Espn reporting Goodell confirmed Patriots using camera (1 Viewer)

[ChrisHenrysDD]

As a Steeler fan, I think a lot of the people on here are being ridiculous with some of the suggested punishments. Suspend Bellicheck for a year? Come on guys. A lot of this really seems like a lot of people are still seething over the Patriots beating them. I got most of that out of my system when the Steelers won a Super Bowl, all the heartache,anger, and resentment disappeared.

Regardless of what punishment they give the Pats there's always going to be that doubt hanging over their 3 super bowls. I think that's the real punishment. No one is ever going to give them any credit until they win another one. How is a lifetime of doubt and suspicion not worse than a measly draft pick and a pocket change type fine?

I don't need anymore reasons to hate the Patriots, that's for damn sure.

 

[BoulderBob]

As a Steeler fan, I think a lot of the people on here are being ridiculous with some of the suggested punishments. Suspend Bellicheck for a year? Come on guys. Regardless of what punishment they give the Pats there's always going to be that doubt hanging over their 3 super bowls. I think that's the real punishment. No one is ever going to give them any credit until they win another one. How is a lifetime of doubt and suspicion not worse than a measly draft pick and a pocket change type fine?

*

 

[PatsFanCT]

As a Steeler fan, I think a lot of the people on here are being ridiculous with some of the suggested punishments. Suspend Bellicheck for a year? Come on guys. Regardless of what punishment they give the Pats there's always going to be that doubt hanging over their 3 super bowls. I think that's the real punishment. No one is ever going to give them any credit until they win another one. How is a lifetime of doubt and suspicion not worse than a measly draft pick and a pocket change type fine?

As a Pats fan, it's painfully embarrassing. I'm ashamed of my team and it's like a kick in the nads by the organization. It's depressing and having to endure the ridicule of every football fan I know seems unfair, yet justified. I don't care if they suspend Belichick for the year, take away every 2008 draft pick they have, hell fire Belichick for all I care. None of that hurts more than questioning the titles.

 

[fatness]

It's tough to imagine the Patriots and Belichick being more than mildly inconvenienced by a suspension. What's to stop him from meeting with the players, meeting with the coaches, talking to them for hours on the phone, calling the plays remotely? A sense of honr? If they can videotape (and apparently listen to) other teams when they shouldn't, it's tough to imagine them having any trouble communicating with their own coach.

 

[jonessed]

It's tough to imagine the Patriots and Belichick being more than mildly inconvenienced by a suspension. What's to stop him from meeting with the players, meeting with the coaches, talking to them for hours on the phone, calling the plays remotely? A sense of honr? If they can videotape (and apparently listen to) other teams when they shouldn't, it's tough to imagine them having any trouble communicating with their own coach.

I imagine if they threatened further penalties and a permanent ban for BB if he decided to contact the team during the suspension Kraft would put his foot down and not allow it. They would be seriously pushing their luck.

 

[Marc Levin]

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 is not true. NFL Live just had a feature on this, and Golic and Salisbury were unanimous in saying that this was not that big a deal. Keyshawn said this happens all the time. The former players, for the most part, seem to be saying that this is commonplace. It should come as no surprise that current players are keeping their mouths shut. If you were the head coach of a team that also did this, would you want your players to say, guys, come on, we do this all the time? Of course not.

Huh - saw Salisbury this a.m. on a different program (maybe around the horn) saying BB should get nailed.I hear what you are saying, bfred - current players prob. couldn't say "oh yeah, I see this happening all the time." The NFL has some serious PR issue to deal with here, like I mentioned in my reasons for a light punishment post. Punishing the team heavily sends a poor message. Just like steroids in baseball or drugs in the NFL, even if everyone's doing it, you nail the person who has the stuff in their system, not the entire organization b/c you don;t want to stain the league.Similarly, I expect the NFL to come down hardest on BB and lighter on the Pats organization. That way, the mnessage is that this coach screwed up by getting caught, but let's not air the league's dirty laundry

 

[Marc Levin]

It could be anything from a fine of $20 to 3 draft picks and suspensions. All I'm saying is I think most are going to be disappointed because of how the rule can be and was interpreted.

AWESOME - someone who has read the entire rule and can fill us in on how it can be interpreted.Please expand on this b/c I have not been able to find a copy of the rule in its entirety. I've only found the snippets in the papers and BB's statement that he interpreted it wrongly.

 

[Marc Levin]

Keep waiting........

No sweat, but the man has a point. Knocking someone else's predictions is a bit more interesting when you put your own predictions out there.

I don't really care about his or anyone else's predictions. It could be anything from a fine of $20 to 3 draft picks and suspensions. All I'm saying is I think most are going to be disappointed because of how the rule can be and was interpreted.

I haven't seen any part of that rule quoted that wasn't crystal clear, and neither has anyone else. This 'rule interpretation' thing is grasping at straws, plain and simple.

Is it? Go find the rules and read them.

It isn't? Love to hear the possible interpretation snafu. Please, enlighten me.

Do your homework, lad. My responsibility is to myself. I'll let you sit in the dark and pray.

Sad, man.

So, this isn't the rule?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.

Link from NFL.com

It's not the entiire rule - there are ellipses in there that imply something was removed from the quote, and there is no "context" - gotta see the whole thing and the rules around it to know what it is saying.

 

[greenline]

It could be anything from a fine of $20 to 3 draft picks and suspensions. All I'm saying is I think most are going to be disappointed because of how the rule can be and was interpreted.

AWESOME - someone who has read the entire rule and can fill us in on how it can be interpreted.Please expand on this b/c I have not been able to find a copy of the rule in its entirety. I've only found the snippets in the papers and BB's statement that he interpreted it wrongly.

I don't think he ever said he interpreted it "wrongly" He said it was interpretation. That's different. There was no contrition or admittal of guilt. There was an acknowledgement of the taping, a reference to discussing interpretation, and an apology for any issues this was causing. I think they still feel they are within rules EVEN if it's a technicality. We'll probably never know with confirmation what the Patriots argument was.

 

[j3r3m3y]

It's not the entiire rule - there are ellipses in there that imply something was removed from the quote, and there is no "context" - gotta see the whole thing and the rules around it to know what it is saying.

Valid point, but I find it hard to misinterpret:

And, a memo from Ray Anderson, NFL head of football operations, to head coaches and GMs on Sept. 6, 2006 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."

I cant think of context that would make what we saw in the pictures not violate the above quote...

 

[Marc Levin]

It could be anything from a fine of $20 to 3 draft picks and suspensions. All I'm saying is I think most are going to be disappointed because of how the rule can be and was interpreted.

AWESOME - someone who has read the entire rule and can fill us in on how it can be interpreted.Please expand on this b/c I have not been able to find a copy of the rule in its entirety. I've only found the snippets in the papers and BB's statement that he interpreted it wrongly.

I don't think he ever said he interpreted it "wrongly" He said it was interpretation. That's different. There was no contrition or admittal of guilt. There was an acknowledgement of the taping, a reference to discussing interpretation, and an apology for any issues this was causing. I think they still feel they are within rules EVEN if it's a technicality. We'll probably never know with confirmation what the Patriots argument was.

'Really? That is good news for the Pats. I would like you to expand on the technicality and the possible interpretation - was it because it was a day game? Or maybe because it was the second Sunday of the month so the rule doesn't apply? I am genuinely curious to know what the possible interpretation and/or technicality could have been - oh, and most importantly - what the technicality might have been that will allow the Pats and BB to escape punishment when the league is clearly treating this very seriously.

 

[Banger]

It's not the entiire rule - there are ellipses in there that imply something was removed from the quote, and there is no "context" - gotta see the whole thing and the rules around it to know what it is saying.

Valid point, but I find it hard to misinterpret:

And, a memo from Ray Anderson, NFL head of football operations, to head coaches and GMs on Sept. 6, 2006 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."

I cant think of context that would make what we saw in the pictures not violate the above quote...

I think BB's interpretation issue is that he didn't believe the rules actually applied to him...

 

[Marc Levin]

It's not the entiire rule - there are ellipses in there that imply something was removed from the quote, and there is no "context" - gotta see the whole thing and the rules around it to know what it is saying.

Valid point, but I find it hard to misinterpret:

And, a memo from Ray Anderson, NFL head of football operations, to head coaches and GMs on Sept. 6, 2006 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."

I cant think of context that would make what we saw in the pictures not violate the above quote...

I can think of a thousand things - from the ridiculous to the argumentative.What I really find hard to stomach is that there is anything unclear after the league had an offseason meeting on this specific subject and after the league decided to clarify that they were going to enforce the rule by sending a league-wide memo. Even if BB had an "interpretation" it seems it is up to HIM to ask the league to clarify the rule. Instead, he took it on himself to interpret the rule as he saw fit (if you buy the interpretation theory) Given that he failed to ask the league whether his interpretation was proper and chose, instead, to simply push the line, he should have to accept the consequences of that action.Esp., since it will be REALLY hard for the league, at this point, to say: "well, now you know better." That subject the league to allowing ALL teams to interpret ALL rules however they see fit and then get caught before getting a clarification.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

It's not the entiire rule - there are ellipses in there that imply something was removed from the quote, and there is no "context" - gotta see the whole thing and the rules around it to know what it is saying.

Valid point, but I find it hard to misinterpret:

And, a memo from Ray Anderson, NFL head of football operations, to head coaches and GMs on Sept. 6, 2006 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."

I cant think of context that would make what we saw in the pictures not violate the above quote...

Well Mr. Commissioner, we thought "locations accessible to club staff members during the game" only included the coaches box. So during the game, we sent our club staff member to a different location where he filmed.... Oh ####. Let me try again. We thought...

 

[greenline]

It could be anything from a fine of $20 to 3 draft picks and suspensions. All I'm saying is I think most are going to be disappointed because of how the rule can be and was interpreted.

AWESOME - someone who has read the entire rule and can fill us in on how it can be interpreted.Please expand on this b/c I have not been able to find a copy of the rule in its entirety. I've only found the snippets in the papers and BB's statement that he interpreted it wrongly.

I don't think he ever said he interpreted it "wrongly" He said it was interpretation. That's different. There was no contrition or admittal of guilt. There was an acknowledgement of the taping, a reference to discussing interpretation, and an apology for any issues this was causing. I think they still feel they are within rules EVEN if it's a technicality. We'll probably never know with confirmation what the Patriots argument was.

'Really? That is good news for the Pats. I would like you to expand on the technicality and the possible interpretation - was it because it was a day game? Or maybe because it was the second Sunday so the rule doesn't apply? I am genuinely curious to know what the possible interpretation and/or technicality could have been - oh, and most importantly - what the technicality might have been that will allow the Pats and BB to escape punishment when the league is clearly treating this very seriously.

You are getting on my nerves. Please read every post I've written again. SLOWLY. Calm yourself down and look for an instance where I said "The Patriots are going to escape punishment" Find that part for me, Eric. I am well aware the "league is treating this very seriously." Especially since Chris Mortensen says so. Everything else is speculation from writers who want to see him hung and shot. I am trying to tell you that the PUNISHMENT YOU SO DESPERATELY WANT TO SEE IS NOT GOING TO BE AS BAD AS YOU OR MANY OTHER OF YOUR FORUM SUPPORTERS WOULD LIKE IT TO BE. There is more as you stated yourself to the actual rule. The are portions of text that you will need to find for yourself. I am not providing you with my sources. If you are a smart person you can research it yourself. I don't know what they argument is specifically. But I know this proverbial hammer isn't going to fall as you wish. Enjoy the basement.

 

[Marc Levin]

Bottom line, BB thought he could get away with something he knew was wrong (even if everyone else was doing it, which I dispute, that is the case), and he decided to brazenly try to get away with it by rationalizing: "I interpreted the rule differently than the league and the other 31 teams."

 

[cobalt_27]

I'm guessing loss of a 1st rounder this year, a 3rd rounder next year, $250,000 fine and a one-game suspension for Belichick.Unlike others, I'm of the belief that the league feels this issue goes much deeper than Belichick and falls more under the category of "lack of institutional control" that the NCAA uses in their punishments to college football programs that run afoul of the rules. My guess is they will come down far harder on the organization for fostering the environment under which Belichick cheated than the actual cheater himself.

I think you're also absolutely right on what penalties will be handed down, except I think it could be as much as a 4 game suspension.

 

[greenline]

Bottom line, BB thought he could get away with something he knew was wrong (even if everyone else was doing it, which I dispute, that is the case), and he decided to brazenly try to get away with it by rationalizing: "I interpreted the rule differently than the league and the other 31 teams."

Bottom line is your whole existence this week is trying everything you can to find arguments to support your desire to see captial punishment served. All you sound is desperate and jealous. I thought you were the lawyer? You should know all about taking advantage of loopholes and semantics.

 

[jonessed]

It could be anything from a fine of $20 to 3 draft picks and suspensions. All I'm saying is I think most are going to be disappointed because of how the rule can be and was interpreted.

AWESOME - someone who has read the entire rule and can fill us in on how it can be interpreted.Please expand on this b/c I have not been able to find a copy of the rule in its entirety. I've only found the snippets in the papers and BB's statement that he interpreted it wrongly.

I don't think he ever said he interpreted it "wrongly" He said it was interpretation. That's different. There was no contrition or admittal of guilt. There was an acknowledgement of the taping, a reference to discussing interpretation, and an apology for any issues this was causing. I think they still feel they are within rules EVEN if it's a technicality.

We'll probably never know with confirmation what the Patriots argument was.

'Really? That is good news for the Pats. I would like you to expand on the technicality and the possible interpretation - was it because it was a day game? Or maybe because it was the second Sunday so the rule doesn't apply? I am genuinely curious to know what the possible interpretation and/or technicality could have been - oh, and most importantly - what the technicality might have been that will allow the Pats and BB to escape punishment when the league is clearly treating this very seriously.

You are getting on my nerves. Please read every post I've written again. SLOWLY. Calm yourself down and look for an instance where I said "The Patriots are going to escape punishment" Find that part for me, Eric.

I am well aware the "league is treating this very seriously." Especially since Chris Mortensen says so. Everything else is speculation from writers who want to see him hung and shot.

I am trying to tell you that the PUNISHMENT YOU SO DESPERATELY WANT TO SEE IS NOT GOING TO BE AS BAD AS YOU OR MANY OTHER OF YOUR FORUM SUPPORTERS WOULD LIKE IT TO BE.

There is more as you stated yourself to the actual rule. The are portions of text that you will need to find for yourself. I am not providing you with my sources. If you are a smart person you can research it yourself.

I don't know what they argument is specifically. But I know this proverbial hammer isn't going to fall as you wish.

Enjoy the basement.

 

[cobalt_27]

There is more as you stated yourself to the actual rule. The are portions of text that you will need to find for yourself. I am not providing you with my sources. If you are a smart person you can research it yourself.

Tool factor is strong with this one.

 

[Marc Levin]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

 

[Marc Levin]

Bottom line, BB thought he could get away with something he knew was wrong (even if everyone else was doing it, which I dispute, that is the case), and he decided to brazenly try to get away with it by rationalizing: "I interpreted the rule differently than the league and the other 31 teams."

Bottom line is your whole existence this week is trying everything you can to find arguments to support your desire to see captial punishment served. All you sound is desperate and jealous. I thought you were the lawyer? You should know all about taking advantage of loopholes and semantics.

LOL - I am the one saying 3rd and 5th and a one game suspension. That is WAY less than most of the thoughts here. I am looking to nail someone?And I don't believe *this* commish will let the Pats off on a technicality or on semantics.

 

[greenline]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

My best responses? Are they bothering you? I wouldn't have thought twice about making fun of the Dolphins until I realized the leader of the pack was a fan from within the division. Oops! Coincidence right? You are just a concerned highly ethical NFL fan without bias or personal agendas. I'll let you continue believing what you want though. Had I read the rule, I'd be certain to discuss it with you, right? I hope I'm not blasting you. Is that blasting? I'm still confused on that.

 

[Banger]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

He's parroting his almighty leader BB and since he said it was an interpretation issue, that's what it must be. Right?LOL.I could really care less what BB gets. As far as my predictions go that's just what I think they will be. If they are less or more it wouldn't bother me one bit. I'm not a Pat hater, never have been. I think BB is a weasel and got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and now he's gotta pay up.

 

[jagerbomb]

The vast majority of poster here are wildly overestimating what the punishment will be. The poll choices and people discussion a forfeit or playoff eligibility are making me laugh. I can't wait for the 20 page thread of people complaining that the penalty wasn't harsh enough.

Slightly off topic, but the league could have avoided this whole nonsense if they had allowed radio communication to the defensive captain as was proposed.

 

[BusMan]

I anticipate the punishment to be more than expected so as to indicate that this will never be tolerated. Couple that with the fact that Goodell is cracking the whip, and I'd bet some Patriots fans are going to be whining quite a bit more than some of them already have in this thread.

 

[Marc Levin]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.

You think this is team-driven. It is not.

My best responses? Are they bothering you? I wouldn't have thought twice about making fun of the Dolphins until I realized the leader of the pack was a fan from within the division. Oops! Coincidence right? You are just a concerned highly ethical NFL fan without bias or personal agendas.

I'll let you continue believing what you want though. Had I read the rule, I'd be certain to discuss it with you, right? I hope I'm not blasting you. Is that blasting? I'm still confused on that.

You CLEARLY have not read my posts in this thread about my respect for the Pats organization or my predictions for penalties from this, but whatever. And if you had read that rule, you'd have had something more intelligent to say than your posts here. As it stands, you are giving a very bad image to Pats fan - and I like the other ones in this thread. bostonfred posted intelligently. Wilbur Wood, same thing, They raised valid points and valid questions.Peace to you as this discussion can't go any further and be productive.

 

[greenline]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

He's parroting his almighty leader BB and since he said it was an interpretation issue, that's what it must be. Right?LOL.I could really care less what BB gets. As far as my predictions go that's just what I think they will be. If they are less or more it wouldn't bother me one bit. I'm not a Pat hater, never have been. I think BB is a weasel and got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and now he's gotta pay up.

It's exactly what it is. Whether you like it or not. Or whether he is using it as an out. It's defensable on a technicality and although it will be punished, your hopes of demise are going by the wayside.

 

[dparker713]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

My best responses? Are they bothering you? I wouldn't have thought twice about making fun of the Dolphins until I realized the leader of the pack was a fan from within the division. Oops! Coincidence right? You are just a concerned highly ethical NFL fan without bias or personal agendas. I'll let you continue believing what you want though. Had I read the rule, I'd be certain to discuss it with you, right? I hope I'm not blasting you. Is that blasting? I'm still confused on that.

Wow, I've never had to put someone on ignore for stuff they post in the pool, but Im getting awfully close with this guy.

 

[greenline]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.

You think this is team-driven. It is not.

My best responses? Are they bothering you? I wouldn't have thought twice about making fun of the Dolphins until I realized the leader of the pack was a fan from within the division. Oops! Coincidence right? You are just a concerned highly ethical NFL fan without bias or personal agendas.

I'll let you continue believing what you want though. Had I read the rule, I'd be certain to discuss it with you, right? I hope I'm not blasting you. Is that blasting? I'm still confused on that.

You CLEARLY have not read my posts in this thread about my respect for the Pats organization or my predictions for penalties from this, but whatever. And if you had read that rule, you'd have had something more intelligent to say than your posts here. As it stands, you are giving a very bad image to Pats fan - and I like the other ones in this thread. bostonfred posted intelligently. Wilbur Wood, same thing, They raised valid points and valid questions.Peace to you as this discussion can't go any further and be productive.

Peace be with you. And also with you.

 

[BusMan]

Slightly off topic, but the league could have avoided this whole nonsense if they had allowed radio communication to the defensive captain as was proposed.

Excellent point, tasteslikecrapandmakesmepukebomb. This here scandal should convince at least two more owners to vote YEAH on that proposal.

 

[Banger]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

He's parroting his almighty leader BB and since he said it was an interpretation issue, that's what it must be. Right?LOL.I could really care less what BB gets. As far as my predictions go that's just what I think they will be. If they are less or more it wouldn't bother me one bit. I'm not a Pat hater, never have been. I think BB is a weasel and got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and now he's gotta pay up.

It's exactly what it is. Whether you like it or not. Or whether he is using it as an out. It's defensable on a technicality and although it will be punished, your hopes of demise are going by the wayside.

and what is the technicality again? 30 words or less would be fine...

 

[parrot]

Slightly off topic, but the league could have avoided this whole nonsense if they had allowed radio communication to the defensive captain as was proposed.

Excellent point, tasteslikecrapandmakesmepukebomb. This here scandal should convince at least two more owners to vote YEAH on that proposal.

There was some discussion of this on Sirius today. It's not as simple as it seems. They said that some of the teams have issue with it because of the many different personnel packages on defense. With your QB he's pretty much always out there on O, not necessarily so with your Def captain.

 

[greenline]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

He's parroting his almighty leader BB and since he said it was an interpretation issue, that's what it must be. Right?LOL.I could really care less what BB gets. As far as my predictions go that's just what I think they will be. If they are less or more it wouldn't bother me one bit. I'm not a Pat hater, never have been. I think BB is a weasel and got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and now he's gotta pay up.

It's exactly what it is. Whether you like it or not. Or whether he is using it as an out. It's defensable on a technicality and although it will be punished, your hopes of demise are going by the wayside.

and what is the technicality again? 30 words or less would be fine...

Talk to Bill. I have no idea. I didn't read the rule. I'm a homer. (please get away with this. please get away with this.)

 

[BusMan]

One of the ever-growing list of things I love about this thread are these arguments:

1) All or most or some of the other NFL teams are doing it too.

Translation

The Patriots got caught which makes them some combination of too arrogant, incompetent, foolish, and unlucky.

2) Everyone else is doing something that yields similar results without violating league rules and/or memos emphasizing said rules.

Translation

The Patriots are not only violating league rules they're doing it when they don't have to and are therefore some combination of too arrogant, incompetent, and foolish.

I'm sure I'll remember more later and add to this list.

 

[bryhamm]

I anticipate the punishment to be more than expected so as to indicate that this will never be tolerated. Couple that with the fact that Goodell is cracking the whip, and I'd bet some Patriots fans are going to be whining quite a bit more than some of them already have in this thread.

See, this is exactly what I was thinking.

 

[jagerbomb]

Slightly off topic, but the league could have avoided this whole nonsense if they had allowed radio communication to the defensive captain as was proposed.

Excellent point, tasteslikecrapandmakesmepukebomb. This here scandal should convince at least two more owners to vote YEAH on that proposal.

There was some discussion of this on Sirius today. It's not as simple as it seems. They said that some of the teams have issue with it because of the many different personnel packages on defense. With your QB he's pretty much always out there on O, not necessarily so with your Def captain.

I heard something similar when the rule was being debated. I think they are overly concerned about there being one and only one defensive player on the field with communication. I wouldn't have a problem giving more than one player communication (to handle cases where one guy goes down), but I also think the one and only one player rule is enforceable with the green dot like QBs get.It's really not a big advantage if a few players on D are receiving plays. Keep in mind that the communication would be cut off with 15-20 seconds left on the play clock.

 

[Reaper]

As a Steeler fan, I think a lot of the people on here are being ridiculous with some of the suggested punishments. Suspend Bellicheck for a year? Come on guys. Regardless of what punishment they give the Pats there's always going to be that doubt hanging over their 3 super bowls. I think that's the real punishment. No one is ever going to give them any credit until they win another one. How is a lifetime of doubt and suspicion not worse than a measly draft pick and a pocket change type fine?

As a Pats fan, it's painfully embarrassing. I'm ashamed of my team and it's like a kick in the nads by the organization. It's depressing and having to endure the ridicule of every football fan I know seems unfair, yet justified. I don't care if they suspend Belichick for the year, take away every 2008 draft pick they have, hell fire Belichick for all I care. None of that hurts more than questioning the titles.

You're a good fan.... Don't let this get to you, you enjoyed championships and have a talented team to root for. If it were my team, I'd say Bring on the punishment, but, I wouldn't languish in threads like this watching fellow fans further embarrass themselves.Until the NFL makes a ruling, there is nothing a Pats fan can say other than what you said that can put them in a better light.... Talking about what team's fans post here more, pointing to Mangini, claiming everyone does it, bringing up scenarios where BB is innocent on a technicality all just makes it worse and keeps the thread going....... AND FUNNY!!!!!I seriously believe this is 20 plus pages of mostly making fun of the Pats fans who don't get what you do. Probably cuz, you're from Ct.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Slightly off topic, but the league could have avoided this whole nonsense if they had allowed radio communication to the defensive captain as was proposed.

Excellent point, tasteslikecrapandmakesmepukebomb. This here scandal should convince at least two more owners to vote YEAH on that proposal.

I don't get that one either, it is OK for the offense to use radio but not the defense?

 

[BoulderBob]

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 is not true. NFL Live just had a feature on this, and Golic and Salisbury were unanimous in saying that this was not that big a deal. Keyshawn said this happens all the time. The former players, for the most part, seem to be saying that this is commonplace. It should come as no surprise that current players are keeping their mouths shut. If you were the head coach of a team that also did this, would you want your players to say, guys, come on, we do this all the time? Of course not.

Similarly, I expect the NFL to come down hardest on BB and lighter on the Pats organization. That way, the mnessage is that this coach screwed up by getting caught, but let's not air the league's dirty laundry

ESPN's "opinions" will follow this line as well...

 

[Gr00vus]

Keep in mind that the communication would be cut off with 15-20 seconds left on the play clock.

Unless of course you've tampered with the equipment and can now send signals on "alternate" frequencies whenever you want....

 

[David Yudkin]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

 

[ChrisHenrysDD]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

Who do you think is going to be stupid enough to engage in "covert operations" now?

 

[Gr00vus]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

That of course assumes Bob Kraft hasn't already had sanctions leveled his way and can still be involved in the operations of the team.It also assumes that the league doesn't preemptively put a moratorium on such play ground retaliatory drama.The former may be a likely assumption, but the latter seems a very unlikely one. Once this thing is done, the league office is going to make sure it is done and dies a quiet death.

 

[David Yudkin]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

That of course assumes Bob Kraft hasn't already had sanctions leveled his way and can still be involved in the operations of the team.It also assumes that the league doesn't preemptively put a moratorium on such play ground retaliatory drama.The former may be a likely assumption, but the latter seems a very unlikely one. Once this thing is done, the league office is going to make sure it is done and dies a quiet death.

IMO, people are kidding themselves that stuff like this doesn't go on all the time, whether it be on game day, at practice, in scouting, at other games, etc. The same exact thing may not happen, but thise thinking this will all come to a dead stop univerally are kidding themselves.The Pats got caught. I'm sure there are other teams not conforming to all the rules, some how, some way. It could be salary cap wise, injury report wise, how many media passes are handed out, using still cameras from across the the stadium, things will continue to go on.The fact that the Pats are alledged to have done stuff like this for years to me indicates that other teams had to have been doing something or else teams would have turned them in. What other reason would there be for all these teams that are lining up now pointing fingers at NE to NOT have filed complaints when all these incidents were to have taken place? Either they were serious about them cheating or they just didn't care.Putting things into context, if I have a fantasy league mate dead to rights for cheating, I'm turning him him. Sorry, I want to win and if someone breaks the rules I will take them to task.By NOT making formal complaints to the league, IMO, NFL teams were effectively condoning the cheating. I don't see how it could be this HUGE ORDEAL for them now when they didn't bother to report it and press the issue before, especially when from I've been reading many teams said they knew the Pats were doing it.Again, I am not making excuses for the Pats, nor am I condoning their behavior, but I think the fact that all these other franchises did very little to stop it and now are screaming about it seems very strange to me.

 

[Sheriff66]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

:( I can't wait until the full details come out on this, and you know someone that hates BB is going to spill the entire pot of beans on him(cheating from years past), and he deserves everything he gets. Don't cry because BB got caught, he was so damn arrogant, it was just a matter of time....

 

[David Yudkin]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

I can't wait until the full details come out on this, and you know someone that hates BB is going to spill the entire pot of beans on him(cheating from years past), and he deserves everything he gets. Don't cry because BB got caught, he was so damn arrogant, it was just a matter of time....

I don't like BB at all and agree that his management style, tactics, personna, etc. are very poor. But if others are doing the same or similar things and that can be proven, they should have to face the same fate.

 

[jonessed]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

That of course assumes Bob Kraft hasn't already had sanctions leveled his way and can still be involved in the operations of the team.It also assumes that the league doesn't preemptively put a moratorium on such play ground retaliatory drama.

The former may be a likely assumption, but the latter seems a very unlikely one. Once this thing is done, the league office is going to make sure it is done and dies a quiet death.

IMO, people are kidding themselves that stuff like this doesn't go on all the time, whether it be on game day, at practice, in scouting, at other games, etc. The same exact thing may not happen, but thise thinking this will all come to a dead stop univerally are kidding themselves.The Pats got caught. I'm sure there are other teams not conforming to all the rules, some how, some way. It could be salary cap wise, injury report wise, how many media passes are handed out, using still cameras from across the the stadium, things will continue to go on.

The fact that the Pats are alledged to have done stuff like this for years to me indicates that other teams had to have been doing something or else teams would have turned them in. What other reason would there be for all these teams that are lining up now pointing fingers at NE to NOT have filed complaints when all these incidents were to have taken place? Either they were serious about them cheating or they just didn't care.

Putting things into context, if I have a fantasy league mate dead to rights for cheating, I'm turning him him. Sorry, I want to win and if someone breaks the rules I will take them to task.

By NOT making formal complaints to the league, IMO, NFL teams were effectively condoning the cheating. I don't see how it could be this HUGE ORDEAL for them now when they didn't bother to report it and press the issue before, especially when from I've been reading many teams said they knew the Pats were doing it.

Again, I am not making excuses for the Pats, nor am I condoning their behavior, but I think the fact that all these other franchises did very little to stop it and now are screaming about it seems very strange to me.

 

[Sheriff66]

If the Pats get reamed on this one and I'm Bob Kraft, I'm telling the commish that I will be investigating all 31 franchises and to expect a full report on what covert operations they are engaged in. And I'd convey that I expect similar penalties handed out to those teams just like they did to my own when I provide clear and concise evidence that shows what they are doing.

I can't wait until the full details come out on this, and you know someone that hates BB is going to spill the entire pot of beans on him(cheating from years past), and he deserves everything he gets. Don't cry because BB got caught, he was so damn arrogant, it was just a matter of time....

I don't like BB at all and agree that his management style, tactics, personna, etc. are very poor. But if others are doing the same or similar things and that can be proven, they should have to face the same fate.

Agreed on that point.

 

[dapunisher]

You are getting on my nerves.

I simply don't believe you have seen the rule, and I believe you are a blind homer - especially since you called me "Eric" and said "enjoy the basement" as your best responses. Had you read the rule, you;d at least speak in generalities as to why there could be an interpretation. But, you didn't. You fell back on insulting me and then insutling my team.You think this is team-driven. It is not.

My best responses? Are they bothering you? I wouldn't have thought twice about making fun of the Dolphins until I realized the leader of the pack was a fan from within the division. Oops! Coincidence right? You are just a concerned highly ethical NFL fan without bias or personal agendas. I'll let you continue believing what you want though. Had I read the rule, I'd be certain to discuss it with you, right? I hope I'm not blasting you. Is that blasting? I'm still confused on that.

Wow, I've never had to put someone on ignore for stuff they post in the pool, but Im getting awfully close with this guy.

Maybe these kind of silly exchanges happen occasionally in the shark pool, but I don't recall seeing them. And I certainly don't remember one where a single poster has seemed to go out of his way to be intentionally irritating. ML must have toddlers at home or the patience of Job.