, if they do, you and I won't hear about it. What incentive does Goddall have to make a huge issue out of this? It smears the game and smears the best organization the game has had over the last 7 years.He wants this punished swiftly, approproately, and then back to the game of football.

Dispute it and back it up with defense of a better organization.The face of the players is also very good - until last year, they were squeaky clean. Never gave bulletin board fodder, always said the right things, etc.

Oh come on, BB has always had a rep for being a jackass and he runs that team his way. Now they are being investigated for cheating over at least part of that span.

Citation needed on that part of your statement. His players love him.

Yes, so? He and Brady are the face of the team. If he treats people like crap outside the organization it reflects badly on the organization. "He runs that team his way" meaning he plays an important role in defining the organization

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it.

I agree. And I see that as a negative for Brady in terms of how his career would be perceived IF the infractions plumb the lowest possible depths. He'll be forever soiled with the residue of this in the minds of many people. Even if he didn't explicitly know about the cheating, he'd definitely be a primary beneficiary and his accomplishments will be called into question, as will the accomplishments of the Pats in general.

I think plenty of people hate him already for his ability to date women that the rest of the real world can only hope to see on screen or in lingerie catalogs.I see this entire situation getting blown out of proportion at this stage and like most other things once it is resolved it will go away and years from now this whole story will be nothing more than a footnote to Brady's career.

Wow, did we get sucked back into the Vick threads? Sure looks that way.

 

[Phlash]

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

"I invented this thing, I call it a jump-to-conclusions mat"

What do you propose they were doing with the stolen signals? Sending them to the center?

Or could it be that the coaches just adjusted their playcalling based on what they saw? Maybe you're just wrong? That might be it.

Or you're wrong. I'm just speculating. I made that pretty clear.

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

Thats not speculating in my book.

I said I was "thinking out loud". What do you think that means?

ob·vi·ous (ŏb'vē-əs)

adj.

1. Easily perceived or understood; quite apparent.

So you were stating that Brady was obviously involved, but that statement was just speculation? That doesn't even make sense.

 

[helix]

this is what happened...they video tape the defensive signals...the pats then go in at halftime compare the video to their eye in the sky Polaroids and then say this signal means this defense...so in the 2nd half they will know this signal means they are blitzing from the right or whatever.then the coach calls in to Brady using the in helmet speaker/mic and gives him the hot play.Brady doesn't have to be in on it...i really think its probably only like 3 or 4 coaches in on the videotaping...something like this you wouldn't want everyone knowing about

Can you imagine the advantage an offense has if they know a blitz is coming from the right side leaving Moss in single coverage? You give that detailed information to a QB like Brady and it is lights out. See final score and Moss's stats against the Jets.My opinion if the Pats are found guilty:$250,000 FineLoss of a 3rd4 game suspension for the Coach

 

[greenline]

You can't punish based on speculation. Prove to me:A. They filmed anyone else. B. They used that film to gain an advantage.

?? I don't have to do anything.If the NFL investigates, they will investigate other allegations that the Pats did similar things last year. You are being obtuse to ignore that and to ask me to prove something to you.

Ok well you are being acute in your analyzation of the facts. I know you want this to go down so badly, at least it appears as much for the last 600 pages, but regardless there is nothing of substance here aside from one incident. Everything else is speculation. I'm sure they will investigate everything but when it comes down to it, you have an organization with a previously squeaky clean image who broke one rule that can be justifiably proven. The rest is conjecture and sour grapes.

 

[Banger]

You can't punish based on speculation. Prove to me:A. They filmed anyone else. B. They used that film to gain an advantage.

?? I don't have to do anything.If the NFL investigates, they will investigate other allegations that the Pats did similar things last year. You are being obtuse to ignore that and to ask me to prove something to you.

Ok well you are being acute in your analyzation of the facts. I know you want this to go down so badly, at least it appears as much for the last 600 pages, but regardless there is nothing of substance here aside from one incident. Everything else is speculation. I'm sure they will investigate everything but when it comes down to it, you have an organization with a previously squeaky clean image who broke one rule that can be justifiably proven. The rest is conjecture and sour grapes.

pure comedy.

 

[mad sweeney]

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it.

I agree. And I see that as a negative for Brady in terms of how his career would be perceived IF the infractions plumb the lowest possible depths. He'll be forever soiled with the residue of this in the minds of many people. Even if he didn't explicitly know about the cheating, he'd definitely be a primary beneficiary and his accomplishments will be called into question, as will the accomplishments of the Pats in general.

I think plenty of people hate him already for his ability to date women that the rest of the real world can only hope to see on screen or in lingerie catalogs.

I see this entire situation getting blown out of proportion at this stage and like most other things once it is resolved it will go away and years from now this whole story will be nothing more than a footnote to Brady's career.

I remember pages of this type of thinking in the many Vick threads.

 

[1huskerfan]

this is what happened...

they video tape the defensive signals...

the pats then go in at halftime compare the video to their eye in the sky Polaroids and then say this signal means this defense...so in the 2nd half they will know this signal means they are blitzing from the right or whatever.

then the coach calls in to Brady using the in helmet speaker/mic and gives him the hot play.

Brady doesn't have to be in on it...

i really think its probably only like 3 or 4 coaches in on the videotaping...something like this you wouldn't want everyone knowing about

Can you imagine the advantage an offense has if they know a blitz is coming from the right side leaving Moss in triple coverage? You give that detailed information to a QB like Brady and it is lights out. See final score and Moss's stats against the Jets.

My opinion if the Pats are found guilty:

$250,000 Fine

Loss of a 3rd

4 game suspension for the Coach

Fixed

 

[massraider]

I'm sure they will investigate everything but when it comes down to it, you have an organization with a previously squeaky clean image who broke one rule that can be justifiably proven.

We will be a lot better off when people stop mentioning this "squeaky clean image" that frankly, hasn't been remotely grime-free in years.

 

[Gr00vus]

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it.

I agree. And I see that as a negative for Brady in terms of how his career would be perceived IF the infractions plumb the lowest possible depths. He'll be forever soiled with the residue of this in the minds of many people. Even if he didn't explicitly know about the cheating, he'd definitely be a primary beneficiary and his accomplishments will be called into question, as will the accomplishments of the Pats in general.

I think plenty of people hate him already for his ability to date women that the rest of the real world can only hope to see on screen or in lingerie catalogs.I see this entire situation getting blown out of proportion at this stage and like most other things once it is resolved it will go away and years from now this whole story will be nothing more than a footnote to Brady's career.

If they connect the extraneous radio signals to illegal transmissions into the helmet, the party's over for Brady. Whether he was knowingly complicit or not, he'll be viewed as a fraud, and what he's done will be put in a Barry Bonds context. And honestly at that point I'd be in that camp myself. It wouldn't be a footnote, it'd be a big red boldfaced asterisk.I've respected the Pats and Brady up to now. My respect for the Pats organization, and particularly the coaching staff is now gone, irrevocably so. I'd like to keep my respect for Brady, but my respect for him is on shaky ground right now - given the illegal snooping on the defensive coaches he's gained an unfair advantage - and although I think it slight, even slight advantages still matter. I really want to know what goes on with those radio signals.

 

[BusMan]

I'm not saying Brady was or was not involved, but I think it's conceivable that he had no knowledge that the information he was receiving was not obtained within the body of the rules. If they told him to run a different play and look for the safety blitz, that's not exactly indicative of Brady being operational involved in the signal/sign stealing.

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it. And it would take big stones for the league to launch an investigation with Watergate like overtones into another face of the NFL after the Vick debacle.

I agree with others. It is in the best interest of the league to get this cleared up and have people move on as quickly as possible.

I agree. But the logical conclusion of having people move on as quickly as possible is having nothing for people to have to move on from in the first place. Which further strengthens my belief that the penalty will be harsher than most Patriots fans can tolerate. harsh penalty = effective deterrent = untarnished shield =

 

[greenline]

I'm sure they will investigate everything but when it comes down to it, you have an organization with a previously squeaky clean image who broke one rule that can be justifiably proven.

We will be a lot better off when people stop mentioning this "squeaky clean image" that frankly, hasn't been remotely grime-free in years.

To who though? They were to most of the world. You are thinking way inside a box.

 

[jonessed]

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

"I invented this thing, I call it a jump-to-conclusions mat"

What do you propose they were doing with the stolen signals? Sending them to the center?

Or could it be that the coaches just adjusted their playcalling based on what they saw? Maybe you're just wrong? That might be it.

Or you're wrong. I'm just speculating. I made that pretty clear.

Brady had to be involved obviously. Not saying he should or should not be suspended, just thinking out loud.

Thats not speculating in my book.

I said I was "thinking out loud". What do you think that means?

ob·vi·ous (ŏb'vē-əs)

adj.

1. Easily perceived or understood; quite apparent.

So you were stating that Brady was obviously involved, but that statement was just speculation? That doesn't even make sense.

It seemed obvious to me based on my assumptions. Most everything in this thread is speculation and my assumptions are based on those. I was "brainstorming", "thinking out loud", "throwing things out there". give it a rest.

 

[Keys Myaths]

ML>hi.

O/U at 20 pages was way too low.

 

[greenline]

You can't punish based on speculation. Prove to me:A. They filmed anyone else. B. They used that film to gain an advantage.

?? I don't have to do anything.If the NFL investigates, they will investigate other allegations that the Pats did similar things last year. You are being obtuse to ignore that and to ask me to prove something to you.

Ok well you are being acute in your analyzation of the facts. I know you want this to go down so badly, at least it appears as much for the last 600 pages, but regardless there is nothing of substance here aside from one incident. Everything else is speculation. I'm sure they will investigate everything but when it comes down to it, you have an organization with a previously squeaky clean image who broke one rule that can be justifiably proven. The rest is conjecture and sour grapes.

pure comedy.

I'm glad it amuses you. Get some popcorn.

 

[Phlash]

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it.

I agree. And I see that as a negative for Brady in terms of how his career would be perceived IF the infractions plumb the lowest possible depths. He'll be forever soiled with the residue of this in the minds of many people. Even if he didn't explicitly know about the cheating, he'd definitely be a primary beneficiary and his accomplishments will be called into question, as will the accomplishments of the Pats in general.

I think plenty of people hate him already for his ability to date women that the rest of the real world can only hope to see on screen or in lingerie catalogs.I see this entire situation getting blown out of proportion at this stage and like most other things once it is resolved it will go away and years from now this whole story will be nothing more than a footnote to Brady's career.

Wow, did we get sucked back into the Vick threads? Sure looks that way.

Are you comparing the maiming and torturing of dogs with some guy videotaping some guys fingers?

 

[Kit Fisto]

Where is Rabid Patriot Homer when you need him?

 

[BusMan]

I have major issues with the homerism in this thread, but I need to clear the air: I thought Shanahan was a genius for busting out the lie detector on Kircus. Thinking back on that now, it was definitely a stretch, and I can see why a lot of non-Denver fans wouldn't like Shanny.

over, back to the thread...

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Even if Brady were involved, I also don't see how anyone could prove it.

I agree. And I see that as a negative for Brady in terms of how his career would be perceived IF the infractions plumb the lowest possible depths. He'll be forever soiled with the residue of this in the minds of many people. Even if he didn't explicitly know about the cheating, he'd definitely be a primary beneficiary and his accomplishments will be called into question, as will the accomplishments of the Pats in general.

I think plenty of people hate him already for his ability to date women that the rest of the real world can only hope to see on screen or in lingerie catalogs.I see this entire situation getting blown out of proportion at this stage and like most other things once it is resolved it will go away and years from now this whole story will be nothing more than a footnote to Brady's career.

Wow, did we get sucked back into the Vick threads? Sure looks that way.

Are you comparing the maiming and torturing of dogs with some guy videotaping some guys fingers?

Nope, just DYs take on both of scenarios.