Tucker agrees with Walsh: Patriots practiced with IR players (1 Viewer)

[Doug Drinen]

I'm curious what the group thinks about the following:

"I'll create some new phony issue out of thin air to try to deflect some responsibility from the Patriots"

So....any actual response to the questions I have posed?

Speaking only for myself, I couldn't understand the questions. I consider my reading comprehension to be at least adequate in most situations. And I read your post about four times because what you post is worth reading. But I still didn't understand.It almost sounded like you were asking/implying something like, "The Patriots didn't buy Walsh's silence (and Tucker's and every other former employee) and/or put out a hit on them. Isn't that evidence that this is probably no big deal?"

ETA: FWIW, I don't necessarily disagree that it's not a big deal.

 

[Doug Drinen]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

 

[Donnie Brasco]

So the commissioner acknowledges a league wide practice of side stepping roster limitations and you really believe these guys who really don't belong on IR are just peddling a bicycle?

Until you produce a witness to the contrary, then I believe that the other teams are following the rules . Speculation isn't doing us any justice in this thread. Get over it... There are 2 witness that have stated publicly that the Patriots abuse/broke the IR rules. It's under investigation, and frankly the Patriots have not done anything that makes me believe they did other wise. In fact a see a continuing pattern here, I think LT said it best..

 

[bostonfred]

Do you agree that a team that orders its players to break the rules is breaking the rules? Do you believe that a team's accomplishments are impacted by the actions of its employees?

No. In your holding example if a coach orders a lineman to hold a player on the next play for the whole world to hear, the player that holds is guilty of holding and "is breaking the rules" and the coach is guilty of nothing in the eyes of the NFL. The team, organization, etc. will receive no repercussions as a result of the coach's orders.

Guilty? The team would be penalized. They don't fine the player. They give the team a ten yard penalty. And, technically, the team would receive no repercussions for telling its players to play while on IR. Only if the players actually practice. So while I appreciate the distinction you're drawing, it's still a highly semantic argument to say that it's not illegal to tell the players to break the rules. The team has institutionalized the deliberate and deceptive breaking of the rules in both cases.

Do you believe that a team's accomplishments are impacted by the actions of its employees?

As to your 2nd question, the accomplishments may or may not be impacted the employees actions. It depends on the employee, depends on the action. Not all employees will have the same impact on the team's accomplishments. Or maybe I'm not getting the question.

That seems like a fair stance. I guess for me, I'm curious which actions are "worse" than others. The only criteria I've heard for why the IR practice is worse than the holding example is a mildly interesting legal argument that holds very little water as an ethical argument.

Just to be clear, I don't think what BB supposedly did was horrible or gave the team a tremendous advantage. It's just his "misinterpretation" of the rules and the fact that some don't apply to him that's the larger issue. Why should he be able to break the rules that most/all other teams abide by? I understand that he's always looking for an edge as are most coach's but when you start breaking rules to gain your advantage it puts every team that follows the rules at a disadvantage. I don't hate the Pat's, I respect their players (with the exception of Harrison) a great deal, I just don't like BB at all.

That seems like a very reasonable stance. I think most people lost some respect for Belichick over the last nine months.

 

[bostonfred]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

If that's true, Doug, it's a shame, because the Patriots still did a lot of things as a team that other organizations did not. I love the way they play team defense. I love Troy Brown being asked to play defensive back, just in case, and next thing you know, he's playing more defense than offense. I love the fact that Tom Brady took a below market contract because he wanted to win. I love the fact that they got introduced at every game, including the Superbowl, as a team, instead of getting everyone their five seconds. Those are still admirable things about a football team. I have no problem with you being sick of them, or disliking the fans, but I was never really crowing about how the team was on a higher moral plane than the rest of the NFL, and while I'm sure Kraft didn't mind the free marketing, I don't think Belichick was ever trying to shove that idea down anyone's throat, either.

Then again, I didn't care when I found out that Clinton lied about the Lewinsky thing, either. Maybe that makes me a less moral person, or maybe I just have lower standards. I don't know.

 

[bostonfred]

So...after several days and several more pages...that Pats defenders are still holding on to "everyone else is doing it"...but are adding things like "its the same as teaching holding or other in game things".Rather than just admitting that once again (if this is true) that their team screwed up and did something against the rules and was busted.

As the guy talking about "holding", I don't think that's a fair representation of what I've said. I've freely admitted that the team screwed up, and did something against the rules, and got busted. I'm just trying to find out how big a deal this is. My comparison to an in game activity (deliberate holding while trying to hide it from the officials) is a response to someone else (GregR) who said, this isn't like holding. I asked for clarification, and it seems like it's been fairly difficult for people to articulate. It doesn't seem like you're interested in a serious conversation on the topic, but if you are, I welcome it.

 

[Donnie Brasco]

So...after several days and several more pages...that Pats defenders are still holding on to "everyone else is doing it"...but are adding things like "its the same as teaching holding or other in game things".Rather than just admitting that once again (if this is true) that their team screwed up and did something against the rules and was busted.

As the guy talking about "holding", I don't think that's a fair representation of what I've said. I've freely admitted that the team screwed up, and did something against the rules, and got busted. I'm just trying to find out how big a deal this is. My comparison to an in game activity (deliberate holding while trying to hide it from the officials) is a response to someone else (GregR) who said, this isn't like holding. I asked for clarification, and it seems like it's been fairly difficult for people to articulate. It doesn't seem like you're interested in a serious conversation on the topic, but if you are, I welcome it.

Unfortunately, "HOLDING" will always be a judgment call made by an official on the field. That fact alone makes it completely different form any violation that the Pats have been deemed as doing. There are no penalties that can be enforced for knowing the defensive calls via a video camera, or for having an extra player on the roster. The biggest difference..Second, There is no rule against teaching holding techniques, probably because "Holding" is a judgment call made by an official. But there are rules stating that the Patriots crossed the line.Third, the offenses the Patriots have been caught doing are premeditated and gave them an immediate advantage, but they don't have to assume an immediate risk. Deliberately holding "while trying to hide it from the officials" can produce a nice advantage, during the game. In the end you're putting your team at an immediate risk of being punished. And possibly costing you the game or score etc.. I know you're smart enough to see the deference in the immediate risk when holding, vs. gaining an advantage with no, to very little risk. So I'll stop.Hell, I would pay the price the Pats paid for the advantage they received.. Very little risk IMO..

 

[twitch]

So the commissioner acknowledges a league wide practice of side stepping roster limitations and you really believe these guys who really don't belong on IR are just peddling a bicycle?

Until you produce a witness to the contrary, then I believe that the other teams are following the rules . Speculation isn't doing us any justice in this thread. Get over it... There are 2 witness that have stated publicly that the Patriots abuse/broke the IR rules. It's under investigation, and frankly the Patriots have not done anything that makes me believe they did other wise. In fact a see a continuing pattern here, I think LT said it best..

Are you seriously kidding me, guy? Anyone who thinks Belichick has actually LIED is speculating. Where's the actual evidence that he lied? The man said he misintrepreted the rule, and that he never once used the video footage on the actual day any of it was shot. Matt Walsh confirmed that FACT. You provide that information here, an actual nugget corroberating a LIE, and you'll shut us Pats fans up for good. Otherwise, spare everyone the pot/kettle act regarding who's speculating. Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!

 

[Donnie Brasco]

LOL...

You're not helping your cause..

So lets get this straight, you stated "you really believe these guys who really don't belong on IR are just peddling a bicycle?". I asked for a witness to collaborate your argument "That everyones doing it". I wanted proof to back up your argument and I get this...........

Are you seriously kidding me, guy? Anyone who thinks Belichick has actually LIED is speculating. Where's the actual evidence that he lied? The man said he misintrepreted the rule, and that he never once used the video footage on the actual day any of it was shot. Matt Walsh confirmed that FACT. You provide that information here, an actual nugget corroberating a LIE, and you'll shut us Pats fans up for good. Otherwise, spare everyone the pot/kettle act regarding who's speculating. Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!

Did my post say Billi is a lier?Let me ask you this, did the NFL think he gained an advantage?

FYI, all Matt Walsh confirmed was that they had been filming defensive calls for years.. He also stated that players were practicing while on IR.. That's it.

Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!! I'm the one who's keeping it clean. You're getting all homer emotional..

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Second, There is no rule against teaching holding techniques, probably because "Holding" is a judgment call made by an official. But there are rules stating that the Patriots crossed the line.

Exactly. This should be patently obvious, but for some reason it's been debated in this thread. We can bicker all day about whether this SHOULD be the case - but currently, there is no rule prohibiting coaches from teaching O-linemen how to hold. Analogy:- If my kid gets busted for speeding, he'll probably get a ticket- If I teach my kid "strategies" for how to avoid getting busted for speeding, should I get a ticket? No, because there isn't a law against "teaching how to speed without getting caught". For obvious reasons - because it would be subjective and unenforceable.

 

[sho nuff]

So...after several days and several more pages...that Pats defenders are still holding on to "everyone else is doing it"...but are adding things like "its the same as teaching holding or other in game things".Rather than just admitting that once again (if this is true) that their team screwed up and did something against the rules and was busted.

As the guy talking about "holding", I don't think that's a fair representation of what I've said. I've freely admitted that the team screwed up, and did something against the rules, and got busted. I'm just trying to find out how big a deal this is. My comparison to an in game activity (deliberate holding while trying to hide it from the officials) is a response to someone else (GregR) who said, this isn't like holding. I asked for clarification, and it seems like it's been fairly difficult for people to articulate. It doesn't seem like you're interested in a serious conversation on the topic, but if you are, I welcome it.

No...Im not interested in more excuses from the Pats faithful by trying to deflect to what other teams do.Its tired.Also not interested in the usual talk of anyone that says anything bad about the Pats is a hater.NOTE: Im not saying you are the one doing these things...but it happens in every one of these threads.I don't think this particular thing is a huge issue on its own...but when compounded with other issues surrounding BB...that is what makes it bigger.

 

[GregR_2]

So...after several days and several more pages...that Pats defenders are still holding on to "everyone else is doing it"...but are adding things like "its the same as teaching holding or other in game things".Rather than just admitting that once again (if this is true) that their team screwed up and did something against the rules and was busted.

As the guy talking about "holding", I don't think that's a fair representation of what I've said. I've freely admitted that the team screwed up, and did something against the rules, and got busted. I'm just trying to find out how big a deal this is. My comparison to an in game activity (deliberate holding while trying to hide it from the officials) is a response to someone else (GregR) who said, this isn't like holding. I asked for clarification, and it seems like it's been fairly difficult for people to articulate. It doesn't seem like you're interested in a serious conversation on the topic, but if you are, I welcome it.

The way you worded your response, you invited the interpretation that you weren't agreeing there was a difference and that you required someone to articulate it for you. Given the tone of these threads and how many times the obvious has been questioned to try to create wiggle room, I'd say that is the interpretation you should have expected your words to have.So you got a lot of eye rolling because I don't think many people are going to believe a mature adult doesn't see a difference. It would be like someone telling me they can't tell a difference between art and pornography. I can buy that they can't define it clearly, but that they don't see any difference is hard to believe. If your goal was really a serious discussion, then saying something like, "I agree they aren't the same thing, but am having trouble articulating why. Can anyone put it into words?" would have accomplished that. With leaving yourself as open as you did, I'd say you got the reply you should have expected.

 

[Road Warriors]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

This explains much of what goes on here and in the wider NFL fan's view. The Patriots were held up on a pedastal, and some of the fans got to be a bit over the top. This is the backlash.

I believe most of these transgressions are much ado about nothing, but I also know I'll never get agreement from those holding a grudge against this team and their fans. I can live with that. What is annoying is the whatever level of "moral superiority" displayed by the Patriot fans during the SB runs is being revisited on the Patriots and their fans by the moralists now calling for the Patriots collective heads on a platter.

If it was obnoxious before, coming from Pats fans, it is just as obnoxious now, even if its an understandable reaction.

 

[Yenrub]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I don't remember Giants fans playing the "everyone else does it" card either.That Giants violation came during Coughlin's 1st season as coach. I was thinking it wasn't the best way to start a new coaching regime

 

[GregR_2]

I'm curious what the group thinks about the following:

"I'll create some new phony issue out of thin air to try to deflect some responsibility from the Patriots"

So....any actual response to the questions I have posed?

Speaking only for myself, I couldn't understand the questions. I consider my reading comprehension to be at least adequate in most situations. And I read your post about four times because what you post is worth reading. But I still didn't understand.It almost sounded like you were asking/implying something like, "The Patriots didn't buy Walsh's silence (and Tucker's and every other former employee) and/or put out a hit on them. Isn't that evidence that this is probably no big deal?"

ETA: FWIW, I don't necessarily disagree that it's not a big deal.

As I read it, that seemed exactly what he was saying. And like fatness, I didn't buy that argument for a second.

 

[Donnie Brasco]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

This explains much of what goes on here and in the wider NFL fan's view. The Patriots were held up on a pedastal, and some of the fans got to be a bit over the top. This is the backlash.

I believe most of these transgressions are much ado about nothing, but I also know I'll never get agreement from those holding a grudge against this team and their fans. I can live with that. What is annoying is the whatever level of "moral superiority" displayed by the Patriot fans during the SB runs is being revisited on the Patriots and their fans by the moralists now calling for the Patriots collective heads on a platter.

If it was obnoxious before, coming from Pats fans, it is just as obnoxious now, even if its an understandable reaction.

Tho, I agree with both of you and what your are saying.. The two examples posted about the Giants and Redskins are rule violations, I don't see a huge advantage gained by either. And I see it as the players complaining about working over time. But in the case of the Patriots, I see a larger roster and spy gate as significant advantages which could pay huge dividends on the field. Which in turn make me feel cheated as a NFL fan.. That is my disgust, I pay a lot of money to watch the NFL live/at home etc.. I want an honest product for all the fans.. So the increased scrutiny is warranted

 

[GregR_2]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the go od of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

I think you nailed a lot of it on the head, Doug. Though I think some of it too at least on this board is the minuscule number of Patriots fans who openly admit they think what the Pats did is wrong vs justifying or marginalizing that it was wrong.To get back to Doug's point though, if anyone thinks the morally superior thing isn't a motivating factor, please see Dame, Notre. ND got ripped on by a large portion of the country when they released a coach (Willingham) from his contract before it ended. Why'd they get ripped on? Because what they did was illegal? Because it was unethical? No, it was just something ND had never done before though it's a routine practice everywhere else in the nation. People ripped because they are got tired of hearing about higher standards of academics and player conduct, about her history, and are annoyed by how wide of a fan base there is.

Imagine what the reaction would be if ND was caught at actually illegal things that schools like SMU, Alabama, Miami, etc, have been caught at. It would easily equal if not even exceed what we've seen happen with the Patriots, and would blow away the reaction we've seen for any other college that has been caught at violations. I think Doug is spot on with the role that reaction is at work here.

 

[twitch]

LOL...

You're not helping your cause..

So lets get this straight, you stated "you really believe these guys who really don't belong on IR are just peddling a bicycle?". I asked for a witness to collaborate your argument "That everyones doing it". I wanted proof to back up your argument and I get this...........

Are you seriously kidding me, guy? Anyone who thinks Belichick has actually LIED is speculating. Where's the actual evidence that he lied? The man said he misintrepreted the rule, and that he never once used the video footage on the actual day any of it was shot. Matt Walsh confirmed that FACT. You provide that information here, an actual nugget corroberating a LIE, and you'll shut us Pats fans up for good. Otherwise, spare everyone the pot/kettle act regarding who's speculating. Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!

Did my post say Billi is a lier?Let me ask you this, did the NFL think he gained an advantage?

FYI, all Matt Walsh confirmed was that they had been filming defensive calls for years.. He also stated that players were practicing while on IR.. That's it.

Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!! I'm the one who's keeping it clean. You're getting all homer emotional..

To answer your question, absolutely the NFL thought NE gained an advantage. They were fined and punished accordingly. And your FYI is WEAK. Walsh confirmed that that footage he recorded was never used on gameday. What, you didnt feel like mentioning that, or you simply werent aware?

You obviously have no idea what "clean" means. Carry on with your circular rant.

 

[Tau837]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

 

[Donnie Brasco]

LOL...

You're not helping your cause..

So lets get this straight, you stated "you really believe these guys who really don't belong on IR are just peddling a bicycle?". I asked for a witness to collaborate your argument "That everyones doing it". I wanted proof to back up your argument and I get this...........

Are you seriously kidding me, guy? Anyone who thinks Belichick has actually LIED is speculating. Where's the actual evidence that he lied? The man said he misintrepreted the rule, and that he never once used the video footage on the actual day any of it was shot. Matt Walsh confirmed that FACT. You provide that information here, an actual nugget corroberating a LIE, and you'll shut us Pats fans up for good. Otherwise, spare everyone the pot/kettle act regarding who's speculating. Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!

Did my post say Billi is a lier?Let me ask you this, did the NFL think he gained an advantage?

FYI, all Matt Walsh confirmed was that they had been filming defensive calls for years.. He also stated that players were practicing while on IR.. That's it.

Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!! I'm the one who's keeping it clean. You're getting all homer emotional..

2nd)

To answer your question, absolutely the NFL thought NE gained an advantage. They were fined and punished accordingly. And your FYI is WEAK. Walsh confirmed that that footage he recorded was never used on gameday. What, you didnt feel like mentioning that, or you simply werent aware?

You obviously have no idea what "clean" means. Carry on with your circular rant.

WOW, So lets avoid the topic at hand.. Usually I wouldn't play this childish game with you but your too easy... and I'm bored..

1st) I asked you to produce evidence or a witness that other teams practice IR'd players, and you spat out some nonsense about liers and Walsh.. Dodging the question are we?

2nd) I can give #&$@ less about what Walsh proved or disproved about spygate. (But I would be interested in a link to your source of info). The Patriots cheated, nothing you can type here will change that!!! Game over!!! If you can't see that the fact that the tapes he brought forward were recorded years ago, proves they were video taping defensive calls years ago. I guess I can break it down for you..

3rd) The only thing that has changed sense Walsh came forward, was the IR violations. Which have been backed by another witness..

 

[twitch]

LOL...

You're not helping your cause..

So lets get this straight, you stated "you really believe these guys who really don't belong on IR are just peddling a bicycle?". I asked for a witness to collaborate your argument "That everyones doing it". I wanted proof to back up your argument and I get this...........

Are you seriously kidding me, guy? Anyone who thinks Belichick has actually LIED is speculating. Where's the actual evidence that he lied? The man said he misintrepreted the rule, and that he never once used the video footage on the actual day any of it was shot. Matt Walsh confirmed that FACT. You provide that information here, an actual nugget corroberating a LIE, and you'll shut us Pats fans up for good. Otherwise, spare everyone the pot/kettle act regarding who's speculating. Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!

Did my post say Billi is a lier?Let me ask you this, did the NFL think he gained an advantage?

FYI, all Matt Walsh confirmed was that they had been filming defensive calls for years.. He also stated that players were practicing while on IR.. That's it.

Keep it clean, man. Keep it clean!! I'm the one who's keeping it clean. You're getting all homer emotional..

2nd)

To answer your question, absolutely the NFL thought NE gained an advantage. They were fined and punished accordingly. And your FYI is WEAK. Walsh confirmed that that footage he recorded was never used on gameday. What, you didnt feel like mentioning that, or you simply werent aware?

You obviously have no idea what "clean" means. Carry on with your circular rant.

WOW, So lets avoid the topic at hand.. Usually I wouldn't play this childish game with you but your too easy... and I'm bored..

1st) I asked you to produce evidence or a witness that other teams practice IR'd players, and you spat out some nonsense about liers and Walsh.. Dodging the question are we?

2nd) I can give #&$@ less about what Walsh proved or disproved about spygate. (But I would be interested in a link to your source of info). The Patriots cheated, nothing you can type here will change that!!! Game over!!! If you can't see that the fact that the tapes he brought forward were recorded years ago, proves they were video taping defensive calls years ago. I guess I can break it down for you..

3rd) The only thing that has changed sense Walsh came forward, was the IR violations. Which have been backed by another witness..

You win. have fun.

 

[Road Warriors]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

This explains much of what goes on here and in the wider NFL fan's view. The Patriots were held up on a pedastal, and some of the fans got to be a bit over the top. This is the backlash.

I believe most of these transgressions are much ado about nothing, but I also know I'll never get agreement from those holding a grudge against this team and their fans. I can live with that. What is annoying is the whatever level of "moral superiority" displayed by the Patriot fans during the SB runs is being revisited on the Patriots and their fans by the moralists now calling for the Patriots collective heads on a platter.

If it was obnoxious before, coming from Pats fans, it is just as obnoxious now, even if its an understandable reaction.

Tho, I agree with both of you and what your are saying.. The two examples posted about the Giants and Redskins are rule violations, I don't see a huge advantage gained by either. And I see it as the players complaining about working over time. But in the case of the Patriots, I see a larger roster and spy gate as significant advantages which could pay huge dividends on the field. Which in turn make me feel cheated as a NFL fan.. That is my disgust, I pay a lot of money to watch the NFL live/at home etc.. I want an honest product for all the fans.. So the increased scrutiny is warranted

It looks like you see what you want to see. All of these cases are rules violations. In fact, Coach Coughlin sound a whole lot like Coach Belichick in the Giants article...""We did not intentionally violate any rules." If these allegations came out against the Patriots right now, this board would be all up in arms about this, too. There is no issue too small for this board to cry "Foul!" when it comes to the Patriots. The Patriots are the current favorite target for many here. It'll shift over time. In any case, I'll just be getting ready for '08.

 

[Donnie Brasco]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

This explains much of what goes on here and in the wider NFL fan's view. The Patriots were held up on a pedastal, and some of the fans got to be a bit over the top. This is the backlash.

I believe most of these transgressions are much ado about nothing, but I also know I'll never get agreement from those holding a grudge against this team and their fans. I can live with that. What is annoying is the whatever level of "moral superiority" displayed by the Patriot fans during the SB runs is being revisited on the Patriots and their fans by the moralists now calling for the Patriots collective heads on a platter.

If it was obnoxious before, coming from Pats fans, it is just as obnoxious now, even if its an understandable reaction.

Tho, I agree with both of you and what your are saying.. The two examples posted about the Giants and Redskins are rule violations, I don't see a huge advantage gained by either. And I see it as the players complaining about working over time. But in the case of the Patriots, I see a larger roster and spy gate as significant advantages which could pay huge dividends on the field. Which in turn make me feel cheated as a NFL fan.. That is my disgust, I pay a lot of money to watch the NFL live/at home etc.. I want an honest product for all the fans.. So the increased scrutiny is warranted

It looks like you see what you want to see. All of these cases are rules violations. In fact, Coach Coughlin sound a whole lot like Coach Belichick in the Giants article...""We did not intentionally violate any rules." If these allegations came out against the Patriots right now, this board would be all up in arms about this, too. There is no issue too small for this board to cry "Foul!" when it comes to the Patriots. The Patriots are the current favorite target for many here. It'll shift over time. In any case, I'll just be getting ready for '08.

Well this is why you are wrong, and obviously don't get it. I'm not blindly seeing what I want to see.. I see the violations as violations, and some are just more hanis then others.. You obviously can't discern the difference.. The NFL who enforces these rules certainly saw the violation differently, look at the deference in punishment.. 3/4 of a million dollars and giving up a 1st round pick vs. forfeiting two days of their off-season program. Yepp, a couple days off... Do I really need to break it down any further???

You seem to think it is the world against the Patriots, it's really not.. I could have been any team, and I would have reacted the same. This is a crime against the fans, and the other franchises and they certainly have a right to be angry. If you don't like the fact that they are angry, well that's your own problem.. Trying to defend against something that has been proven really does no good.. No team is above the rules, nether are the Patriots.

 

[TheOriginalDoubledown]

Is a coach who teaches his players to hold, and teaches them ways to try to get away with it, as bad in your mind as someone who practices injured reserve players? I'm not talking about what kind of punishment they will get, or should get. I'm talking about whether you consider one to be more of a "cheater" than the other, and which one that is.

Not even close. One infraction is training someone to commit a minor in game in-fraction (which is not illegal to do - the teaching) and the other is a major infraction. Felony and misdemeanor.

As for calling holding a "minor in game in-fraction", I completely disagree. It's a relatively major infraction. Are you saying that illegally, repeatedly, stopping defensive players from moving provides less of an in game advantage than having a player on IR practice with the team? Please explain.

LOL, you're right it's a major infraction. I've seen many a player suspended for repeatedly holding. Unfortunately, it was their own coach's who benched them.

As well they should. Each time they get caught holding, it costs their team ten yards and a loss of down. That's one of the most substantial penalties given for an in game infraction, and it is repeatedly delivered to teams whose players hold because it has such an impact on the game. Coaches who try to get away with holding by teaching their players how to hide it from the refs are deliberately trying to gain an in game advantage while circumventing the rules of the NFL. Why don't you reserve the same dislike for these coaches? Why aren't you calling them cheaters?

When was this instituted?

 

[Pat Patriot]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

This explains much of what goes on here and in the wider NFL fan's view. The Patriots were held up on a pedastal, and some of the fans got to be a bit over the top. This is the backlash.

I believe most of these transgressions are much ado about nothing, but I also know I'll never get agreement from those holding a grudge against this team and their fans. I can live with that. What is annoying is the whatever level of "moral superiority" displayed by the Patriot fans during the SB runs is being revisited on the Patriots and their fans by the moralists now calling for the Patriots collective heads on a platter.

If it was obnoxious before, coming from Pats fans, it is just as obnoxious now, even if its an understandable reaction.

Tho, I agree with both of you and what your are saying.. The two examples posted about the Giants and Redskins are rule violations, I don't see a huge advantage gained by either. And I see it as the players complaining about working over time. But in the case of the Patriots, I see a larger roster and spy gate as significant advantages which could pay huge dividends on the field. Which in turn make me feel cheated as a NFL fan.. That is my disgust, I pay a lot of money to watch the NFL live/at home etc.. I want an honest product for all the fans.. So the increased scrutiny is warranted

It looks like you see what you want to see. All of these cases are rules violations. In fact, Coach Coughlin sound a whole lot like Coach Belichick in the Giants article...""We did not intentionally violate any rules." If these allegations came out against the Patriots right now, this board would be all up in arms about this, too. There is no issue too small for this board to cry "Foul!" when it comes to the Patriots. The Patriots are the current favorite target for many here. It'll shift over time. In any case, I'll just be getting ready for '08.

Well this is why you are wrong, and obviously don't get it. I'm not blindly seeing what I want to see.. I see the violations as violations, and some are just more hanis then others.. You obviously can't discern the difference.. The NFL who enforces these rules certainly saw the violation differently, look at the deference in punishment.. 3/4 of a million dollars and giving up a 1st round pick vs. forfeiting two days of their off-season program. Yepp, a couple days off... Do I really need to break it down any further???

You seem to think it is the world against the Patriots, it's really not.. I could have been any team, and I would have reacted the same. This is a crime against the fans, and the other franchises and they certainly have a right to be angry. If you don't like the fact that they are angry, well that's your own problem.. Trying to defend against something that has been proven really does no good.. No team is above the rules, nether are the Patriots.

So which violation is more heinous? Getting extra offseason practice time and meeting time with guys that are actually going to contribute to your season. Or having a guy who has been IRed already and cant play anymore that season participating in a practice?

 

[Donnie Brasco]

While we're on the topic of practice violations, looks like the Giants are cheaters too. And so are the Redskins.

I don't remember seeing the same kind of vitriol against these confirmed violations as there is against these accusations.

I agree with you completely that there is a double-standard regarding how people view Patriot violations and how people view other teams' violations. There are lots of reasons for that --- some legitimate (IMO) and others not --- but in my opinion the main reason the Pats are getting so much backlash is because, ever since February of 2002, the Pats have set themselves up as being morally better than every other team in the NFL.

The Pats don't win because they have more talent; they win because they play better as a team. They don't win because they're better athletes, they win because they're smarter and harder-working and more willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the team. When a team goes out of its way to break from the norm and introduce itself as a team --- and when its fans fall all over themselves praising this choice --- there is a clear implication of moral superiority. The Rams could have won that Super Bowl if only they weren't so concerned about putting personal glory above the good of the team. Those are moral issues in team sports culture. The Pats didn't just win. They won The Right Way, and that's what Pats fans have been emphasizing for the last five years.

The Pats take more grief about this than other teams for the same reason that a televangelist takes more grief than a rock star when he turns out to be a drug-using adulterer.

This explains much of what goes on here and in the wider NFL fan's view. The Patriots were held up on a pedastal, and some of the fans got to be a bit over the top. This is the backlash.

I believe most of these transgressions are much ado about nothing, but I also know I'll never get agreement from those holding a grudge against this team and their fans. I can live with that. What is annoying is the whatever level of "moral superiority" displayed by the Patriot fans during the SB runs is being revisited on the Patriots and their fans by the moralists now calling for the Patriots collective heads on a platter.

If it was obnoxious before, coming from Pats fans, it is just as obnoxious now, even if its an understandable reaction.

Tho, I agree with both of you and what your are saying.. The two examples posted about the Giants and Redskins are rule violations, I don't see a huge advantage gained by either. And I see it as the players complaining about working over time. But in the case of the Patriots, I see a larger roster and spy gate as significant advantages which could pay huge dividends on the field. Which in turn make me feel cheated as a NFL fan.. That is my disgust, I pay a lot of money to watch the NFL live/at home etc.. I want an honest product for all the fans.. So the increased scrutiny is warranted

It looks like you see what you want to see. All of these cases are rules violations. In fact, Coach Coughlin sound a whole lot like Coach Belichick in the Giants article...""We did not intentionally violate any rules." If these allegations came out against the Patriots right now, this board would be all up in arms about this, too. There is no issue too small for this board to cry "Foul!" when it comes to the Patriots. The Patriots are the current favorite target for many here. It'll shift over time. In any case, I'll just be getting ready for '08.

Well this is why you are wrong, and obviously don't get it. I'm not blindly seeing what I want to see.. I see the violations as violations, and some are just more hanis then others.. You obviously can't discern the difference.. The NFL who enforces these rules certainly saw the violation differently, look at the deference in punishment.. 3/4 of a million dollars and giving up a 1st round pick vs. forfeiting two days of their off-season program. Yepp, a couple days off... Do I really need to break it down any further???

You seem to think it is the world against the Patriots, it's really not.. I could have been any team, and I would have reacted the same. This is a crime against the fans, and the other franchises and they certainly have a right to be angry. If you don't like the fact that they are angry, well that's your own problem.. Trying to defend against something that has been proven really does no good.. No team is above the rules, nether are the Patriots.

So which violation is more heinous? Getting extra offseason practice time and meeting time with guys that are actually going to contribute to your season. Or having a guy who has been IRed already and cant play anymore that season participating in a practice?

I think the increased roster size is the more heinous.. But not by much.. One is more of a player union issue IMO.

 

[Pat Patriot]

Donnie,

I'm truly interested. What perceived advantage do you see that the Patriots team would gain by allowing some scout team player to practice even though he was on the IR?

 

[brednbuddah]

bl blah,

blah bla blah blah, blah b bl bla blah blah.

blah,

bl blah.

 

[Das Boot]

A mish mash of quick comments...

Anything the Pats did, or any other team does, that breaks the rules, is done with the intention of gaining a benefit. They would not risk the chance of discovery otherwise, no matter how small that chance. Nor would they go to the effort of breaking whatever rule is involved it if didn't offer a benefit in the team's opinion.
To add to Doug D's observations above, the other factor that has particularly raised everyone's aggravation and disgust with what the Pats have done is that they have been highly successful on the field. If all of these events had happened to any other team that was mediocre or worse, there would have not been nearly the firestorm. This isn't any sort of excuse though... there's a very legitimate question in most people's minds about what degree of success the Pats would have achieved without the cheating. There's no way of ever determining this, and opinions will vary wildly, but the bottom line is that the Pats did gain an advantage from their cheating - even if it was minuscule.
I actually have been a Pats fan for 20+ years... not as my primary team, but certainly a team I cared about and followed with much more interest than the rest of the league (had a friend who played for them back in the day). I felt betrayed when the allegations came out, and I was disgusted by watching many of the Pats fans (not all) try to defend the actions, and even worse justify them. If the Bengals or the Browns ever are guilty of this kind of crap, you won't see me defending them... I'll be in favor of cleaning house and rebuilding the team's reputation.
Last thought... everyone is entitled to, and will have, their own opinion. My opinion is that Belichick has clearly, beyond any shadow of a doubt, demonstrated that he will knowingly break rules - and lie about it - and take actions to avoid discovery. As a reasonable person, it's my conclusion that it's highly likely other rules have been broken that we don't know about, and will never hear about. I suspect a lot of other people feel the same way - it's a pretty logical conclusion. That's what kind of hit a person's (and team's) reputation takes after cheating.The Pats will eventually put this behind them - players turn over, mgmt changes, eventually ownership changes.

I'd respect the Pats a hell of a lot more now, and start the forgiving process sooner, if they'd deal NOW with the person that appears to be responsible, perhaps solely so, for placing a large stain on the team's legacy. Failure to do so - and I'm 99% sure they won't deal with Belichick - is essentially defending and approving of his actions.

 

[bostonfred]

So...after several days and several more pages...that Pats defenders are still holding on to "everyone else is doing it"...but are adding things like "its the same as teaching holding or other in game things".Rather than just admitting that once again (if this is true) that their team screwed up and did something against the rules and was busted.

As the guy talking about "holding", I don't think that's a fair representation of what I've said. I've freely admitted that the team screwed up, and did something against the rules, and got busted. I'm just trying to find out how big a deal this is. My comparison to an in game activity (deliberate holding while trying to hide it from the officials) is a response to someone else (GregR) who said, this isn't like holding. I asked for clarification, and it seems like it's been fairly difficult for people to articulate. It doesn't seem like you're interested in a serious conversation on the topic, but if you are, I welcome it.

Unfortunately, "HOLDING" will always be a judgment call made by an official on the field. That fact alone makes it completely different form any violation that the Pats have been deemed as doing. There are no penalties that can be enforced for knowing the defensive calls via a video camera, or for having an extra player on the roster. The biggest difference..Second, There is no rule against teaching holding techniques, probably because "Holding" is a judgment call made by an official. But there are rules stating that the Patriots crossed the line.Third, the offenses the Patriots have been caught doing are premeditated and gave them an immediate advantage, but they don't have to assume an immediate risk. Deliberately holding "while trying to hide it from the officials" can produce a nice advantage, during the game. In the end you're putting your team at an immediate risk of being punished. And possibly costing you the game or score etc.. I know you're smart enough to see the deference in the immediate risk when holding, vs. gaining an advantage with no, to very little risk. So I'll stop.Hell, I would pay the price the Pats paid for the advantage they received.. Very little risk IMO..

This is exactly the kind of post I was looking for. I think the judgement call nature of holding is a valid difference between the two. On the one hand, that's an advantage for the team that is holding, because they're less likely to get caught. On the other hand, that's proof of the unambiguously deliberate nature of the IR stashing/practicing. I disagree that there are no penalties for "knowing the defensive calls via a video camera," and I want to be clear that the Patriots are not accused of using video to learn the calls in the middle of the game. They were effectively being punished for overexuberant advanced scouting. That's not to say they didn't gain any advantage, but it's nowhere near the advantage people imply when they talk about "knowing the defensive calls". The penalty for knowing the calls was that the team was hit with the stiffest penalty of its kind in the history of the NFL, and lambasted by the media for a full year. It cost the team a first round pick and a lot of money, among other things. There might not be an explicitly identified penalty in the rule books, but I would argue that that is worse for the Patriots. You mention that there's an advantage in that there's an immediate risk when holding, but none for IR stashing or videotaping. I would argue that that is a huge advantage for the holders of the world, who can deliberately risk a holding call or a dangerous chop/cut block on third down and know that the worst thing that can happen is a ten yard penalty. If Belichick were weighing the cost to his team and reputation, knowing that the NFL would come down with the loss of a first down pick and the media would blast him for the rest of his career, I don't know if he would have taken the same actions. I still don't understand why people are clinging to the argument that it's not illegal to teach their players to hold. It's still illegal to hold. Ordering your team to do illegal things is not inherently more ethical than doing illegal things. If anything, the coach who teaches his team how to get away with breaking the rules is more blatantly breaking the rules. I'm not convinced that one is substantially worse than the other, but I appreciate that there is room for debate on some of the issues above. I'd be interested in understanding why people consider some of them to be more important than others.

 

[bostonfred]

So...after several days and several more pages...that Pats defenders are still holding on to "everyone else is doing it"...but are adding things like "its the same as teaching holding or other in game things".Rather than just admitting that once again (if this is true) that their team screwed up and did something against the rules and was busted.

As the guy talking about "holding", I don't think that's a fair representation of what I've said. I've freely admitted that the team screwed up, and did something against the rules, and got busted. I'm just trying to find out how big a deal this is. My comparison to an in game activity (deliberate holding while trying to hide it from the officials) is a response to someone else (GregR) who said, this isn't like holding. I asked for clarification, and it seems like it's been fairly difficult for people to articulate. It doesn't seem like you're interested in a serious conversation on the topic, but if you are, I welcome it.

The way you worded your response, you invited the interpretation that you weren't agreeing there was a difference and that you required someone to articulate it for you. Given the tone of these threads and how many times the obvious has been questioned to try to create wiggle room, I'd say that is the interpretation you should have expected your words to have.So you got a lot of eye rolling because I don't think many people are going to believe a mature adult doesn't see a difference. It would be like someone telling me they can't tell a difference between art and pornography. I can buy that they can't define it clearly, but that they don't see any difference is hard to believe. If your goal was really a serious discussion, then saying something like, "I agree they aren't the same thing, but am having trouble articulating why. Can anyone put it into words?" would have accomplished that. With leaving yourself as open as you did, I'd say you got the reply you should have expected.

I don't think this is the same as the art vs. pornography discussion. I understand that you feel that way. But I honestly don't. I've heard a lot of teeth gnashing over the issue over the last nine months, but now that we understand what Spygate really was, I guess I don't have a huge problem with it. It was wrong to do it. It was stupid, it was arrogant, and it was against the rules. But as far as I can understand it, the backlash doesn't really fit the crime. Not the punishment, which I understand, even though I would still argue that it was a mistake for Goodell to issue the worst punishment in NFL history for this. It's the backlash that I don't understand. I think Doug made a very good point about the perception that the Patriots were supposed to be this goody two shoes team that did everything the right way. And I understand that they're doing well right now, which might be why the Patriots are still being criticized nine months later while the Jimmy Johnson Cowboys remain unscathed. If that's the real reason for the backlash, I'm fine with it, but I don't think it puts you on some higher moral pedastal or makes me something less than a mature adult.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I'm curious what the group thinks about the following:

"I'll create some new phony issue out of thin air to try to deflect some responsibility from the Patriots"

So....any actual response to the questions I have posed?

Speaking only for myself, I couldn't understand the questions. I consider my reading comprehension to be at least adequate in most situations. And I read your post about four times because what you post is worth reading. But I still didn't understand.It almost sounded like you were asking/implying something like, "The Patriots didn't buy Walsh's silence (and Tucker's and every other former employee) and/or put out a hit on them. Isn't that evidence that this is probably no big deal?"

ETA: FWIW, I don't necessarily disagree that it's not a big deal.

Hi Doug. My questions were (obviously?) at least partly rhetorical, but I'll elaborate since you asked.But first to address a couple of other comments from the thread (the first was yours; the second a later poster).

1. Myth: Patriots fans had a "we're better than you are" attitude about "winning the right way" and this is why many take glee in seeing them knocked down.

This has been discussed previously, but the two aspects of this I think are important are (1) "winning the right way" was not a tribute to possessing a higher morality than other teams, it was a "team first" attitude that discouraged Terrell Owens like behavior. (2) if a reality was created where this perception was created, it was a media construct perverting Patriot pride.

2. Myth: Patriots fans think the world is against them.

Personally anyway, my exhasperation comes from quite a different dynamic which is a small very vocal minority of fans who INVARIABLY claim that they speak for the "silent majority" despite their transparent allegiances to other teams and/or issues with BB as a person. It is very instructional to observe the way arguments about the severity of Patriots rule-breaking eventually lead to the "but BB is a bad person" argument.

There are a variety of other fictions that are being promulgated, but a "personal favorite" is the repeated opinion stated here along the lines of "Patriots fans never accept guilt / always try to minimize or deflect". The posting history in the "spygate era" paints an entirely different picture, which is one of responding to the vocal minority of haters. To be redundant, the posting history speaks for itself.

Assuming all the advanced process controls like using security, etc., to propogate the illegal practices, is it odd that BB opened himself up for such scrutiny by having no process control in place to effectively deal with the Matt Walsh's and Tucker's of the world?

What does this say about the "control" that coaches have over players that BB would have reasonable confidence that the risk of discovery would be mitigated through control over what an outsider might call an essentially uncontrollable situation?

Where did Belichick come up with these ideas? Why has the competition committee and the commisioner's office been so unwilling or unable to deal with such rampant immoral, integrity-lacking behavior? Why do 32 owners who deal with 7 billion in revenue choose to allow such renegade behavior to exist?

And what is the relationship between those types of questions and the judgements that are passed here?

Doug, my questions go to the ridiculousness of the "lone gunman" theorists that BB is an isolated protagonist. I find it hard to believe that an organization would expose itself to the risk of punishment unless it had a concrete understanding of the severity of any such punishment. This is simply a "good business" argument. Secondly, BB has a coaching lineage that directly or indirectly touches Paul Brown, Marshabroda (sp?), Shula, Coughlin, Parcells, etc. and there is a perception floating around out there that tactics including videotape scouting and IR practicing are isolated / unprecedented / unparalleled is dubious, particularly when former coaches and players freely admit as such.Critics are fond of pointing out that Patriots fans are always deflecting and never just taking their medicine. The problem is the confession that is sought is not just of cheating, but of cheating and bad moral character and deprivation of all prior accomplishments and acceptance of an asterisk. To this request for confession Patriots fans happily flip the bird.

 

[sho nuff]

Hi Doug. My questions were (obviously?) at least partly rhetorical, but I'll elaborate since you asked.But first to address a couple of other comments from the thread (the first was yours; the second a later poster).1. Myth: Patriots fans had a "we're better than you are" attitude about "winning the right way" and this is why many take glee in seeing them knocked down. This has been discussed previously, but the two aspects of this I think are important are (1) "winning the right way" was not a tribute to possessing a higher morality than other teams, it was a "team first" attitude that discouraged Terrell Owens like behavior. (2) if a reality was created where this perception was created, it was a media construct perverting Patriot pride.2. Myth: Patriots fans think the world is against them.Personally anyway, my exhasperation comes from quite a different dynamic which is a small very vocal minority of fans who INVARIABLY claim that they speak for the "silent majority" despite their transparent allegiances to other teams and/or issues with BB as a person. It is very instructional to observe the way arguments about the severity of Patriots rule-breaking eventually lead to the "but BB is a bad person" argument.There are a variety of other fictions that are being promulgated, but a "personal favorite" is the repeated opinion stated here along the lines of "Patriots fans never accept guilt / always try to minimize or deflect". The posting history in the "spygate era" paints an entirely different picture, which is one of responding to the vocal minority of haters. To be redundant, the posting history speaks for itself.

Talk about myths.I don't think anyone has claimed that no patriot fans ever accept guilt.But many do not...and continue to deflect rather than just admitting what went on.And the constant cry is that "everyone else is doing it". Its a sad mentality.And to continue calling anyone who says anything negative about the Pats to be haters is completely laughable.

Doug, my questions go to the ridiculousness of the "lone gunman" theorists that BB is an isolated protagonist. I find it hard to believe that an organization would expose itself to the risk of punishment unless it had a concrete understanding of the severity of any such punishment. This is simply a "good business" argument. Secondly, BB has a coaching lineage that directly or indirectly touches Paul Brown, Marshabroda (sp?), Shula, Coughlin, Parcells, etc. and there is a perception floating around out there that tactics including videotape scouting and IR practicing are isolated / unprecedented / unparalleled is dubious, particularly when former coaches and players freely admit as such.Critics are fond of pointing out that Patriots fans are always deflecting and never just taking their medicine. The problem is the confession that is sought is not just of cheating, but of cheating and bad moral character and deprivation of all prior accomplishments and acceptance of an asterisk. To this request for confession Patriots fans happily flip the bird.

So...he knew the severity of such punishment...yet did it anyway...and still we have some trying to claim that he did not really know and that it did not give them much of an advantage.So...if you find it hard to believe that they did not know what could happen...yet they did it anyway, you would have to admit their tactics must have given them some advantage to keep risking that punishment for little to no gain.Again...do you know when the video tape rule was put in place (this is a serious question)?Why is that relevant? Because if some of these people who have supposedly admitted to videotaping in the manner in which the Pats did (which I still have not seen someone admit to doing)...but it was not yet illegal...it is pretty much irrelevant what they did at the time.And you know of former coaches or players admitting they had guys practice while on the IR? Really? Care to point those out?Does that somehow make it right for NE to be doing it?And no...its not just a confession of bad moral character...its BB actually stopping the "i misinterpreted the rules" crap and just man up.The only small minority that you might be right on is that it is only a small minority that want them to accept any asterisk.Plenty of Pats fans have flipped the bird to admitting that their team cheated and continue to make excuses about it.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Doug, my questions go to the ridiculousness of the "lone gunman" theorists that BB is an isolated protagonist. I find it hard to believe that an organization would expose itself to the risk of punishment unless it had a concrete understanding of the severity of any such punishment. This is simply a "good business" argument. Secondly, BB has a coaching lineage that directly or indirectly touches Paul Brown, Marshabroda (sp?), Shula, Coughlin, Parcells, etc. and there is a perception floating around out there that tactics including videotape scouting and IR practicing are isolated / unprecedented / unparalleled is dubious, particularly when former coaches and players freely admit as such.Critics are fond of pointing out that Patriots fans are always deflecting and never just taking their medicine. The problem is the confession that is sought is not just of cheating, but of cheating and bad moral character and deprivation of all prior accomplishments and acceptance of an asterisk. To this request for confession Patriots fans happily flip the bird.

When any of the coaches in BB lineage get caught videotape stealing or practicing players on IR they should be penalized accordingly. But frankly, the NFL knew, or at least was made aware of videotape signal stealing and sent a letter out to everyone. Don't you think at that point, maybe, BB should have changed his practice. I'd be willing to give the guy a free pass on anything he did prior to a letter warning teams not to videotape signals (even the NFL was going to do that). Once that letter goes out, you're on notice, don't do it. As far as practicing players on IR. Ross Tucker already said, other teams he's been on didn't do it. So this isn't some league-wide practice to bend the rules. It's a clear violation. You know you're in the wrong when you have security look-outs.

 

[Kit Fisto]

Oh, the naiveté in this thread...

 

[49erBamBam52]

And this is a big deal why?

mods, please. end this crap.

How are the mods supposed to end New Englands cheating?

wake up son, they all cheat...

All I'm hearing is the Patriots. Is there something on ESPN about another team cheating? Hell, if this was college NE would get the death penalty.

dude, it's just like drinking and driving. everybody does it, NE just got caught.

Why do NE fans have such an aversion to integrity?

So a player gets injured early in the year and you cant afford to be short a player because the roster limits are so tight so you IR him. By week 10 this player is completely healthy but you have IRed him so he cant play in any games. Why should he have to lose a whole year of development? Its a stupid rule.If you are worried about players being put on IR that arent injured, then hire a League doctor (hell, maybe they already have one) and have each player examined before they are put on the IR.

Its a dumb and insignificant rule. Many of you are really making a big deal about stuff that doesnt affect the game on the field.

Why? Because every other team has to abide by that rule. Why do the Patriots players get an extra year of development? What makes them so special that they can pick and choose which rules they want to follow?

Boy, it must be tough for all of you going through life as such rule followers. I bet none of you speed either. ITS A DUMB RULE!! Players in the NFL, especially marginal ones, have a very short shelf life. Why penalize the player?If the player was legitimately put on the IR but then rehabs back to full strength by the end of the year, why shouldnt the player be able to practice?

I cant even tell you how many "rules" I break on a daily basis. I actually think I jaywalked yesterday. I also went straight in a turning only lane. Some of you rule followers should live a little.

Many of you are SO obsessed with what happens off the field. Football is played ON the field. The best team is determined on a weekly basis ON the field.

If the Patriots IR Roosevelt Colvin and he recovers and they slip him into Pierre Woods uniform and put him in a game, now THAT would be cheating.

i almost died yesterday when one of you "rule breakers" thought he didnt have to use his turn signal on the freeway when changing lanes...

Rules are there for a reason... ALL OF THEM.

Rules make the playing field fair whether you are on the road or the gridiron. Without rules there would be utter chaos!

Hey while your at it Mr. Rulebreaker, why do you even follow those little white lines on the road, you are too good for them anyway!!!

BAM

 

[Hairy Snowman]

Doug, my questions go to the ridiculousness of the "lone gunman" theorists that BB is an isolated protagonist. I find it hard to believe that an organization would expose itself to the risk of punishment unless it had a concrete understanding of the severity of any such punishment. This is simply a "good business" argument. Secondly, BB has a coaching lineage that directly or indirectly touches Paul Brown, Marshabroda (sp?), Shula, Coughlin, Parcells, etc. and there is a perception floating around out there that tactics including videotape scouting and IR practicing are isolated / unprecedented / unparalleled is dubious, particularly when former coaches and players freely admit as such.Critics are fond of pointing out that Patriots fans are always deflecting and never just taking their medicine. The problem is the confession that is sought is not just of cheating, but of cheating and bad moral character and deprivation of all prior accomplishments and acceptance of an asterisk. To this request for confession Patriots fans happily flip the bird.

When any of the coaches in BB lineage get caught videotape stealing or practicing players on IR they should be penalized accordingly. But frankly, the NFL knew, or at least was made aware of videotape signal stealing and sent a letter out to everyone. Don't you think at that point, maybe, BB should have changed his practice. I'd be willing to give the guy a free pass on anything he did prior to a letter warning teams not to videotape signals (even the NFL was going to do that). Once that letter goes out, you're on notice, don't do it. As far as practicing players on IR. Ross Tucker already said, other teams he's been on didn't do it. So this isn't some league-wide practice to bend the rules. It's a clear violation. You know you're in the wrong when you have security look-outs.