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!
NFL rules state "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." They also say all video for coaching purposes must be shot from locations "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."If the pats gave them permission why did they remove them. Mangini answered that with a shrug. Good answer coach.
Then why is the NFL doing nothing about this...or the supposed numerous other times that the Jets and other teams have requested taping and have done this?Oh wait...because you really don't have a thing? Thats what I thought.
It was a good answer...are you saying the possibility does not exist that everything was done legally and the Pats decided not to let them after a certain point?
Yes...you most certainly have been "
wned:" in this thread. 
http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/jet...0,2673323.story
That is not an eclosed area so that would be in violation of the rules.
The NFL is doing nothing about this because nobody ran to tell mommy that the big meanie was doing something bad.Does it really stretch your mental capacity to envision Mangini trying to copy what his mentor had shown him? I know there is no proof, nor is there ever going to be any NFL investigation regarding this issue. But, in your heart, do you really believe that because nobody called in the NFL during the incident that the taping and removal of the cameraman didn't occur? And do you think its even unlikely that the jets taping was just of the game, and there was no sideline taping going on?
If the tape shows anything close to what the Pats* were caught doing, then by all means hand out fines...take our draft pick. But this happened LAST year, and is now just brought to the attention of the media (ie
ats* nation) before the game in which Belichik wants to get back at Mangini. Serious, if you think this was a serious infraction...why wait 14 weeks to bring it up??And there was no "official notice" from the commish last year regarding that. It went out before week 1 of the 2007 season...you were caught week 1 of the 2007 season.What I am trying to say is that this is the reason that Belichick is pissed at the rest of the league. They are all hypocrites who have done the same thing. The spygate was blown out of proprtion. So, its kind of ironic that the whiny patriot hater tools on this board are all upset cause pats fans are blowing this out of proportion.
P.s. I am enjoying this season like no other! thanks!
Somebody created the thread, and then a bunch of people replied
Belichik can be pissed all he wants. Truth is, the Pats* were the only team to be caught doing it AFTER the Commish sent official notice. If Tagliabue(sp?) allowed it to happen and overlooked it, that was his choice. Goodell made it clear he did not want it to happen....the Pats* didn't listen.What I am trying to say is that this is the reason that Belichick is pissed at the rest of the league. They are all hypocrites who have done the same thing. The spygate was blown out of proprtion. So, its kind of ironic that the whiny patriot hater tools on this board are all upset cause pats fans are blowing this out of proportion.P.s. I am enjoying this season like no other! thanks!
Kind of speaks to the arbitrary nature of the rule in the first place. You can videotape over here, but not there. You could videotape with a nod and a wink last year, but not this year....Belichik can be pissed all he wants. Truth is, the Pats* were the only team to be caught doing it AFTER the Commish sent official notice. If Tagliabue(sp?) allowed it to happen and overlooked it, that was his choice. Goodell made it clear he did not want it to happen....the Pats* didn't listen.What I am trying to say is that this is the reason that Belichick is pissed at the rest of the league. They are all hypocrites who have done the same thing. The spygate was blown out of proprtion. So, its kind of ironic that the whiny patriot hater tools on this board are all upset cause pats fans are blowing this out of proportion.P.s. I am enjoying this season like no other! thanks!
3-10*
New Commish, new enforcement.ie: Just cause one cop let you go when you were D.W.I. doesnt mean that every cop after is going to do the same.Kind of speaks to the arbitrary nature of the rule in the first place. You can videotape over here, but not there. You could videotape with a nod and a wink last year, but not this year....Belichik can be pissed all he wants. Truth is, the Pats* were the only team to be caught doing it AFTER the Commish sent official notice. If Tagliabue(sp?) allowed it to happen and overlooked it, that was his choice. Goodell made it clear he did not want it to happen....the Pats* didn't listen.What I am trying to say is that this is the reason that Belichick is pissed at the rest of the league. They are all hypocrites who have done the same thing. The spygate was blown out of proprtion. So, its kind of ironic that the whiny patriot hater tools on this board are all upset cause pats fans are blowing this out of proportion.P.s. I am enjoying this season like no other! thanks!
Way to deflect and avoid even addressing my point.Shocker that you would do such things given your posts in this thread.
If and when Goodell makes a comment, or reacts to this in any way. I'll give it merit. Until then, its all fodder for the media for the circus on Sunday.
Though I think it's pretty meaningless, if you're going to continue to beat this drum I'll go ahead and point out the memo was sent in September of 2006.
Does it really stretch yours that maybe it was nothing?I am not denying it could have been cheating...Im denying that it is automatically so based on what we know so far.
And I'll point out that Goodell sent the memo out before the start of this season, when he was the commish. As I said before if Tagliabue let it slide, that was then. New Commish, new enforcement.
There was a thread here started by NE fans accusing them of betting amongst themselves on personal game stats, which would be illegal. I don't know what became of it.
I think you're mistaken about Goodell sending another memo. Link?
BB should be pissed at himself for being dumb enough to get caught. You have proof that other teams have done the same thing?Note...this article is neither proof, nor even the same thing at this point as what the Pats got caught actually doing.What I am trying to say is that this is the reason that Belichick is pissed at the rest of the league. They are all hypocrites who have done the same thing. The spygate was blown out of proprtion. So, its kind of ironic that the whiny patriot hater tools on this board are all upset cause pats fans are blowing this out of proportion.P.s. I am enjoying this season like no other! thanks!
I don't hate the Pats.At this point...the only ones being tools are the Pats fans jumping to conclusions simply because their team got caught cheating and they cannot stand it.
Of course this doesn't have any relevance
, but I thought it bears repeating:
And no one from the Patriots has come forth to disagree with this. Strange.And now, thanks to this article's plethora of anonymous "league sources familiar with the situation", we probably have to classify the Patriots as rats. Who else would have such valuable information- information that the Patriots would stand to gain the most from divulging? Who would know more about it than the Patriots?
Point taken. However, Mangini's press conference certainly suggests that the Jets are STILL videotaping from the end zones."What we do at every away game is we tape our team from both end zones, whenever it’s possible. We always ask for permission to do that. Usually, it’s granted, provided there’s a physical space to do that. We try and get the same angle we do in practice. Anybody that asks us to do it, we extend the same courtesy. It’s pretty common, one way or the other, depending on how teams like to look at their game tape, and that’s really what it was.”Look, I'm not suggesting that Mangini is taping signal calls. But the memo and the rule certaintly seems to indicate that this kind of videotaping is prohibited. The Jets sure seem like they're breaking that rule. Either way, I think that Goodell needs to address this and either investigate it or explain why this is somehow an exception to the rule.
Nothing did...as it was found to have been minimal and the practice was stopped.
I did'nt realize multiple people could start a thread. You learn something new everyday.
That...or none of us understand the rule completely...and that apparently with permission, the Jets are/were allowed to do such...as were other teams...but specifically what the Pats were doing was not allowed...they were warned...and busted.
Assuming the bolded above was your point... Are you saying the possiblity does not exist that the Patriots graciously granted permission to tape from the noted location, but kept a watchful eye on the cameraman, then asked him to leave when his camera "inadvertently" strayed to the sidelines between plays? From the stories I've seen to date and listening to Mangini's presser today, it seems clear that the Jets were taping at Foxboro last year, and that the cameraman was asked to leave. I've seen nothing that would resemble proof of anything, from either side, so in the end we really don't know anything. However, I would point out that the posters assuming innocence appear to be the same ones that called for the Pats heads earlier. Coincidence?Way to deflect and avoid even addressing my point.Shocker that you would do such things given your posts in this thread.
Wow...spin and twist...nowhere have I denied any possibilities.I have maintained that if they did cheat...if they did tape signals...they should be punished.Assuming the bolded above was your point... Are you saying the possiblity does not exist that the Patriots graciously granted permission to tape from the noted location, but kept a watchful eye on the cameraman, then asked him to leave when his camera "inadvertently" strayed to the sidelines between plays? From the stories I've seen to date and listening to Mangini's presser today, it seems clear that the Jets were taping at Foxboro last year, and that the cameraman was asked to leave. I've seen nothing that would resemble proof of anything, from either side, so in the end we really don't know anything. However, I would point out that the posters assuming innocence appear to be the same ones that called for the Pats heads earlier. Coincidence?Way to deflect and avoid even addressing my point.Shocker that you would do such things given your posts in this thread.
Well, it sure seems that if Goodell is going to issue an unprecedented punishment for violating the rule, the burden is on him to clarify the rule to the fans. Most of the fans on this board laughed at Belichick for saying that he "misinterpreted" the rule, by citing it chapter and verse. Now that another team appears to have violated the letter of the law, it seems that "none of us understand the rule completely".
One person started it and others jumped on board with that opinion. My intent seems pretty obvious.I did'nt realize multiple people could start a thread. You learn something new everyday.
I don't think there is any burden on Goodell to explain squat to the fans.Well, it sure seems that if Goodell is going to issue an unprecedented punishment for violating the rule, the burden is on him to clarify the rule to the fans. Most of the fans on this board laughed at Belichick for saying that he "misinterpreted" the rule, by citing it chapter and verse. Now that another team appears to have violated the letter of the law, it seems that "none of us understand the rule completely".
We'll agree to disagree on that. Selective rule enforcement can set a very dangerous precedent.I don't think there is any burden on Goodell to explain squat to the fans.Well, it sure seems that if Goodell is going to issue an unprecedented punishment for violating the rule, the burden is on him to clarify the rule to the fans. Most of the fans on this board laughed at Belichick for saying that he "misinterpreted" the rule, by citing it chapter and verse. Now that another team appears to have violated the letter of the law, it seems that "none of us understand the rule completely".
You wanted a comment to your "point" I gave you one. Its no more spin and twist than your statement. So I understand where you are coming from... if there is no irrefutable proof, it didn't happen. So plesae prove to me they didn't tape the sideline.Wow...spin and twist...nowhere have I denied any possibilities.I have maintained that if they did cheat...if they did tape signals...they should be punished.Assuming the bolded above was your point... Are you saying the possiblity does not exist that the Patriots graciously granted permission to tape from the noted location, but kept a watchful eye on the cameraman, then asked him to leave when his camera "inadvertently" strayed to the sidelines between plays? From the stories I've seen to date and listening to Mangini's presser today, it seems clear that the Jets were taping at Foxboro last year, and that the cameraman was asked to leave. I've seen nothing that would resemble proof of anything, from either side, so in the end we really don't know anything. However, I would point out that the posters assuming innocence appear to be the same ones that called for the Pats heads earlier. Coincidence?Way to deflect and avoid even addressing my point.Shocker that you would do such things given your posts in this thread.
As of this point...there is no real evidence suggesting that.
And people are assuming innocence given the lack of evidence...in the Pats case...there was clear evidence.
So you are the poster Bellichick'sRevenge? Or just answering for everyone now...because it was he that I said diverted from my point.And your reply was pure spin and twist when you take my statement...then try rewording things to ask a question like this "Are you saying the possiblity does not exist that the Patriots graciously granted permission to tape from the noted location, but kept a watchful eye on the cameraman, then asked him to leave when his camera "inadvertently" strayed to the sidelines between plays? "You wanted a comment to your "point" I gave you one. Its no more spin and twist than your statement. So I understand where you are coming from... if there is no irrefutable proof, it didn't happen. So plesae prove to me they didn't tape the sideline.Wow...spin and twist...nowhere have I denied any possibilities.I have maintained that if they did cheat...if they did tape signals...they should be punished.Assuming the bolded above was your point... Are you saying the possiblity does not exist that the Patriots graciously granted permission to tape from the noted location, but kept a watchful eye on the cameraman, then asked him to leave when his camera "inadvertently" strayed to the sidelines between plays? From the stories I've seen to date and listening to Mangini's presser today, it seems clear that the Jets were taping at Foxboro last year, and that the cameraman was asked to leave. I've seen nothing that would resemble proof of anything, from either side, so in the end we really don't know anything. However, I would point out that the posters assuming innocence appear to be the same ones that called for the Pats heads earlier. Coincidence?Way to deflect and avoid even addressing my point.Shocker that you would do such things given your posts in this thread.
As of this point...there is no real evidence suggesting that.
And people are assuming innocence given the lack of evidence...in the Pats case...there was clear evidence.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=trueAbout the 11th stanza..."That was re-emphasized in a memo sent on Sept. 6......"
What are you talking about? My point is that if they were taping on the mezanine level of Gilette Staduim: It was not Legal. It does'nt matter if the patriots gave them permission. It is against the rules. And the Pats have never said they gave him permission to be there anyways.Way to deflect and avoid even addressing my point.Shocker that you would do such things given your posts in this thread.
He's not mistaken, Goodell sent a memo out the week before the season started which was well documented when Spygate occurred.
Again: That memo was sent out September 6th, 2006. A year prior to the 9/9/07 game against the Jets.
Sorry, didn't know this was a private forum. I pose a question in the same form as you, and mine is spin and yours, of course, is spot on. Got it.So you are the poster Bellichick'sRevenge? Or just answering for everyone now...because it was he that I said diverted from my point.And your reply was pure spin and twist when you take my statement...then try rewording things to ask a question like this "Are you saying the possiblity does not exist that the Patriots graciously granted permission to tape from the noted location, but kept a watchful eye on the cameraman, then asked him to leave when his camera "inadvertently" strayed to the sidelines between plays? "You wanted a comment to your "point" I gave you one. Its no more spin and twist than your statement. So I understand where you are coming from... if there is no irrefutable proof, it didn't happen. So plesae prove to me they didn't tape the sideline.Wow...spin and twist...nowhere have I denied any possibilities.I have maintained that if they did cheat...if they did tape signals...they should be punished.Assuming the bolded above was your point... Are you saying the possiblity does not exist that the Patriots graciously granted permission to tape from the noted location, but kept a watchful eye on the cameraman, then asked him to leave when his camera "inadvertently" strayed to the sidelines between plays? From the stories I've seen to date and listening to Mangini's presser today, it seems clear that the Jets were taping at Foxboro last year, and that the cameraman was asked to leave. I've seen nothing that would resemble proof of anything, from either side, so in the end we really don't know anything. However, I would point out that the posters assuming innocence appear to be the same ones that called for the Pats heads earlier. Coincidence?Way to deflect and avoid even addressing my point.Shocker that you would do such things given your posts in this thread.
As of this point...there is no real evidence suggesting that.
And people are assuming innocence given the lack of evidence...in the Pats case...there was clear evidence.
If I was saying that...I would have said it.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=trueAs I said, 11th stanza confirms a memo was resent/re-emphasized.
Nope, you're just reading it wrong.Read that stanza and the one preceeding it again.
Emphasis, mine. The Anderson memo, which re-emphasized the rule, was sent Sept 6th, 2006.
@ all the Pats haters trying to explain this away. The tool factor is strong with this bunch.
