Jets caught videotaping signals in Foxboro (1 Viewer)

[BelichicksRevenge]

just make fun of our record.

HA ha! Jets stink! :(

 

[Road Warriors]

It seems to me that you believe the NFL ruling when it suits your argument.

I don't know why they decided to kick the guy out...but apparently, he was doing nothing illegal...that according to the NFL

And you ignore the NFL ruling when it doesn't suit your argument.

...

Do you really believe that the Pats gained no competitive advantage by taping opponents signals? If so...why would BB risk getting busted and the consequences...to do something that gave him no advantage? I guess he is no genius...but a complete moron.

So which is it? Is an NFL ruling to be believed ( ie. no Jets cheating, no Patriots advantage gained from tapes )?Or do you get to decide which ruling has merit and which doesn't?

I'll give you credit for having somewhat of an argument here, but it's disingenuous IMO.The NFL made rulings on both cases. However, they weren't asked to make a ruling on whether the Pats gained an advantage from the material that was confiscated. They were just required to judge whether any rules were actually broken, then mete out punishment. It's pretty clear- you either broke the rules or you didn't. The Pats were found to have broken the rules, the Jets were not. It's that easy. The only thing left to do then is hand out punishment for those who DID break the rules.

However, for some strange reason, the Commissioner's office felt the need to tack on the additional statement that "there was no advantage gained from this material". Yet they won't let anyone actually look at the tapes. They supposedly destroyed all of it. Admit it, if you are any team besides the Patriots, it would seem highly suspicious that the NFL would say no advantage was gained, but you were denied access to look at the tapes yourself.

Why would the NFL feel the need to make that additional statement? And it's not a ruling- it's an opinion. Did it factor into the punishment? Probably. But you can't deny people the right to speculate about it when they were denied access to the tapes themselves. And we have debated to death the reasons why it would be in the NFL's best interest to make that situation go away quickly. And they did make it go away quickly, let us not forget. In five days, no less.

So if you want to make an argument about it, it's unfair to compare apples to oranges.

I should just stop... I think the NFL position on the Jets is closer to an apples to apples than you give it credit for, and here's why.The NFL didn't do an investigation into the Jets cameraman at Foxboro last year. They have no tape or other proof to determine if the Jets broke a rule or not. Their statement, if I may interpret, is the location where they were taping is allowed to tape on field action. However, I submit that if the Jets were ( and I make no claim this is the case ) taping the NE sidelines from that location, it would be a rules violation.

No tape was confiscated, no claim was made, but the Jets cameraman was asked to stop taping and removed from the stadium.

What I think is the case here is there is no proof of a rules violation, as opposed to proof that no rule was broken.

The NFL has ruled that we have no proof of a violation, therefore we rule no violation occurred.

With the Pats ( on the subject of advantage gained ).... you can make the same statement:

No proof of advantage gained, therefore no advantage gained.

Both of these rulings are different than the original NE taping ruling, which was a definitive proof of a violation.

 

[Road Warriors]

Most will acknowledge that the Pats are not the only team who have done/ still do it. But as it stands, they are the only team to be penalized by the league.

True, but Jimmy Johnson has stated that when a coach he did it, too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and/or Dolphins deserve asterisks as well?

No, they were never caught in violation of the rules by the league, and there has never been any penalty handed to them.If I say I have driven after having a few drinks before, can they retroactively give me a DWI???

Be careful, the lawmakers just may implement that.

 

[Bill Lust]

Most will acknowledge that the Pats are not the only team who have done/ still do it. But as it stands, they are the only team to be penalized by the league.

True, but Jimmy Johnson has stated that when a coach he did it, too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and/or Dolphins deserve asterisks as well?

No, they were never caught in violation of the rules by the league, and there has never been any penalty handed to them.If I say I have driven after having a few drinks before, can they retroactively give me a DWI???

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...o_battle-1.html"It's no big deal," former Cowboys and Dolphins coach Jimmy Johnson told the Daily News yesterday. "Everybody made too much out of it when it happened. This stuff has been going on for 20 years. I did it, too."

I am not asking whether Johnson's teams should be punished. I am asking whether their achievements should be called into question because they videotaped opposing team's signals. These are two separate issues.

 

[nerangers]

Just let it go...

NFL: Jets' actions legal

The Jets' video procedures in which they request permission to shoot games from both end zones does not violate league rules, the NFL said today.

"It is not uncommon for visiting team video crews to request permission to shoot coaching video from both upper end zone positions," spokesman Greg Aiello wrote in an email. "Home clubs must provide visiting clubs with equal vantage points for the taping of games. Teams typically shoot coaching video from one upper 50-yard line location and one upper end zone location, but there are no restrictions on shooting from both upper end zone positions as long as the opportunity is provided to both teams. No permission is needed from the league office."

 

[Shrek]

just make fun of our record.

HA ha! Jets stink! :X

Nice

 

[NYCGangGreen]

just make fun of our record.

HA ha! Jets stink!

That's the smartest remark from a Pats* fan throughout this whole thread....and it had to be handed on a plate to you.I guess they don't call em chowderheads for nothing. :X

 

[Bill Lust]

just make fun of our record.

HA ha! Jets stink!

That's the smartest remark from a Pats* fan throughout this whole thread....and it had to be handed on a plate to you.I guess they don't call em chowderheads for nothing. :X

You'll have to forgive him. It was forced. Making fun of the Jets record got old 3-4 years ago.

 

[Shrek]

It seems to me that you believe the NFL ruling when it suits your argument.

I don't know why they decided to kick the guy out...but apparently, he was doing nothing illegal...that according to the NFL

And you ignore the NFL ruling when it doesn't suit your argument.

...

Do you really believe that the Pats gained no competitive advantage by taping opponents signals? If so...why would BB risk getting busted and the consequences...to do something that gave him no advantage? I guess he is no genius...but a complete moron.

So which is it? Is an NFL ruling to be believed ( ie. no Jets cheating, no Patriots advantage gained from tapes )?Or do you get to decide which ruling has merit and which doesn't?

I'll give you credit for having somewhat of an argument here, but it's disingenuous IMO.The NFL made rulings on both cases. However, they weren't asked to make a ruling on whether the Pats gained an advantage from the material that was confiscated. They were just required to judge whether any rules were actually broken, then mete out punishment. It's pretty clear- you either broke the rules or you didn't. The Pats were found to have broken the rules, the Jets were not. It's that easy. The only thing left to do then is hand out punishment for those who DID break the rules.

However, for some strange reason, the Commissioner's office felt the need to tack on the additional statement that "there was no advantage gained from this material". Yet they won't let anyone actually look at the tapes. They supposedly destroyed all of it. Admit it, if you are any team besides the Patriots, it would seem highly suspicious that the NFL would say no advantage was gained, but you were denied access to look at the tapes yourself.

Why would the NFL feel the need to make that additional statement? And it's not a ruling- it's an opinion. Did it factor into the punishment? Probably. But you can't deny people the right to speculate about it when they were denied access to the tapes themselves. And we have debated to death the reasons why it would be in the NFL's best interest to make that situation go away quickly. And they did make it go away quickly, let us not forget. In five days, no less.

So if you want to make an argument about it, it's unfair to compare apples to oranges.

I should just stop... I think the NFL position on the Jets is closer to an apples to apples than you give it credit for, and here's why.The NFL didn't do an investigation into the Jets cameraman at Foxboro last year. They have no tape or other proof to determine if the Jets broke a rule or not. Their statement, if I may interpret, is the location where they were taping is allowed to tape on field action. However, I submit that if the Jets were ( and I make no claim this is the case ) taping the NE sidelines from that location, it would be a rules violation.

No tape was confiscated, no claim was made, but the Jets cameraman was asked to stop taping and removed from the stadium.

What I think is the case here is there is no proof of a rules violation, as opposed to proof that no rule was broken.

The NFL has ruled that we have no proof of a violation, therefore we rule no violation occurred.

With the Pats ( on the subject of advantage gained ).... you can make the same statement:

No proof of advantage gained, therefore no advantage gained.

Both of these rulings are different than the original NE taping ruling, which was a definitive proof of a violation.

And not to be antagonistic, but this raises the question of "If no competitive advantage was gained, what was the point of handing out the biggest fine/punishment in NFL history?" If the league has stated that NE gained no advantage from doing it, don't they deserve a better explanation for such harsh punishment?

 

[NYCGangGreen]

just make fun of our record.

HA ha! Jets stink!

That's the smartest remark from a Pats* fan throughout this whole thread....and it had to be handed on a plate to you.I guess they don't call em chowderheads for nothing.

You'll have to forgive him. It was forced. Making fun of the Jets record got old 3-4 years ago.

02- AFC East champs03- last place04- lost Divisional Playoff game05- last place06- lost to N.E in wildcard game07- third placeSo if you mean the odd numbered years over the last 3-4 years, yeah you nailed it. But seriously look at the record book before making fun of it.They may not be great, but there were far worse teams.

 

[Shrek]

Most will acknowledge that the Pats are not the only team who have done/ still do it. But as it stands, they are the only team to be penalized by the league.

True, but Jimmy Johnson has stated that when a coach he did it, too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and/or Dolphins deserve asterisks as well?

No, they were never caught in violation of the rules by the league, and there has never been any penalty handed to them.If I say I have driven after having a few drinks before, can they retroactively give me a DWI???

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...o_battle-1.html"It's no big deal," former Cowboys and Dolphins coach Jimmy Johnson told the Daily News yesterday. "Everybody made too much out of it when it happened. This stuff has been going on for 20 years. I did it, too."

I am not asking whether Johnson's teams should be punished. I am asking whether their achievements should be called into question because they videotaped opposing team's signals. These are two separate issues.

This raises a few question IMO.1) Was there was a written rule at that time that forbade these actions?

2) If there was, is there documentation and proof (besides Johnson's comments) that this took place?

3) What motivation would Johnson have for tarnishing his team's accomplishments after this much time?

 

[Bill Lust]

Most will acknowledge that the Pats are not the only team who have done/ still do it. But as it stands, they are the only team to be penalized by the league.

True, but Jimmy Johnson has stated that when a coach he did it, too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and/or Dolphins deserve asterisks as well?

No, they were never caught in violation of the rules by the league, and there has never been any penalty handed to them.If I say I have driven after having a few drinks before, can they retroactively give me a DWI???

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...o_battle-1.html"It's no big deal," former Cowboys and Dolphins coach Jimmy Johnson told the Daily News yesterday. "Everybody made too much out of it when it happened. This stuff has been going on for 20 years. I did it, too."

I am not asking whether Johnson's teams should be punished. I am asking whether their achievements should be called into question because they videotaped opposing team's signals. These are two separate issues.

This raises a few question IMO.1) Was there was a written rule at that time that forbade these actions?

2) If there was, is there documentation and proof (besides Johnson's comments) that this took place?

3) What motivation would Johnson have for tarnishing his team's accomplishments after this much time?

All are legitimate questions. 1. I am not sure if it was legal at the time or not. For the sake of argument, let's assume it was not. Should this call his teams' accomplishments into question? (If it was legal, then this is moot).

2. Do we need any more documentation and proof? He was the head coach. He would know, wouldn't he?

3. I don't think he views his admission as tarnishing his teams' accomplishments. I think he views this as such commonplace that it is not a big deal. (However, this does not change the fact that Belichick broke the rules, and should have been punished.)

 

[Road Warriors]

...And not to be antagonistic, but this raises the question of "If no competitive advantage was gained, what was the point of handing out the biggest fine/punishment in NFL history?" If the league has stated that NE gained no advantage from doing it, don't they deserve a better explanation for such harsh punishment?

My take on this has always been that the Pats were very likely the driver for the league memo that went out. They were flat out told to cut the s#!t. They gave Goodell a big FU and still went and taped. As many have noted here, sheer arrogance from BB, IMO. So Goodell decided to make certain BB ( and the rest of the NFL ) knows who REALLY has the juice in the NFL.They were made an example of, a big example. I doubt you'll see another infraction like this for a LONG time to come.

 

[Shrek]

Most will acknowledge that the Pats are not the only team who have done/ still do it. But as it stands, they are the only team to be penalized by the league.

True, but Jimmy Johnson has stated that when a coach he did it, too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and/or Dolphins deserve asterisks as well?

No, they were never caught in violation of the rules by the league, and there has never been any penalty handed to them.If I say I have driven after having a few drinks before, can they retroactively give me a DWI???

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football...o_battle-1.html"It's no big deal," former Cowboys and Dolphins coach Jimmy Johnson told the Daily News yesterday. "Everybody made too much out of it when it happened. This stuff has been going on for 20 years. I did it, too."

I am not asking whether Johnson's teams should be punished. I am asking whether their achievements should be called into question because they videotaped opposing team's signals. These are two separate issues.

This raises a few question IMO.1) Was there was a written rule at that time that forbade these actions?

2) If there was, is there documentation and proof (besides Johnson's comments) that this took place?

3) What motivation would Johnson have for tarnishing his team's accomplishments after this much time?

All are legitimate questions. 1. I am not sure if it was legal at the time or not. For the sake of argument, let's assume it was not. Should this call his teams' accomplishments into question? (If it was legal, then this is moot).

2. Do we need any more documentation and proof? He was the head coach. He would know, wouldn't he?

3. I don't think he views his admission as tarnishing his teams' accomplishments. I think he views this as such commonplace that it is not a big deal. (However, this does not change the fact that Belichick broke the rules, and should have been punished.)

1. If it was not legal, I doubt even Jimmy Johnson would stupid enough to open his mouth about it. I assume he knows he can't be held accountable for it now.2. Johnson's comments would surely be damning enough evidence for most of us (assuming what he did was illegal), but I'm sure there would be some who would want something more concrete. If someone was to go back and find out that, yes indeed, these actions were against league rules, I am certain Johnson and his team would enter full spin control mode.

But let's not kid ourselves. If someone gets away with breaking the rules, they generally only admit to their wrongdoing after they know they can't be punished for it anymore. So I'm guessing that Johnson's mindset is "It wasn't against the rules when we did it, but the NFL went and made it a rule, and I think it's dumb."

 

[GregR_2]

If the Pats interpretation of the rules was that such taping is allowed and that's why the Pats engaged in it themselves... then why did they tell the Jets they had to stop?

 

[Shrek]

If the Pats interpretation of the rules was that such taping is allowed and that's why the Pats engaged in it themselves... then why did they tell the Jets they had to stop?

Their interpretation was that it was illegal for everyone else.

 

[phthalatemagic]

just make fun of our record.

HA ha! Jets stink!

That's the smartest remark from a Pats* fan throughout this whole thread....and it had to be handed on a plate to you.I guess they don't call em chowderheads for nothing.

 

[Tanner9919]

Camera man was a double agent working for Bellicheat.

how original...

let it go, man...

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

...

And not to be antagonistic, but this raises the question of "If no competitive advantage was gained, what was the point of handing out the biggest fine/punishment in NFL history?" If the league has stated that NE gained no advantage from doing it, don't they deserve a better explanation for such harsh punishment?

My take on this has always been that the Pats were very likely the driver for the league memo that went out. They were flat out told to cut the s#!t. They gave Goodell a big FU and still went and taped. As many have noted here, sheer arrogance from BB, IMO. So Goodell decided to make certain BB ( and the rest of the NFL ) knows who REALLY has the juice in the NFL.They were made an example of, a big example. I doubt you'll see another infraction like this for a LONG time to come.

That's an important point, although you haven't explained the basis of this take. As far as I know there's no strong coaching lineage tie between Jimmy Johnson and Belichick. Conversely, Belichick's lineage is more well travelled, so a more interesting question is who did Belichick "learn his tricks from"? There are linkages to Marchabroda(sp?) and Knoll at the Colts, Brown and Allen, obviously Parcells, etc. Or do people want to assume that Belichick videotaping from the opposing sidelines was a unilateral unprecedented trick? Side bar: my favorite aspect of Jimmy Johnson commentary is his discussion of other non-videotape solutions for signal stealing that he's seen other coaching staffs engage in, up to and including picking through the trash in the opposing coordinators upstairs booths. Baseball has its spitballs and pinetar; the NFL to hear former coaches describe it has institutional signal stealing.

Having said that, to pre-empt the asterisk pundits, I openly agree with said pundits that BB tried to show his tail to Roger Goodell and became the only one found guilty of violating a league rule and clarifying memo.

How awful.

 

[The Ref]

JETS*

 

[phthalatemagic]

JETS*

 

[Bill Lust]

If the Pats interpretation of the rules was that such taping is allowed and that's why the Pats engaged in it themselves... then why did they tell the Jets they had to stop?

Their interpretation was that it was illegal for everyone else.

No, because the Jets did not have permission to tape.

 

[Shrek]

If the Pats interpretation of the rules was that such taping is allowed and that's why the Pats engaged in it themselves... then why did they tell the Jets they had to stop?

Their interpretation was that it was illegal for everyone else.

No, because the Jets did not have permission to tape.

You sure can't wait to knee-jerk react to this, can you?If the Jets didn't have permission, why didn't Hobo say something about it when he was asked earlier? I'll tell you why. Because he knows it can't be proven or disproven at this point, and this is a way to smear another team without any personal risk to himself. This will be a lot of hot air that, in the end, will go nowhere, and is going to end up making Hobo look worse than if he had just kept his mouth shut. And why did the NFL say that the Jets were clear and did nothing wrong? I understand you're a homer, but honestly, you're not making yourself look any smarter here.

 

[Bill Lust]

If the Pats interpretation of the rules was that such taping is allowed and that's why the Pats engaged in it themselves... then why did they tell the Jets they had to stop?

Their interpretation was that it was illegal for everyone else.

No, because the Jets did not have permission to tape.

You sure can't wait to knee-jerk react to this, can you?

If the Jets didn't have permission, why didn't Hobo say something about it when he was asked earlier? I'll tell you why. Because he knows it can't be proven or disproven at this point, and this is a way to smear another team without any personal risk to himself. This will be a lot of hot air that, in the end, will go nowhere, and is going to end up making Hobo look worse than if he had just kept his mouth shut.

And why did the NFL say that the Jets were clear and did nothing wrong? I understand you're a homer, but honestly, you're not making yourself look any smarter here.

Uh... Belichick DID say something when he was asked about it.http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=txje...t&type=lgns

I have acknowledged in this thread and others that the Pats flagrantly broke the rules and deserved to be punished. I've also pointed out that as prominent a coach as Jimmy Johnson is on record as saying that videotaping opposing teams signals is something that goes on "all the time." You conveniently brushed this aside, since it's incompatible with your argument. The people on this board who do not make themselves look any smarter are the ones that ignore or brush aside facts that they don't like and immediately click into name-calling mode when someone (politely) challenges them. Right now, you're running away with this category.

 

[Road Warriors]

...

And not to be antagonistic, but this raises the question of "If no competitive advantage was gained, what was the point of handing out the biggest fine/punishment in NFL history?" If the league has stated that NE gained no advantage from doing it, don't they deserve a better explanation for such harsh punishment?

My take on this has always been that the Pats were very likely the driver for the league memo that went out. They were flat out told to cut the s#!t. They gave Goodell a big FU and still went and taped. As many have noted here, sheer arrogance from BB, IMO. So Goodell decided to make certain BB ( and the rest of the NFL ) knows who REALLY has the juice in the NFL.They were made an example of, a big example. I doubt you'll see another infraction like this for a LONG time to come.

That's an important point, although you haven't explained the basis of this take. As far as I know there's no strong coaching lineage tie between Jimmy Johnson and Belichick. Conversely, Belichick's lineage is more well travelled, so a more interesting question is who did Belichick "learn his tricks from"? There are linkages to Marchabroda(sp?) and Knoll at the Colts, Brown and Allen, obviously Parcells, etc. Or do people want to assume that Belichick videotaping from the opposing sidelines was a unilateral unprecedented trick? Side bar: my favorite aspect of Jimmy Johnson commentary is his discussion of other non-videotape solutions for signal stealing that he's seen other coaching staffs engage in, up to and including picking through the trash in the opposing coordinators upstairs booths. Baseball has its spitballs and pinetar; the NFL to hear former coaches describe it has institutional signal stealing.

Having said that, to pre-empt the asterisk pundits, I openly agree with said pundits that BB tried to show his tail to Roger Goodell and became the only one found guilty of violating a league rule and clarifying memo.

How awful.

I wasn't going back to lineage or who he learned his tricks from, but I believe that with the smattering of other teams calling the Pats on this in the past ( GB comes to mind, earlier Jets games ), that the NFL offices decided to make a clear, unequivocal statement that this particular method was no longer going to be tolerated or swept under the rug.I love the JJ comments on how far coaching staffs have gone in the past to try to gain knowledge of the opponents signals and playcalling. I have little doubt this goes on far and wide, and that is in no way trying to lessen or mitigate the Patriots actions. As I've stated before, I really think the punishment was mostly directed at the willful child that BB showed himself to be by outright defying Daddy Goodell.