Cheatriots At It Again....

FenwayFaithful · #1 01-25-2015, 09:28 PM

.

itjclarke · #2 01-25-2015, 10:07 PM

Wow, I've been busy writing my own novel, so didn't see yours until after.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

"But what has the NFL really found? As one league source has explained it to PFT, the football intercepted by Colts linebacker D�Qwell Jackson was roughly two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum. The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI."

Read that same column... my guess is no one will ever know what the other balls were because the refs don't really give a crap, and probably just topped them back up to spec. I doubt they take time to log the pressures.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

So looks like Chris Mortensen's report may be wrong, just like the report about Jackson being one who noticed the ball was deflated. Sports journalism in this country is at an all-time low.

EXACTLY!! But he sure as hell did a good job creating a story and driving ratings for the foreseeable future, so am sure he'll be commended.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

Funny how you mention teams that were successful and "None of those teams received the negative reaction of the Pats. It's the cheating, not the winning." Let's see here:

70's Steelers - Rampant steroid use

Broncos - Circumventing the salary cap during the late Elway years when they won 2 SBs; taping part of a 49ers walk-through practice in London in 2010

Late 90's 49ers - Circumventing the salary cap

90's Cowboys - Jimmy Johnson has admitted that videotaping coaches' signals was common practice and something he did although he felt it didn't help him at all.

Steelers - Cowher: �Stealing someone�s signals was a part of the game and everybody attempted to do that. We had people that always tried to steal signals,� said Cowher, whose 2004 team won 16 consecutive games before losing to the Patriots in the AFC title game. �What happened when we lost that game is they outplayed us. It had nothing to do with stealing signals or cheating or anything else.�
http://espn.go.com/blog/pittsburgh-s...act-of-spygate

I could list many more things, but I think that'll do.

Yes, yes, and yes.. all examples of things teams are willing to do. I'm the first to admit the Niners did some dirty stuff.. and separately, a whole hell of a lot of coke. Fans get such a small portal into the real world of pro football, so when they get little bits and pieces (often without full context) here and there, it looks terrible. However, most involved are pulling similar tricks. Re- Spygate, I had more issue because they were filming walk throughs/practices that were supposed to be closed, right? That said, I never thought they were the only ones doing this. I had also singled the Saints out for their Bountygate.. but bounties have been around forever, and am sure many teams and coaches have done this.

Bounties to hurt players are probably a little more serious than deflated balls... or is it just me that feels this way?

FenwayFaithful · #3 01-25-2015, 10:18 PM

.

itjclarke · #4 01-25-2015, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

That was NEVER proven to be true. A huge misconception by people out there.

Fine with me, I'll take your word for it. I didn't follow it really closely at the time, which is precisely the issue I take with irresponsible reporting. Most people don't follow closely, so once something blows up like this, it's irreversible in the court of public opinion. This is beyond wrong. I wish there was a way to hold these reporters and networks more accountable.

I think reputable news agencies are probably generally better at fact checking, etc, but ESPN, and maybe some other networks I won't mention for fear of a firestorm, seem intent only on breaking stories first, then inflating importance of their stories ("the Decision", "---- gate", etc) and in turn increasing web hits, ratings.

itjclarke · #5 01-25-2015, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

Edit: I'll add that if you want to call the Patriots cheaters, fine. They did violate the rules once. Just be consistent and label every team that has ever violated rules cheaters too. That's all I ask. Teams have done far worse things than film something that's out in the wide open for anyone in the stadium to see.

You're preaching to the choir. I outed my own team (Niners) in my post.

freakhappy · #6 01-25-2015, 11:30 PM

We should start a "sour grapes" thread and let everyone that has true hatred (looking at you Phil) for a team or individual player(s), rip them through and through. Maybe it would make them feel better? Maybe their hatred would expire? Doubtful, but at least their partial thoughts could be outed in a thread that would welcome it.

Well, I think it was David that was looking for the "Patriot apologists" and it seems he got more than that

itjclarke · #7 01-25-2015, 11:59 PM

Mike, I agree that there do seem to be a lot of sour grapes toward these guys, and I think "haters" has been aptly used here. I don't have much invested in this here.. but think a lot of people (well beyond this board) want to see them fail by any/all means, and they smell blood in the water in right now.

Scott, would be nice if this were totally objective, though I don't think it's necessary for something as trivial as sports discussion, and I don't think it has been here. The vehement (not yours) reads loud and clear to me, and I think plenty of people outside Boston feel some passion toward the Pats (mostly bad). This is similar to what people felt about the Yanks, the Bulls, the Lakers, the Niners, etc.. and if your Hawks win another, will be more commonly felt toward them. Seems pretty natural in sports.

Runscott · #8 01-25-2015, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

So often? Please tell me what you're referring to besides the Spygate issue.

You conveniently skipped the main point of my response, which is that nobody "hates' the Patriots - No one outside of Boston gives a shlt about them any more than any other team. We are discussing a current 'issue' - that's all. You are making it out as if discussing and giving opinions is not allowed until after the investigation. You're forgetting that you are participating in a DISCUSSION FORUM.

FenwayFaithful · #9 01-26-2015, 12:02 AM

.

rats60 · #10 01-26-2015, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

So often? Please tell me what you're referring to besides the Spygate issue.

They were filming something out in the wide open for anyone to see. Every person in the stadium could see those signals being given by the coach. The severe penalty wasn't because of the infraction itself. It was because they continued to do it after a memo went out to all teams by the league in 2006 telling them to stop filming coaches' signals. They were wrong for that and were punished accordingly. They won those SBs because they had dominant defenses, a HOF coach, and a HOF QB. You can't get a competitive advantage when other teams are doing what you're doing but just in a slightly less convenient way (have a scout in the stands or press box taking notes with pen and paper of the coaches' signals, which once again, are available to anyone in the stadium). There's a reason why the league passed a rule that allowed defensive players to have audio communication with their coaches via their helmets. Stealing signals was part of the game (and probably still is to a degree to this day), as has been acknowledged by many NFL coaches (see below for a couple examples).

Funny how you mention teams that were successful and "None of those teams received the negative reaction of the Pats. It's the cheating, not the winning." Let's see here:

70's Steelers - Rampant steroid use

Broncos - Circumventing the salary cap during the late Elway years when they won 2 SBs; taping part of a 49ers walk-through practice in London in 2010

Late 90's 49ers - Circumventing the salary cap

90's Cowboys - Jimmy Johnson has admitted that videotaping coaches' signals was common practice and something he did although he felt it didn't help him at all.

2006 Colts - pumping artificial crowd noise into the stadium when the Patriots were on offense during the 2006 AFC Championship game

Steelers - Cowher: �Stealing someone�s signals was a part of the game and everybody attempted to do that. We had people that always tried to steal signals,� said Cowher, whose 2004 team won 16 consecutive games before losing to the Patriots in the AFC title game. �What happened when we lost that game is they outplayed us. It had nothing to do with stealing signals or cheating or anything else.�
http://espn.go.com/blog/pittsburgh-s...act-of-spygate

I could list many more things, but I think that'll do.

Oh, and then there's this re: "DeflateGate" from Mike Florio today:

"But what has the NFL really found? As one league source has explained it to PFT, the football intercepted by Colts linebacker D�Qwell Jackson was roughly two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum. The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...r-deflategate/

So looks like Chris Mortensen's report may be wrong, just like the report about Jackson being one who noticed the ball was deflated. Sports journalism in this country is at an all-time low. If they were indeed closer to 1 PSI below the 12.5 minimum requirement, Belichick's explanation he gave yesterday is certainly plausible. If it's proven they intentionally deflated the footballs, then they should be punished accordingly.

But hey, great job jumping to conclusions before having all of the facts by all of the ignorant people here. Bravo.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, delusional Patriots fan. You really don't understand the difference between watching signs and being able to film them, having a permanent record which you can used to figure out all their defenses? You can claim that it was dominant defense, but when you know what the other team is doing it is a huge advantage, it is cheating and is a major reason why the Pats won those 3 SBs. Fact, the Pats are the only SB champion to be sanctioned for cheating. You can try to justify it all you want, but the Pats are cheaters. They were cheating 2001-07 and they are still cheating today.

You complain about us discussing what the nfl has leaked. We can still discuss this and change our opinion if new info comes out. However, your mind is already closed. No matter what the nfl decides, you are going to try to argue away the fact that the Pats are cheaters. 7 years later you are still trying to argue away Spygate

FenwayFaithful · #11 01-26-2015, 10:47 AM

.

DeanH3 · #12 01-26-2015, 11:03 AM

Interesting article. I hope it's OK for me to post a link. Sorry if it's not OK to do.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports...f_fumbles.html

rats60 · #13 01-26-2015, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwayFaithful

Other teams weren't simply "watching" signals. They were stealing them, too. Have a scout in the stands or press box taking notes of the coaches' signals and then later syncing them with the game tape to decipher the signals. The Patriots did it in a more convenient way. With the memo going out to ALL teams in 2006, it's very possible that other teams were doing what the Patriots were doing before 2006.

Major reason they won those SBs? Lol, yeah, they have the highest win % in the NFL since then and have been to 3 SBs. Yeah, was a huge game changer.

"Fact, the Pats are the only SB champion to be sanctioned for cheating." Once again, wrong. Broncos in the late 90s when they won 2 SBs - circumvented the salary cap. They deferred $29 million to Terrell Davis and John Elway. The Broncos were fined $968,000 and were stripped of a 3rd round pick in 2002. And then were fined $950,000 and stripped of another 3rd round draft pick in the 2005 draft.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ap-violations/

Funny how you never hear about that.

The difference is what other teams were doing was allowed by the rules. That wasn't good enough for the Pats, they had to break the rules. It gave them an unfair advantage. If it wasn't a major reason they won 3 SBs, how come they have won ZERO since then?

It wasn't like they were blowing teams out, it was 3 close wins, two on last second fgs, Since then, they are losing those close games (to the Giants). I'd say having the other team's signals was a major reason they won.

You can turn a blind eye to the Pats cheating. Just don't expect the rest of us to ignore it.

steve B · #14 01-26-2015, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

The difference is what other teams were doing was allowed by the rules. That wasn't good enough for the Pats, they had to break the rules. It gave them an unfair advantage. If it wasn't a major reason they won 3 SBs, how come they have won ZERO since then?

It wasn't like they were blowing teams out, it was 3 close wins, two on last second fgs, Since then, they are losing those close games (to the Giants). I'd say having the other team's signals was a major reason they won.

You can turn a blind eye to the Pats cheating. Just don't expect the rest of us to ignore it.

Taping the practices and signals was and I believe is standard practice. That there's a rule stating where this taping can be done pretty much confirms that. Prior to the pats taping from the wrong place the Jets had someone taping from the wrong place and the Pats didn't go to the league, just asked him to leave.

Frankly, if taping practices and signals is as common as it is, and a head coach is too dumb to change those signals the team is probably going to have some problems anyway.

Hey, I get it.
The Pats used to be truly horrible in just about every way.
A coach whose main highlight was getting electrocuted during his introductory press conference.
Players harassing a female member of the press.
And generally just being a bad football team.

And as sports fans do, I looked anywhere else for the reason. The refs were against us, the rules were unfair, anything except the organization was just bad from the top down. Sure, they had some good players. Plunkett was pretty good, and was better after he left. Hmmmmm .......must be something odd going on there.....(Like the Raiders having a clue)

I'm looking forward to the superbowl, and the matchup between the most successful Pats head coach and the second most successful Pats head coach.

You mad bro?

Steve B

pgellis · #15 01-26-2015, 03:21 PM

Breaking news from Jay Glazer:

http://m.tmi.me/1eXHpm

gregr2 · #16 01-26-2015, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgellis

Breaking news from Jay Glazer:

http://m.tmi.me/1eXHpm

This is what I thought would happen from the beginning. Some no name, low level employee would get blamed and fired for this. The Patriots (Tom Brady) will of course claim that they never ever ever ever ever ever told him to reduce the air pressure in the balls, he just did it on his own.

rats60 · #17 01-26-2015, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B

Taping the practices and signals was and I believe is standard practice. That there's a rule stating where this taping can be done pretty much confirms that. Prior to the pats taping from the wrong place the Jets had someone taping from the wrong place and the Pats didn't go to the league, just asked him to leave.

Frankly, if taping practices and signals is as common as it is, and a head coach is too dumb to change those signals the team is probably going to have some problems anyway.

Hey, I get it.
The Pats used to be truly horrible in just about every way.
A coach whose main highlight was getting electrocuted during his introductory press conference.
Players harassing a female member of the press.
And generally just being a bad football team.

And as sports fans do, I looked anywhere else for the reason. The refs were against us, the rules were unfair, anything except the organization was just bad from the top down. Sure, they had some good players. Plunkett was pretty good, and was better after he left. Hmmmmm .......must be something odd going on there.....(Like the Raiders having a clue)

I'm looking forward to the superbowl, and the matchup between the most successful Pats head coach and the second most successful Pats head coach.

You mad bro?

Steve B

This makes no sense. The only one mad is Tom Brady for losing to the Seahawks and then running away like a little girl instead of shaking Richard Sherman's hand.

itjclarke · #18 01-26-2015, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

This makes no sense. The only one mad is Tom Brady for losing to the Seahawks and then running away like a little girl instead of shaking Richard Sherman's hand.

I guarantee, nothing would make a player look like a bigger chump than would accepting Richard Sherman's mock conciliatory hand shakes. Ask Michael Crabtree last year. I think in both cases those guys did well to just walk away, rather than to let it escalate which is all Sherman wants. I give it up to Sherman though, he's an amazing talent and a champion talker and head shrinker. He's to the NFL what Gary Payton was to basketball.

I expect to see LeGarrette Blount and some pulling guard running his way quite a bit on Sunday. Also, so much of what NE does passing, they do from the inside out (backs, TEs and the slots), so will be interesting to see how much a factor Sherman will be. The one I can't wait to see is Kam Chanceller vs Gronk, one of Sunday's more compelling potential matchups.