Brewer Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 nope. sorry, you are wrong. this is not a 'proven fact'.what is a proven fact is that the Patriots violated an NFL rule of having a camera on the sideline and they were fined for it. get your facts straight please. If you break the rules of competition, intentionally, you haven't cheated? What do you kids call it these days then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 If you break the rules of competition, intentionally, you haven't cheated? What do you kids call it these days then? Probably opening antoher can of worms, but what the hell When you break the rules you get punished....When a DB interfares with a WR he is breaking the rules, technially this is cheating so what happens the team gets put at a disadvantage because of it. Now everyone who thinks that BB should have been suspended instead of losing a draft pick think of this. Say he is suspended 5 games, they will not lose all 5 and the disadvantage will not a very large one. BB will still be in contact with the team and he will still be involved in gameplaning. Now losing the draft pick hurts this team for a long time. Here are all of BB's first round picks since he became head coach of NE: Brandon Meriweather Laurence Maroney Logan Mankins Vince Wilfork Benjamin Watson Ty Warren Daniel Graham Richard Seymour (no first round pick in 2000) Now consider a player of these calliber is never going to make it on to the pats team....that hurts. It puts them at a disadvantage the same as a team gets penalized if the DB interfares with a pass. So all you haters I can not wait till sunday when you complain how Champ Bailey is a cheater because of pass interfarence Let the name calling begin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 The New England Patriots are the only team in the NFL that are proven cheaters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 I feel like I heard that before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 (edited) The New York Jets are currently 0-1 against teams that have been proven to be cheating during the contest, and 0-0 against the rest of the league. Edited September 14, 2007 by Vet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 SHUT UP VET!!!! If you can not bring something new to the table or remotely intelligent please stop talking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 SHUT UP VET!!!! If you can not bring something new to the table or remotely intelligent please stop talking Sorry. I didn't realize cheaters were so easily offended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 So far this season, the New England Patriots are 1-0 in games where they have cheated, and 0-0 in all other games. I wonder what Bill Bellichick's career record is in games where he didn't cheat as opposed to games in which he did cheat. I guess we'll never know the answer to that question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 Sorry. I didn't realize cheaters were so easily offended. I do not play in the NFL My post is saying they took their medicine and I guess it would be useless for me to repeat to you for the hundreth time today that the camera was taken 8 minutes into the game. THEY DESERVED THE PUNISHMENT I AM JUST BRINGING A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION NOT THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 SHUT UP VET!!!! If you can not bring something new to the table or remotely intelligent please stop talking Read Panther Dave's post in my sig line below. If you don't like what others have to say, then get out of the post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 SHUT UP VET!!!! If you can not bring something new to the table or remotely intelligent please stop talking If you can't take the heat, perhaps you need to find a different forum. Or a different team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 (edited) Read Panther Dave's post in my sig line below. If you don't like what others have to say, then get out of the post. I am not defending the Pats all I have said was the draft pick was a worst punishment then BB getting suspended then Vet just Ctrl + V and reply because he saw a post that said Pats in it Edited September 14, 2007 by SMF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MORNINWOOD Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 I still think they should have to forfit the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilwiggum Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 I still think they should have to forfit the game. Mornin - I think if the tape were taken later in the game that may be an appropriate punishment, but 8 minutes in? Also making the PATS forfeit opens a whole new can of worms for the league. If a player is caught on roids do you forfeit all the games he played in? I think Goodell laid down an appropriate sentence. If a suspension had also been granted I could have taken that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 Mornin - I think if the tape were taken later in the game that may be an appropriate punishment, but 8 minutes in? Also making the PATS forfeit opens a whole new can of worms for the league. If a player is caught on roids do you forfeit all the games he played in? I think Goodell laid down an appropriate sentence. If a suspension had also been granted I could have taken that as well. Only if you prove that the team or organization was complicit in the useage of the juice. That is an individual act where his absence punishes the team anyway upon his suspention. It also, in theory, only benefits the performance of ONE player, not all 22! This was an entire team participating and/or benefitting from the CHEATING! The penalty is a joke. One draft pick? GMAFB! The money is loose change to these guys. They got off light! The Pats in the eyes of almost everyone that REALLY UNDERSTANDS the ramifications of what they did and apparently have been doing over an undetermined but extensive time frame now look at your franchise as a joke. A bunch of cheaters that were incapable of leaving their game playing, preparation, strategy and talent to determine the outcome of football games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pig devilz Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 aside from putting Belichick in front of a firing squad, which i think many of you would pay to see, taking draft picks away is, imo, the harshes penalty. it will hurt the franchise for years to come. (some might argue its to harsh or unfair, i wont) lets take a look.... $500K~BB could make that doing one commercial. how 'bout a Joseph Aboud spot?...ha! $250K~ BK, thats a high school graduation present for his grandkid...do you know what he is building next to Gillette Stadium? forfeit the game~ i would take this penalty in a heart beat and consider it a slap on the wrist!! a one time, one game spanking. yeh, it could have an effect on home field come playoff time, but really what it would do is give the Jets a 5-11 record instead of a 4-12 record... take away a first round draft pick~ this hurts! it could figure out to be a penalty for 6 years or more!! imagine if it were Seymour.....and since the Patriots had 2 first rounders, they could have traded one away and gotten who knows. arguably a pretty f'n good player. this hurts! think it through, all you Anti-Homers who want blood, before spewing your hate. this penalty of draft picks could actually benefit your Homer team in next years draft and in years to come.... ps.....if i lose in my FF leauges this week, i'm blaming you guys! i havent been giving my teams enough love cuz a this..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 Ok. I'm a Pats homer. Never been called a blind homer here before, so hopefully people will actually read this response for what it is. I have questions, but different questions than I've seen addressed anywhere so far. The Pats violated a league rule. They cheated. They got caught. They have been punished. I fully think they deserve everything they got. Do wrong, get punished. I have no problem with how the league responded. My question is this. In doing a little research I came across a quote a few years back from Mike Shanahan (I know, another guy many people don't like, but a fairly succesful coach himself) from an article with SI. I'll post the link, but I'll also cut and paste the important quote: SI Article "Our guy keeps a pair of binoculars on their signal-callers every game," says Broncos coach Mike Shanahan. "With any luck, we have their defensive signals figured out by halftime. Sometimes, by the end of the first quarter." So again, my actual question is this. The Broncos are allowed to have a guy with binoculars to figure out the other team's defensive signals. In guessing, but I'm sure they jot down the signals, decipher them, and pass them on to the team to make halftime adjustments. The Patriots got caught using a camera to film the signals, and again I'm guessing, but the idea must be to look at them, analyze them, and at some point as soon as possible, get them to the coaching staff to make adjustments. If the end result is exactly the same; one coaching staff having the signals of another teams defensive unit, why is doing it with binoculars ok, but with, say, binoculars with a digital card that takes movie clips, not ok? Shouldn't the rules be the same for one as it is for the other? Isn't the idea to limit the team's ability to know what the other team is going to do before they do it? Again, I'm not defending the Pats in any way. But I look at it kind of like a kid who did something wrong, but didn't get hurt, so he doesn't think it's wrong. Mom tells Johnny not to ride his bike down the street without mom or dad because it's too dangerous. Johnny goes for a ride down the street and comes back unharmed. Mom finds out and grounds Johnny because she had told him not to do that. Johnny says "What's the difference if I go by myself or with you?" Mom says, becasue it's dangerous and I said so. I think the arrogant Bellicheck figured, what's the difference between getting the signals by binoculars and getting them by video? He was wrong, the league has a rule. But why, specifically, is it not ok to use video, but it's ok to use binoculars? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 Ok. I'm a Pats homer. Never been called a blind homer here before, so hopefully people will actually read this response for what it is. I have questions, but different questions than I've seen addressed anywhere so far. The Pats violated a league rule. They cheated. They got caught. They have been punished. I fully think they deserve everything they got. Do wrong, get punished. I have no problem with how the league responded. My question is this. In doing a little research I came across a quote a few years back from Mike Shanahan (I know, another guy many people don't like, but a fairly succesful coach himself) from an article with SI. I'll post the link, but I'll also cut and paste the important quote: SI Article "Our guy keeps a pair of binoculars on their signal-callers every game," says Broncos coach Mike Shanahan. "With any luck, we have their defensive signals figured out by halftime. Sometimes, by the end of the first quarter." So again, my actual question is this. The Broncos are allowed to have a guy with binoculars to figure out the other team's defensive signals. In guessing, but I'm sure they jot down the signals, decipher them, and pass them on to the team to make halftime adjustments. The Patriots got caught using a camera to film the signals, and again I'm guessing, but the idea must be to look at them, analyze them, and at some point as soon as possible, get them to the coaching staff to make adjustments. If the end result is exactly the same; one coaching staff having the signals of another teams defensive unit, why is doing it with binoculars ok, but with, say, binoculars with a digital card that takes movie clips, not ok? Shouldn't the rules be the same for one as it is for the other? Isn't the idea to limit the team's ability to know what the other team is going to do before they do it? Again, I'm not defending the Pats in any way. But I look at it kind of like a kid who did something wrong, but didn't get hurt, so he doesn't think it's wrong. Mom tells Johnny not to ride his bike down the street without mom or dad because it's too dangerous. Johnny goes for a ride down the street and comes back unharmed. Mom finds out and grounds Johnny because she had told him not to do that. Johnny says "What's the difference if I go by myself or with you?" Mom says, becasue it's dangerous and I said so. I think the arrogant Bellicheck figured, what's the difference between getting the signals by binoculars and getting them by video? He was wrong, the league has a rule. But why, specifically, is it not ok to use video, but it's ok to use binoculars? The difference is there is a specific rules stating that using a recording device is not allowed and there was an emphasis on this rule over the off season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 The difference is there is a specific rules stating that using a recording device is not allowed and there was an emphasis on this rule over the off season. BINGO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 The difference is there is a specific rules stating that using a recording device is not allowed and there was an emphasis on this rule over the off season. I understand that. The question is why? If the league had a rule that said you couldn't wear white gloves, but you could wear balack, wouldn't some people question why? I'm just asking why it is you can't use video, but can use visual? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 I understand that. The question is why? If the league had a rule that said you couldn't wear white gloves, but you could wear balack, wouldn't some people question why? I'm just asking why it is you can't use video, but can use visual? I would have to say the best response is to keep technology for overtaking the game. Personally I do not see to much of a difference but every team was warned and BB was dumb enough to continue to do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 I would have to say the best response is to keep technology for overtaking the game. Personally I do not see to much of a difference but every team was warned and BB was dumb enough to continue to do it Yes, again, I understand the concept of breaking the rules. He should be punished because he knew the rule and broke it. Just asking if anyone has the explanation of why the rule exists? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMF Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 (edited) I would have to say the best response is to keep technology from overtaking the game. Personally I do not see to much of a difference but every team was warned and BB was dumb enough to continue to do it Edited September 15, 2007 by SMF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.