Patriots Fans...

[sm1zzle]

Explain please...



http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...patriots-apart

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/9/8...bill-belichick



RIP Goodell.

[GrecoRoman]

[Noliberals4]

Of course it was a cover up and worse than thought - why else did they burn the tapes?

This is not really "new" - ESPN is finally just checkmating it all.

Google "NYPost Spygate" This is from 2012. Notice how Brady still had his helmet communication equipment on PAST 15 seconds? Or notice that the Packers and Lions CAUGHT the Patriots filming them illegally? Notice how even though Bill claims he didn't know he was breaking the rules he had the cameramen have an ALIBI if they were caught? You don't make up alibis if you're doing something innocent now.

Also they say "It was just the location of the video taping." This makes it worse - think of it like instant replay. The angle and location of the video tape SIGNIFICANTLY changes an instant replay. If the location of the tape didn't matter then instant reply would cease to exist (the refs would just look at the play from the view we see on television).

The fact is Tom Brady was a 6th round draft pick for a reason. Belichick was a failure as a head coach before (see the Browns), and the Patriots had dubious "wins" in their Super Bowls (all by 3 points, all by questionable plays, etc. etc.).

The Patriots had a chance to prove everyone wrong in 2007 but they lost to the Giants. Why? They couldn't cheat.

Not surprising they don't win another SB until they can cheat again (Deflategate). Of course, this is just a coincidence right?

Just a coincidence.

[GrecoRoman]

Of course it was a cover up and worse than thought - why else did they burn the tapes?

stopped reading here since apparently you didn't read at all either.

[Noliberals4]

stopped reading here since apparently you didn't read at all either.

Are you nitpicking now? "They were crushed, not burned!" Who cares?

[sm1zzle]

...at what point was Shanahan exposed for sending low level Bronco employees into the opposing teams locker room to steal playbooks ?

[Noliberals4]

If Spygate didn't help why didn't they beat the Giants in 2007?

[stevedarsh]

I tried to read the ESPN article but it's like 15 pages long

cliffs

[GrecoRoman]

Are you nitpicking now? "They were crushed, not burned!" Who cares?

good question

2000-2007 (while allegedly taping signals): wasn't illegal until 06
88-39

2007-2015 (not taping signals):
108-34

...at what point was Shanahan exposed for sending low level Bronco employees into the opposing teams locker room to steal playbooks ?

at what point was BB?

[Noliberals4]

I tried to read the ESPN article but it's like 15 pages long

cliffs

- Spygate was worse than thought (which anyone who did research on it knows)
- Mike Martz, Rams' head coach in 2001 (Super Bowl against the Patriots), was told to make the NFL look good by Roger Goodell (Mike knew they were cheated but had to exonerate the NFL)
- The NFL thought Spygate would destroy the league so they covered it up
- The "taping from the sidelines" wasn't even the worst part of Spygate - the Patriots were sending employees to literally steal playbooks
- The cameramen for the Patriots had DETAILED alibis if they were caught
- Ernie Adams was about 50/50 on getting the other teams' signals right. This explains why the Patriots didn't win all their games
- A memo was sent out in 2006 because other teams were complaing about the Patriots illegally filming opposing teams

[Noliberals4]

good question

2000-2007 (while allegedly taping signals): wasn't illegal until 06
88-39

2007-2015 (not taping signals):
108-34


gate.jpg[/img]

1. The Patriots were not fined/punished for "taping signals"
2. The Patriots are 0-2* without cheating (They lost to the Giants in both Super Bowl 42 and 46)
3. The Patriots are 4-0**** with cheating (Spygate in 01, 03, 04, and Deflategate in 14)

[iamgenus]

...at what point was Shanahan exposed for sending low level Bronco employees into the opposing teams locker room to steal playbooks ?

Did I miss something of when the Pats did this?

[stevedarsh]

- Spygate was worse than thought (which anyone who did research on it knows)
- Mike Martz, Rams' head coach in 2001 (Super Bowl against the Patriots), was told to make the NFL look good by Roger Goodell (Mike knew they were cheated but had to exonerate the NFL)
- The NFL thought Spygate would destroy the league so they covered it up
- The "taping from the sidelines" wasn't even the worst part of Spygate - the Patriots were sending employees to literally steal playbooks
- The cameramen for the Patriots had DETAILED alibis if they were caught
- Ernie Adams was about 50/50 on getting the other teams' signals right. This explains why the Patriots didn't win all their games
- A memo was sent out in 2006 because other teams were complaing about the Patriots illegally filming opposing teams

thanks i got a little further in the article

Seems to basically say the patriots were cheating their asses off 2001-2007. Deflategate was an attempted makeup call for the lack of severe punishment they got, because the league deliberately stuck its head in the sand regarding just how far the patriot's cheating went and even stonewalled a congressional investigation so the truth wouldn't come out. They were afraid the truth about Spygate would destroy the NFL.

Also the hatred between Belichick and the NYJ runs very, very deep (NFL VPs with ties to the Jets organization were the primary movers in the Deflategate sting).

[Mumra]

If Spygate didn't help why didn't they beat the Giants in 2007?

it can't help you offensive line from getting it's collective tail kicked and Brady form getting sacked.

[Noliberals4]

I wanna make this be on the first page because a lot of Patriot fans are going to say "Well taping signals (from the sideline) wasn't illegal til 2006!"

I want to make the IMPORTANT distinction that in 2006, there was a MEMO sent out by Ray Anderson. The rule said well before 2006: "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game."

Now the argument - which Bill made - was that the rule technically doesn't say "sidelines." This argument goes out the window when you find out all the alibis and the lengths Bill Belichick was going to cover it up. Bill knew the rules - he's not stupid.

Now the argument is "Taping from the sidelines shouldn't matter!" But it does - taping from the sidelines means you can use a wide angle lense to figure out dummy signals. These dummy signals were sent to Ernie Adams who then deciphered them. As mentioned in the ESPN article he was about 50/50 with these. This fact blew my mind because I thought at MOST Ernie was 20/80 with deciphering the dummy signals - 50/50 is HUGE. No wonder they won 3 Super Bowls!!!

This is why Eric Mangini RATTED the Patriots out. I think this is important to know - because Eric KNEW the advantage the Patriots were getting and has been on record saying he was "Tired of coming up with extra dummy signals to throw the Patriots off" (Google NY Post Spygate cover up). The Patriots were never "caught" technically. A former employee ratted on them.

A former employee who knew how much it helped the Patriots.

A former employee who was tired of the advantage it gave the Patriots.

Think of it like instant replay - when you see a fumble, it can be hard to tell if it was a legit fumble with the bird's eye view of a typical televised NFL game. However, with instant reply they have cameras go straight to where the hands are. This is the advantage the Patriots were getting.

The Patriots need to be banned/dissolved. They need to go and Roger needs to really give an explanation on why he covered it up so much.

[compan]

1. The Patriots were not fined/punished for "taping signals"
2. The Patriots are 0-2* without cheating (They lost to the Giants in both Super Bowl 42 and 46)
3. The Patriots are 4-0**** with cheating (Spygate in 01, 03, 04, and Deflategate in 14)

lol and here I thought deflategate happened before the super bowl.

Note the "wasn't illegal until 06" portion. edit: Did you just cite the NY Post?




What interesting timing for ESPN to try and kick more dirt on the Patriots after the NFL lost in court.

[Negativ]

ESPN smear campaign v2.0.

Sources: Zero.


Edit: Basically the article says that Patriots were being punished now for things that happened between 2000-2006, which is kind of stupid.

[stevedarsh]

ESPN smear campaign v2.0.

Sources: Zero.

I do think you have to keep the source in mind for this article. The timing is a little suspect. ESPN has essentially been the NFL's unofficial mouthpiece throughout Deflategate and have been complicit in some of the NFL's dirty PR tactics to smear the Patriots. Now, right after the NFL got humiliated by Tom Brady, ESPN releases a smear article about the Patriots. Seems like an obvious PR tactic by the League.

The NFL appears to be doing a PR full-court press right now to justify their Deflategate appeal, as they had Roger Goodell do a 13 minute interview on Mike and Mike this morning to justify his side. No doubt this article was put together ahead of time just in case the NFL lost the federal court case, you couldn't throw this thing together in a week.

[Noliberals4]

lol and here I thought deflategate happened before the super bowl.

Note the "wasn't illegal until 06" portion. edit: Did you just cite the NY Post?




What interesting timing for ESPN to try and kick more dirt on the Patriots after the NFL lost in court.

The "It wasn't illegal til 2006" is a myth. What you're getting confused with is the memo Ray Anderson sent out because teams were complaining about the Patriots.

[Noliberals4]

I do think you have to keep the source in mind for this article. The timing is a little suspect. ESPN has essentially been the NFL's unofficial mouthpiece throughout Deflategate and have been complicit in some of the NFL's dirty PR tactics to smear the Patriots. Now, right after the NFL got humiliated by Tom Brady, ESPN releases a smear article about the Patriots. Seems like an obvious PR tactic by the League.

The NFL appears to be doing a PR full-court press right now to justify their Deflategate appeal, as they had Roger Goodell do a 13 minute interview on Mike and Mike this morning to justify his side. No doubt this article was put together ahead of time just in case the NFL lost the federal court case, you couldn't throw this thing together in a week.

I knew something like this was going to happen (albeit I thought it'd come from Roger himself or the NFL itself).

What got me the most was Mike Martz having to exonerate the NFL. People always say "Bill Cowher and Jimmy Johnson said Spygate is meaningless!" yet I always thought that was strange. Now we know why they were saying it - the NFL told them to do so.

[snova031]

The "It wasn't illegal til 2006" is a myth. What you're getting confused with is the memo Ray Anderson sent out because teams were complaining about the Patriots.

A September 6, 2006 memo from Ray Anderson, the NFL head of game operations, adds to this. However, the rules don’t support this belief. Anderson’s memo reads, “Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent’s offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches’ booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.”

Unfortunately, the memo misquotes the rules, and Anderson can’t change the rules. Rule changes must be proposed to and voted on by the teams. The NFL cited the misquoted rules against the Patriots from pages A105-A106 of the league’s Policy Manual for Member Clubs Volume II: Game Operations 2007 edition.

Miscellaneous Rules and Regulations, Section A. reads, “No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches’ booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game.”

The league also cited a portion of section D against the Patriots. Section D reads, “To ensure the protection of equipment and employees of the teams’ video departments, please follow the guidelines listed for the video shooting booths at your stadium.”

The league quoted the first guideline against the Patriots, “All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead.” The rules never prohibit filming coaches. The sections used against the Patriots only concern camera locations.

Anderson’s memo adds an emphasis on signals, which isn’t in the rules. Also, Anderson says that videotaping is prohibited from “any other locations accessible to club staff members.”

This isn’t in the rules either.

The rule mentions only three spots where teams can’t use video equipment during games—the coaches’ booth, the locker room, and the field. No rule bars teams from recording signals as long as they locate their cameras properly.

Despite this, Goodell and especially the media continue to portray signal taping as the problem when the only real issue is camera location.

Even the location technicality isn’t open and shut. Again, consider the differences between Anderson’s memo and the rules. We’ve already seen that Anderson’s any “location accessible to club staff members” isn’t in the rules.

(And if it were, how would staff film games as required?)

Of the three locations the rules actually mention, Anderson substitutes “sidelines” for “field.”

That’s important.

NFL rules seem to define “the field” as the area between the sidelines and the endlines. By that definition, a camera man standing out of bounds isn’t on the “field,” although the rule would stop teams from using helmet cameras like those which the networks sometimes use.

Also, using the Section D guideline about enclosed locations against the Patriots is disputable. The manual says the locations “ensure the protection of equipment and employees.” It doesn’t require teams to shoot from those locations. It only asks that teams provide them.

Defending himself, Bill Belichick said he interpreted the rules based on Article IX of The NFL Constitution and By-laws. Among other things, Article IX concerns videotaping. It reads, “Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game.”

This seems to ban all taping, but, as we’ve seen, the league has two pages of rules requiring teams to tape and exchange the recordings.

Isn’t that contradictory?

The NFL reconciles it by interpreting Article IX to mean that teams can film during games, but they can only use the recordings between games, not during them. Belichick applied this interpretation to ground level taping too.

Goodell disagreed.

Goodell’s ruling means he applies the Article IX interpretation to Sections B, C, E, and most of D in the Miscellaneous Rules, but to not Section A and the first guideline in Section D.

In contrast, Belichick applied it consistently.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...omoting-parity

[GrecoRoman]

lol enjoy it while you can boys 2 more days until its time to go to sleep and the nightmare starts again.

[StiffSproles]

If Spygate didn't help why didn't they beat the Giants in 2007?

It was literally one GOAT catch that beat the Patriots.

[McNatty69]

lmao sounds like some butthurt pats hater who just can't stand to see Brady get off free.

Just except the fact that the GOAT is gonna GOAT.


stay mad pats haters

[Noliberals4]

lol enjoy it while you can boys 2 more days until its time to go to sleep and the nightmare starts again.

Wanna know the real nightmare?

18-1** after Spygate

I can't wait to see how the Patriots fail after they can't cheat again. Honestly I hope they go 18-0* again and lose to the Giants yet again. The Giants beating the Patriots in 2007 is the reason I became a Giants fan, so it'd be nice to see them complete the blowout trilogy.

And why didn't the Patriots beat the Giants in 2007? How come they lost by 3 points instead of winning? They went 18-0 so the excuse "The Giants were better" doesn't work.

They lost because they couldn't cheat.

[Noliberals4]

It was literally one GOAT catch that beat the Patriots.

Holding the Patriots to 14 points ("We're only going to score 17 points? Lol okay hahahaha... does Plax play defense?") had nothing to do with it?

Not to mention the Giants proved they weren't flukes when they destroyed the Patriots yet AGAIN in Super Bowl 46.

[biggquis]

It was literally one GOAT catch that beat the Patriots.

Not only that, but the Giants (with Osi and Tuck) had the Pats' number. They were able to get pressure with a 4 man rush like no other team has against the Pats. Quite simple really

[biggquis]

Wanna know the real nightmare?

18-1** after Spygate

I can't wait to see how the Patriots fail after they can't cheat again. Honestly I hope they go 18-0* again and lose to the Giants yet again. The Giants beating the Patriots in 2007 is the reason I became a Giants fan, so it'd be nice to see them complete the blowout trilogy.

And why didn't the Patriots beat the Giants in 2007? How come they lost by 3 points instead of winning? They went 18-0 so the excuse "The Giants were better" doesn't work.

They lost because they couldn't cheat.

Are you dumb? The Pats could not protect against the pass rush. Game over

[biggquis]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...omoting-parity

Boom goes the dynamite. Any of you potatoes realize that Belicheck never denied taping signals? He has been consistent all along with what he says. The NFL/ESPN can spin whatever they want however they want. Just makes them look like babies. And to suggest this was a makeup for "spygate" makes Goodell look even worse. If things were so straight forward, why wouldn't Goodell be pushing for an investigation to show he did the right thing? That situation set a precedent for the front office that they would allow social media to decide conflicts for them

[Noliberals4]

Are you dumb? The Pats could not protect against the pass rush. Game over

I bet you Brady wish he had the Giants defensive signals during that game. What a coincidence the second Brady doesn't get to use Spygate during a Super Bowl the "Pats could not protect against the pass rush."

Just a coincidence though!

The Patriots were 18-0, had a dynasty on the line (4 SBs in a decade seals the dynasty), had 19-0 on the line (only team to go 19-0), absolutely CRUSHED regular season opponents (the other perfect team, the Dolphins, struggled), they had dozens of records on the line including (but not limited to) - most TD passes in a season, most TD receptions in a season, most points scored in a season, and highest point differential in a season.

The Patriots had it ALL on the line, and they also had neutral weather as well (which favors the passing game). Not to mention they beat the Giants earlier in the season AND the Giants were a wild card team. By all means the Patriots should have beat them 48-17.

But how did they do?

"We're only going to score 17 points? Lol okay hahahaha.... does Plax play defense?"

Nuff said.

I feel something similar is going to happen this year - either Patriots will dominate the regular season again only to be exposed in the Super Bowl, or the Patriots will struggle the whole season due to extra scrutiny.

It will be interesting to say the least.