This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Likewise, a home team could have a "secret window" that a camera has been installed in, taping defensive coordinators hand signals and directly linking up to BB, Brady, or McDaniel's headset.Conspiracy theories aside, I highly, highly, highly doubt that Kraft would knowingly accept any of these kinds of shenanigans. His reputation is a lot more important than Bill's.
But that would mean the stain on Bill Bellichick's poncho is...Nevermind.
So they would allow the away team an advantage the home team can not use on the off chance the home team installed a secret window to tape opposing defensive coordinators?The argument gets thinner and thinner as it is made. But, I respect the desire to want to see the entire rule.
Good post. And you may be right. We shall see after Goodell sees what's on the tape.Imagine for a second that Belichick found out Mangini was looking to bust him on the "video" thing. Let's say a pissed off Tim Dwight, on his visit to NE after being cut by Mangini, says to Bill, "Be careful, Eric's gunning for you and the camera." So Bill puts a kid on the sideline, but there's nothing on the tape except Bill waving hello to Mangini... More gamesmanship?
That wouldn't stop anybody from doing anything.
I honestly don't think that would be harsh enough on the coach.
Not necessarily, but that may be BB's argument. Not that it is "allowed", that it just wasn't written into the rule well enough, and BB tried to exploit it.
Goodell is not Fred Thompson in Days of Thunder.
You are assuming the commish's only desire is to stop the conduct.His desire is to punish without alienating fans and without tarnishing the league.A big penalty sends two messages:1) I will not tolerate this kind of conduct.2) This kind of conduct is really really bad cheating and we need to nip it in the budHe would impose such a penalty under message #2 for one of two reasons - everyone's doing it, which is a bad thing to admit, or - the Pats have committed an egregious violation of the rules and we need to harshly punish them.Dissuading conduct by other teams is one of, but not the most important, factor here. None of the reasons above for punishing harshly are things the NFL would want to have oublic right now - it tarnishes the league's image and that is paramount to dissuading this conduct by beating on the Pats.The message would be sent effectively with the penalty I mentioned. You all believe that the commish would have to impose the same penalty if another team is caught - WRONG! The next team could lose a number two and a number three plus a 4 game suspension becaiuse they are now made aware that hte league will punish this as cheating. The commish can do what he wants - he is not bound by a CBA's restriction on penalties.
That would be awesome.
I think Goodell would laugh him out of his office.
To be clear, I don't think it would be harsh enough either. But, the commish has considerations well beyond ours.The casual fan might not understand why this is cheating, what the harm is, why it should be harshly punished - does the commish want to open the NFL to discussing how much cheating is going on?Heck, we are all (well, mostly) intelligent knowledgeable football fans and we are having problems getting our minds fully around it after almost 18 pages of discussion.ETA - my prediction above is what I think he will do - not what I think is appropriate
Might be the difference between a slap and the hammer. We shall see.
Full and honest disclosure is what will avoid the hammer - that and Kraft stepping in to give an opinion on how hard BB should be slapped around and how hard he, personally, will slap BB around.
To expand on this - the casual fan will hear "rule violation" and will not associate that with "cheating." On field penalties are assessed for wearing the wrong kind of socks, so the casual fan may see this as akin to that more than a real cheating violation.
This is the level of argument that you always hear from people who can't articulate the difference that the moron is supposed to understand.
Oh well, that explains it. Realize what % of the population are morons, and then get back to me.
Post of the thread.Colin- like others in this thread have posted:
Nuance would imply there is room for intereptation, which I don't see here. The alleged violation, as explained and thus far not refuted by any offended party, is that they used video gear with the exact method and manner which was prohibited. It seems concrete to me, but we'll let the process play out.
I hate him a little bit for that. But mostly I just think he's stupid for choosing Gisele over Bridgett.
There is more... http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story...=simmons/070912
Simmons and Schatz come off as less than intelligent homers in that one.I almost stopped reading after the "17 bastardizations" line. The comment is so stupid (nonsensical actually, you can't "bastardize" a rule, someone buy the guy a dictionary and a thesaurus) I wonder how Simmons manages to hang on to a writing job. Unfortunately I read the whole thing. Lots of rationalization, very little else.
If the spirit of the rule is grey, then yes, I'll give the benefit of the doubt.If the spirit of the rule is clear, but BB found a loophole, then I'm sour on it and don't want this to be swept under the carpet. If "everyones doing it", then the NFL needs to make everyone stop, or change the rules to make this behavior allowable.
What a waste of space. Maybe one of the less entertaing pieces put out by Simmons. And how are Pats homers so fiercely defending this team they didn't support unitl a few years ago? Just strange to me.
What's the difference? They both accomplish the same goal. And I just put YOU on ignore you arrogant jerk.
And that distinction is still disputed. If Shanahan literally knows his opponents' plays by the end of the first quarter, then the advantage of videotaping them is much smaller than what people are inferring. The severity of the infraction is based entirely on two things - the fact that there's a rule against it, and the fact that videotaping is seen as giving a greater advantage. If you don't think it's relevant to ask "a greater advantage than WHAT?", then you're the one who is "without understanding context". The rule issue is a significant one. But I think that, if it was shown that Belichick had successfully found a loophole in the rules, most of the people calling for his head would continue to do so. Would you be willing to take back everything you said about him if it turns out that what he did was, technically, legal?
Just dont see how there is any technical loophole Bill is going to be able to wiggle out of on this one. My main problem with this is the sheer stupidity 'The Genius' has shown here. To do it the first week with Mangini on the other side line after having just been warned about it. Anything that stupid or arrogant deserves to be punished harshly.
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.
My issue is completely with the allegation of cheating, which was done in the face of a league directive inspired by the Patriots' disregard of the rule last year. They got caught last year, the league dealt with it internally, and now they've been caught again.I've been an active participant in this thread, and I find that the good discussion had in here gets diluted when someone chimes in with something irrelevant. The league doesn't have a rule against deciphering signals; it has a rule against using a video recorder to do so. This isn't about loopholes or interpretations anymore. This is about getting caught cheating multiple times and having to pay the consequences. The homerism that so easily dismisses this point is laughable.
Fixed. That'll learn 'im.There is no dispute that both the spirit and intention were violated.
He should forfeit his ring fingers!
Nuance as in you can steal signals if you use your eyes, or if you catch it on the legal video equipment (unlikely), but you can't use sideline video equipment to steal signals, even though there are a ton of cameramen allowed onthe sideline - but not from your team.
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.
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.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?
You don't see how there's any technical loophole? Have you seen the tape? Or do you have some kind of information that's not publicly available? I agree that it looks like Belichick did something very, very stupid. As much as Belichick and Mangini legitimately seem to dislike each other, he should have known that Mangini wouldn't look the other way on this. If all of this is true, this is really embarrassing.
I'd ask the same question (which you didn't answer, by the way) to anyone who is calling Belichick a cheater before all of the facts are out. I think it's a very relevant question. If you're going to call Belichick a cheater before all of the facts come out, then you should be willing to answer this question before the facts are out, and take your licks in the (as you see it, highly unlkely) event that Belichick had, or believed he had, a loophole. I'm not going to go back through 18 pages of posts to figure out who said exactly what. Are you saying you don't know if he cheated? Your posts seem like you're saying he DID cheat, but I may be reading you wrong.
