Patriots being investigated after Colts game (1 Viewer)

[Jercules]

Anyone read this book about Spygate?

http://www.amazon.com/Spygate-Untold-Story-Bryan-OLeary/dp/0985467002/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1349970716&sr=8-1&keywords=spygate+the+untold+story

Has a lot of positive reviews. Supposedly uncovers TONS of dirt about the Patriots that Goodell's office covered up for the good of the league. But in agreeing to destroying evidence and covering things up, he demanded from Kraft that this nonsense of pushing every edge stops.

That was all fine until the Patriots were caught cheating again. And before Patriots nation scream nothing has been proven, etc...we get back to one simple fact:

The Indianapolis Colts alerted the NFL that this would happen in the game they were about to play. And like clockwork, it happened. The Patriots balls were well below the spec.

You know what La'el Collins did when everyone was accusing him of stuff? He took a lie detector test. What did the Patriots do? They stone-walled the investigation from the beginning (one interview per person only), not turning over records, lying about relationships, etc.

The racheting up from the Patriots and Commish's office is entertaining. I see no way this ends well for the Patriots even if the league lessens the penalties. The commish no longer is going to look away and I don't think the Patriots are willing to not try and push every possible edge.

I can see Goodell fining the Patriots every week for not submitting an accurate injury report.

and heaven forbid if New England is still doing any of these other things found in the Spygate book above. That's hammer time.

Goodell was in New England's pocket for Kraft getting him the job and his big raise. For Goodell to turn on that, I am convinced he has ample proof that new England is not honoring their end of the deal he made with them during Spygate. What would Goodell's motivation be to discredit a star in the league and the team that just won the Super Bowl? Goodell has no motive to do this. He wins by this being pushed under the rug again. Yet Goodell is not letting that happen at all. He is digging in. He will be hearing the appeal, etc.

Today, Goodell is not in New England's pocket and I think it's safe to say he never will be again. Unless Kraft can get the backing of the owners and they can oust Goodell, he is going to find the sledding very rough very soon. The problem with escalation is there can be no winners. And it's all pointing to a grand finale where Goodell and Kraft both self-destruct.

That's the problem with these giant threads. Just when you think you've made some progress, and have delved into the issues a bit with friends and foes alike, some newbie comes along and posts the stuff we dealt with 100 pages ago.

And plenty of fiction is well-reviewed, so I don't see the point there.

Latest theory to chew on: Goodell knew any sane independent arbitrator would carpet his doghouse with the Wells report, so he had to fix it so that he would hear Brady's appeal.

Great theory. Were Marty McFly and Doc Brown in on it? Because the CBA that the players union agreed to in 2011 specifically says Goodell has the power to hear appeals of player punishment himself (if he chooses to do so).

So unless you think Goodell was planning this back when the CBA was being hammered out in 2011, he didn't have to "fix" anything so that he would hear Brady's appeal, he only had to exercise the right that Brady (and the rest of the NFL players) gave him.

He needed his boy Troy Vincent to dole out the initial punishment so that he could appoint himself as arbitrator for the inevitable appeal.

Troy Vincent is usually not the person deciding lengths of suspensions, draft picks lost, etc., perhaps you've noticed.

It's an obvious play by Goodell. it will be interesting to see what the long term ramifications might be.

No, he didn't. That's just something that Patriot fanboys latched onto because it fit their "out to get us" nonsense.

The CBA gives Goodell the power to hand out punishments AND the power to hear any appeals of those punishments. He shouldn't have allowed Vincent to hand out the punishment (although a legal argument that Vincent was acting as his proxy, therefore he didn't actually violate the CBA), but Goodell has always had the right to hear Brady's appeal, if he chooses to do so.

Read the CBA, rather than listening to homer nonsense that is based on nothing except "maybe this is true, b/c it's good news for NE!"

I have to concede, you're right. Apparently having Vincent play such an active role in doling out the punishment was Goodell's attempt to shield himself, somewhat, from the rage of Mr. Kraft (hard to imagine it worked).

"Out to get us nonsense" is ultimately a foolish statement though. The Wells report itself states tampering with a game ball post-inspection is supposed to net a $25,000 fine. You can harp about a failure to cooperate (not something the NFLPA agrees with btw), or past history (the spygate nonsense), or whatever, there's simply no reasonable bridge between that recommendation and what was ultimately doled out.

Plus, the NFL sat idly by while drastic mistakes in reporting of the incident stoked the anti-Patriots furor that they are now forced to react to with this wildly absurd punishment.

I do not necessarily claim they haven't got good reason to be out to get us. But they are most definitely out to get us, rest assured.

1-No, it doesn't. It states that tampering with game balls post-inspection is, AT MINIMUM, a $25,000 fine.

2-You are arguing a different point now. I have said, since the punishments were handed down, that they were too severe. However, countless Pats fans (not sure whether you are one of these or not), on this board and others have railed on and on about conspiracies, stings, the NFL/Goodell having it in for the Pats, etc. The idea that Goodell had Vincent issue the punishment, IN ORDER to allow himself to hear any appeal was one of the pieces of "proof" that the NFL was out to get them. As I've noted, this piece of "proof" was based on fiction, as has much of the "proof" of any conspiracy or sting attempts.

The fact is the Pats broke a rule, then tried to throw their weight around by claiming they were blameless, demanding apologies, and just basically being jackasses. Pats fans want their past history not to be a factor, but that's not reality. Because of their past transgressions (that we are aware of), and their generally #####-y behavior after deflategate broke, they got a stiffer penalty than they might have otherwise.

So in a wildly egregious case, the Commissioner may decide to raise the fine by as much as 100%, and that would give you... $50,000. Call it a minimum, call it a prescription, call it whatever you will, the point is it indicates appropriate punishment for the infraction the NFL was able to sort of prove happened, and it's been totally ignored.

"The minimum sentence for your crime is 4 months, but because we don't like you you're gonna get life without parole".

I agree it would be nice to see the 'why' aspect or a complete breakdown of the punishment Goodell handed out and his reasoning for it.

I guess as a Pats fan you will have to trust that Kraft has now heard and seen the why part of it and it has caused him to accept the punishment without an appeal. That in itself should tell you the punishment is at least somewhat deserved and it entails a lot more than playing with some deflated balls.

Kraft is just playing the hand he's been dealt. He didn't have the support of any other owners to do something as destabilizing to the league as a team appeal, plus, who knows what kind of promises were made to him if he backed off. We still don't have a ruling yet on Brady's appeal.

I don't agree that Kraft's tactics (such as firing McNally and Jastremski) are indicative of how he really feels about any of this.

 

[Anarchy99]

What I'd like to know, and honestly, with no snark whatsoever, is what people think the tapes would've shown? All they did was put a cameraman in the wrong place, how could anything evil and nefarious come from that?

I will take a stab at this one. Part of the problem with what may have been on the tapes is that if released to the public, the perception would have been that the video was heinous and a blatant advantage and violation of the rules. However, I would guess most of what was on there probably was legal (or otherwise not enforced by the league). It would have likely looked way worse than it was . . . and would call into question what other teams were doing.

I realize people are going to hate the Pats or love the Pats and few fall in between. But the Patriots pretty much were only fully cheating in that one game against the Jets in 2007. All the other stuff (taping signals) before then was either allowed or ignored by the league, and the true violation was for where the camera was positioned and something to do with the number of walls or having a roof where the camera was.

To the best of my knowledge, there weren't tapes of any walkthroughs or teams practicing (maybe there were but never disclosed), but at the time the NFL really wanted to keep everything in house. I would guess if there really were tapes of things highly salacious that Goodell would have had a much sterner penalty.

The other thing which I have never seen discussed anywhere is we assume that tapes and evidence was destroyed of things involving the Patriots. But what if some of what got destroyed was tape that NE had of OTHER TEAMS cheating. That would have been a big issue for the league to deal with. From what I have heard, there were tapes of NE video guys taping signals and coaches where they zoomed in on camera guys from their opponents and the guys from each team waved back and forth to each other. I have no idea if that actually happened, but if it did, it showed that 1) other teams were doing it, 2) teams were not outraged at the thought of it, 3) and it was an accepted practice.

Just food for thought . . .

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Why was the punishment so severe? There's an element of 'nailing Capone for tax evasion' here.

People say the Pats didn't cooperate with Wells, but that's highly debatable (and what constitutes adequate cooperation?)

People say it's the history, but spygate alone was such a technical and ultimately meaningless infraction that it can't be the reason either.

I think it's simply the reputation the Patriots have around the league, that they cut every corner and find every advantage, and typically get away with it. Goodell is under immense pressure to 'reel these guys in', so to speak, so whatever proof of wrongdoing he can conjure up is used to crucify them.

The unspoken truth is: we're taking a million dollars, two draft picks, and four games from your MVP for likely tampering with game balls in January... and all that other crap that you know that we know that you do that you always get away with.

Salty haters and Pats fanboys coming together...I agree with this post. The Capone analogy is perfect.

The only thing I dont wholeheartedly buy into is the concept that Spygate was a meaningless infraction. I find myself on the other side of that one, and believe that there is a lot we dont know about what really happened there. You dont just "lose" evidence of that magnitude, unless you are losing it for good reason. I am on the conspiracy side of that one, and think the Pats got seriously hooked up by the league, which is why the hammer is coming down so hard now.

What evidence was lost?

Apologies if I am mistaken about what happened to all of the video that the public never got to see. If it wasnt "lost", it was locked away and hidden from the general public, or destroyed. I dont remember the exact nature of the BS that ensued with that scandal, because at that time I only really cared about what happened on the field. Any of the 3 leads me to the same exact conclusion though.

When spygate happened, they played all of the tapes on live broadcast television...

come on now. You know that godell destroyed the tapes the Patriots turned over...

There was a poster on this message board a while back, GordonGekko (is he still around?), that answered this thing about the tapes to my satisfaction.

Apparently, the reason the evidence was destroyed so swiftly was because Arlen Specter was about to start a congressional inquiry into spygate ostensibly, but really to get into the NFL's business. The NFL has a fair amount of enemies among lawmakers who aren't exactly thrilled their anti-trust exemption, and the taxpayer dollars they suck up with new stadiums, tax exemptions, etc. Spygate was a chance for them to drag the NFL before congress and put the whole operation under the spotlight. Nobody wanted that, so the evidence was swiftly destroyed.

The Wells report is actually a similar thing: the NFL wanted a chance to get an up-close-and-personal look at the Patriots' operation (unless there are other 5 million dollar investigations into teams for minor infractions that I'm unaware of).

What I'd like to know, and honestly, with no snark whatsoever, is what people think the tapes would've shown? All they did was put a cameraman in the wrong place, how could anything evil and nefarious come from that?

Not sure that passes the sniff test for me. Why would he need the video evidence to start an inquiry if he wanted to start an inquiry? There was evidence of wrongdoing even without the tapes. It still is pretty stanky if you ask me. Destroying evidence that a guy was filming in the wrong location avoided a congressional inquiry? Thats above my head.

Again, I didnt pay as close of attention to this stuff back then because it was more about the game than the scandal to me. Thats clearly changed now, but my recollection could definitely be flawed as a result. That said, The tapes could have shown a ton. For example, they could have shown that there was more than just video from a camera man standing in the wrong place. Mangini probably wouldnt have blown the whistle if that is all it was. The tapes could have shown far more egregious use of cameras in stealing intel. I remember a team - either the Rams or Eagles I think - saying that the Pats defenders were calling out their plays before they were even at the line in the Super Bowl. They seemed convinced that they knew what plays were coming well before they should have even had a clue. Pats fans will say it was great coaching and great preparation. Pats haters may see it differently. We will never know though because the evidence was destroyed.

Im just a guy on the Internet, but the dots that I am connecting paint a picture that Pats fans wont wont to see. Its a picture of a team that got off easy for a truly horrible offense, and then continued to test the limits, and got over-punished for a relatively harmless crime as a result.

 

[Run It Up]

Mangini blew the whistle cause he had a grudge. He asked Bill to not do it against the Jets, then the Pats did it anyway and he was pissed.

He knew what was going on, because he did it himself. Before, during and after he was a Patriot.

 

[JIslander]

What I'd like to know, and honestly, with no snark whatsoever, is what people think the tapes would've shown? All they did was put a cameraman in the wrong place, how could anything evil and nefarious come from that?

I will take a stab at this one. Part of the problem with what may have been on the tapes is that if released to the public, the perception would have been that the video was heinous and a blatant advantage and violation of the rules. However, I would guess most of what was on there probably was legal (or otherwise not enforced by the league). It would have likely looked way worse than it was . . . and would call into question what other teams were doing.

I realize people are going to hate the Pats or love the Pats and few fall in between. But the Patriots pretty much were only fully cheating in that one game against the Jets in 2007. All the other stuff (taping signals) before then was either allowed or ignored by the league, and the true violation was for where the camera was positioned and something to do with the number of walls or having a roof where the camera was.

To the best of my knowledge, there weren't tapes of any walkthroughs or teams practicing (maybe there were but never disclosed), but at the time the NFL really wanted to keep everything in house. I would guess if there really were tapes of things highly salacious that Goodell would have had a much sterner penalty.

The other thing which I have never seen discussed anywhere is we assume that tapes and evidence was destroyed of things involving the Patriots. But what if some of what got destroyed was tape that NE had of OTHER TEAMS cheating. That would have been a big issue for the league to deal with. From what I have heard, there were tapes of NE video guys taping signals and coaches where they zoomed in on camera guys from their opponents and the guys from each team waved back and forth to each other. I have no idea if that actually happened, but if it did, it showed that 1) other teams were doing it, 2) teams were not outraged at the thought of it, 3) and it was an accepted practice.

Just food for thought . . .

Its really just conjecture for thought. We could come up with multiple scenerios for what the Pats really did and why the NFL allegedly destroyed the tapes. Your version of course is Pats friendly.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I said it before and I will say it again, the initial infraction for Deflategate was an equipment violation for tampering with the footballs. The baseline penalty, as cited by many, is a fine of $25,000 (plus the option of more). Financially, the Pats got hit with that dollar amount times 40. No other equipment violation ever sparked an independent investigation and 243-page report. No other team was ever docked any draft picks. And no NFL player had ever been suspended for an equipment violation.
I've seen this a few times now, from a few posters, and it just now caught my attention. I'm not sure there is a well defined category of violations called equipment violations. I am aware f some uniform violations which many seem to be referencing, when they use this term, but none relating to "equipment". Is this an effort to downplay the matter through a comparison to uniform violations, or has there been a violation involving "equipment" whatever that may be?

For instance has there been a violation relating to the length or condition of the field, the yardage chains, the goalposts, the equipment common to all in the game, or are we comparing the ball all play with to a slick jersey on a single individual. I am just trying to understand the term so I can understand the argument. It seems to me this was a new thing, its own thing, not readily comparable to other violations. I understand looking for reference points, I am just not certain how relatable the points may be.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Mangini blew the whistle cause he had a grudge. He asked Bill to not do it against the Jets, then the Pats did it anyway and he was pissed.

He knew what was going on, because he did it himself. Before, during and after he was a Patriot.

Well that proved to be a pretty moronic decision by Bill then, huh? For a smart guy, that sure was dumb.

Im sure Mangini was part of the culture that did it when he was with the Patriots - because thats obviously the culture in New England, but is there evidence he did it with any other team?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Mangini blew the whistle cause he had a grudge. He asked Bill to not do it against the Jets, then the Pats did it anyway and he was pissed.

He knew what was going on, because he did it himself. Before, during and after he was a Patriot.

Kind of makes me wonder if the whistleblower in deflategate might have had similar inside knowledge. The whistleblower did seem specific and certain the violation would be found.

 

[Jercules]

Why was the punishment so severe? There's an element of 'nailing Capone for tax evasion' here.

People say the Pats didn't cooperate with Wells, but that's highly debatable (and what constitutes adequate cooperation?)

People say it's the history, but spygate alone was such a technical and ultimately meaningless infraction that it can't be the reason either.

I think it's simply the reputation the Patriots have around the league, that they cut every corner and find every advantage, and typically get away with it. Goodell is under immense pressure to 'reel these guys in', so to speak, so whatever proof of wrongdoing he can conjure up is used to crucify them.

The unspoken truth is: we're taking a million dollars, two draft picks, and four games from your MVP for likely tampering with game balls in January... and all that other crap that you know that we know that you do that you always get away with.

Salty haters and Pats fanboys coming together...I agree with this post. The Capone analogy is perfect.

The only thing I dont wholeheartedly buy into is the concept that Spygate was a meaningless infraction. I find myself on the other side of that one, and believe that there is a lot we dont know about what really happened there. You dont just "lose" evidence of that magnitude, unless you are losing it for good reason. I am on the conspiracy side of that one, and think the Pats got seriously hooked up by the league, which is why the hammer is coming down so hard now.

What evidence was lost?

Apologies if I am mistaken about what happened to all of the video that the public never got to see. If it wasnt "lost", it was locked away and hidden from the general public, or destroyed. I dont remember the exact nature of the BS that ensued with that scandal, because at that time I only really cared about what happened on the field. Any of the 3 leads me to the same exact conclusion though.

When spygate happened, they played all of the tapes on live broadcast television...

come on now. You know that godell destroyed the tapes the Patriots turned over...

There was a poster on this message board a while back, GordonGekko (is he still around?), that answered this thing about the tapes to my satisfaction.

Apparently, the reason the evidence was destroyed so swiftly was because Arlen Specter was about to start a congressional inquiry into spygate ostensibly, but really to get into the NFL's business. The NFL has a fair amount of enemies among lawmakers who aren't exactly thrilled their anti-trust exemption, and the taxpayer dollars they suck up with new stadiums, tax exemptions, etc. Spygate was a chance for them to drag the NFL before congress and put the whole operation under the spotlight. Nobody wanted that, so the evidence was swiftly destroyed.

The Wells report is actually a similar thing: the NFL wanted a chance to get an up-close-and-personal look at the Patriots' operation (unless there are other 5 million dollar investigations into teams for minor infractions that I'm unaware of).

What I'd like to know, and honestly, with no snark whatsoever, is what people think the tapes would've shown? All they did was put a cameraman in the wrong place, how could anything evil and nefarious come from that?

Not sure that passes the sniff test for me. Why would he need the video evidence to start an inquiry if he wanted to start an inquiry? There was evidence of wrongdoing even without the tapes. It still is pretty stanky if you ask me. Destroying evidence that a guy was filming in the wrong location avoided a congressional inquiry? Thats above my head.

Again, I didnt pay as close of attention to this stuff back then because it was more about the game than the scandal to me. Thats clearly changed now, but my recollection could definitely be flawed as a result. That said, The tapes could have shown a ton. For example, they could have shown that there was more than just video from a camera man standing in the wrong place. Mangini probably wouldnt have blown the whistle if that is all it was. The tapes could have shown far more egregious use of cameras in stealing intel. I remember a team - either the Rams or Eagles I think - saying that the Pats defenders were calling out their plays before they were even at the line in the Super Bowl. They seemed convinced that they knew what plays were coming well before they should have even had a clue. Pats fans will say it was great coaching and great preparation. Pats haters may see it differently. We will never know though because the evidence was destroyed.

Im just a guy on the Internet, but the dots that I am connecting paint a picture that Pats fans wont wont to see. Its a picture of a team that got off easy for a truly horrible offense, and then continued to test the limits, and got over-punished for a relatively harmless crime as a result.

Can you be more specific with the bolded? What could the Patriots have captured illegally with a camera that would allow them to know an offensive play before it is even run? (Remember, offenses back then used the radios; no signals).

Not trying to get on your back--you're a good guy--just want to clarify my original question.

 

[Anarchy99]

Why was the punishment so severe? There's an element of 'nailing Capone for tax evasion' here.

People say the Pats didn't cooperate with Wells, but that's highly debatable (and what constitutes adequate cooperation?)

People say it's the history, but spygate alone was such a technical and ultimately meaningless infraction that it can't be the reason either.

I think it's simply the reputation the Patriots have around the league, that they cut every corner and find every advantage, and typically get away with it. Goodell is under immense pressure to 'reel these guys in', so to speak, so whatever proof of wrongdoing he can conjure up is used to crucify them.

The unspoken truth is: we're taking a million dollars, two draft picks, and four games from your MVP for likely tampering with game balls in January... and all that other crap that you know that we know that you do that you always get away with.

Salty haters and Pats fanboys coming together...I agree with this post. The Capone analogy is perfect.

The only thing I dont wholeheartedly buy into is the concept that Spygate was a meaningless infraction. I find myself on the other side of that one, and believe that there is a lot we dont know about what really happened there. You dont just "lose" evidence of that magnitude, unless you are losing it for good reason. I am on the conspiracy side of that one, and think the Pats got seriously hooked up by the league, which is why the hammer is coming down so hard now.

What evidence was lost?

Apologies if I am mistaken about what happened to all of the video that the public never got to see. If it wasnt "lost", it was locked away and hidden from the general public, or destroyed. I dont remember the exact nature of the BS that ensued with that scandal, because at that time I only really cared about what happened on the field. Any of the 3 leads me to the same exact conclusion though.

When spygate happened, they played all of the tapes on live broadcast television...

come on now. You know that godell destroyed the tapes the Patriots turned over...

There was a poster on this message board a while back, GordonGekko (is he still around?), that answered this thing about the tapes to my satisfaction.

Apparently, the reason the evidence was destroyed so swiftly was because Arlen Specter was about to start a congressional inquiry into spygate ostensibly, but really to get into the NFL's business. The NFL has a fair amount of enemies among lawmakers who aren't exactly thrilled their anti-trust exemption, and the taxpayer dollars they suck up with new stadiums, tax exemptions, etc. Spygate was a chance for them to drag the NFL before congress and put the whole operation under the spotlight. Nobody wanted that, so the evidence was swiftly destroyed.

The Wells report is actually a similar thing: the NFL wanted a chance to get an up-close-and-personal look at the Patriots' operation (unless there are other 5 million dollar investigations into teams for minor infractions that I'm unaware of).

What I'd like to know, and honestly, with no snark whatsoever, is what people think the tapes would've shown? All they did was put a cameraman in the wrong place, how could anything evil and nefarious come from that?

Not sure that passes the sniff test for me. Why would he need the video evidence to start an inquiry if he wanted to start an inquiry? There was evidence of wrongdoing even without the tapes. It still is pretty stanky if you ask me. Destroying evidence that a guy was filming in the wrong location avoided a congressional inquiry? Thats above my head.

Again, I didnt pay as close of attention to this stuff back then because it was more about the game than the scandal to me. Thats clearly changed now, but my recollection could definitely be flawed as a result. That said, The tapes could have shown a ton. For example, they could have shown that there was more than just video from a camera man standing in the wrong place. Mangini probably wouldnt have blown the whistle if that is all it was. The tapes could have shown far more egregious use of cameras in stealing intel. I remember a team - either the Rams or Eagles I think - saying that the Pats defenders were calling out their plays before they were even at the line in the Super Bowl. They seemed convinced that they knew what plays were coming well before they should have even had a clue. Pats fans will say it was great coaching and great preparation. Pats haters may see it differently. We will never know though because the evidence was destroyed.

Im just a guy on the Internet, but the dots that I am connecting paint a picture that Pats fans wont wont to see. Its a picture of a team that got off easy for a truly horrible offense, and then continued to test the limits, and got over-punished for a relatively harmless crime as a result.

Can you be more specific with the bolded? What could the Patriots have captured illegally with a camera that would allow them to know an offensive play before it is even run? (Remember, offenses back then used the radios; no signals).

Not trying to get on your back--you're a good guy--just want to clarify my original question.

I believe he is referencing the Marshall Faulk claim that the Rams added new plays to their play book that they never ran in a game prior to the SB vs. the Pats. His version is that when they broke the huddle that the Pats knew where to go, what to do, who to cover, and where the ball was going better than the Rams offense did. Faulk insists to this day the Patriots taped and studied their walkthrough to figure out what to do.

 

[David Dodds]

It was not a $25,000 fine because the league is convinced that this has been going on for a long time. Plus I am pretty sure it would be $25,000 per ball.

The Colts complained BEFORE the incident even happened. Does that sound like a first-time offender? McNally was already nicknamed the Deflator in May.

The message from the Commish was clear after Spygate and even more clear now. No more warnings and soft-handling of these constant issues. Clean up your cheating. It's tainting the whole NFL. The punishments are this severe because the other 31 owners are tired of this crap.

Kraft backed down because he has minimal (to no support) from the rest of the owners. They are tired of his cheating ways.

 

[Jercules]

Mangini blew the whistle cause he had a grudge. He asked Bill to not do it against the Jets, then the Pats did it anyway and he was pissed.

He knew what was going on, because he did it himself. Before, during and after he was a Patriot.

Yeah, 'War Room' by Michael Holley discusses that. Mangini basically meant it as a shot across the NE bow (ratting on them for the sideline cameraman), but the NY media got a hold of it and the whole issue spiraled out of control. He admits he never meant for it to become what it did.

Remember, those SB wins called into question because of spygate were some of Mangini's greatest accomplishments. He doesn't explicitly say he regrets ratting on Bill (the guy who gave him his opportunity, and mentored him), but I don't think you need to be a total Pats fanboy to arrive at that conclusion.

 

[Anarchy99]

I said it before and I will say it again, the initial infraction for Deflategate was an equipment violation for tampering with the footballs. The baseline penalty, as cited by many, is a fine of $25,000 (plus the option of more). Financially, the Pats got hit with that dollar amount times 40. No other equipment violation ever sparked an independent investigation and 243-page report. No other team was ever docked any draft picks. And no NFL player had ever been suspended for an equipment violation.
I've seen this a few times now, from a few posters, and it just now caught my attention. I'm not sure there is a well defined category of violations called equipment violations. I am aware f some uniform violations which many seem to be referencing, when they use this term, but none relating to "equipment". Is this an effort to downplay the matter through a comparison to uniform violations, or has there been a violation involving "equipment" whatever that may be?

For instance has there been a violation relating to the length or condition of the field, the yardage chains, the goalposts, the equipment common to all in the game, or are we comparing the ball all play with to a slick jersey on a single individual. I am just trying to understand the term so I can understand the argument. It seems to me this was a new thing, its own thing, not readily comparable to other violations. I understand looking for reference points, I am just not certain how relatable the points may be.

I do not believe there is an official definition of what is classified as "equipment," but things that have been brought up in the past would be things like uniforms, stickum, vasoline, cooking spray, cleats, field conditions, helmets, things like casts on players, etc. As I referenced in other sports, things like putting a substance on a baseball, corking a bat, having a stick in hockey that was too long or too curved. A boxer soaking his gloves or wearing too much tape on his hands. A NASCAR driver tinkering with an emissions valve to get more power. Things that involve equipment in the field of play.

 

[moleculo]

I said it before and I will say it again, the initial infraction for Deflategate was an equipment violation for tampering with the footballs. The baseline penalty, as cited by many, is a fine of $25,000 (plus the option of more). Financially, the Pats got hit with that dollar amount times 40. No other equipment violation ever sparked an independent investigation and 243-page report. No other team was ever docked any draft picks. And no NFL player had ever been suspended for an equipment violation.

I've seen this a few times now, from a few posters, and it just now caught my attention. I'm not sure there is a well defined category of violations called equipment violations. I am aware f some uniform violations which many seem to be referencing, when they use this term, but none relating to "equipment". Is this an effort to downplay the matter through a comparison to uniform violations, or has there been a violation involving "equipment" whatever that may be?

For instance has there been a violation relating to the length or condition of the field, the yardage chains, the goalposts, the equipment common to all in the game, or are we comparing the ball all play with to a slick jersey on a single individual. I am just trying to understand the term so I can understand the argument. It seems to me this was a new thing, its own thing, not readily comparable to other violations. I understand looking for reference points, I am just not certain how relatable the points may be.

I do not believe there is an official definition of what is classified as "equipment," but things that have been brought up in the past would be things like uniforms, stickum, vasoline, cooking spray, cleats, field conditions, helmets, things like casts on players, etc. As I referenced in other sports, things like putting a substance on a baseball, corking a bat, having a stick in hockey that was too long or too curved. A boxer soaking his gloves or wearing too much tape on his hands. A NASCAR driver tinkering with an emissions valve to get more power. Things that involve equipment in the field of play.

That's quite a bit different than tampering with equipment that has been inspected and certified by game officials.

 

[Jercules]

Why was the punishment so severe? There's an element of 'nailing Capone for tax evasion' here.

People say the Pats didn't cooperate with Wells, but that's highly debatable (and what constitutes adequate cooperation?)

People say it's the history, but spygate alone was such a technical and ultimately meaningless infraction that it can't be the reason either.

I think it's simply the reputation the Patriots have around the league, that they cut every corner and find every advantage, and typically get away with it. Goodell is under immense pressure to 'reel these guys in', so to speak, so whatever proof of wrongdoing he can conjure up is used to crucify them.

The unspoken truth is: we're taking a million dollars, two draft picks, and four games from your MVP for likely tampering with game balls in January... and all that other crap that you know that we know that you do that you always get away with.

Salty haters and Pats fanboys coming together...I agree with this post. The Capone analogy is perfect.

The only thing I dont wholeheartedly buy into is the concept that Spygate was a meaningless infraction. I find myself on the other side of that one, and believe that there is a lot we dont know about what really happened there. You dont just "lose" evidence of that magnitude, unless you are losing it for good reason. I am on the conspiracy side of that one, and think the Pats got seriously hooked up by the league, which is why the hammer is coming down so hard now.

What evidence was lost?

Apologies if I am mistaken about what happened to all of the video that the public never got to see. If it wasnt "lost", it was locked away and hidden from the general public, or destroyed. I dont remember the exact nature of the BS that ensued with that scandal, because at that time I only really cared about what happened on the field. Any of the 3 leads me to the same exact conclusion though.

When spygate happened, they played all of the tapes on live broadcast television...

come on now. You know that godell destroyed the tapes the Patriots turned over...

There was a poster on this message board a while back, GordonGekko (is he still around?), that answered this thing about the tapes to my satisfaction.

Apparently, the reason the evidence was destroyed so swiftly was because Arlen Specter was about to start a congressional inquiry into spygate ostensibly, but really to get into the NFL's business. The NFL has a fair amount of enemies among lawmakers who aren't exactly thrilled their anti-trust exemption, and the taxpayer dollars they suck up with new stadiums, tax exemptions, etc. Spygate was a chance for them to drag the NFL before congress and put the whole operation under the spotlight. Nobody wanted that, so the evidence was swiftly destroyed.

The Wells report is actually a similar thing: the NFL wanted a chance to get an up-close-and-personal look at the Patriots' operation (unless there are other 5 million dollar investigations into teams for minor infractions that I'm unaware of).

What I'd like to know, and honestly, with no snark whatsoever, is what people think the tapes would've shown? All they did was put a cameraman in the wrong place, how could anything evil and nefarious come from that?

Not sure that passes the sniff test for me. Why would he need the video evidence to start an inquiry if he wanted to start an inquiry? There was evidence of wrongdoing even without the tapes. It still is pretty stanky if you ask me. Destroying evidence that a guy was filming in the wrong location avoided a congressional inquiry? Thats above my head.

Again, I didnt pay as close of attention to this stuff back then because it was more about the game than the scandal to me. Thats clearly changed now, but my recollection could definitely be flawed as a result. That said, The tapes could have shown a ton. For example, they could have shown that there was more than just video from a camera man standing in the wrong place. Mangini probably wouldnt have blown the whistle if that is all it was. The tapes could have shown far more egregious use of cameras in stealing intel. I remember a team - either the Rams or Eagles I think - saying that the Pats defenders were calling out their plays before they were even at the line in the Super Bowl. They seemed convinced that they knew what plays were coming well before they should have even had a clue. Pats fans will say it was great coaching and great preparation. Pats haters may see it differently. We will never know though because the evidence was destroyed.

Im just a guy on the Internet, but the dots that I am connecting paint a picture that Pats fans wont wont to see. Its a picture of a team that got off easy for a truly horrible offense, and then continued to test the limits, and got over-punished for a relatively harmless crime as a result.

Can you be more specific with the bolded? What could the Patriots have captured illegally with a camera that would allow them to know an offensive play before it is even run? (Remember, offenses back then used the radios; no signals).

Not trying to get on your back--you're a good guy--just want to clarify my original question.

I believe he is referencing the Marshall Faulk claim that the Rams added new plays to their play book that they never ran in a game prior to the SB vs. the Pats. His version is that when they broke the huddle that the Pats knew where to go, what to do, who to cover, and where the ball was going better than the Rams offense did. Faulk insists to this day the Patriots taped and studied their walkthrough to figure out what to do.

For the record, none of the confiscated tapes included that mythical Rams walk through (and even if they did, seeing a walk through is really only slightly better than game tape in that you know what you are watching is relevant to the game at hand. There's no way to 'decode' it to such a degree that you can be 100% sure what is coming on any given play).

My point in all this is people use the ambiguity of not knowing exactly what was on the tapes as an avenue to assume outrageously bad things. It was a guy with a camera on the sidelines. Simple common sense tells you other than getting an illegally good look at the signal caller, there's really nothing more they could have done.

 

[Anarchy99]

It was not a $25,000 fine because the league is convinced that this has been going on for a long time. Plus I am pretty sure it would be $25,000 per ball.

The Colts complained BEFORE the incident even happened. Does that sound like a first-time offender? McNally was already nicknamed the Deflator in May.

The message from the Commish was clear after Spygate and even more clear now. No more warnings and soft-handling of these constant issues. Clean up your cheating. It's tainting the whole NFL. The punishments are this severe because the other 31 owners are tired of this crap.

Kraft backed down because he has minimal (to no support) from the rest of the owners. They are tired of his cheating ways.

Here is the problem as I see it. You are right. It appears several teams knew what the Patriots were doing, and as you said it likely went on for years. Again, for clarity's sake, I am not condoning what the Patriots did (and I am sure all the other things they continue to get away with).

But if the Patriots were known to tinker with the footballs and this practice went on over and over again and no one complained, then either 1) the other teams didn't really care all that much, 2) teams were doing some shady things on their own, or 3) it was an accepted or common practice that there was not a groundswell of outrage over it.

My issue is the inconsistency of what goes on from the league's perspective. How things are ignored or regulated, what is enforced or not, and what the penalties are (or are not) based on who the teams and participants are. If Goodell really is worried about the integrity of the game, then have 32 teams knock it off . . . not just the Patriots. Make everyone stop with the shenanigans, hand out equal penalties, and not let anyone get away with anything.

 

[David Dodds]

I believe he is referencing the Marshall Faulk claim that the Rams added new plays to their play book that they never ran in a game prior to the SB vs. the Pats. His version is that when they broke the huddle that the Pats knew where to go, what to do, who to cover, and where the ball was going better than the Rams offense did. Faulk insists to this day the Patriots taped and studied their walkthrough to figure out what to do.

This is what I vividly remember. And if the tapes showed that the Patriots had footage of this walk-through, you can see why the tapes were destroyed in Foxboro (never even taken into custody by the NFL offices in New York for fear they somehow get leaked). Many cried cover-up at the time this went down and it's telling the Patriots did not fight any of the punishments at all. They too knew that if all was told, their Super Bowl win could very well be pulled.

At the time this was the largest sanction ever against a team. And more than the sanction, Goodell had extremely tough words for the Patriots about cheating.

So despite Patriots fans not wanting this stuff in play for DeflateGate, it is very much in play as this is the Commissioner who resided over Spygate. He has intimate knowledge of what he swept under the rug then.

I think people are correct in saying when Wells started getting denied access (only 1 interview, no phones, etc), the Commish was going to raise the stakes a LOT. And he did.

I am curious to see if Kraft can actually change the culture of the Patriots. Based on how the fans responded to him giving in and their unconditional support behind Tom Brady is I am guessing he can't.

 

[Jercules]

I played high school football in Canada... not a big deal. But we had shenanigans. Our coaches weren't above dumpster diving to get an opposing playbook, and it was important that we destroyed all our playbooks once the season was over.

I remember an opposing coach taping our practices from across the street before a big playoff game. I remember my coach telling me "a 15-yard unnecessary roughness penalty, early in the game, isn't the worst thing in the world" ... you can read between the lines there.

Football is hyper-competitive and stuff like that is a byproduct of that. Doesn't mean it's right, but when I see some of the comments about spygate and deflategate and how egregious some people genuinely seem to think they are, I can't help but wonder if they have any familiarity with football outside of an NFL broadcast.

 

[David Dodds]

It was not a $25,000 fine because the league is convinced that this has been going on for a long time. Plus I am pretty sure it would be $25,000 per ball.

The Colts complained BEFORE the incident even happened. Does that sound like a first-time offender? McNally was already nicknamed the Deflator in May.

The message from the Commish was clear after Spygate and even more clear now. No more warnings and soft-handling of these constant issues. Clean up your cheating. It's tainting the whole NFL. The punishments are this severe because the other 31 owners are tired of this crap.

Kraft backed down because he has minimal (to no support) from the rest of the owners. They are tired of his cheating ways.

Here is the problem as I see it. You are right. It appears several teams knew what the Patriots were doing, and as you said it likely went on for years. Again, for clarity's sake, I am not condoning what the Patriots did (and I am sure all the other things they continue to get away with).

But if the Patriots were known to tinker with the footballs and this practice went on over and over again and no one complained, then either 1) the other teams didn't really care all that much, 2) teams were doing some shady things on their own, or 3) it was an accepted or common practice that there was not a groundswell of outrage over it.

My issue is the inconsistency of what goes on from the league's perspective. How things are ignored or regulated, what is enforced or not, and what the penalties are (or are not) based on who the teams and participants are. If Goodell really is worried about the integrity of the game, then have 32 teams knock it off . . . not just the Patriots. Make everyone stop with the shenanigans, hand out equal penalties, and not let anyone get away with anything.

I think it has been somewhat of an unwritten rule for many years that teams do whatever to win. Most of it would be called gamesmanship. If you suspect something foul going on, you call the other coach up and say don't do this stuff when you are playing us. Mangini honored that code and did that. Belichick said screw you so he was called out. It still played bad for Mangini.

Harbaugh got bent out of shape for the formation stuff (which was clever, but clearly looking to tweak the intention of the rules. Enough so that there is now a new rule in place to not ever allow this going forward). Brady taunting Harbaugh to know the rules better isn't gamesmanship...it is being a #####. He knows damn well they were losing that game until they pulled the formation crap. So when you cheat/bend rules plus taunt and snub (and you are winning a lot), I think you create a situation for your team where the rest of the league really feels something needs to be done. So much so that the macho way of everything is fair in war goes out the window. That's where we are now.

Other teams cheat/bend rules too. That's a given. But most of the league believes the Patriots do more of it and better than every other team. That's a source of pride with Patriots fans, but it could very well be the major unraveling of the legacy of this team and it's star players.

 

[Anarchy99]

I believe he is referencing the Marshall Faulk claim that the Rams added new plays to their play book that they never ran in a game prior to the SB vs. the Pats. His version is that when they broke the huddle that the Pats knew where to go, what to do, who to cover, and where the ball was going better than the Rams offense did. Faulk insists to this day the Patriots taped and studied their walkthrough to figure out what to do.

This is what I vividly remember. And if the tapes showed that the Patriots had footage of this walk-through, you can see why the tapes were destroyed in Foxboro (never even taken into custody by the NFL offices in New York for fear they somehow get leaked). Many cried cover-up at the time this went down and it's telling the Patriots did not fight any of the punishments at all. They too knew that if all was told, their Super Bowl win could very well be pulled.

At the time this was the largest sanction ever against a team. And more than the sanction, Goodell had extremely tough words for the Patriots about cheating.

So despite Patriots fans not wanting this stuff in play for DeflateGate, it is very much in play as this is the Commissioner who resided over Spygate. He has intimate knowledge of what he swept under the rug then.

I think people are correct in saying when Wells started getting denied access (only 1 interview, no phones, etc), the Commish was going to raise the stakes a LOT. And he did.

I am curious to see if Kraft can actually change the culture of the Patriots. Based on how the fans responded to him giving in and their unconditional support behind Tom Brady is I am guessing he can't.

Everyone will have their own take on things, and as far as I am concerned, I personally do not believe there was ever a videotape of the Rams pre-SB practice/walkthrough. That being said, a more likely conclusion was if somehow there was someone related to the Pats in attendance who observed one or two of the plays and then reported back on what he saw. I have no idea where that would be covered in the rule book and if that would even be illegal. For example, if team personnel were allowed to move or set up equipment while the other team was practicing, would that be a violation or not?

I am pretty sure I individually researched Spygate more on my own than anyone that posts at FBG. I communicated with just about every beat reporter that covered the Pats (print, online, radio, tv, cable, NFL Network, etc.) at the time. I knew people that traveled with the team. I knew someone that worked for the team. I still know someone who is friends and socializes with BB. Heck, I could even post pictures of the inside of BB's house.

I have heard many stories, rumors, vignettes, suspicions, and ideal gossip about so many things that I could write a book. But it would all fall under speculation and second, third, or fourth hand information.

That being said, I have not come across anyone that has seen, heard of, knew about any tape of the Rams walkthrough. The Pats video guy said he didn't tape it and never had a tape of it. The Boston Herald ran a story without having any evidence of a tape. The author of the story never saw a tape or knew of the existence of a tape. The league never logged in a copy of a tape. BB claimed there never was a tape. I don't know how the story ever got out in the first place.

I don't know what the league destroyed when it destroyed the Spygate videotapes, but I am fairly confident that the league went through everything they received and catalogued what was on video. Maybe that itemized log still exists even if the tapes do not.

I have a different take on the penalties for the Patriots with regard to Deflategate. I think they waited a week not to check the reaction by the fans, but instead to gauge the reaction and demands of the 31 other owners. I would guess Goodell formally or informally polled the other owners to see what he had to come down with a punishment that other teams could live with. So they settled on the 4 games, 2 picks, $1 million as what the other owners would let fly as a penalty. All the other stuff, to me, is window dressing.

 

[General Tso]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Why was the punishment so severe? There's an element of 'nailing Capone for tax evasion' here.

People say the Pats didn't cooperate with Wells, but that's highly debatable (and what constitutes adequate cooperation?)

People say it's the history, but spygate alone was such a technical and ultimately meaningless infraction that it can't be the reason either.

I think it's simply the reputation the Patriots have around the league, that they cut every corner and find every advantage, and typically get away with it. Goodell is under immense pressure to 'reel these guys in', so to speak, so whatever proof of wrongdoing he can conjure up is used to crucify them.

The unspoken truth is: we're taking a million dollars, two draft picks, and four games from your MVP for likely tampering with game balls in January... and all that other crap that you know that we know that you do that you always get away with.

Salty haters and Pats fanboys coming together...I agree with this post. The Capone analogy is perfect.

The only thing I dont wholeheartedly buy into is the concept that Spygate was a meaningless infraction. I find myself on the other side of that one, and believe that there is a lot we dont know about what really happened there. You dont just "lose" evidence of that magnitude, unless you are losing it for good reason. I am on the conspiracy side of that one, and think the Pats got seriously hooked up by the league, which is why the hammer is coming down so hard now.

What evidence was lost?

Apologies if I am mistaken about what happened to all of the video that the public never got to see. If it wasnt "lost", it was locked away and hidden from the general public, or destroyed. I dont remember the exact nature of the BS that ensued with that scandal, because at that time I only really cared about what happened on the field. Any of the 3 leads me to the same exact conclusion though.

When spygate happened, they played all of the tapes on live broadcast television...

come on now. You know that godell destroyed the tapes the Patriots turned over...

There was a poster on this message board a while back, GordonGekko (is he still around?), that answered this thing about the tapes to my satisfaction.

Apparently, the reason the evidence was destroyed so swiftly was because Arlen Specter was about to start a congressional inquiry into spygate ostensibly, but really to get into the NFL's business. The NFL has a fair amount of enemies among lawmakers who aren't exactly thrilled their anti-trust exemption, and the taxpayer dollars they suck up with new stadiums, tax exemptions, etc. Spygate was a chance for them to drag the NFL before congress and put the whole operation under the spotlight. Nobody wanted that, so the evidence was swiftly destroyed.

The Wells report is actually a similar thing: the NFL wanted a chance to get an up-close-and-personal look at the Patriots' operation (unless there are other 5 million dollar investigations into teams for minor infractions that I'm unaware of).

What I'd like to know, and honestly, with no snark whatsoever, is what people think the tapes would've shown? All they did was put a cameraman in the wrong place, how could anything evil and nefarious come from that?

Not sure that passes the sniff test for me. Why would he need the video evidence to start an inquiry if he wanted to start an inquiry? There was evidence of wrongdoing even without the tapes. It still is pretty stanky if you ask me. Destroying evidence that a guy was filming in the wrong location avoided a congressional inquiry? Thats above my head.

Again, I didnt pay as close of attention to this stuff back then because it was more about the game than the scandal to me. Thats clearly changed now, but my recollection could definitely be flawed as a result. That said, The tapes could have shown a ton. For example, they could have shown that there was more than just video from a camera man standing in the wrong place. Mangini probably wouldnt have blown the whistle if that is all it was. The tapes could have shown far more egregious use of cameras in stealing intel. I remember a team - either the Rams or Eagles I think - saying that the Pats defenders were calling out their plays before they were even at the line in the Super Bowl. They seemed convinced that they knew what plays were coming well before they should have even had a clue. Pats fans will say it was great coaching and great preparation. Pats haters may see it differently. We will never know though because the evidence was destroyed.

Im just a guy on the Internet, but the dots that I am connecting paint a picture that Pats fans wont wont to see. Its a picture of a team that got off easy for a truly horrible offense, and then continued to test the limits, and got over-punished for a relatively harmless crime as a result.

Can you be more specific with the bolded? What could the Patriots have captured illegally with a camera that would allow them to know an offensive play before it is even run? (Remember, offenses back then used the radios; no signals).

Not trying to get on your back--you're a good guy--just want to clarify my original question.

I believe he is referencing the Marshall Faulk claim that the Rams added new plays to their play book that they never ran in a game prior to the SB vs. the Pats. His version is that when they broke the huddle that the Pats knew where to go, what to do, who to cover, and where the ball was going better than the Rams offense did. Faulk insists to this day the Patriots taped and studied their walkthrough to figure out what to do.

Thank you. I recalled it incorrectly, but that is exactly what I was trying to remember.

 

[Anarchy99]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

 

[JIslander]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

 

[Anarchy99]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

For the 3,000th time. I am not advocating anyone break the rules. But rules violations are so prevalent and pervasive even down to little kids football . . . precipitated by adults mind you . . . that it has become almost an accepted practice.

Here are some things I have seen IN PERSON that have happened at games I have attended. (I should also point out that there is a huge home field advantage in youth football.)

- Visiting team scores 60 yard touchdown to take lead in the final minutes. Head coach of home team tells ref there had to be a penalty somewhere as kid runs into end zone. Flag gets tossed. Holding call 15-20 seconds from when the play started and after the team was already lining up for an extra point.

- Home team called for no penalties, visiting team called for 18 penalties.

- Many times, team did not make yardage to gain on fourth down. Chain gang intentionally moved the sticks to mark the new yardage to gain. Refs baited into calling it a first down since there is nothing to look at or measure.

- Host team adjusted scales so everyone on the visiting team weighs 5 pounds heaver (with 3 main players disqualified for being over weight) and then recalibrating the scale so players on their own team weighed 5 pounds less (allowing several overweight players to be able to play).

- Assistant coaches climbing trees and roofs to videotape entire practices of other teams.

- Teams inserting smaller size footballs into play because QB had small hands.

- Assistant coaches impersonating a league official to review all records and documentation of opposition.

- Team calling for a measurement after every play in a blatant attempt to stop the clock when they had no timeouts and there was no possible way it was a first down. They were allowed to run 4 RUNNING plays in the final 15 seconds (with no timeouts) and finally scored on the last play of the game.

- Teams intentionally hitting the best player on a team after numerous plays after the whistle in a clear attempt to cause an injury.

- Teams agreeing to waive a rule and play the game anyway only to protest after they lost and have the result vacated or forfeited.

- Teams weighing in the proper players on the roster and then having brothers of the players 3-4 years older dress and play instead.

- Coaches standing next to the opposing bench and texting what the names of plays were so the defense would know what was coming on future plays.

- Coaches telling the bad kids on a team the wrong day and time for a playoff game so they wouldn't show up so their good kids could get way more playing time.

- Coaches bogusly saying bad kids were too hurt to play, waiving the minimum playing time requirement.

Yes, I am offended by the things that go on and it is inexcusable. Sadly kids learn the culture of cheating at an early age. So when I hear that Tom Brady likes his footballs slightly under inflated I am not morally offended, as that pales in comparison to some of the stuff I have witnesses in games with elementary age kids up through high school. Every single one of those things happened, and I am sure there are more that I have forgotten.

I welcome suggestions on how to fix things, now that people know the win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat philosophy runs deep.

 

[Franknbeans]

maybe we all just need to stop accepting cheating. It almost always ends badly for the parties involved.

 

[Jercules]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

Wow.

 

[Jercules]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

For the 3,000th time. I am not advocating anyone break the rules. But rules violations are so prevalent and pervasive even down to little kids football . . . precipitated by adults mind you . . . that it has become almost an accepted practice.

Here are some things I have seen IN PERSON that have happened at games I have attended. (I should also point out that there is a huge home field advantage in youth football.)

- Visiting team scores 60 yard touchdown to take lead in the final minutes. Head coach of home team tells ref there had to be a penalty somewhere as kid runs into end zone. Flag gets tossed. Holding call 15-20 seconds from when the play started and after the team was already lining up for an extra point.

- Home team called for no penalties, visiting team called for 18 penalties.

- Many times, team did not make yardage to gain on fourth down. Chain gang intentionally moved the sticks to mark the new yardage to gain. Refs baited into calling it a first down since there is nothing to look at or measure.

- Host team adjusted scales so everyone on the visiting team weighs 5 pounds heaver (with 3 main players disqualified for being over weight) and then recalibrating the scale so players on their own team weighed 5 pounds less (allowing several overweight players to be able to play).

- Assistant coaches climbing trees and roofs to videotape entire practices of other teams.

- Teams inserting smaller size footballs into play because QB had small hands.

- Assistant coaches impersonating a league official to review all records and documentation of opposition.

- Team calling for a measurement after every play in a blatant attempt to stop the clock when they had no timeouts and there was no possible way it was a first down. They were allowed to run 4 RUNNING plays in the final 15 seconds (with no timeouts) and finally scored on the last play of the game.

- Teams intentionally hitting the best player on a team after numerous plays after the whistle in a clear attempt to cause an injury.

- Teams agreeing to waive a rule and play the game anyway only to protest after they lost and have the result vacated or forfeited.

- Teams weighing in the proper players on the roster and then having brothers of the players 3-4 years older dress and play instead.

- Coaches standing next to the opposing bench and texting what the names of plays were so the defense would know what was coming on future plays.

- Coaches telling the bad kids on a team the wrong day and time for a playoff game so they wouldn't show up so their good kids could get way more playing time.

- Coaches bogusly saying bad kids were too hurt to play, waiving the minimum playing time requirement.

Yes, I am offended by the things that go on and it is inexcusable. Sadly kids learn the culture of cheating at an early age. So when I hear that Tom Brady likes his footballs slightly under inflated I am not morally offended, as that pales in comparison to some of the stuff I have witnesses in games with elementary age kids up through high school. Every single one of those things happened, and I am sure there are more that I have forgotten.

I welcome suggestions on how to fix things, now that people know the win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat philosophy runs deep.

You know where all of that started? Spygate.

 

[Anarchy99]

I have been involved with youth football since 5 years pre-Spygate, so I would have to say that there is no correlation.

Maybe where I live is just a bigger collection of hoodlums, gangbangers, and thieves. Maybe the rest of the country is filled with do gooders, former choir boys, and people that drive the speed limit and don't cheat on their taxes. Maybe no other team in the NFL other than New England has ever broken the rules. But somehow I doubt it.

 

[JIslander]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

Wow.

why a "wow"? Kids will emulate "professionals" and to me that's where it starts. Its like Anarchy is saying there's cheating across the board at all ages, so how can you be so offended at the professionals. Its so backwards.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I said it before and I will say it again, the initial infraction for Deflategate was an equipment violation for tampering with the footballs. The baseline penalty, as cited by many, is a fine of $25,000 (plus the option of more). Financially, the Pats got hit with that dollar amount times 40. No other equipment violation ever sparked an independent investigation and 243-page report. No other team was ever docked any draft picks. And no NFL player had ever been suspended for an equipment violation.
I've seen this a few times now, from a few posters, and it just now caught my attention. I'm not sure there is a well defined category of violations called equipment violations. I am aware f some uniform violations which many seem to be referencing, when they use this term, but none relating to "equipment". Is this an effort to downplay the matter through a comparison to uniform violations, or has there been a violation involving "equipment" whatever that may be?

For instance has there been a violation relating to the length or condition of the field, the yardage chains, the goalposts, the equipment common to all in the game, or are we comparing the ball all play with to a slick jersey on a single individual. I am just trying to understand the term so I can understand the argument. It seems to me this was a new thing, its own thing, not readily comparable to other violations. I understand looking for reference points, I am just not certain how relatable the points may be.

I do not believe there is an official definition of what is classified as "equipment," but things that have been brought up in the past would be things like uniforms, stickum, vasoline, cooking spray, cleats, field conditions, helmets, things like casts on players, etc. As I referenced in other sports, things like putting a substance on a baseball, corking a bat, having a stick in hockey that was too long or too curved. A boxer soaking his gloves or wearing too much tape on his hands. A NASCAR driver tinkering with an emissions valve to get more power. Things that involve equipment in the field of play.

Do you think Vaseline on a jersey the qualitative equivalent of the ball? I get that there is some point of reference, but my visceral reaction is that there is a difference. As to field conditions I would agree that to be a much more analogous situation. Stickum is the sticking point for me. I want to find that more integral to the game, but I cannot articulate a sound reason.

I guess my overall point is that I find reference to most of the prior uniform violations poorly analogous. Stickum, and to a lesser extent Vaseline I find more so. I'm just not clear that the label equipment violation is, as a whole, a comparable. "Comparables" are big in Civil Service Disciplines, where I have some familiarity, and that may be coloring my perceptions here.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Why do signal callers cover their lips with their sheet when they call signals? Would knowing a signal and the play it relates to be helpful? Would that be something that could be gleaned with a head on taping of the signal caller, yet which would not be ascertainable from a profile view, and if so would a head on view be something which should be protected in practices. Do Patriot coaches cover their lips while calling plays or consulting with Brady?

 

[Jercules]

Why do signal callers cover their lips with their sheet when they call signals? Would knowing a signal and the play it relates to be helpful? Would that be something that could be gleaned with a head on taping of the signal caller, yet which would not be ascertainable from a profile view, and if so would a head on view be something which should be protected in practices. Do Patriot coaches cover their lips while calling plays or consulting with Brady?

For the record, none of the confiscated tapes included that mythical Rams walk through (and even if they did, seeing a walk through is really only slightly better than game tape in that you know what you are watching is relevant to the game at hand. There's no way to 'decode' it to such a degree that you can be 100% sure what is coming on any given play).

My point in all this is people use the ambiguity of not knowing exactly what was on the tapes as an avenue to assume outrageously bad things. It was a guy with a camera on the sidelines. Simple common sense tells you other than getting an illegally good look at the signal caller, there's really nothing more they could have done.

Signals were used on defense a few years ago before they started using radios. You'd have a guy on the sidelines giving physical signals to a defender (much like a third base coach). Obviously, with enough repetition and a coach too lazy to change the signals, one could decode them and gain an advantage. It's a part of the game, perfectly above board.

What you describe is not 'calling signals', but calling plays to a player on the field. I imagine covering their mouth helps them be heard more clearly, but certainly also keeps any interested lip readers from trying to figure things out. It may seem a little paranoid, but A) they can't change the name of a play as simply as they can change a signal, so they need to be more careful, and B) teams will record them and see if they can glean any information (so long as the 'recorder' is not using a camera on the opposing sideline, it is all perfectly legal).

I wholeheartedly endorse the last two paragraphs of your post.

 

[Jercules]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

Wow.

why a "wow"? Kids will emulate "professionals" and to me that's where it starts. Its like Anarchy is saying there's cheating across the board at all ages, so how can you be so offended at the professionals. Its so backwards.

The USS Phony Sanctimony sailed some 30 pages ago, and has evidently returned.

I'm willing to bet you have no experience playing or coaching football, and so when you hear something about stealing signals or deflating game balls, you think it's akin to a capital crime. The truth is, stuff like this is so commonplace in competitive football you even see it at the Pop Warner level (Anarchy's obvious point).

 

[davearm]

I said it before and I will say it again, the initial infraction for Deflategate was an equipment violation for tampering with the footballs. The baseline penalty, as cited by many, is a fine of $25,000 (plus the option of more). Financially, the Pats got hit with that dollar amount times 40. No other equipment violation ever sparked an independent investigation and 243-page report. No other team was ever docked any draft picks. And no NFL player had ever been suspended for an equipment violation.

Yes, I understand, part of the penalty is for not fully cooperating with the investigation, being a multiple time offender, and let's be honest, for being a bunch of pompous, self-righteous, arrogant A--holes. And I am not saying the Pats should have skated on this. They should have been punished. But IMO the penalty was way worse than the crime. I would have guessed 2 games for Brady, a $250,000 fine, and a loss of a 4th or 5th round pick.

What was the penalty handed down for Spygate? $500k and a first round pick?

Was that sufficient to deter the Pats from continuing to cheat? Apparently not.

Maybe a penalty 2 or 3 times stiffer will be a more effective deterrent. I guess we'll see.

 

[GregR]

Why do signal callers cover their lips with their sheet when they call signals? Would knowing a signal and the play it relates to be helpful? Would that be something that could be gleaned with a head on taping of the signal caller, yet which would not be ascertainable from a profile view, and if so would a head on view be something which should be protected in practices. Do Patriot coaches cover their lips while calling plays or consulting with Brady?

Gruden and Andy Reid came from the same coaching tree, used the same naming scheme for plays. I recall a game when Gruden was an announcer and the broadcast focused on Reid calling in a play. Gruden said he could tell what type of play it was just from how long Reid spoke.

 

[moleculo]

I think Nixon should have just gotten a stern talking to because its common for people to "cheat" in high school elections.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Did (Brady) do what he was accused of doing?

Jim Kelly: "No doubt."

 

[JIslander]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

Wow.

why a "wow"? Kids will emulate "professionals" and to me that's where it starts. Its like Anarchy is saying there's cheating across the board at all ages, so how can you be so offended at the professionals. Its so backwards.

The USS Phony Sanctimony sailed some 30 pages ago, and has evidently returned.

I'm willing to bet you have no experience playing or coaching football, and so when you hear something about stealing signals or deflating game balls, you think it's akin to a capital crime. The truth is, stuff like this is so commonplace in competitive football you even see it at the Pop Warner level (Anarchy's obvious point).

The USS Apologist refuses to be decommissioned, with a mission to spread the word that, so what if the Pats cheated, everybody does it, even the kids.

 

[Bri]

During Wednesday’s press conference that ended the quarterly ownership meeting in San Francisco, Tom Curran of CSN New England asked Commissioner Roger Goodell a pointed question regarding media leaks by the league during the #DeflateGate investigation.

In response, Goodell referred generally to the report generated by Ted Wells. When Curran followed with a specific question about the league’s leak of the false information that 11 of the 12 Patriots footballs were two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum, Goodell said that Ted Wells “had the opportunity to evaluate that.”

While Wells may have had the opportunity to evaluate whether the NFL deliberately leaked false PSI data, possibly to create an opening narrative of presumed tampering that would trigger a scorched-earth investigation of the Patriots, Wells didn’t address the topic at all in his report.

As noted by Mike Reiss of ESPN.com, Wells devoted only one paragraph to the notion that the investigation arose in whole or in part from an agenda against the Patriots. The 243-page document says nothing about whether Wells explored the leak of false information — a leak that likely led directly to the decision to bring in Wells for another multi-million-dollar probe.

Frankly, it’s a bit ironic that anyone from ESPN would demand transparency regarding the false information disseminated by the league, given that ESPN was the media company that accepted the false information as true and published it. In the 15 days since it became clear that the information given to Chris Mortensen was false, ESPN has said nothing about its role in fueling the early days of the #DeflateGate frenzy.

Either Mortensen was flat wrong or he was lied to. If it was the former, the NFL should have corrected the information quickly and aggressively. Instead, the true PSI numbers remained hidden from view until the Wells report was released.

On one hand, it’s important for a reporter to protect his sources. On the other hand, the rules should change when the reporter has been flat-out lied to. And if the NFL isn’t going to shed light on what actually happened back in January regarding the false PSI data, ESPN shouldn’t simply point out the NFL’s silence; ESPN should end its own.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

 

[Run It Up]

Two things;

1. Tom Brady is a Saint*
2. The Pats are gonna go 19-0 this season and it will literally kill Don Shula




*He will die for our sins.

 

[Old Smiley]

During Wednesday’s press conference that ended the quarterly ownership meeting in San Francisco, Tom Curran of CSN New England asked Commissioner Roger Goodell a pointed question regarding media leaks by the league during the #DeflateGate investigation.

In response, Goodell referred generally to the report generated by Ted Wells. When Curran followed with a specific question about the league’s leak of the false information that 11 of the 12 Patriots footballs were two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum, Goodell said that Ted Wells “had the opportunity to evaluate that.”

....http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

Head M_____ F__________ Weasel in Charge.

 

[ratbast]

My guess is Brady's approach will be to illustrate that even though he pressures the ball guys to have his balls at minimum, that he did not instruct them to execute deflation after the inspection.

Then they will try to illustrate defamation with that as their base.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

My guess is that Brady's appeal offers absolutely nothing in terms of a rebuttal of the evidence, and sticks 100% to challenging the procedure itself.

ETA: nothing except lawyer and/or agent speak that is.

 

[davearm]

During Wednesday’s press conference that ended the quarterly ownership meeting in San Francisco, Tom Curran of CSN New England asked Commissioner Roger Goodell a pointed question regarding media leaks by the league during the #DeflateGate investigation.

In response, Goodell referred generally to the report generated by Ted Wells. When Curran followed with a specific question about the league’s leak of the false information that 11 of the 12 Patriots footballs were two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum, Goodell said that Ted Wells “had the opportunity to evaluate that.”

While Wells may have had the opportunity to evaluate whether the NFL deliberately leaked false PSI data, possibly to create an opening narrative of presumed tampering that would trigger a scorched-earth investigation of the Patriots, Wells didn’t address the topic at all in his report.

As noted by Mike Reiss of ESPN.com, Wells devoted only one paragraph to the notion that the investigation arose in whole or in part from an agenda against the Patriots. The 243-page document says nothing about whether Wells explored the leak of false information — a leak that likely led directly to the decision to bring in Wells for another multi-million-dollar probe.

Frankly, it’s a bit ironic that anyone from ESPN would demand transparency regarding the false information disseminated by the league, given that ESPN was the media company that accepted the false information as true and published it. In the 15 days since it became clear that the information given to Chris Mortensen was false, ESPN has said nothing about its role in fueling the early days of the #DeflateGate frenzy.

Either Mortensen was flat wrong or he was lied to. If it was the former, the NFL should have corrected the information quickly and aggressively. Instead, the true PSI numbers remained hidden from view until the Wells report was released.

On one hand, it’s important for a reporter to protect his sources. On the other hand, the rules should change when the reporter has been flat-out lied to. And if the NFL isn’t going to shed light on what actually happened back in January regarding the false PSI data, ESPN shouldn’t simply point out the NFL’s silence; ESPN should end its own.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

The notion that the NFL has an obligation to correct misinformation that's made public by anyone that doesn't work for the NFL is just beyond ridiculous.

How many thousands of articles have been written about Deflategate since January? The NFL has an obligation to proof them all?

What about Twitter? Does the league need to moderate that too? Who are they required to follow, and who are they not required to follow?

And message boards like this one? Lots of misinformation in this thread alone.

 

[The General]

My guess is that Brady's appeal offers absolutely nothing in terms of a rebuttal of the evidence, and sticks 100% to challenging the procedure itself.

ETA: nothing except lawyer and/or agent speak that is.

I don't really know how the appeal works but thought it was pretty much standard for the union to appeal on behalf of the player. Totally agree that nothing new will come out of the process and Brady will offer up nothing new other than a couple of carefully prepared paragraphs.

We'll see.

 

[Flying Elvis]

Anarchy - do you think the Pats were deflating footballs after pregame inspection? What's your take on deflategate?

I have provided my perspective throughout the entire thread. Like the Wells report said, I think they probably did something at some point. However, I am not sure if they did anything in the AFCCG and I don't think the report did a good job proving that they did anything leading up to the start of that particular game. It does look fishy that something could have happened against the Colts.

I have mostly taken the stance that even if we just say they really did do it, it was still a misdemeanor and not a capital crime. Put another way, I would guess they have gotten away with way worse than letting a small amount of air out of the footballs.

I am less offended not because I am a homer but because I have seen the type of stuff that goes on in youth and scholastic football (which I have posted on a fair amount). I can only imagine what goes on at the pro level based on what I have seen go on to try to win a Pop Warner game. As a for instance, the latest one I heard locally was a girl from one school hooking up with the QB from another school and getting him to review all the audibles at the LOS and what they meant. I guess that truly gives new meaning to taking one for the team.

As for Deflategate, I think the entire thing could have been handled internally by warning the Patriots (and 31 other teams) not to mess with the footballs and that each and every football must be inflated between 12.5 - 13.5 PSI when given to the refs. I would have also said that the footballs will be fully inspected per the rules pregame and there would be in-game and half time spot checks. (For those that missed it, I read somewhere that a random football has already been taken after some games were completed to check for any number of things . . . inflation, condition, wear, etc.) I also would have stated what the penalty would be or imply series penalties would be issued for non-compliance.

That would have stopped NE in their tracks, none of this would have come out, there would not have been a media circus, and the league would not have had egg on its face. Granted, the Patriots would not have been punished, so part of me things the league really did have it out to beat up on the Patriots. The whole thing could have been avoided . . . yet the league chose a different path.

And for the record, yes, the whole thing could have been avoided if the Patriots didn't cheat.

There's a lot in your post I have issue with but to focus on the bold...wow... so you don't see the feedback to Pop Warner that if Pats are doing it, hey, that's just football and good for the kids?

For the 3,000th time. I am not advocating anyone break the rules. But rules violations are so prevalent and pervasive even down to little kids football . . . precipitated by adults mind you . . . that it has become almost an accepted practice.

Here are some things I have seen IN PERSON that have happened at games I have attended. (I should also point out that there is a huge home field advantage in youth football.)

- Visiting team scores 60 yard touchdown to take lead in the final minutes. Head coach of home team tells ref there had to be a penalty somewhere as kid runs into end zone. Flag gets tossed. Holding call 15-20 seconds from when the play started and after the team was already lining up for an extra point.

- Home team called for no penalties, visiting team called for 18 penalties.

- Many times, team did not make yardage to gain on fourth down. Chain gang intentionally moved the sticks to mark the new yardage to gain. Refs baited into calling it a first down since there is nothing to look at or measure.

- Host team adjusted scales so everyone on the visiting team weighs 5 pounds heaver (with 3 main players disqualified for being over weight) and then recalibrating the scale so players on their own team weighed 5 pounds less (allowing several overweight players to be able to play).

- Assistant coaches climbing trees and roofs to videotape entire practices of other teams.

- Teams inserting smaller size footballs into play because QB had small hands.

- Assistant coaches impersonating a league official to review all records and documentation of opposition.

- Team calling for a measurement after every play in a blatant attempt to stop the clock when they had no timeouts and there was no possible way it was a first down. They were allowed to run 4 RUNNING plays in the final 15 seconds (with no timeouts) and finally scored on the last play of the game.

- Teams intentionally hitting the best player on a team after numerous plays after the whistle in a clear attempt to cause an injury.

- Teams agreeing to waive a rule and play the game anyway only to protest after they lost and have the result vacated or forfeited.

- Teams weighing in the proper players on the roster and then having brothers of the players 3-4 years older dress and play instead.

- Coaches standing next to the opposing bench and texting what the names of plays were so the defense would know what was coming on future plays.

- Coaches telling the bad kids on a team the wrong day and time for a playoff game so they wouldn't show up so their good kids could get way more playing time.

- Coaches bogusly saying bad kids were too hurt to play, waiving the minimum playing time requirement.

Yes, I am offended by the things that go on and it is inexcusable. Sadly kids learn the culture of cheating at an early age. So when I hear that Tom Brady likes his footballs slightly under inflated I am not morally offended, as that pales in comparison to some of the stuff I have witnesses in games with elementary age kids up through high school. Every single one of those things happened, and I am sure there are more that I have forgotten.

I welcome suggestions on how to fix things, now that people know the win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat philosophy runs deep.

You know where all of that started? Spygate.

Incorrect. It all started with an ex-con on a plow-affixed tractor.

During Wednesday’s press conference that ended the quarterly ownership meeting in San Francisco, Tom Curran of CSN New England asked Commissioner Roger Goodell a pointed question regarding media leaks by the league during the #DeflateGate investigation.

In response, Goodell referred generally to the report generated by Ted Wells. When Curran followed with a specific question about the league’s leak of the false information that 11 of the 12 Patriots footballs were two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum, Goodell said that Ted Wells “had the opportunity to evaluate that.”

While Wells may have had the opportunity to evaluate whether the NFL deliberately leaked false PSI data, possibly to create an opening narrative of presumed tampering that would trigger a scorched-earth investigation of the Patriots, Wells didn’t address the topic at all in his report.

As noted by Mike Reiss of ESPN.com, Wells devoted only one paragraph to the notion that the investigation arose in whole or in part from an agenda against the Patriots. The 243-page document says nothing about whether Wells explored the leak of false information — a leak that likely led directly to the decision to bring in Wells for another multi-million-dollar probe.

Frankly, it’s a bit ironic that anyone from ESPN would demand transparency regarding the false information disseminated by the league, given that ESPN was the media company that accepted the false information as true and published it. In the 15 days since it became clear that the information given to Chris Mortensen was false, ESPN has said nothing about its role in fueling the early days of the #DeflateGate frenzy.

Either Mortensen was flat wrong or he was lied to. If it was the former, the NFL should have corrected the information quickly and aggressively. Instead, the true PSI numbers remained hidden from view until the Wells report was released.

On one hand, it’s important for a reporter to protect his sources. On the other hand, the rules should change when the reporter has been flat-out lied to. And if the NFL isn’t going to shed light on what actually happened back in January regarding the false PSI data, ESPN shouldn’t simply point out the NFL’s silence; ESPN should end its own.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

The notion that the NFL has an obligation to correct misinformation that's made public by anyone that doesn't work for the NFL is just beyond ridiculous.

How many thousands of articles have been written about Deflategate since January? The NFL has an obligation to proof them all?

What about Twitter? Does the league need to moderate that too? Who are they required to follow, and who are they not required to follow?

And message boards like this one? Lots of misinformation in this thread alone.

You should have stopped after the first sentence. The other three are total trash, as a correction by the league when the initial data was clearly and drastically inaccurate would have spread through all other mediums on its own, just as the inaccurate data did.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

During Wednesday’s press conference that ended the quarterly ownership meeting in San Francisco, Tom Curran of CSN New England asked Commissioner Roger Goodell a pointed question regarding media leaks by the league during the #DeflateGate investigation.

In response, Goodell referred generally to the report generated by Ted Wells. When Curran followed with a specific question about the league’s leak of the false information that 11 of the 12 Patriots footballs were two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum, Goodell said that Ted Wells “had the opportunity to evaluate that.”

While Wells may have had the opportunity to evaluate whether the NFL deliberately leaked false PSI data, possibly to create an opening narrative of presumed tampering that would trigger a scorched-earth investigation of the Patriots, Wells didn’t address the topic at all in his report.

As noted by Mike Reiss of ESPN.com, Wells devoted only one paragraph to the notion that the investigation arose in whole or in part from an agenda against the Patriots. The 243-page document says nothing about whether Wells explored the leak of false information — a leak that likely led directly to the decision to bring in Wells for another multi-million-dollar probe.

Frankly, it’s a bit ironic that anyone from ESPN would demand transparency regarding the false information disseminated by the league, given that ESPN was the media company that accepted the false information as true and published it. In the 15 days since it became clear that the information given to Chris Mortensen was false, ESPN has said nothing about its role in fueling the early days of the #DeflateGate frenzy.

Either Mortensen was flat wrong or he was lied to. If it was the former, the NFL should have corrected the information quickly and aggressively. Instead, the true PSI numbers remained hidden from view until the Wells report was released.

On one hand, it’s important for a reporter to protect his sources. On the other hand, the rules should change when the reporter has been flat-out lied to. And if the NFL isn’t going to shed light on what actually happened back in January regarding the false PSI data, ESPN shouldn’t simply point out the NFL’s silence; ESPN should end its own.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

The notion that the NFL has an obligation to correct misinformation that's made public by anyone that doesn't work for the NFL is just beyond ridiculous.

How many thousands of articles have been written about Deflategate since January? The NFL has an obligation to proof them all?

What about Twitter? Does the league need to moderate that too? Who are they required to follow, and who are they not required to follow?

And message boards like this one? Lots of misinformation in this thread alone.

Ya that is ridiculous to think they would have to search out and correct every wrong piece of information out there. Some people just can't accept that although not perfect, Goodell shoulders way too much blame for anything negative in the NFL.

 

[General Tso]

Did (Brady) do what he was accused of doing?

Jim Kelly: "No doubt."

And he would know. I once met a young, naive Hungarian dancer in Niagara who told me a heartbreaking story of a love affair she was just getting out of. The guy swore he was single, until one day she saw him on TV announcing his retirement from football, with his loving wife right by his side. One of the funniest stories I ever heard, only she wasn't laughing.

 

[Old Smiley]

You know where all of that started? Spygate.

Incorrect. It all started with an ex-con on a plow-affixed tractor.

That or the tuck rule game. (Or, were they the same?)