Espn reporting Goodell confirmed Patriots using camera (1 Viewer)

[1huskerfan]

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

I believe there was no ling to Wilson distributing HGH. He was cited for using it. Apparently all NFL employees are forbidden from using banned substances, players and coaches alike.

My bad, I only skimmed the article. Still not taking a banned substance > than improperly reviewing video tape.

 

[massraider]

Update from RotoWorld. If this is all the Pats get, that's just a slap on the wrist. Losing a third is nothing.

FOXSports.com's John Czarnecki reports the Patriots could lose a third-round pick after being caught stealing signals in regular season games.

Some around the league are pushing for the Pats to lose multiple draft choices, and strong consideration is reportedly being given to suspending coach Bill Belichick for one year. Czarnecki also says that cheating has been going on for decades in both college and pro football and that Belichick may have done it because he knows his opponents are too.

Source: FOXSports.com

And losing Belichick for a year???

Is excessive.

I'd say that is an appropriate penalty.

It's nothing. It's hardly a deterrent to prevent teams from doing it in the future. If all it will cost is a third teams should be lining up to cheat every week. I'd say they should lose two picks, including one first, and Belichick should get suspended 4 games. Goodell has been very effective in terms of sending strong messages so far in his tenure but if he lets the Patriots get off this easy (assuming they're guilty, of course) he'll have caved big time in my opinion.

?? Suspending Belichick for a year, but penalizing the team only a third-rounder, punishes the right person and keeps Kraft on the league's side without him having to come down on his own head coach for losing the team 1st round picks.I think it is the perfect solution for boththe Pats and the league.

Keep Kraft on the league's side? Kraft (i.e. the organization) should be fined in the $50k-$100k range, in addition to the draft picks and a BB suspension. He should be coming down on his coach for cheating. His fans should be coming down on the whole organization for sullying the name of their team, and not defending them. Kraft should be held accountable for his organization's gametime actions. The buck ultimately stops with him.

That won't happen. BB has brought Kraft's team to prominence. Besides, he's already made statements to the effect that this is all just a witch hunt because people are jealous of their success. Apparently the arrogance starts at the very top.

Kraft's statement was an joke, and has the potential to look very stupid.

Just to clarify, do you mean that he was attempting to make a joke? Or do you mean that the fact that he made the statement was ill-timed and out of place was "a joke"? Seriously, I'm just trying to see what you meant.

I don't think he was making a joke, I think that making the arrogant swipe that teams are just jealous of the Pats success, and the implication that this is the only way they can bring us down, is a joke. And I think it has the potential to look very stupid because it appears that the bonehead camera guy was caught with the tape, essentially proof that the Pats were cheating.

 

[Shrek]

Again, this is not about hating NE. This about hating cheaters.

Let's compromise and say its about hating cheaters with the amazing coincidence that said hatred is being voiced by:60% Jets and Steelers fans30% Rams, Colts, Raiders, Panthers fans10% Other

Purely speculation. But if it makes you feel comfortable to make up these stats, go for it.Funny how it is absolutely inconceivable to some of these Pats fans that an average football fan could be outraged by these allegations independently of their fan affiliation with a team.

 

[helix]

I would not want to be in Kraft's shoes if Goodell finds the Pats at fault.

The commish is employed by the owners, and while he may have the ability to feret punishment and yield it with great wrath and great speed, it may not be in his own best interest to start pounding on franchises. Owners gave him the job and owners can also take it away. I'm not saying that he will go easy on the Pats because of this, but in the past commiches in major sports normally have not gone crazy pinishing teams (with the notable exception the Timbervolves losing A TON of first round picks).This may turn into 31 other franchises looking to jump in and turn the screws to the Patriots organization, and I don't think that's what the league wants either.

I disagree:The Boss was suspended from running the Yankees for two years because of his connections to Howie Spira. Historically, strong commish's have not been worried about making an owner upset. Now if the NFL commish was Selig...Kraft will have to plead a hell of a case. His organization that he built is at risk of a public relations disaster and that is not good business.

 

[shakeybarn]

Interesting... every lay person uses the term "cheating" or "not cheating"... the AP article doesn't mention it once. Uses term "signal taping"... ah Vick participating in canine achievement drills... get that... please use canine achievement drills.

Let's guess the reporter was pulled locally to write that bit...

 

[Kit Fisto]

Again, this is not about hating NE. This about hating cheaters.

Let's compromise and say its about hating cheaters with the amazing coincidence that said hatred is being voiced by:60% Jets and Steelers fans30% Rams, Colts, Raiders, Panthers fans10% Other

Honestly, I think Jets fans in here are actually being pretty cool and level-headed about the whole thing.

 

[shakeybarn]

..and nicley... ESPN does it right with the CHEATWAVE callout box.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

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 Fine

Loss of a 3rd

4 game suspension for the Coach

You definitley could be right, but I think the penalty for BB should be more. If Wade Wilson gets 5 games for legally ordering a drug for his own personal health and providing exactly zero competitive advantage for his team, then BB deserves to be suspended for the year - if not for life. Goodell made it very clear when he penalized Wilson that coaches will be held to a "higher standard". Well, it doesnt get too much lower than cheating. It is certainly a far more heinous offense than what Wade Wilson did, and I would find it very hypocritical if Wilson's punishment exceeded that of BB's personal punishment. BB may not even be there next year to feel the pain of the lost draft choice. The organization deserves that penalty, but BB seems to be the main culprit here, and he should pay a very high price. He has compromised the integrity of not only himself, but also of the history books. He is a stain on this league, and a disgrace to professional sports. Do we want our youth to see a cheater on the sidelines leading their favorite team?

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

First of all, from my understanding there was not even an accusation of "passing out HGH". It was my understanding that he needed the drug for a medical condition. If I am wrong, then my post is garbage. Second of all, to call it "reviewing video tape during the game" is like saying that Michael Vick was simply an irresponsible pet owner. Even if Wilson was passing out HGH (which I think is a blatantly false statement), I find what Belicheck is being accused of to be at least equally eggregious, irresponsible, and dispicable. Probably more. He has called into question the integrity and validity of the NFL history books.

 

[shakeybarn]

And let's be honest (not a fan/hater of either team), if this was the Raiders who got popped....

 

[massraider]

Again, this is not about hating NE. This about hating cheaters.

Let's compromise and say its about hating cheaters with the amazing coincidence that said hatred is being voiced by:60% Jets and Steelers fans30% Rams, Colts, Raiders, Panthers fans10% Other

GB being in the other group.

Hmmm, the original poster may be onto something. So, Colts/Raiders/Steelers/Jets fans are taking more interest in the Pats recent misfortune that say....a Lions fan? Wow.Shocking theory.

 

[NY/NJMFDIVER]

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?

Yeah, one actually affects the NFL, one affects their image. The Pats situation IF they were cheating and relaying information in the game as it happened, is incalcuably worse than the Vick deal. Not looking to hijack this, maybe that debate deserves its own FFA thread, but you are wrong to think Vick is worse than this.

 

[shakeybarn]

Again, this is not about hating NE. This about hating cheaters.

Let's compromise and say its about hating cheaters with the amazing coincidence that said hatred is being voiced by:60% Jets and Steelers fans30% Rams, Colts, Raiders, Panthers fans10% Other

GB being in the other group.

Hmmm, the original poster may be onto something. So, Colts/Raiders/Steelers/Jets fans are taking more interest in the Pats recent misfortune that say....a Lions fan? Wow.Shocking theory.

Um... why shouldn't they, GB/CHI/DET thread would too... so long as their constructive about it, much less provide some "counter" to any apologetic homerism.... and in good taste.

 

[Autumn Wind]

Howdy all. Just dropping by to chime in with my latest thinking / conjecture / revised prediction of outcome, and a question.I'm thinking a #1 pick, $500M fine, and 1 game BB suspension. Stiffer than expected on pick and money impact, but not wanting to protract the issue visibility beyond a week via a multi-game suspension. Question: does Brady call his own plays or are they called in? If he calls his own plays, this would support the notion of him knowing. If the sideline calls the plays, less likely he knew ("Hey Tom, we think you should run left. Really.").

$500 mill? What do they do with the money from the fine, fund Social Security?

Put it in the retired players fund.(and yes, I saw that it's not 500 mil)

 

[David Yudkin]

If the Pats get reamed on this one, you can bet the team will hire a team of people to dig up dirt on all the other franchises and will be giving regular updates to the league office on what everyone else is doing. Maybe we will enter an era of tattletailing.

I think you've brought up the true nature of the problem we're discussing here---the Patriots only care about winning, and are stretching or breaking the rules to reach that goal. The fact that you as a Patriots fan can so definitely state that the team would waste time and effort on childish behavior like this is more proof that BB is infecting the team and its fan base with his pugnacious brand of "fair play". It stinks. And it gets harder and harder to cover up the smell the further away the team gets from the Aqua Velva that was it last Lombardi.

I am not a true Pats fan as some have alluded to in the past (Cowboys fan). I happen to live in Pats country, but I certainly am no fan of Belichick and could ramble on about how big of a stain he is on the game of football.I don't condone any of these shennigans by the Pats or any other team and think all teams should stick to playing football. But the fact of the matter is that teams do bizarre things to try to win. The sad part is that it appears that many times it's the teams that win that are accused of trying to bend the rules the most.For example, last year at our son's POP WARNER football game, I was taking notes on the game (I wrote articles for all the local papers) and a team wanted me kicked out for spying and writing down what they called their plays. I can only imagine what the paranoia must be like if this is how elementary school coaches are concerned about.

 

[shakeybarn]

Overall, whether this is blown out of proportion or not... good thing they got caught in a week one regular season game vs the AFC Championship.

 

[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 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 Fine

Loss of a 3rd

4 game suspension for the Coach

You definitley could be right, but I think the penalty for BB should be more. If Wade Wilson gets 5 games for legally ordering a drug for his own personal health and providing exactly zero competitive advantage for his team, then BB deserves to be suspended for the year - if not for life. Goodell made it very clear when he penalized Wilson that coaches will be held to a "higher standard". Well, it doesnt get too much lower than cheating. It is certainly a far more heinous offense than what Wade Wilson did, and I would find it very hypocritical if Wilson's punishment exceeded that of BB's personal punishment. BB may not even be there next year to feel the pain of the lost draft choice. The organization deserves that penalty, but BB seems to be the main culprit here, and he should pay a very high price. He has compromised the integrity of not only himself, but also of the history books. He is a stain on this league, and a disgrace to professional sports. Do we want our youth to see a cheater on the sidelines leading their favorite team?

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

First of all, from my understanding there was not even an accusation of "passing out HGH". It was my understanding that he needed the drug for a medical condition. If I am wrong, then my post is garbage. Second of all, to call it "reviewing video tape during the game" is like saying that Michael Vick was simply an irresponsible pet owner. Even if Wilson was passing out HGH (which I think is a blatantly false statement), I find what Belicheck is being accused of to be at least equally eggregious, irresponsible, and dispicable. Probably more. He has called into question the integrity and validity of the NFL history books.

Reviewing the tape during the game is the rule that was broken (and not having the video taper in an enclsure). If you think it was illegal or unethical for him to tape the signs, then you are not familiar with the rule nor the practices of the NFL. I am calling it what it is and not trying to rename it for the purpose of increased shock value.

 

[BusMan]

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?

Yeah, one actually affects the NFL, one affects their image. The Pats situation IF they were cheating and relaying information in the game as it happened, is incalcuably worse than the Vick deal. Not looking to hijack this, maybe that debate deserves its own FFA thread, but you are wrong to think Vick is worse than this.

This cheating situation strikes at the image of the game within the hardcore fan base. Casual fans probably don't care. We'll probably never know because casual fans wouldn't be posting or even lurking on the MB. Hopefully whoever is in Goodell's ear is letting him know that this is a PR problem because of his base, not the independents.

 

[BusMan]

If the Pats get reamed on this one, you can bet the team will hire a team of people to dig up dirt on all the other franchises and will be giving regular updates to the league office on what everyone else is doing. Maybe we will enter an era of tattletailing.

I think you've brought up the true nature of the problem we're discussing here---the Patriots only care about winning, and are stretching or breaking the rules to reach that goal. The fact that you as a Patriots fan can so definitely state that the team would waste time and effort on childish behavior like this is more proof that BB is infecting the team and its fan base with his pugnacious brand of "fair play". It stinks. And it gets harder and harder to cover up the smell the further away the team gets from the Aqua Velva that was it last Lombardi.

I am not a true Pats fan as some have alluded to in the past (Cowboys fan). I happen to live in Pats country, but I certainly am no fan of Belichick and could ramble on about how big of a stain he is on the game of football.I don't condone any of these shennigans by the Pats or any other team and think all teams should stick to playing football. But the fact of the matter is that teams do bizarre things to try to win. The sad part is that it appears that many times it's the teams that win that are accused of trying to bend the rules the most.For example, last year at our son's POP WARNER football game, I was taking notes on the game (I wrote articles for all the local papers) and a team wanted me kicked out for spying and writing down what they called their plays. I can only imagine what the paranoia must be like if this is how elementary school coaches are concerned about.

David,I hope you know I respect you greatly and I apologize for assuming you were a hardcore Patriots homer. That said, I still stand behind my take above given the reactions of many of the hardcore NE homers within this thread.BusMan

 

[AB in DC]

Actually, the commish can punish based on pure speculation. Its completely up to his discretion. He doesnt need to prove a thing.

Goddell is a lawyer. There's no way he'd take any action without some kind of paper trail and multi-page report documenting the entire rationale -- if for no other reason than to protect himself and the NFL from any kind of lawsuit.

 

[NY/NJMFDIVER]

I really want to know what goes on with those radio signals.

I think you and many others may be left disppointed in this whole thing. I doubt the league will provide many details only to say that they completed their investigation and the penalty is X, Y, Z and leave it at that. IMO, the more of this that gets reviewed and attended to behind closed doors, the better for the league. When the league has to start policing itself is when the P.R. gets to be all bad, IMO. If the Pats get reamed on this one, you can bet the team will hire a team of people to dig up dirt on all the other franchises and will be giving regular updates to the league office on what everyone else is doing. Maybe we will enter an era of tattletailing.

What is this scenario played out, in regard to "tattletailing". And I'll credit Mike Francesa who raised this point. What if the Jets, who played the Pats 3 times last year, INCLUDING a playoff game, through backchannel sources, got word to the Pats to not engage in this when they played them. If this is common practice, you might pull this card in a playoff game, and you'd think Mangini had an idea of common practice in Pats land. What if they were "warned" and the Pats did it anyway, and the Jets were more dilligent in pointing it out. Is the tattletailing as bad if you were warned the Jets might go this way?

 

[massraider]

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

I believe there was no ling to Wilson distributing HGH. He was cited for using it. Apparently all NFL employees are forbidden from using banned substances, players and coaches alike.

My bad, I only skimmed the article. Still not taking a banned substance > than improperly reviewing video tape.

Coach passing out HGH>>>>>Taping sidelines.Coach taking HGH<<Coaches taping sidelines.

We don't give a crap about Wade Wilson's health. And it is even a big deal because a coach having that access may, down the road, make it easier for a player to get it. But the action, of itself, doesn't affect any fan watching the game, or the game itself.

Coaches taping the sideline? I know you think it's no big deal, but the NFL, the Jets coaches, and obviously, the Patriots, disagree. The Pats thought it was so important, they were willing to try it again, after having gotten a letter form the league, and the same guy caught and ejected from the Packer sideline. Allegedly.

You could take a poll as to which was worse, but I am guessing that videotaping the sideline would win in a landslide.

 

[1huskerfan]

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

I believe there was no ling to Wilson distributing HGH. He was cited for using it. Apparently all NFL employees are forbidden from using banned substances, players and coaches alike.

My bad, I only skimmed the article. Still not taking a banned substance > than improperly reviewing video tape.

Coach passing out HGH>>>>>Taping sidelines.Coach taking HGH<<Coaches taping sidelines.

We don't give a crap about Wade Wilson's health. And it is even a big deal because a coach having that access may, down the road, make it easier for a player to get it. But the action, of itself, doesn't affect any fan watching the game, or the game itself.

Coaches taping the sideline? I know you think it's no big deal, but the NFL, the Jets coaches, and obviously, the Patriots, disagree. The Pats thought it was so important, they were willing to try it again, after having gotten a letter form the league, and the same guy caught and ejected from the Packer sideline. Allegedly.

You could take a poll as to which was worse, but I am guessing that videotaping the sideline would win in a landslide.

Taping the sideline is not against the rules and not what they are in trouble for.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I really want to know what goes on with those radio signals.

I think you and many others may be left disppointed in this whole thing. I doubt the league will provide many details only to say that they completed their investigation and the penalty is X, Y, Z and leave it at that. IMO, the more of this that gets reviewed and attended to behind closed doors, the better for the league. When the league has to start policing itself is when the P.R. gets to be all bad, IMO. If the Pats get reamed on this one, you can bet the team will hire a team of people to dig up dirt on all the other franchises and will be giving regular updates to the league office on what everyone else is doing. Maybe we will enter an era of tattletailing.

What is this scenario played out, in regard to "tattletailing". And I'll credit Mike Francesa who raised this point. What if the Jets, who played the Pats 3 times last year, INCLUDING a playoff game, through backchannel sources, got word to the Pats to not engage in this when they played them. If this is common practice, you might pull this card in a playoff game, and you'd think Mangini had an idea of common practice in Pats land. What if they were "warned" and the Pats did it anyway, and the Jets were more dilligent in pointing it out. Is the tattletailing as bad if you were warned the Jets might go this way?

I just don't see this as "tattling"."Tattling" is when you tell the teacher that Johnny is drinking soda in the back of class, when he's only allowed to have water.This is a very competitive game with billions of dollars at stake. If someone's cheating, it's not the same thing as telling on Johnny.

 

[AB in DC]

On a related note -- though this has more relevance to the Wade Wilson suspension than to Belichick --

Exactly what authority does Goddell have to suspend a coach?

With a player, it's outlined specifically in the collective bargaining agreement. There is no CBA for coaches, last I checked. And coaches are employed by their franchise, not the NFL, so any rules that the NFL imposes on their employees don't apply.

 

[Kit Fisto]

I know you think it's no big deal, but the NFL, the Jets coaches, and obviously, the Patriots, disagree.

They do? Goodell has spoken? Link to the punishment?

 

[Banger]

Actually, the commish can punish based on pure speculation. Its completely up to his discretion. He doesnt need to prove a thing.

Goddell is a lawyer. There's no way he'd take any action without some kind of paper trail and multi-page report documenting the entire rationale -- if for no other reason than to protect himself and the NFL from any kind of lawsuit.

no he's not.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

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 Fine

Loss of a 3rd

4 game suspension for the Coach

You definitley could be right, but I think the penalty for BB should be more. If Wade Wilson gets 5 games for legally ordering a drug for his own personal health and providing exactly zero competitive advantage for his team, then BB deserves to be suspended for the year - if not for life. Goodell made it very clear when he penalized Wilson that coaches will be held to a "higher standard". Well, it doesnt get too much lower than cheating. It is certainly a far more heinous offense than what Wade Wilson did, and I would find it very hypocritical if Wilson's punishment exceeded that of BB's personal punishment. BB may not even be there next year to feel the pain of the lost draft choice. The organization deserves that penalty, but BB seems to be the main culprit here, and he should pay a very high price. He has compromised the integrity of not only himself, but also of the history books. He is a stain on this league, and a disgrace to professional sports. Do we want our youth to see a cheater on the sidelines leading their favorite team?

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

First of all, from my understanding there was not even an accusation of "passing out HGH". It was my understanding that he needed the drug for a medical condition. If I am wrong, then my post is garbage. Second of all, to call it "reviewing video tape during the game" is like saying that Michael Vick was simply an irresponsible pet owner. Even if Wilson was passing out HGH (which I think is a blatantly false statement), I find what Belicheck is being accused of to be at least equally eggregious, irresponsible, and dispicable. Probably more. He has called into question the integrity and validity of the NFL history books.

Reviewing the tape during the game is the rule that was broken (and not having the video taper in an enclsure). If you think it was illegal or unethical for him to tape the signs, then you are not familiar with the rule nor the practices of the NFL. I am calling it what it is and not trying to rename it for the purpose of increased shock value.

Are you attempting to spin it that this is no big deal and a minor infraction that is less significant than a guy taking HGH for medical purposes? If so, then we are clearly on a different page. However you want to word it, it can be summarized simply by saying "cheating". Not for shock value - for accuracy value.

 

[dparker713]

Actually, the commish can punish based on pure speculation. Its completely up to his discretion. He doesnt need to prove a thing.

Goddell is a lawyer. There's no way he'd take any action without some kind of paper trail and multi-page report documenting the entire rationale -- if for no other reason than to protect himself and the NFL from any kind of lawsuit.

He has the discretion, and the only owner crazy enough to sue the league is Al Davis. Kraft wouldn't dare do anything of the sort. Sure, Goodell wouldnt do anything that could be considered arbitraty or capricious, but thats an exceedingly low standard. He wont be afraid to connect the dots.ETA - Goodell isnt a lawyer btw.

 

[massraider]

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

I believe there was no ling to Wilson distributing HGH. He was cited for using it. Apparently all NFL employees are forbidden from using banned substances, players and coaches alike.

My bad, I only skimmed the article. Still not taking a banned substance > than improperly reviewing video tape.

Coach passing out HGH>>>>>Taping sidelines.Coach taking HGH<<Coaches taping sidelines.

We don't give a crap about Wade Wilson's health. And it is even a big deal because a coach having that access may, down the road, make it easier for a player to get it. But the action, of itself, doesn't affect any fan watching the game, or the game itself.

Coaches taping the sideline? I know you think it's no big deal, but the NFL, the Jets coaches, and obviously, the Patriots, disagree. The Pats thought it was so important, they were willing to try it again, after having gotten a letter form the league, and the same guy caught and ejected from the Packer sideline. Allegedly.

You could take a poll as to which was worse, but I am guessing that videotaping the sideline would win in a landslide.

Taping the sideline is not against the rules and not what they are in trouble for.

Wade Wilson<<<<<<Whatever the Pats are in trouble for.How's that work for ya?

 

[NY/NJMFDIVER]

On a related note -- though this has more relevance to the Wade Wilson suspension than to Belichick --Exactly what authority does Goddell have to suspend a coach?With a player, it's outlined specifically in the collective bargaining agreement. There is no CBA for coaches, last I checked. And coaches are employed by their franchise, not the NFL, so any rules that the NFL imposes on their employees don't apply.

In baseball, I'm fairly certain a coach or manager can't appeal a suspension, I think the individual organziations will nearly always side with the league as a ruling body and go with whats good for the goose is good for the gander and not rock the boat on any suspensions.However, a season long suspension for Belichick would put that to the test, because that is a major hit to the Patriots, I think that would mean war. 4 games though, they'd let it go and that would be that IMO.

 

[dparker713]

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

I believe there was no ling to Wilson distributing HGH. He was cited for using it. Apparently all NFL employees are forbidden from using banned substances, players and coaches alike.

My bad, I only skimmed the article. Still not taking a banned substance > than improperly reviewing video tape.

Coach passing out HGH>>>>>Taping sidelines.Coach taking HGH<<Coaches taping sidelines.

We don't give a crap about Wade Wilson's health. And it is even a big deal because a coach having that access may, down the road, make it easier for a player to get it. But the action, of itself, doesn't affect any fan watching the game, or the game itself.

Coaches taping the sideline? I know you think it's no big deal, but the NFL, the Jets coaches, and obviously, the Patriots, disagree. The Pats thought it was so important, they were willing to try it again, after having gotten a letter form the league, and the same guy caught and ejected from the Packer sideline. Allegedly.

You could take a poll as to which was worse, but I am guessing that videotaping the sideline would win in a landslide.

Taping the sideline is not against the rules and not what they are in trouble for.

Page 105 of the league's Game Operations manual says: "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." It later says: "All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

Ray Anderson, the league's head of football operations, sent a memo to head coaches and GMs last September 6 that said: "Video taping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

Care to revise your statement?

 

[jonessed]

Howdy all. Just dropping by to chime in with my latest thinking / conjecture / revised prediction of outcome, and a question.I'm thinking a #1 pick, $500M fine, and 1 game BB suspension. Stiffer than expected on pick and money impact, but not wanting to protract the issue visibility beyond a week via a multi-game suspension. Question: does Brady call his own plays or are they called in? If he calls his own plays, this would support the notion of him knowing. If the sideline calls the plays, less likely he knew ("Hey Tom, we think you should run left. Really.").

$500 mill? What do they do with the money from the fine, fund Social Security?

MM = millionM = thousandedit: maybe i was confused, but I thought someone else used to post in terms like that in FFA.

Probably, could be my bad. my decoder pin is busted.

That's pretty standard in financial circles I believe. Although it could be confusing outside of that.

 

[David Yudkin]

If the Pats get reamed on this one, you can bet the team will hire a team of people to dig up dirt on all the other franchises and will be giving regular updates to the league office on what everyone else is doing. Maybe we will enter an era of tattletailing.

I think you've brought up the true nature of the problem we're discussing here---the Patriots only care about winning, and are stretching or breaking the rules to reach that goal. The fact that you as a Patriots fan can so definitely state that the team would waste time and effort on childish behavior like this is more proof that BB is infecting the team and its fan base with his pugnacious brand of "fair play". It stinks. And it gets harder and harder to cover up the smell the further away the team gets from the Aqua Velva that was it last Lombardi.

I am not a true Pats fan as some have alluded to in the past (Cowboys fan). I happen to live in Pats country, but I certainly am no fan of Belichick and could ramble on about how big of a stain he is on the game of football.I don't condone any of these shennigans by the Pats or any other team and think all teams should stick to playing football. But the fact of the matter is that teams do bizarre things to try to win. The sad part is that it appears that many times it's the teams that win that are accused of trying to bend the rules the most.For example, last year at our son's POP WARNER football game, I was taking notes on the game (I wrote articles for all the local papers) and a team wanted me kicked out for spying and writing down what they called their plays. I can only imagine what the paranoia must be like if this is how elementary school coaches are concerned about.

David,I hope you know I respect you greatly and I apologize for assuming you were a hardcore Patriots homer. That said, I still stand behind my take above given the reactions of many of the hardcore NE homers within this thread.BusMan

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

 

[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 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 Fine

Loss of a 3rd

4 game suspension for the Coach

You definitley could be right, but I think the penalty for BB should be more. If Wade Wilson gets 5 games for legally ordering a drug for his own personal health and providing exactly zero competitive advantage for his team, then BB deserves to be suspended for the year - if not for life. Goodell made it very clear when he penalized Wilson that coaches will be held to a "higher standard". Well, it doesnt get too much lower than cheating. It is certainly a far more heinous offense than what Wade Wilson did, and I would find it very hypocritical if Wilson's punishment exceeded that of BB's personal punishment. BB may not even be there next year to feel the pain of the lost draft choice. The organization deserves that penalty, but BB seems to be the main culprit here, and he should pay a very high price. He has compromised the integrity of not only himself, but also of the history books. He is a stain on this league, and a disgrace to professional sports. Do we want our youth to see a cheater on the sidelines leading their favorite team?

Reviewing video tape during the game > passing out HGH?

First of all, from my understanding there was not even an accusation of "passing out HGH". It was my understanding that he needed the drug for a medical condition. If I am wrong, then my post is garbage. Second of all, to call it "reviewing video tape during the game" is like saying that Michael Vick was simply an irresponsible pet owner. Even if Wilson was passing out HGH (which I think is a blatantly false statement), I find what Belicheck is being accused of to be at least equally eggregious, irresponsible, and dispicable. Probably more. He has called into question the integrity and validity of the NFL history books.

Reviewing the tape during the game is the rule that was broken (and not having the video taper in an enclsure). If you think it was illegal or unethical for him to tape the signs, then you are not familiar with the rule nor the practices of the NFL. I am calling it what it is and not trying to rename it for the purpose of increased shock value.

Are you attempting to spin it that this is no big deal and a minor infraction that is less significant than a guy taking HGH for medical purposes? If so, then we are clearly on a different page. However you want to word it, it can be summarized simply by saying "cheating". Not for shock value - for accuracy value.

That's what the rule is. If stating the rule is considered spin, then so be it. If breaking a rule is cheating, then they are all cheaters. Kind of takes the sting out of the label though.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

Interesting... every lay person uses the term "cheating" or "not cheating"... the AP article doesn't mention it once. Uses term "signal taping"... ah Vick participating in canine achievement drills... get that... please use canine achievement drills. Let's guess the reporter was pulled locally to write that bit...

Maybe it's because reporters are trained to be objective, and not speculative. At this point, "signal taping" is all the Patriots are accused of doing.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to be very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. Each one could easily be unique in its own methodology.The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

 

[1huskerfan]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

 

[helix]

Actually, the commish can punish based on pure speculation. Its completely up to his discretion. He doesnt need to prove a thing.

Goddell is a lawyer. There's no way he'd take any action without some kind of paper trail and multi-page report documenting the entire rationale -- if for no other reason than to protect himself and the NFL from any kind of lawsuit.

no he's not.

I love it when guys play fast and loose with the facts-

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

:knockmeoverwithafeather:

 

[Dickie Dunn]

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.

Actually this isn't accurateats have Brandon Meriweather (1st) and Kareem Brown (4th) on the active roster. Justise Hairston, Mike Richardson (both 6ths) and Oscar Lua (7th) are on I/R. Clint Oldenburg (5th) is on the practice squad. They didn't have a 2nd (Welker trade).

 

[1huskerfan]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

:knockmeoverwithafeather:

I'll get the smelling salts.

 

[nygiants56]

Dear Raiders, Jets, Dolphins, Bills, Steelers, Rams, and Packers fans,

It was nice jawing with you over this topic. I don't really post here so it was mildly amusing but the number of angry and jealous fans who want Belichick strung up and finally have a reason is a little overwhelming.

I'm going to return to anonymity temporarily. See you after the verdict is served.

Patriots fan.

Note: Broncos fans don't seem as rabid about it since Denver sort of owns NE. Colts fans are at peace as well.

1) Jets fan here. FWIW - to make you feel better I guess, since you seem to care - stealing signs or not, the Jets got BEAT Sunday. They need to worry about that o-line... that said...2) if BB cheated, he got caught and will pay the piper.

3) I wonder how you would feel if Mangini got caught? I bet there'd be a ton of Pats fans out here pounding their chests. Although it's been excessive....

Back to topic -

From the blogger

Patriots HC Bill Belichick released the following statement with respect to his meeting with Commissioner Roger Goodell and the accusassions of the signal-stealing via videotape; "Earlier this week, I spoke with Commissioner Goodell about a videotaping procedure during last Sunday's game and my interpretation of the rules. At this point, we have not been notified of the league's ruling. Although it remains a league matter, I want to apologize to everyone who has been affected, most of all ownership, staff and players. Following the league's decision, I will have further comment."

Found the bolded part interesting -- really well worded on BB's part. Careful to not try to say he wasn't doing some taping - and equally careful to say he feels he just intrepreted the rules differently.

I'll tell you what - he isn't a Super Bowl winning coach for nothing. He's clever.

can't be the first time any nfl team has cheated like this, I mean, why do ALL coaches cover their faces now when they call plays?!

BILL WALSH IS THE FATHER OF THE CUT-BLOCK technique, the cheapest,dirtiest coaching call in the history if the NFL...It not only ended the careers of MANY football players ( Jerry Ball, anyone?), but it also was a major part of helping the Niners win so many SB's..it was the dirtiest play ever, MUCH worse than anything Bellichick and a camera, could ever do..

not only that, but Walsh also used and employed a technique that would set picks on defenders, he also set picks on defenders using the Umpire as the pickster, running crossing routes 5 yards off the line where the umpire is standing..

you can kill BB all you want, but even the 'grand exulted ruler' Bill Walsh was guilty of dirty tricks, shady play calling, and cheating, hell, his front office was ALL ABOUT cheating! lets not even get into the salary cap cheating the Niners used in the 90's..

and you want to hang BB for using a camera?!

c'mon now..lets be fair here..Walsh was as dirty a coach as there ever was calling plays on any football field, anywhere..

he was a cheater and a cheap shot artist, more than anyone in the history of the game...

 

[massraider]

Dear Raiders, Jets, Dolphins, Bills, Steelers, Rams, and Packers fans,

It was nice jawing with you over this topic. I don't really post here so it was mildly amusing but the number of angry and jealous fans who want Belichick strung up and finally have a reason is a little overwhelming.

I'm going to return to anonymity temporarily. See you after the verdict is served.

Patriots fan.

Note: Broncos fans don't seem as rabid about it since Denver sort of owns NE. Colts fans are at peace as well.

1) Jets fan here. FWIW - to make you feel better I guess, since you seem to care - stealing signs or not, the Jets got BEAT Sunday. They need to worry about that o-line... that said...2) if BB cheated, he got caught and will pay the piper.

3) I wonder how you would feel if Mangini got caught? I bet there'd be a ton of Pats fans out here pounding their chests. Although it's been excessive....

Back to topic -

From the blogger

Patriots HC Bill Belichick released the following statement with respect to his meeting with Commissioner Roger Goodell and the accusassions of the signal-stealing via videotape; "Earlier this week, I spoke with Commissioner Goodell about a videotaping procedure during last Sunday's game and my interpretation of the rules. At this point, we have not been notified of the league's ruling. Although it remains a league matter, I want to apologize to everyone who has been affected, most of all ownership, staff and players. Following the league's decision, I will have further comment."

Found the bolded part interesting -- really well worded on BB's part. Careful to not try to say he wasn't doing some taping - and equally careful to say he feels he just intrepreted the rules differently.

I'll tell you what - he isn't a Super Bowl winning coach for nothing. He's clever.

can't be the first time any nfl team has cheated like this, I mean, why do ALL coaches cover their faces now when they call plays?!

BILL WALSH IS THE FATHER OF THE CUT-BLOCK technique, the cheapest,dirtiest coaching call in the history if the NFL...It not only ended the careers of MANY football players ( Jerry Ball, anyone?), but it also was a major part of helping the Niners win so many SB's..it was the dirtiest play ever, MUCH worse than anything Bellichick and a camera, could ever do..

not only that, but Walsh also used and employed a technique that would set picks on defenders, he also set picks on defenders using the Umpire as the pickster, running crossing routes 5 yards off the line where the umpire is standing..

you can kill BB all you want, but even the 'grand exulted ruler' Bill Walsh was guilty of dirty tricks, shady play calling, and cheating, hell, his front office was ALL ABOUT cheating! lets not even get into the salary cap cheating the Niners used in the 90's..

and you want to hang BB for using a camera?!

c'mon now..lets be fair here..Walsh was as dirty a coach as there ever was calling plays on any football field, anywhere..

he was a cheater and a cheap shot artist, more than anyone in the history of the game...

If you wanna dig him up and suspend him for the rest of the season, I am fine with that.In the meantime, I'll just deal with the cheater in front of me.

By the way, the "So-and-So did it too!" defense hasn't worked for me since 3rd grade, so I don't know how much help this is to BB.

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to be very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. Each one could easily be unique in its own methodology.The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

Beacue this does two things:1) By disclosing what the punishment is initially (or at least the framework), it would help discourage abusers. Set the bar at a minimum of a first round draft pick, a suitable fine, and a suspension of the coach (or whatever they wanted to set as a benchmark) and a lot fewer teams may have elected to do stuff like this.2) It allows for consistency and sets the cornerstone for future occurences. If the same thing happened again but the penalty was different, teams would go ballistic.For example, let's say there are no real iron clad laws on stealing. I steal something. Then the penalty is handed out and it's death by hanging. Had I known that that would be the penalty, I likely would not have stolen anything.But let's also say that I was hanged for stealing. And the next guy does the same thin and is sentenced to 300 hours of community service. Does that not set a bad precident? Changing the rules ex post facto is problematic in my book. By stating actual terms and conditions it also takes away some of the power of the commish to set his own terms and establish his own rules dictatorially.Think about a fantasy commish. How many threads are there each year featuring compliants about a league commish unilaterally changing the rules or making rulings on his own and how outraged the league is. How is this any different?

 

[Banger]

My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

I think they would rather say this is the rule and break it at your own peril. If you say the rule is that a team will forfeit a 3rd and said team has 3 3rd's next year and they need to win to get into the playoffs, what do you think the team will do if they know the worst that will happen is giving up a 3rd? They want to remove the temptation to cheat from their minds.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.

My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to be very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. Each one could easily be unique in its own methodology.

The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

Beacue this does two things:1) By disclosing what the punishment is initially (or at least the framework), it would help discourage abusers. Set the bar at a minimum of a first round draft pick, a suitable fine, and a suspension of the coach (or whatever they wanted to set as a benchmark) and a lot fewer teams may have elected to do stuff like this.

2) It allows for consistency and sets the cornerstone for future occurences. If the same thing happened again but the penalty was different, teams would go ballistic.

For example, let's say there are no real iron clad laws on stealing. I steal something. Then the penalty is handed out and it's death by hanging. Had I known that that would be the penalty, I likely would not have stolen anything.

But let's also say that I was hanged for stealing. And the next guy does the same thin and is sentenced to 300 hours of community service. Does that not set a bad precident? Changing the rules ex post facto is problematic in my book. By stating actual terms and conditions it also takes away some of the power of the commish to set his own terms and establish his own rules dictatorially.

Think about a fantasy commish. How many threads are there each year featuring compliants about a league commish unilaterally changing the rules or making rulings on his own and how outraged the league is. How is this any different?

But then they would have to do that for every imaginable instance of a transgression. That could be thousands and thousands of rules and penalties for which 99% of them will never occur. You are looking at it with hindsight DY. Which is totally unfair. They will discourage future abusers right now. They had just given the benefit of the doubt that people within their league had some integrity.

An important piece is this: Each one could easily be unique in its own methodology. Which changes the possible penalty a million time over each individual situation. Even US laws allow for much judgement determination by it judges and jury. The league has had no reason to up until now. And even now, whatever is the price the Patriots pay does in no way cause that to be the price for the next transgressor. And it shouldnt.

 

[Banger]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to be very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. Each one could easily be unique in its own methodology.The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

Beacue this does two things:1) By disclosing what the punishment is initially (or at least the framework), it would help discourage abusers. Set the bar at a minimum of a first round draft pick, a suitable fine, and a suspension of the coach (or whatever they wanted to set as a benchmark) and a lot fewer teams may have elected to do stuff like this.2) It allows for consistency and sets the cornerstone for future occurences. If the same thing happened again but the penalty was different, teams would go ballistic.For example, let's say there are no real iron clad laws on stealing. I steal something. Then the penalty is handed out and it's death by hanging. Had I known that that would be the penalty, I likely would not have stolen anything.But let's also say that I was hanged for stealing. And the next guy does the same thin and is sentenced to 300 hours of community service. Does that not set a bad precident? Changing the rules ex post facto is problematic in my book. By stating actual terms and conditions it also takes away some of the power of the commish to set his own terms and establish his own rules dictatorially.Think about a fantasy commish. How many threads are there each year featuring compliants about a league commish unilaterally changing the rules or making rulings on his own and how outraged the league is. How is this any different?

Isn't the sentencing phase by judge exactly what you're talking about? Vick can get X number of years but depending on cooperation, extenuating circumstances, etc. the judge has the discretion to alter the actual sentence. Each case is different.

 

[Gr00vus]

I'd imagine this will be "the" pats/problem thread for a while. Can somebody update the title of the thread when there's some actual news posted? Otherwise I have to keep checking back in the thread itself to see if there has been, and frankly I've written and read enough speculation for the time being.

Thanks.

 

[David Yudkin]

My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

I think they would rather say this is the rule and break it at your own peril. If you say the rule is that a team will forfeit a 3rd and said team has 3 3rd's next year and they need to win to get into the playoffs, what do you think the team will do if they know the worst that will happen is giving up a 3rd? They want to remove the temptation to cheat from their minds.

They coould set language to say that at a mimimum it wil be blah blah blah or that on a second infraction it will jump to blah blah blah.And I don't see how having three 3rd round picks should have any bearing on what the rule should be. The team did something TO GET those picks, so they still would loose something if they were taken away.A set policy doesn't seem to be a problem in enforcing substance use suspensions. You don't see them saying that PLAYER X has 10 years still to play so the penalty should be more severe than PLAYER Y who only has two years left to play so he should get a lighter suspension. And you don't see them saying pot is not as hardcore as another drug or steroids . . . the rules are the rules no matter what.

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't diasagree that the homerism on these boards is laughable at times. People clearly need to understand that being outraged if TEAM A had done something but ok with it if TEAM B did it makes no logicial sense.My main contention throughout all this is more with the league rules than what happened. Again, I don't approve of what the Pats did, but my concern is that the league should have rules that state, "Failure to comply will result in . . ." for a penalty phase.

Why handcuff themselves to something that may prove to be very inappropriate. The penalty should be based on the transgression. Each one could easily be unique in its own methodology.The league and commisioner enacting judgement - at the time and what is fitting to the crime - is they way it should be.

Beacue this does two things:1) By disclosing what the punishment is initially (or at least the framework), it would help discourage abusers. Set the bar at a minimum of a first round draft pick, a suitable fine, and a suspension of the coach (or whatever they wanted to set as a benchmark) and a lot fewer teams may have elected to do stuff like this.2) It allows for consistency and sets the cornerstone for future occurences. If the same thing happened again but the penalty was different, teams would go ballistic.For example, let's say there are no real iron clad laws on stealing. I steal something. Then the penalty is handed out and it's death by hanging. Had I known that that would be the penalty, I likely would not have stolen anything.But let's also say that I was hanged for stealing. And the next guy does the same thin and is sentenced to 300 hours of community service. Does that not set a bad precident? Changing the rules ex post facto is problematic in my book. By stating actual terms and conditions it also takes away some of the power of the commish to set his own terms and establish his own rules dictatorially.Think about a fantasy commish. How many threads are there each year featuring compliants about a league commish unilaterally changing the rules or making rulings on his own and how outraged the league is. How is this any different?

Isn't the sentencing phase by judge exactly what you're talking about? Vick can get X number of years but depending on cooperation, extenuating circumstances, etc. the judge has the discretion to alter the actual sentence. Each case is different.

But in the Vick case there is a typical range involved inherant to the charges. So dogfighting as a charge would carry say 2-5 years in prison (with the judge than determining the outlying and mitigating factors).