Espn reporting Goodell confirmed Patriots using camera (1 Viewer)

[jonessed]

This was a stupid thing for the Pats/Belichek to do. The Patriots should be fined and Belichek should be suspended 4 games. Equate it to a steroids suspension. I dont think the commish wants to appear like he punnishes the players more harshly than coaches. Especially since the majority of players are black and the majority of coaches are white.

Is this technically cheating? YES, it breaks a rule. Do you gain a measureable advantage over your opponent? NO. The question I have for Belichek is, why do it? Its not going to help you win a game. Its ridiculous. I keep hearing people talk about how they film the first half and break down the film at halftime or on the fly. Halftime is 15 minutes, you barely have enough time to piss. I just dont buy it as much of a competitive advantage at all. Its just stupid.

Some say that it is ridiculous that Wade Wilson got suspended for HGH usage. What does the use of performance enhancing drugs have to do with a coach? I feel that he was slapped so hard because the coach has access to players. Since he didnt notify the league of his condition, he could have been securing the HGH to give to players which is the perception that the league was concerned about.

I do want to hear from Belichek an explanation of his "interpretation" issue. That is ridiculous and any PR flunky that helped him write that statement for his press conference is out to lunch. BTW, Bob Kraft is a VERY hands on owner. I would find it hard to believe that he didnt know this was going on. So, the thought of Goodell letting Kraft punish Belichek is a little naive to me as well.

I saw an interview with Favre about in the NFL Network and he clearly stated that it would be an advantage. Favre is a pretty stand up guy. I'll take his word for it over the Patriot fan brigade.

If Favre's team isnt doing "it", how would he know if it is an advantage or not? There are 40 seconds between plays in the NFL. I believe you have 20 seconds to call the next play before the headset shuts off on you. So by filming the defensive signals in the 1st half, you now have someone that can watch the defensive coach on the Jets, decipher those signals, and at that point you can decide on what play to run based on that defense and call in that play to Brady all in 20 seconds? Have you ever heard an NFL play called? It takes at least 5 seconds to call it. Then it would presumably take at least another 5 seconds for Brady to call it in the huddle. Then he gets to the line of scrimmage. Presumably, based on formation, the Jets might adjust the defense that has been called. Based on that, Brady might audible the play. See where I am going here?I see the point of videotaping the signals against a team like the Jets because you will play them again. Presuming they are going to use the same signals, which they would be stupid to do, you could use the videotape as a scouting tool for the next game. I dont understand how it could possibly be used to much advantage in game and dont understand why the Patriots would try to film the GB game since they only play them once every 4 years.

My understanding of the GB situation is that they spotted the guy before the game and confiscated the camera or made him leave the sideline. There was no actual filming during the GB game and the Pats won 35-0 anyways.

I dont think this type of videotaping in game lends you a measurable advantage. Unless it is purely psychological.

The situation was described and he said it would be a "definite" advantage. I think he is smart enough and has enough experience playing football to know. You don't? Which category do you think you have him beat in?

I dont know. Has he coached? I'm sure he is aware of what goes on within the headset during a game but maybe he doesnt. You tell me logistically how it would work. Or when situations arise do you just look for some popular figure that you like and just OWN his opinion? Do you have an opinion of your own or do you just want to take what Brett Favre says at face value? Many coaches have said that it does not pose a significant advantage.

I doubt he knows how the headsets work. He's only played with one the entire time they have been in existence. Favre is about as straight a talker as you are going to find on the football field. You can call him a liar if you like, but I've never known him to be one.

 

[twitch]

just one of the all-time WORST days as a Pats fan. The very fitting piling on leaves me feeling like a midget covered in honey playing smear the queer with 20 grizzly bears. much worse than after the Colts loss. horrible day for the dynasty.

 

[Pat Patriot]

This was a stupid thing for the Pats/Belichek to do. The Patriots should be fined and Belichek should be suspended 4 games. Equate it to a steroids suspension. I dont think the commish wants to appear like he punnishes the players more harshly than coaches. Especially since the majority of players are black and the majority of coaches are white.

Is this technically cheating? YES, it breaks a rule. Do you gain a measureable advantage over your opponent? NO. The question I have for Belichek is, why do it? Its not going to help you win a game. Its ridiculous. I keep hearing people talk about how they film the first half and break down the film at halftime or on the fly. Halftime is 15 minutes, you barely have enough time to piss. I just dont buy it as much of a competitive advantage at all. Its just stupid.

Some say that it is ridiculous that Wade Wilson got suspended for HGH usage. What does the use of performance enhancing drugs have to do with a coach? I feel that he was slapped so hard because the coach has access to players. Since he didnt notify the league of his condition, he could have been securing the HGH to give to players which is the perception that the league was concerned about.

I do want to hear from Belichek an explanation of his "interpretation" issue. That is ridiculous and any PR flunky that helped him write that statement for his press conference is out to lunch. BTW, Bob Kraft is a VERY hands on owner. I would find it hard to believe that he didnt know this was going on. So, the thought of Goodell letting Kraft punish Belichek is a little naive to me as well.

I saw an interview with Favre about in the NFL Network and he clearly stated that it would be an advantage. Favre is a pretty stand up guy. I'll take his word for it over the Patriot fan brigade.

If Favre's team isnt doing "it", how would he know if it is an advantage or not? There are 40 seconds between plays in the NFL. I believe you have 20 seconds to call the next play before the headset shuts off on you. So by filming the defensive signals in the 1st half, you now have someone that can watch the defensive coach on the Jets, decipher those signals, and at that point you can decide on what play to run based on that defense and call in that play to Brady all in 20 seconds? Have you ever heard an NFL play called? It takes at least 5 seconds to call it. Then it would presumably take at least another 5 seconds for Brady to call it in the huddle. Then he gets to the line of scrimmage. Presumably, based on formation, the Jets might adjust the defense that has been called. Based on that, Brady might audible the play. See where I am going here?I see the point of videotaping the signals against a team like the Jets because you will play them again. Presuming they are going to use the same signals, which they would be stupid to do, you could use the videotape as a scouting tool for the next game. I dont understand how it could possibly be used to much advantage in game and dont understand why the Patriots would try to film the GB game since they only play them once every 4 years.

My understanding of the GB situation is that they spotted the guy before the game and confiscated the camera or made him leave the sideline. There was no actual filming during the GB game and the Pats won 35-0 anyways.

I dont think this type of videotaping in game lends you a measurable advantage. Unless it is purely psychological.

The situation was described and he said it would be a "definite" advantage. I think he is smart enough and has enough experience playing football to know. You don't? Which category do you think you have him beat in?

I dont know. Has he coached? I'm sure he is aware of what goes on within the headset during a game but maybe he doesnt. You tell me logistically how it would work. Or when situations arise do you just look for some popular figure that you like and just OWN his opinion? Do you have an opinion of your own or do you just want to take what Brett Favre says at face value? Many coaches have said that it does not pose a significant advantage.

I doubt he knows how the headsets work. He's only played with one the entire time they have been in existence. Favre is about as straight a talker as you are going to find on the football field. You can call him a liar if you like, but I've never known him to be one.

1. I was refering to the back and forth that goes on between offensive coaches on the headset before the 1 coach who has a connection to the QB gives him the play. Since Favre is in the game and not "on the headset" when coaches are deciding what play is called, I dont think he is necessarily aware of all of the banter that goes on before the play call comes in to him. If he thinks there is time for that banter, decoding defensive signals and deciding what play to call all in the 15-20 seconds they have to get him the play, then that is his opinion.2. Where did I call him a liar? I said that he has an opinion and that you apparently dont.

 

[jonessed]

This was a stupid thing for the Pats/Belichek to do. The Patriots should be fined and Belichek should be suspended 4 games. Equate it to a steroids suspension. I dont think the commish wants to appear like he punnishes the players more harshly than coaches. Especially since the majority of players are black and the majority of coaches are white.

Is this technically cheating? YES, it breaks a rule. Do you gain a measureable advantage over your opponent? NO. The question I have for Belichek is, why do it? Its not going to help you win a game. Its ridiculous. I keep hearing people talk about how they film the first half and break down the film at halftime or on the fly. Halftime is 15 minutes, you barely have enough time to piss. I just dont buy it as much of a competitive advantage at all. Its just stupid.

Some say that it is ridiculous that Wade Wilson got suspended for HGH usage. What does the use of performance enhancing drugs have to do with a coach? I feel that he was slapped so hard because the coach has access to players. Since he didnt notify the league of his condition, he could have been securing the HGH to give to players which is the perception that the league was concerned about.

I do want to hear from Belichek an explanation of his "interpretation" issue. That is ridiculous and any PR flunky that helped him write that statement for his press conference is out to lunch. BTW, Bob Kraft is a VERY hands on owner. I would find it hard to believe that he didnt know this was going on. So, the thought of Goodell letting Kraft punish Belichek is a little naive to me as well.

I saw an interview with Favre about in the NFL Network and he clearly stated that it would be an advantage. Favre is a pretty stand up guy. I'll take his word for it over the Patriot fan brigade.

If Favre's team isnt doing "it", how would he know if it is an advantage or not? There are 40 seconds between plays in the NFL. I believe you have 20 seconds to call the next play before the headset shuts off on you. So by filming the defensive signals in the 1st half, you now have someone that can watch the defensive coach on the Jets, decipher those signals, and at that point you can decide on what play to run based on that defense and call in that play to Brady all in 20 seconds? Have you ever heard an NFL play called? It takes at least 5 seconds to call it. Then it would presumably take at least another 5 seconds for Brady to call it in the huddle. Then he gets to the line of scrimmage. Presumably, based on formation, the Jets might adjust the defense that has been called. Based on that, Brady might audible the play. See where I am going here?I see the point of videotaping the signals against a team like the Jets because you will play them again. Presuming they are going to use the same signals, which they would be stupid to do, you could use the videotape as a scouting tool for the next game. I dont understand how it could possibly be used to much advantage in game and dont understand why the Patriots would try to film the GB game since they only play them once every 4 years.

My understanding of the GB situation is that they spotted the guy before the game and confiscated the camera or made him leave the sideline. There was no actual filming during the GB game and the Pats won 35-0 anyways.

I dont think this type of videotaping in game lends you a measurable advantage. Unless it is purely psychological.

The situation was described and he said it would be a "definite" advantage. I think he is smart enough and has enough experience playing football to know. You don't? Which category do you think you have him beat in?

I dont know. Has he coached? I'm sure he is aware of what goes on within the headset during a game but maybe he doesnt. You tell me logistically how it would work. Or when situations arise do you just look for some popular figure that you like and just OWN his opinion? Do you have an opinion of your own or do you just want to take what Brett Favre says at face value? Many coaches have said that it does not pose a significant advantage.

I doubt he knows how the headsets work. He's only played with one the entire time they have been in existence. Favre is about as straight a talker as you are going to find on the football field. You can call him a liar if you like, but I've never known him to be one.

1. I was refering to the back and forth that goes on between offensive coaches on the headset before the 1 coach who has a connection to the QB gives him the play. Since Favre is in the game and not "on the headset" when coaches are deciding what play is called, I dont think he is necessarily aware of all of the banter that goes on before the play call comes in to him. If he thinks there is time for that banter, decoding defensive signals and deciding what play to call all in the 15-20 seconds they have to get him the play, then that is his opinion.2. Where did I call him a liar? I said that he has an opinion and that you apparently dont.

I don't have an opinion? I would be surprised if anyone here didn't have an opinion.

 

[Pat Patriot]

This was a stupid thing for the Pats/Belichek to do. The Patriots should be fined and Belichek should be suspended 4 games. Equate it to a steroids suspension. I dont think the commish wants to appear like he punnishes the players more harshly than coaches. Especially since the majority of players are black and the majority of coaches are white.

Is this technically cheating? YES, it breaks a rule. Do you gain a measureable advantage over your opponent? NO. The question I have for Belichek is, why do it? Its not going to help you win a game. Its ridiculous. I keep hearing people talk about how they film the first half and break down the film at halftime or on the fly. Halftime is 15 minutes, you barely have enough time to piss. I just dont buy it as much of a competitive advantage at all. Its just stupid.

Some say that it is ridiculous that Wade Wilson got suspended for HGH usage. What does the use of performance enhancing drugs have to do with a coach? I feel that he was slapped so hard because the coach has access to players. Since he didnt notify the league of his condition, he could have been securing the HGH to give to players which is the perception that the league was concerned about.

I do want to hear from Belichek an explanation of his "interpretation" issue. That is ridiculous and any PR flunky that helped him write that statement for his press conference is out to lunch. BTW, Bob Kraft is a VERY hands on owner. I would find it hard to believe that he didnt know this was going on. So, the thought of Goodell letting Kraft punish Belichek is a little naive to me as well.

I saw an interview with Favre about in the NFL Network and he clearly stated that it would be an advantage. Favre is a pretty stand up guy. I'll take his word for it over the Patriot fan brigade.

If Favre's team isnt doing "it", how would he know if it is an advantage or not? There are 40 seconds between plays in the NFL. I believe you have 20 seconds to call the next play before the headset shuts off on you. So by filming the defensive signals in the 1st half, you now have someone that can watch the defensive coach on the Jets, decipher those signals, and at that point you can decide on what play to run based on that defense and call in that play to Brady all in 20 seconds? Have you ever heard an NFL play called? It takes at least 5 seconds to call it. Then it would presumably take at least another 5 seconds for Brady to call it in the huddle. Then he gets to the line of scrimmage. Presumably, based on formation, the Jets might adjust the defense that has been called. Based on that, Brady might audible the play. See where I am going here?I see the point of videotaping the signals against a team like the Jets because you will play them again. Presuming they are going to use the same signals, which they would be stupid to do, you could use the videotape as a scouting tool for the next game. I dont understand how it could possibly be used to much advantage in game and dont understand why the Patriots would try to film the GB game since they only play them once every 4 years.

My understanding of the GB situation is that they spotted the guy before the game and confiscated the camera or made him leave the sideline. There was no actual filming during the GB game and the Pats won 35-0 anyways.

I dont think this type of videotaping in game lends you a measurable advantage. Unless it is purely psychological.

The situation was described and he said it would be a "definite" advantage. I think he is smart enough and has enough experience playing football to know. You don't? Which category do you think you have him beat in?

I dont know. Has he coached? I'm sure he is aware of what goes on within the headset during a game but maybe he doesnt. You tell me logistically how it would work. Or when situations arise do you just look for some popular figure that you like and just OWN his opinion? Do you have an opinion of your own or do you just want to take what Brett Favre says at face value? Many coaches have said that it does not pose a significant advantage.

I doubt he knows how the headsets work. He's only played with one the entire time they have been in existence. Favre is about as straight a talker as you are going to find on the football field. You can call him a liar if you like, but I've never known him to be one.

1. I was refering to the back and forth that goes on between offensive coaches on the headset before the 1 coach who has a connection to the QB gives him the play. Since Favre is in the game and not "on the headset" when coaches are deciding what play is called, I dont think he is necessarily aware of all of the banter that goes on before the play call comes in to him. If he thinks there is time for that banter, decoding defensive signals and deciding what play to call all in the 15-20 seconds they have to get him the play, then that is his opinion.2. Where did I call him a liar? I said that he has an opinion and that you apparently dont.

I don't have an opinion? I would be surprised if anyone here didn't have an opinion.

You opinion as stated is that Brett Favre says that videotaping a teams signals during a game gives you a definite advantage. Therefore, because Brett Favre says so, you believe it gives you a destinct advantage. That sounds more like Brett Favre has an opinion than you actually do.

 

[jonessed]

This was a stupid thing for the Pats/Belichek to do. The Patriots should be fined and Belichek should be suspended 4 games. Equate it to a steroids suspension. I dont think the commish wants to appear like he punnishes the players more harshly than coaches. Especially since the majority of players are black and the majority of coaches are white.

Is this technically cheating? YES, it breaks a rule. Do you gain a measureable advantage over your opponent? NO. The question I have for Belichek is, why do it? Its not going to help you win a game. Its ridiculous. I keep hearing people talk about how they film the first half and break down the film at halftime or on the fly. Halftime is 15 minutes, you barely have enough time to piss. I just dont buy it as much of a competitive advantage at all. Its just stupid.

Some say that it is ridiculous that Wade Wilson got suspended for HGH usage. What does the use of performance enhancing drugs have to do with a coach? I feel that he was slapped so hard because the coach has access to players. Since he didnt notify the league of his condition, he could have been securing the HGH to give to players which is the perception that the league was concerned about.

I do want to hear from Belichek an explanation of his "interpretation" issue. That is ridiculous and any PR flunky that helped him write that statement for his press conference is out to lunch. BTW, Bob Kraft is a VERY hands on owner. I would find it hard to believe that he didnt know this was going on. So, the thought of Goodell letting Kraft punish Belichek is a little naive to me as well.

I saw an interview with Favre about in the NFL Network and he clearly stated that it would be an advantage. Favre is a pretty stand up guy. I'll take his word for it over the Patriot fan brigade.

If Favre's team isnt doing "it", how would he know if it is an advantage or not? There are 40 seconds between plays in the NFL. I believe you have 20 seconds to call the next play before the headset shuts off on you. So by filming the defensive signals in the 1st half, you now have someone that can watch the defensive coach on the Jets, decipher those signals, and at that point you can decide on what play to run based on that defense and call in that play to Brady all in 20 seconds? Have you ever heard an NFL play called? It takes at least 5 seconds to call it. Then it would presumably take at least another 5 seconds for Brady to call it in the huddle. Then he gets to the line of scrimmage. Presumably, based on formation, the Jets might adjust the defense that has been called. Based on that, Brady might audible the play. See where I am going here?I see the point of videotaping the signals against a team like the Jets because you will play them again. Presuming they are going to use the same signals, which they would be stupid to do, you could use the videotape as a scouting tool for the next game. I dont understand how it could possibly be used to much advantage in game and dont understand why the Patriots would try to film the GB game since they only play them once every 4 years.

My understanding of the GB situation is that they spotted the guy before the game and confiscated the camera or made him leave the sideline. There was no actual filming during the GB game and the Pats won 35-0 anyways.

I dont think this type of videotaping in game lends you a measurable advantage. Unless it is purely psychological.

The situation was described and he said it would be a "definite" advantage. I think he is smart enough and has enough experience playing football to know. You don't? Which category do you think you have him beat in?

I dont know. Has he coached? I'm sure he is aware of what goes on within the headset during a game but maybe he doesnt. You tell me logistically how it would work. Or when situations arise do you just look for some popular figure that you like and just OWN his opinion? Do you have an opinion of your own or do you just want to take what Brett Favre says at face value? Many coaches have said that it does not pose a significant advantage.

I doubt he knows how the headsets work. He's only played with one the entire time they have been in existence. Favre is about as straight a talker as you are going to find on the football field. You can call him a liar if you like, but I've never known him to be one.

1. I was refering to the back and forth that goes on between offensive coaches on the headset before the 1 coach who has a connection to the QB gives him the play. Since Favre is in the game and not "on the headset" when coaches are deciding what play is called, I dont think he is necessarily aware of all of the banter that goes on before the play call comes in to him. If he thinks there is time for that banter, decoding defensive signals and deciding what play to call all in the 15-20 seconds they have to get him the play, then that is his opinion.2. Where did I call him a liar? I said that he has an opinion and that you apparently dont.

I don't have an opinion? I would be surprised if anyone here didn't have an opinion.

You opinion as stated is that Brett Favre says that videotaping a teams signals during a game gives you a definite advantage. Therefore, because Brett Favre says so, you believe it gives you a destinct advantage. That sounds more like Brett Favre has an opinion than you actually do.

Oh I see, because I value someone's opinion I can't have any of my own. That makes sense.

 

[JohnnyU]

Is it just me or have we already made this a boring subject before the penalty has even been handed out? As much as I love anything bad happening to the Patriots, I wish the commish would just go ahead and do what he's going to do so we can get back to football.

 

[twistd]

Whatever, whatever, whatever... There is language (or lack thereof) in the rule that Belichick has pushed. Like Yudkin said, this isn't all that unlike a fantasy player pushing a rule becuase it wasn't written specifically enough by the commish.Now it's up to the Commissioner to determine if what Belichick did may be violating "the spirit" or a direct violation, but that's for Goodell to decide. Not homers/haters on fantasy football message boards.We don't know what's on those tapes or what use the Patriots put it to. It's all speculation right now.

What is bothersome is that a lot of other teams are now coming forward with their stories. So this certainly isn't an isolated incident. Apparently, the Patriots have been doing this for a long time. And teams have had evidence, but apparently not enough till now. This is the first instance where they have been caught red-handed. But, if this is true, that they were stealing signals, I find it hard to believe this is the first time. In that case the commissioner would have to come down really hard.

 

[Tau837]

I want to clarify my last couple of posts. I am not defending Belichick or the Patriots here. If this is true, I will repeat what I've said numerous times - this is embarrassing, it's wrong, and the Patriots should be punished.

I can't predict the punishment for this offense. We've all heard anywhere between a third round pick, and the two firsts and a yearlong suspension for Belichick. Assuming that this is just a case of videotaping the defensive playcalls, I think the former is a little light, while the latter is far too harsh. I've said before that I don't think that coaches should be suspended in the NFL, but I think that suspending Belichick for the next Jets game seems like part of a fair punishment. I can understand a punishment that involves a first round pick, but I don't think it's realistic to take both firsts simply because most teams won't have two first round picks, so this punishment would seem to me to be targetted specifically at these Patriots, and not an attempt to find a fair punishment to deter an offense that is rumored to be widespread.

I will also reiterate that, if the worst case turns out to be true and the Patriots were not only stealing signs but offensive radio signals, and this is neither an isolated incident nor a widespread practice, then I'll just say that I will have much more serious concerns about the Patriots.

But I would also point out that if this were the Cardinals, we wouldn't have an 18 page thread. The vitriol aimed at the Patriots is fueling unrealistic hopes and demands for the punishment that should be doled out to them, and it seems to be very self serving behavior in the guise of a demand for justice. If you've been equally upset about other recent scandals in the NFL, please feel free to show some links to your thoughts or at least elaborate on the punishment you think should have been doled out for other rulebreaking that's occurred in recent history. I'm particularly interested in the fans of rival teams who've never been involved in NFL rules violations threads before but seem appalled at the Patriots' alleged behavior without knowing the details.

I'm also legitimately interested in the line that people are drawing between cheating and not cheating. It seems like the same people who are saying, if it's against the rules, it's cheating, are calling Belichick a cheater without yet knowing if what he did was against the rules. If he'd found some loophole, would you recant your accusations? If it's not the fact that it's against the rules, then is it this specific rule violation that bothers you? Can somebody please articulate in more detail why this rule violation is worse than the act of simply stealing signs? I haven't heard an explanation for this that goes deeper than "doesn't it seem wrong?". I've heard that the NFL shouldn't be about technology, but the same people seem OK with videotaping everything else on the field. I've heard that for one team to videotape signs is an unfair advantage over other teams who don't, but those same teams are legally watching the signs, employing lipreaders, and, according to Shanahan, deciphering those signs so they know the opponents' playcalls by the end of the first quarter. Why is this so much worse?

On the bolded line, it kind of cuts both ways. There are more Pats "haters" here who enjoy this situation and want to pile on than there would be for the Cards, but by the same token, there are also more Pats "homers" here who passionately defend their team, in many cases no matter what the situation (not saying you are doing that here). It is for both reasons that this is 18 pages long.I read the first 10 pages or so and then skipped to the end, so I'm not sure how much I missed in there. But in the first 10 pages, there were plenty of posts explaining how this practice could provide a competitive advantage, particularly if the radio frequency tampering was done in conjunction with the stealing and relaying of signs. I can't definitively know for myself, having never played in the NFL, but I am comfortable in assuming the reason this practice is illegal is because it *can* provide a competitive advantage. Given that assumption, I'd call it cheating. And it could be an "integrity of the game" issue, depending on what the details of the competitive advantage are. Obviously, the greater the competitive advantage, the worse the infraction and the greater the penalties should be.

Now, I agree with you that if in the end it turns out that there is no substantive difference between this and stealing signs via other legal means, it doesn't make sense to levy a harsh punishment, mostly because the rule wouldn't make sense in that case. But even then, the Pats' behavior violates the league directive, which will call for some level of punishment.

I hope the league in rendering its decision will lay out in some detail what was done and why they want to preclude it.

 

[icehouse]

Hmm, when I was growing up if someone looked at what plays the other guy was picking in Madden he would get his ### kicked. Take some picks if the cheating is legit....

 

[GregR_2]

...But I would also point out that if this were the Cardinals, we wouldn't have an 18 page thread. The vitriol aimed at the Patriots is fueling unrealistic hopes and demands for the punishment that should be doled out to them, and it seems to be very self serving behavior in the guise of a demand for justice.

I think some of the things have been said like a year long suspension, are a bit silly and I imagine come from dislike and not from objective thinking.But I think you also are overlooking the part of the situation that warrants a stiff punishment. I'm not all that appalled that a team illegally video taped coaches. I'm appalled that a team was publicly alleged to have been video taping coaches for awhile now, enough so that the league sent out a specific warning against doing this which I think that team had to know was at least partly due to those allegations if not largely due to them... and then they go ahead and do it again anyway in the first week of the season.It's dumb. It's stupid. But worse, doing it after being specifically warned not to shows a complete disdain for the league and its rules that goes beyond just breaking a rule. I thought it was bad when Pacman went out to a strip club the night before he meets with Goodell about all his issues stemming from going to strip clubs. But this one makes Pacman's audacity and stupidity pale in comparison. And that is what makes it deserve a stiff punishment moreso than the violation by itself does.I don't care who the name is of the person that did it or what team he's on. If my Texans had a reputation for doing this and got caught doing it right after a league warning I'd want to see the same punishment I think BB and the Pats should get.

I'm also legitimately interested in the line that people are drawing between cheating and not cheating. It seems like the same people who are saying, if it's against the rules, it's cheating, are calling Belichick a cheater without yet knowing if what he did was against the rules.

People are working off of reports from guys whose are supposed to be verifying their sources. It's one thing to believe an obvious rumor monger (i.e. PFT) without any critical evaluation. When multiple news outlets are carrying corroborating stories, I think you're giving too much benefit of the doubt to BB. When we hear from multiple sources that the commish already reviewed the tape and decided they are guilty, it doesn't mean that he's announced it publicly, but I think it's reasonable that the public respond as if that is likely the case. Don't you?

If he'd found some loophole, would you recant your accusations? If it's not the fact that it's against the rules, then is it this specific rule violation that bothers you?

If he didn't break the rule it will change my opinion of him, though people who find and exploit loopholes are their own class of low life. (Hello, my name is Al Davis, and I'm a loophole abuser.) So I wouldn't suddenly think BB is a great guy for having found a loophole and abusing it, no. Would you?

Can somebody please articulate in more detail why this rule violation is worse than the act of simply stealing signs? I haven't heard an explanation for this that goes deeper than "doesn't it seem wrong?".

Already answered above, so I'll leave off there.

 

[Red Apples]

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

if this doesn't explain it clearly for people im not sure what will.

 

[NY/NJMFDIVER]

I can understand a punishment that involves a first round pick, but I don't think it's realistic to take both firsts simply because most teams won't have two first round picks, so this punishment would seem to me to be targetted specifically at these Patriots, and not an attempt to find a fair punishment to deter an offense that is rumored to be widespread.

If the concept is to take your top two draft picks, regardless of slot, its not Pats specific punishment. However, I do think there may be some additional severity to whatever comes down considering their status as being accused last year. The bigger question is, what would they do to a team like the Falcons who could have the top pick, would they deny a team the number one overall in this scenario. It gets easier as the Pats pick near the back of the round. Incidentally I agree with you, I think taking two first rounders is too harsh, but one would really send a message.

But I would also point out that if this were the Cardinals, we wouldn't have an 18 page thread.

There is certainly greater interest in here in light of their success as much as anything. There wouldn't be an interest in the Cardinals, because hypothetically, what would have been the result of their cheating? The interest in the Pats is because the proof is in the pudding and people want to know on some level if this can be traced all the way back to their Super Bowl success.

The vitriol aimed at the Patriots is fueling unrealistic hopes and demands for the punishment that should be doled out to them, and it seems to be very self serving behavior in the guise of a demand for justice. If you've been equally upset about other recent scandals in the NFL, please feel free to show some links to your thoughts or at least elaborate on the punishment you think should have been doled out for other rulebreaking that's occurred in recent history. I'm particularly interested in the fans of rival teams who've never been involved in NFL rules violations threads before but seem appalled at the Patriots' alleged behavior without knowing the details.

You've been more or less non-homerish in these threads, but this just sad. The Pats aren't a galvanizing force like the Cowboys or something, non-Pats fans don't hate them, they really don't think that much of them, so this stuff witch hunt feeling is self important paranoia. Belichick has earned, and I mean earned, a reputation as a #####, but as much as anything, there is interest here because of the brazeness of whats alleged. There were strong enough suspicions last year to call them on the carpet, but nothing came of it, however with the memo directed this preseason, its easy to connect the dots and see who it was directed at. Week 1 Belichick looks to have violated it, and I think that kind of arrogance is going to draw some ire as its just kind of unthinkable frankly and something quite relatable to anyone's life.

I'm also legitimately interested in the line that people are drawing between cheating and not cheating. It seems like the same people who are saying, if it's against the rules, it's cheating, are calling Belichick a cheater without yet knowing if what he did was against the rules. If he'd found some loophole, would you recant your accusations? If it's not the fact that it's against the rules, then is it this specific rule violation that bothers you? Can somebody please articulate in more detail why this rule violation is worse than the act of simply stealing signs? I haven't heard an explanation for this that goes deeper than "doesn't it seem wrong?". I've heard that the NFL shouldn't be about technology, but the same people seem OK with videotaping everything else on the field. I've heard that for one team to videotape signs is an unfair advantage over other teams who don't, but those same teams are legally watching the signs, employing lipreaders, and, according to Shanahan, deciphering those signs so they know the opponents' playcalls by the end of the first quarter. Why is this so much worse?

Its so much worse because of the above mention about the warning that was mentioned. But the actual act is worse because its on the darker doorstep of deeper cheating. If you don't draw the line here, where is it? Directional microphones aimed at the huddle? Bugging the sideline? Lipstick cameras in the smoke detectors in the locker room? Once you open the door to technology for this form of information gathering, then where do you close it and where do you turn back. Take the homer glasses off and look at the wider implications of the league taking it easy on them.

 

[bryan215]

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

if this doesn't explain it clearly for people im not sure what will.

Stealing signals is not illegal.Herm Edwards has admitted to doing it, Marty Shottenheimer, Mike Shanahan...just about every good coach in the NFLwhat is illegal is using a video camera that isnt part of the normal media coverage to videotape the signals.Miami was well known for miking their defensive players so they could record the audibles...I'm pretty sure Zach Thomas admitted as such after they whipped the Pats last year.This isonly deserving of a fine and if u really want to send a message a draft pickanything more than that is complete bull#### and just being done to satisfy the idiots and haters...like LT.

 

[mad sweeney]

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

if this doesn't explain it clearly for people im not sure what will.

Stealing signals is not illegal.Herm Edwards has admitted to doing it, Marty Shottenheimer, Mike Shanahan...just about every good coach in the NFL

what is illegal is using a video camera that isnt part of the normal media coverage to videotape the signals.

Miami was well known for miking their defensive players so they could record the audibles...I'm pretty sure Zach Thomas admitted as such after they whipped the Pats last year.

This isonly deserving of a fine and if u really want to send a message a draft pick

anything more than that is complete bull#### and just being done to satisfy the idiots and haters...like LT.

Sounds like the words of a true idiot and hater.

 

[bryan215]

6) SIGNAL INTERCEPT

After the Dolphins defeated the Patriots 21-0 in Miami last season, Dolphins linebacker Zach Thomas claimed he knew the Patriots' audibles. He wasn't kidding. Teams sometimes will place microphones on their defensive players to tape the opposing team's audibles. The team then matches the audibles with the play the offense runs. In the shutout loss to Miami, the Patriots played their worst game of the season, as Tom Brady was sacked four times. Coincidence?

Charles Casserly on what Miami was doing vs. other teams

"When I was on the competition committee a couple years ago, we discovered a team that was putting a microphone on a defensive lineman, the nose tackle, to get the signals from the quarterback, matched it to the game tape, and they had the audibles the next time they played them. Another one that goes on, this is what they call a parabolic mic. This picks up sound from the quarterback. What some teams do is have an extra one at the game, get the sound from the quarterback, match that to the game tape, and they've got the audibles next time they play them. Miami wasn't doing anything compared to other teams."

 

[NY/NJMFDIVER]

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

if this doesn't explain it clearly for people im not sure what will.

Stealing signals is not illegal.Herm Edwards has admitted to doing it, Marty Shottenheimer, Mike Shanahan...just about every good coach in the NFL

what is illegal is using a video camera that isnt part of the normal media coverage to videotape the signals.

Miami was well known for miking their defensive players so they could record the audibles...I'm pretty sure Zach Thomas admitted as such after they whipped the Pats last year.

This isonly deserving of a fine and if u really want to send a message a draft pick

anything more than that is complete bull#### and just being done to satisfy the idiots and haters...like LT.

Go back to your home on Homer Island. BTW, where is this process documented as "well known"??? If it is, I will apologize to the hilt, and if they did it, thats just as awful as anything the Pats did.

 

[Shrek]

I want to clarify my last couple of posts. I am not defending Belichick or the Patriots here. If this is true, I will repeat what I've said numerous times - this is embarrassing, it's wrong, and the Patriots should be punished.

I can't predict the punishment for this offense. We've all heard anywhere between a third round pick, and the two firsts and a yearlong suspension for Belichick. Assuming that this is just a case of videotaping the defensive playcalls, I think the former is a little light, while the latter is far too harsh. I've said before that I don't think that coaches should be suspended in the NFL, but I think that suspending Belichick for the next Jets game seems like part of a fair punishment. I can understand a punishment that involves a first round pick, but I don't think it's realistic to take both firsts simply because most teams won't have two first round picks, so this punishment would seem to me to be targetted specifically at these Patriots, and not an attempt to find a fair punishment to deter an offense that is rumored to be widespread.

I will also reiterate that, if the worst case turns out to be true and the Patriots were not only stealing signs but offensive radio signals, and this is neither an isolated incident nor a widespread practice, then I'll just say that I will have much more serious concerns about the Patriots.



But I would also point out that if this were the Cardinals, we wouldn't have an 18 page thread. The vitriol aimed at the Patriots is fueling unrealistic hopes and demands for the punishment that should be doled out to them, and it seems to be very self serving behavior in the guise of a demand for justice. If you've been equally upset about other recent scandals in the NFL, please feel free to show some links to your thoughts or at least elaborate on the punishment you think should have been doled out for other rulebreaking that's occurred in recent history. I'm particularly interested in the fans of rival teams who've never been involved in NFL rules violations threads before but seem appalled at the Patriots' alleged behavior without knowing the details.

I'm also legitimately interested in the line that people are drawing between cheating and not cheating. It seems like the same people who are saying, if it's against the rules, it's cheating, are calling Belichick a cheater without yet knowing if what he did was against the rules. If he'd found some loophole, would you recant your accusations? If it's not the fact that it's against the rules, then is it this specific rule violation that bothers you? Can somebody please articulate in more detail why this rule violation is worse than the act of simply stealing signs? I haven't heard an explanation for this that goes deeper than "doesn't it seem wrong?". I've heard that the NFL shouldn't be about technology, but the same people seem OK with videotaping everything else on the field. I've heard that for one team to videotape signs is an unfair advantage over other teams who don't, but those same teams are legally watching the signs, employing lipreaders, and, according to Shanahan, deciphering those signs so they know the opponents' playcalls by the end of the first quarter. Why is this so much worse?

Disagree with the bolded part for a few reasons. First, there aren't 900 rabid Cardinal fans ready to jump in and defend a stupid action taken by their team. Second, the "vitriol aimed at the Pats" has looked to be aimed more at the blind homer fans and their ridiculous attempts at defending this than at the Pats themselves. Most people here seem to be realistic about what to expect as far as punishment for the Pats goes. Some Pats fans are jumping in every time punishment is discussed because they can't stand having to admit that their team may have cheated. They don't like having every other team scorn them when they were riding so high before all of this came up. I understand that. But they have to also understand that when they try to defend this behavior, or justify it by saying "everyone else does it too", or say "It's not as big of a deal as you're trying to make it out to be", etc., this is not winning them any more fans.

These people need to get it out of their head that if someone is being critical of the Pats here, it doesn't automatically make them a "hater" or a "Jets/Steelers/Colts/Panthers/Eagles" fan. I for one have watched the game since I was old enough to play neighborhood football. I love the NFL. And to see a team doing this type of crap makes me angry, because it is damaging the reputation of something that I have always cherished.

My team affiliation has nothing to do with the outrage I feel at BB/The Pats' actions here. I keep seeing it repeated here, but I honestly can't fathom why someone would believe that the two things (outrage and team fan affiliation) cannot be separated. Honestly, this is an arrogant and patronizing viewpoint that probably does create vitriol toward the Pats or those certain fans. But it should be noted that in this case, the vitriol wasn't there until Rabid Homer Pats Fan put it there through their own actions.

 

[twitch]

Is it just me or have we already made this a boring subject before the penalty has even been handed out? As much as I love anything bad happening to the Patriots, I wish the commish would just go ahead and do what he's going to do so we can get back to football.

always good to hear from a voice of reason. ditto the sentiment.

 

[twitch]

I want to clarify my last couple of posts. I am not defending Belichick or the Patriots here. If this is true, I will repeat what I've said numerous times - this is embarrassing, it's wrong, and the Patriots should be punished.

I can't predict the punishment for this offense. We've all heard anywhere between a third round pick, and the two firsts and a yearlong suspension for Belichick. Assuming that this is just a case of videotaping the defensive playcalls, I think the former is a little light, while the latter is far too harsh. I've said before that I don't think that coaches should be suspended in the NFL, but I think that suspending Belichick for the next Jets game seems like part of a fair punishment. I can understand a punishment that involves a first round pick, but I don't think it's realistic to take both firsts simply because most teams won't have two first round picks, so this punishment would seem to me to be targetted specifically at these Patriots, and not an attempt to find a fair punishment to deter an offense that is rumored to be widespread.

I will also reiterate that, if the worst case turns out to be true and the Patriots were not only stealing signs but offensive radio signals, and this is neither an isolated incident nor a widespread practice, then I'll just say that I will have much more serious concerns about the Patriots.



But I would also point out that if this were the Cardinals, we wouldn't have an 18 page thread. The vitriol aimed at the Patriots is fueling unrealistic hopes and demands for the punishment that should be doled out to them, and it seems to be very self serving behavior in the guise of a demand for justice. If you've been equally upset about other recent scandals in the NFL, please feel free to show some links to your thoughts or at least elaborate on the punishment you think should have been doled out for other rulebreaking that's occurred in recent history. I'm particularly interested in the fans of rival teams who've never been involved in NFL rules violations threads before but seem appalled at the Patriots' alleged behavior without knowing the details.

I'm also legitimately interested in the line that people are drawing between cheating and not cheating. It seems like the same people who are saying, if it's against the rules, it's cheating, are calling Belichick a cheater without yet knowing if what he did was against the rules. If he'd found some loophole, would you recant your accusations? If it's not the fact that it's against the rules, then is it this specific rule violation that bothers you? Can somebody please articulate in more detail why this rule violation is worse than the act of simply stealing signs? I haven't heard an explanation for this that goes deeper than "doesn't it seem wrong?". I've heard that the NFL shouldn't be about technology, but the same people seem OK with videotaping everything else on the field. I've heard that for one team to videotape signs is an unfair advantage over other teams who don't, but those same teams are legally watching the signs, employing lipreaders, and, according to Shanahan, deciphering those signs so they know the opponents' playcalls by the end of the first quarter. Why is this so much worse?

Disagree with the bolded part for a few reasons. First, there aren't 900 rabid Cardinal fans ready to jump in and defend a stupid action taken by their team. Second, the "vitriol aimed at the Pats" has looked to be aimed more at the blind homer fans and their ridiculous attempts at defending this than at the Pats themselves. Most people here seem to be realistic about what to expect as far as punishment for the Pats goes. Some Pats fans are jumping in every time punishment is discussed because they can't stand having to admit that their team may have cheated. They don't like having every other team scorn them when they were riding so high before all of this came up. I understand that. But they have to also understand that when they try to defend this behavior, or justify it by saying "everyone else does it too", or say "It's not as big of a deal as you're trying to make it out to be", etc., this is not winning them any more fans.

These people need to get it out of their head that if someone is being critical of the Pats here, it doesn't automatically make them a "hater" or a "Jets/Steelers/Colts/Panthers/Eagles" fan. I for one have watched the game since I was old enough to play neighborhood football. I love the NFL. And to see a team doing this type of crap makes me angry, because it is damaging the reputation of something that I have always cherished.

My team affiliation has nothing to do with the outrage I feel at BB/The Pats' actions here. I keep seeing it repeated here, but I honestly can't fathom why someone would believe that the two things (outrage and team fan affiliation) cannot be separated. Honestly, this is an arrogant and patronizing viewpoint that probably does create vitriol toward the Pats or those certain fans. But it should be noted that in this case, the vitriol wasn't there until Rabid Homer Pats Fan put it there through their own actions.

Pats fan chiming to 1) take it on the chin, 2) recognize the crime 3) accept ANY AND ALL punishment, hopefully as HARSH as possible, to be MORE than fitting the crime, 4) defend the PLAYERS because to NOONE's knowledge did ANY of them have anything to do with this, and 5) basically move on with my football life. Pats fans, I would implore you all to do the same.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

...But I would also point out that if this were the Cardinals, we wouldn't have an 18 page thread. The vitriol aimed at the Patriots is fueling unrealistic hopes and demands for the punishment that should be doled out to them, and it seems to be very self serving behavior in the guise of a demand for justice.

I think some of the things have been said like a year long suspension, are a bit silly and I imagine come from dislike and not from objective thinking.But I think you also are overlooking the part of the situation that warrants a stiff punishment. I'm not all that appalled that a team illegally video taped coaches. I'm appalled that a team was publicly alleged to have been video taping coaches for awhile now, enough so that the league sent out a specific warning against doing this which I think that team had to know was at least partly due to those allegations if not largely due to them... and then they go ahead and do it again anyway in the first week of the season.It's dumb. It's stupid. But worse, doing it after being specifically warned not to shows a complete disdain for the league and its rules that goes beyond just breaking a rule. I thought it was bad when Pacman went out to a strip club the night before he meets with Goodell about all his issues stemming from going to strip clubs. But this one makes Pacman's audacity and stupidity pale in comparison. And that is what makes it deserve a stiff punishment moreso than the violation by itself does.I don't care who the name is of the person that did it or what team he's on. If my Texans had a reputation for doing this and got caught doing it right after a league warning I'd want to see the same punishment I think BB and the Pats should get.

I'm also legitimately interested in the line that people are drawing between cheating and not cheating. It seems like the same people who are saying, if it's against the rules, it's cheating, are calling Belichick a cheater without yet knowing if what he did was against the rules.

People are working off of reports from guys whose are supposed to be verifying their sources. It's one thing to believe an obvious rumor monger (i.e. PFT) without any critical evaluation. When multiple news outlets are carrying corroborating stories, I think you're giving too much benefit of the doubt to BB. When we hear from multiple sources that the commish already reviewed the tape and decided they are guilty, it doesn't mean that he's announced it publicly, but I think it's reasonable that the public respond as if that is likely the case. Don't you?

If he'd found some loophole, would you recant your accusations? If it's not the fact that it's against the rules, then is it this specific rule violation that bothers you?

If he didn't break the rule it will change my opinion of him, though people who find and exploit loopholes are their own class of low life. (Hello, my name is Al Davis, and I'm a loophole abuser.) So I wouldn't suddenly think BB is a great guy for having found a loophole and abusing it, no. Would you?

Can somebody please articulate in more detail why this rule violation is worse than the act of simply stealing signs? I haven't heard an explanation for this that goes deeper than "doesn't it seem wrong?".

Already answered above, so I'll leave off there.

VERY

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Pats fan chiming to 1) take it on the chin, 2) recognize the crime 3) accept ANY AND ALL punishment, hopefully as HARSH as possible, to be MORE than fitting the crime, 4) defend the PLAYERS because to NOONE's knowledge did ANY of them have anything to do with this, and 5) basically move on with my football life. Pats fans, I would implore you all to do the same.

Pardon me if I don't recognize the crime until the ruling body (Goodell) hands down the ruling. Other than that, I agree with your sentiment.

 

[twitch]

If there were 'multiple' crimes involved that will be determined by the Chief, but at the very least we know there was an 'unroofed' camera employed on the sidelines, and that guy wasnt filming his kids picnicking by the lake. Ive removed the 'roof' from my own head over all this.

 

[Workhorse]

Interesting take on this in the NY Daily News:

Article

 

[Reaper]

I want to clarify my last couple of posts. I am not defending Belichick or the Patriots here. If this is true, I will repeat what I've said numerous times - this is embarrassing, it's wrong, and the Patriots should be punished.

I can't predict the punishment for this offense. We've all heard anywhere between a third round pick, and the two firsts and a yearlong suspension for Belichick. Assuming that this is just a case of videotaping the defensive playcalls, I think the former is a little light, while the latter is far too harsh. I've said before that I don't think that coaches should be suspended in the NFL, but I think that suspending Belichick for the next Jets game seems like part of a fair punishment. I can understand a punishment that involves a first round pick, but I don't think it's realistic to take both firsts simply because most teams won't have two first round picks, so this punishment would seem to me to be targetted specifically at these Patriots, and not an attempt to find a fair punishment to deter an offense that is rumored to be widespread.

I will also reiterate that, if the worst case turns out to be true and the Patriots were not only stealing signs but offensive radio signals, and this is neither an isolated incident nor a widespread practice, then I'll just say that I will have much more serious concerns about the Patriots.



But I would also point out that if this were the Cardinals, we wouldn't have an 18 page thread. The vitriol aimed at the Patriots is fueling unrealistic hopes and demands for the punishment that should be doled out to them, and it seems to be very self serving behavior in the guise of a demand for justice. If you've been equally upset about other recent scandals in the NFL, please feel free to show some links to your thoughts or at least elaborate on the punishment you think should have been doled out for other rulebreaking that's occurred in recent history. I'm particularly interested in the fans of rival teams who've never been involved in NFL rules violations threads before but seem appalled at the Patriots' alleged behavior without knowing the details.

I'm also legitimately interested in the line that people are drawing between cheating and not cheating. It seems like the same people who are saying, if it's against the rules, it's cheating, are calling Belichick a cheater without yet knowing if what he did was against the rules. If he'd found some loophole, would you recant your accusations? If it's not the fact that it's against the rules, then is it this specific rule violation that bothers you? Can somebody please articulate in more detail why this rule violation is worse than the act of simply stealing signs? I haven't heard an explanation for this that goes deeper than "doesn't it seem wrong?". I've heard that the NFL shouldn't be about technology, but the same people seem OK with videotaping everything else on the field. I've heard that for one team to videotape signs is an unfair advantage over other teams who don't, but those same teams are legally watching the signs, employing lipreaders, and, according to Shanahan, deciphering those signs so they know the opponents' playcalls by the end of the first quarter. Why is this so much worse?

Disagree with the bolded part for a few reasons. First, there aren't 900 rabid Cardinal fans ready to jump in and defend a stupid action taken by their team. Second, the "vitriol aimed at the Pats" has looked to be aimed more at the blind homer fans and their ridiculous attempts at defending this than at the Pats themselves. Most people here seem to be realistic about what to expect as far as punishment for the Pats goes. Some Pats fans are jumping in every time punishment is discussed because they can't stand having to admit that their team may have cheated. They don't like having every other team scorn them when they were riding so high before all of this came up. I understand that. But they have to also understand that when they try to defend this behavior, or justify it by saying "everyone else does it too", or say "It's not as big of a deal as you're trying to make it out to be", etc., this is not winning them any more fans.

These people need to get it out of their head that if someone is being critical of the Pats here, it doesn't automatically make them a "hater" or a "Jets/Steelers/Colts/Panthers/Eagles" fan. I for one have watched the game since I was old enough to play neighborhood football. I love the NFL. And to see a team doing this type of crap makes me angry, because it is damaging the reputation of something that I have always cherished.

My team affiliation has nothing to do with the outrage I feel at BB/The Pats' actions here. I keep seeing it repeated here, but I honestly can't fathom why someone would believe that the two things (outrage and team fan affiliation) cannot be separated. Honestly, this is an arrogant and patronizing viewpoint that probably does create vitriol toward the Pats or those certain fans. But it should be noted that in this case, the vitriol wasn't there until Rabid Homer Pats Fan put it there through their own actions.

BINGO!!!!!!!

And to add to that - I'm not even outraged at the event, I'm here more for the comic relief and humor and the fact that Pat fans practically invented board shtick around here, were named for it, and it's just hilarious to see it go the other way..... If this were another team, Pat fans would STILL be major contributor here with jokes and 1 liners.

Heck, before much was known, Bostonfred was going off exaggerating the whole thing with 1 liners about how BB should get the Death penalty and such... Yeah That TOO Is funny... HILARIOUS Even.... But, realize it does NOT help quiet the issue, it probably brings in another dozen or so posts with equally "Funny" shtick, except now to BostonFred and Pat fans it's no longer Shtick but, haters and people who normally don't talk about these issues that have a problem. :X

If it were Arizona involved, there would be less Arz fans to keep the threads going with defenses, diversion techniques and plain old garbage and exageration jokes the other way.... It would be a lot more "Wait and See" and more Bottom Line discussion about the Allegations instead of most of the BS.

BOTTOM LINE - A lot of this is Shtick and is Just plane ole FUNNY.

The boards here Thirst for such events to watch how the Team's fans react and pounce when/if they try to defend the indefensible - If they say "wait and see and it's embarrassing" then the talk probably leads to more bottom line discussion - If it turns to 1000 excuses and "Everyone does it "type stuff, we see 18 PLUS pages.

The biggest such event in FBG history was the TUCK RULE... and again, the reactions of Pat fans from then where they quickly grasped every nuance of that rule within minutes to now, where they have every angle and excuse in the Book is just HILARIOUS.

This Isn't about HATING Pat fans.... It's about Shtick and mocking fans that can't see a situation without their colored glasses on.. Like the tuck rule and like the Steeler / Seattle Super Bowl calls.....

As for punishment - To me, whatever, take away a 3rd round pick, like I said from the start....

 

[((Morpheus))]

Just out of curiosity: how many non-Patriots fans can honestly say that they don't think their team records and analyzes the signals of the opposition?

 

[[icon]]

Just out of curiosity: how many non-Patriots fans can honestly say that they don't think their team records and analyzes the signals of the opposition?

"I'll put it this way: That's not the only team that has ever done that," one head coach said yesterday. "It's a bunch of nothing. That stuff goes on everywhere. It ain't like it's something new. Are you kidding me? Half the teams do that crap. We've never done it here, but I've been involved in staffs that have done it."

The Jets were aware of Belichick's passion for video espionage long before Mangini came back to the Jets. Crossing the line to find an edge is apparently nothing new for Belichick.

A few years ago, when Herm Edwards was coaching the Jets and Mangini was working for Belichick in New England, the Jets coaching staff noticed a Patriots employee on the sideline pointing a video camera at the Jets coach who was sending in the defensive calls with hand signals.

The Jets coaches reacted by smiling for the Patriots camera and stopped just short of saying, "Hi, Bill."

"At times, we would wave at the guy that was filming over there," a Jets source, who is no longer with the team, said yesterday. "We just gave false signals and waved at the camera. I don't know if they picked up our signals or not. We didn't really worry about it too much. We didn't make a big deal out of it. Sometimes we would just send a guy in with the play instead."

...

Belichick won three Super Bowls in four years. Did he do it by cheating? This is not the NCAA, so the NFL is not repossessing the Vince Lombardi trophies. But if he was stealing the Rams' defensive signals, did that contribute to the second greatest upset in Super Bowl history when New England beat St. Louis, 20-17, after the 2001 season?

"If he did steal signals in that game, he didn't do a very good job," said Lions offensive coordinator Mike Martz, the Rams coach at the time. "Going into the last drive, they had 100 yards of offense. He got the wrong signals. If he had our defensive signals, it didn't help him much."

The Patriots actually had 214 yards going into the 53-yard drive for the winning field goal on the last play of the game. Tom Brady's offense managed only one TD, 15 first downs and was 2-for-11 on third down. Belichick won two more Super Bowls in the next three years.

"He won legitimately," Martz insists. "Those players had to line up and play and win those games. And they did."

 

[Shrek]

Interesting take on this in the NY Daily News:

Article

LOL This is such a solid story that it couldn't name even one source. Everyone is "a source" or "a Jets source who is no longer with the team" or "another coach". And the article makes the unsubstantiated claim that Mangini was in on it while he was in NE. Is that scenario likely? It's possible. Is it proven? No. But if Mangini was DC, it still remains unproven as to how stealing defensive signals could have benefited him. We've been over this already. Maybe one of this author's "unnamed sources" could shed some light on the situation.

 

[Marc Levin]

<<snip>>

VERY

GregR rocks - consistently one of the most objective and intelligent posters here.I think it is funny to read editorials this a.m. from both the Providence Journal and NY Times. Noone except Pats fans here are trying to justify Belichick's actions. Players, other coaches, GMs, and the press are all lining up against the Pats. Don't you all find it funny that not a single player, coach or GM from the 31 other teams is saying "Yeah, the Pats have been known for this, but so have other teams." This issue was addressed in detail this offseason at the league meeting, a memo was sent, coaches were made dutifully aware not to do this - Belichick displayed the height of arrogance to do this against a team he knew would know he did it. The funniest thing was the editorial by the ProJo guy comparing Belichick to Meyers and preferring Meyers' up-front-edness about bending the rules, mentioning the snow plow game. Meyers wasn't smart enough to win w/o cheating - the sad thing here is that Belichick didn't need to cheat to win.Every single word I have read the last two days, and every single commentator on the sports shows I listen to all day long, accepts that what Belichick did was cheating and was well below the standards of the organization. I firmly believe the Pats take a minor hit (one first day and one second day pick will do it) and Belichick will take it on the chin. One game to four game suspension is my guess.That is the appropriate penalty - Belichick is the jackass here, not the Pats. This penalty also helps assuage some of the grime that will get on the Pats due to this hulabaloo. Folks can point to the penalty and lay the blame - and the brunt of the backlash - on Belichick and not the team or the organization.At this juncture, the only point I find worthy of discussion is what the likely penalty will be, and whether that likely penalty is sufficient.

 

[Marc Levin]

If this were another team, Pat fans would STILL be major contributor here with jokes and 1 liners.

If the Chargers were the ones caught doing that this week in Foxboro, and the Pats lost the game, I would bet the tool factor in here would be off the charts.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Don't you all find it funny that not a single player, coach or GM from the 31 other teams is saying "Yeah, the Pats have been known for this, but so have other teams."

I saw a video clip of Jon Gruden's response which was basically "this whole tempest in a teapot is a BS issue".

 

[428143]

Some former QB (Erik Kramer?) was on sportsradio last night claiming Tom Brady is a tainted QB due to this...what do you think? He claimed that the advantage of stealing the signs would give a smart QB a huge edge.

 

[David Yudkin]

At this juncture, the only point I find worthy of discussion is what the likely penalty will be, and whether that likely penalty is sufficient.

I heard back from one of my contacts close to the Pats, and there is apparently talk of a hefty fine, loss of picks (as in more than one), and a suspension for BB. The severity of each is what seems to be in question. None of this should be considered even close to official. That appears to be the talk that's circulating in Foxoboro, and while this can only be filed under "unsubstantiated rumors," I personally would think this will end up being the outcome. And we'll just have to wait and see what the specifics are. If I had more info, I'd post it, but that's all I've got . . .

 

[massraider]

Just out of curiosity: how many non-Patriots fans can honestly say that they don't think their team records and analyzes the signals of the opposition?

I can honestly say I don't think my team records and analyzes the signals of the opposition. Key word here is 'records', of course.I think my team, like most, has a 3rd QB or an assistant upstairs trying to break the signals. Which I think everyone expects.

And some will fail to see the difference between that and recording the signals. I have no desire to try and convince them of the differences. Frankly, I think they already know, and are just arguing to be pig-headed.

And some will say that recording won't do a team any good. I love that argument. So then: Why was Bill Belichick, uber-Coach Genius Almighty, doing it????????? For real, if it isn't that helpful, why was BB doing it?

 

[Marc Levin]

Downplaying the issue is not unusual - someone saying "everyone's doing it" is not what is coming out.

Stealing signals is not prohibited and goes on all the time. Video equipment on the sideline is apparently crossing the line and is unusual - folks wondering why, it is the real time aspect of it.

The 'phins picking off audible signals in a game is gamesmanship. Recording them for later analysis is B.S. And I am a phins fan. BUUUUUUT it is not specifically prohibited by the rules, so as B.S. as I think it is, it is not punishable. Video cameras on the sideline = B.S., = prohibited bythe rules, = something they were warnbed not to do, = and issue discussed at league meeting, = punishable offense.

 

[massraider]

Some former QB (Erik Kramer?) was on sportsradio last night claiming Tom Brady is a tainted QB due to this...what do you think? He claimed that the advantage of stealing the signs would give a smart QB a huge edge.

Noper. The only time Tom Brady will be tainted is when I am arguing with my Patriot buddies from back home. :(

 

[Marc Levin]

At this juncture, the only point I find worthy of discussion is what the likely penalty will be, and whether that likely penalty is sufficient.

I heard back from one of my contacts close to the Pats, and there is apparently talk of a hefty fine, loss of picks (as in more than one), and a suspension for BB. The severity of each is what seems to be in question. None of this should be considered even close to official. That appears to be the talk that's circulating in Foxoboro, and while this can only be filed under "unsubstantiated rumors," I personally would think this will end up being the outcome. And we'll just have to wait and see what the specifics are. If I had more info, I'd post it, but that's all I've got . . .

Thanks for the update, David- I think the Pats should be (and sounds like they are) preparing for the worst.I think a minimum is the picks I mentioned (3rd and 5th) and a low 5 figure fine.I think the maximum is high picks - their 1st in '08 and 1st in '09, mid six figures (500G), plus a four game suspension of BBEverything in between is fair game and, IMO, where it lies on that spectrum will tell you how badly or how well the Pats were able to spin this for Goodell. I think some kind of suspension of BB is inevitable, but that is just me.

 

[Marc Levin]

The only time Tom Brady will be tainted is when I am arguing with my Patriot buddies from back home.

OMG - the smack will be flying wicked hahd when I tahk to mah Pats friends.

 

[krazyaero]

I'll say it again - the most appropriate action the commissioner can take is to suspend the coach without pay for (minimum) four full games. He should be banned from having anything to do with the team in any capacity, including telephone and email. The punishment for this coach should be every bit as severe as it would be for a player.

Not death, though? Are you sure? This is the only topic you've posted about since Sunday, so it seems like you're pretty excited about it.

That's funny! And sad! Calling a guy out for taking one day off from posting. Man, you've taken more time than that to make your draft pick.

 

[David Yudkin]

At this juncture, the only point I find worthy of discussion is what the likely penalty will be, and whether that likely penalty is sufficient.

I heard back from one of my contacts close to the Pats, and there is apparently talk of a hefty fine, loss of picks (as in more than one), and a suspension for BB. The severity of each is what seems to be in question. None of this should be considered even close to official. That appears to be the talk that's circulating in Foxoboro, and while this can only be filed under "unsubstantiated rumors," I personally would think this will end up being the outcome. And we'll just have to wait and see what the specifics are. If I had more info, I'd post it, but that's all I've got . . .

Thanks for the update, David- I think the Pats should be (and sounds like they are) preparing for the worst.I think a minimum is the picks I mentioned and a low 5 figure fine.I think the maximum is high picks - their 1st in '08 and 1st in '09, mid six figures (500G), plus a four game suspension of BBEverything in between is fair game and, IMO, where it lies on that spectrum will tell you how badly or how well the Pats were able to spin this for Goodell. I think some kind of suspension of BB is inevitable, but that is just me.

If I were to guess, $500,000 fine, loss of 3rd and 5th round picks (maybe a 2nd and a 4th instead), and 2 game suspension for BB. I suppose a case could be made that player suspensions are normally 4 games, so maybe they hit him with that instead.I think taking away a first round pick may be excessive. Unless they prohibit BB from interacting with the team AT ALL for however long he would be suspended for, that part would be effectively useless. He could coach a game from anywhere by telephone. So they would have to basically lock him in an empty room during the actual game to prevent him from coaching.

 

[massraider]

The only time Tom Brady will be tainted is when I am arguing with my Patriot buddies from back home.

OMG - the smack will be flying wicked hahd when I tahk to mah Pats friends.

massraider: "Geez, how'd you guys only win 3 Super Bowls? Maybe if Belichick kept it in his pants, he'd have spent more time analyzing his ill-gotten video, and they coulda beat the Colts...."Life-long friends: "Please leave."

 

[Marc Levin]

Unless they prohibit BB from interacting with the team AT ALL for however long he would be suspended for, that part would be effectively useless. He could coach a game from anywhere by telephone. So they would have to basically lock him in an empty room during the actual game to prevent him from coaching.

What do you think suspended means?He is barred from any contact with the Patriots. If he's found to have violated THAT, as well? He'll be out of football for a year.

 

[Marc Levin]

The only time Tom Brady will be tainted is when I am arguing with my Patriot buddies from back home.

OMG - the smack will be flying wicked hahd when I tahk to mah Pats friends.

massraider: "Geez, how'd you guys only win 3 Super Bowls? Maybe if Belichick kept it in his pants, he'd have spent more time analyzing his ill-gotten video, and they coulda beat the Colts...."Life-long friends: "Please leave."

Mine will respond with - stick around, your 'phins are about to go down by 24, tough guy, WITHOUT any cheating.

 

[massraider]

I think taking away a first round pick may be excessive.

So do I. And if the penalty comes out on the harsh side, I think that'll give us an idea that things were worse than just this one incident.I simply can't see a team getting docked a 1st round pick for one incident. If circumventing the cap is only worth a 3rd round pick, I don't see how this is going to warrant a 1st. As far as a fine? Who cares? Half a mill, one mill, the team won't even feel it.

 

[David Yudkin]

Unless they prohibit BB from interacting with the team AT ALL for however long he would be suspended for, that part would be effectively useless. He could coach a game from anywhere by telephone. So they would have to basically lock him in an empty room during the actual game to prevent him from coaching.

What do you think suspended means?He is barred from any contact with the Patriots. If he's found to have violated THAT, as well? He'll be out of football for a year.

I don't know what the league considers as being suspended. For players, I believe that a guy can't be at team facilities or practice with the team. If that rule adheres to the coaches, I am not sure if there is a loophole that would allow BB to call in to the team from a different location.Similarly, if Belichick were off site and watching on tv, I don't think it would be out of the question for him to tell someone else what to do and then have THAT person be on the phone with someone in a team box in the stadium.In baseball, how many times has a manager been ejected but still managed the game from the clubhouse? Again, I don't know how any of this officially works in the NFL. Maybe the best solution is to have the commish and BB watch the game together from a luxuy box with no communications in the box at all.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

If BB does not get a suspension at least as long as the one they gave Wade Wilson, I will be very disappointed in the commish.

 

[Marc Levin]

Unless they prohibit BB from interacting with the team AT ALL for however long he would be suspended for, that part would be effectively useless. He could coach a game from anywhere by telephone. So they would have to basically lock him in an empty room during the actual game to prevent him from coaching.

What do you think suspended means?He is barred from any contact with the Patriots. If he's found to have violated THAT, as well? He'll be out of football for a year.

I don't know what the league considers as being suspended. For players, I believe that a guy can't be at team facilities or practice with the team. If that rule adheres to the coaches, I am not sure if there is a loophole that would allow BB to call in to the team from a different location.Similarly, if Belichick were off site and watching on tv, I don't think it would be out of the question for him to tell someone else what to do and then have THAT person be on the phone with someone in a team box in the stadium.In baseball, how many times has a manager been ejected but still managed the game from the clubhouse? Again, I don't know how any of this officially works in the NFL. Maybe the best solution is to have the commish and BB watch the game together from a luxuy box with no communications in the box at all.

It'll be like the player's suspension, except it will include a no-contact provision.The player has to actually be there to truly affect the game - like you said, BB could video conference into the facility and the games. sure there would be a provision in the commish's ruiling that he is to have ZERO contact with the team during the suspension - not even phone calls between Kraft and BB to see how he is doing.As for what the commish is allowed to do, there is unlikely a rule - it is entirely in his jurisprudence and discretion.

 

[massraider]

If BB does not get a suspension at least as long as the one they gave Wade Wilson, I will be very disappointed in the commish.

Someone else brought up Wade Wilson, and it's a real good point. Tough to argue BB should get less than he did.

 

[Banger]

At this juncture, the only point I find worthy of discussion is what the likely penalty will be, and whether that likely penalty is sufficient.

I heard back from one of my contacts close to the Pats, and there is apparently talk of a hefty fine, loss of picks (as in more than one), and a suspension for BB. The severity of each is what seems to be in question. None of this should be considered even close to official. That appears to be the talk that's circulating in Foxoboro, and while this can only be filed under "unsubstantiated rumors," I personally would think this will end up being the outcome. And we'll just have to wait and see what the specifics are. If I had more info, I'd post it, but that's all I've got . . .

Thanks for the update, David- I think the Pats should be (and sounds like they are) preparing for the worst.I think a minimum is the picks I mentioned and a low 5 figure fine.I think the maximum is high picks - their 1st in '08 and 1st in '09, mid six figures (500G), plus a four game suspension of BBEverything in between is fair game and, IMO, where it lies on that spectrum will tell you how badly or how well the Pats were able to spin this for Goodell. I think some kind of suspension of BB is inevitable, but that is just me.

If I were to guess, $500,000 fine, loss of 3rd and 5th round picks (maybe a 2nd and a 4th instead), and 2 game suspension for BB. I suppose a case could be made that player suspensions are normally 4 games, so maybe they hit him with that instead.I think taking away a first round pick may be excessive. Unless they prohibit BB from interacting with the team AT ALL for however long he would be suspended for, that part would be effectively useless. He could coach a game from anywhere by telephone. So they would have to basically lock him in an empty room during the actual game to prevent him from coaching.

I think this is in the ballpark of what it will be. I'd guess 4 game suspension, $250K fine, and a 2nd and 4th.

 

[greenline]

At this juncture, the only point I find worthy of discussion is what the likely penalty will be, and whether that likely penalty is sufficient.

I heard back from one of my contacts close to the Pats, and there is apparently talk of a hefty fine, loss of picks (as in more than one), and a suspension for BB. The severity of each is what seems to be in question. None of this should be considered even close to official. That appears to be the talk that's circulating in Foxoboro, and while this can only be filed under "unsubstantiated rumors," I personally would think this will end up being the outcome. And we'll just have to wait and see what the specifics are. If I had more info, I'd post it, but that's all I've got . . .

Thanks for the update, David- I think the Pats should be (and sounds like they are) preparing for the worst.I think a minimum is the picks I mentioned and a low 5 figure fine.I think the maximum is high picks - their 1st in '08 and 1st in '09, mid six figures (500G), plus a four game suspension of BBEverything in between is fair game and, IMO, where it lies on that spectrum will tell you how badly or how well the Pats were able to spin this for Goodell. I think some kind of suspension of BB is inevitable, but that is just me.

If I were to guess, $500,000 fine, loss of 3rd and 5th round picks (maybe a 2nd and a 4th instead), and 2 game suspension for BB. I suppose a case could be made that player suspensions are normally 4 games, so maybe they hit him with that instead.I think taking away a first round pick may be excessive. Unless they prohibit BB from interacting with the team AT ALL for however long he would be suspended for, that part would be effectively useless. He could coach a game from anywhere by telephone. So they would have to basically lock him in an empty room during the actual game to prevent him from coaching.

I think this is in the ballpark of what it will be. I'd guess 4 game suspension, $250K fine, and a 2nd and 4th.

Keep dreaming, fellas.