(09-09-2015 12:03 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  Bill Simmons is spot on. All the haters just have excuses for being inferior to the Patriots:
http://www.boston.com/sports/football/pa...p1=stream_

Even Tedy Bruschi calls ESPN out on it:
http://www.boston.com/sports/football/pa...p1=stream_

Well, if two neutral sources like Bill Simmons and Teddy Bruschi say so, who can argue with that?

I think you're going to get the **** penalized out of you all season long.

yeah I do think Brady isn't going to get the benefit of the doubt like he has in the past with roughing the passer calls.

(09-10-2015 09:04 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(09-09-2015 12:03 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  Bill Simmons is spot on. All the haters just have excuses for being inferior to the Patriots:
http://www.boston.com/sports/football/pa...p1=stream_

Even Tedy Bruschi calls ESPN out on it:
http://www.boston.com/sports/football/pa...p1=stream_

Well, if two neutral sources like Bill Simmons and Teddy Bruschi say so, who can argue with that?

I think you're going to get the **** penalized out of you all season long.

I doubt that the refs are harboring a personal grudge against Tom Brady or the Patriots. They probably hate the NFL league office in regard to practically everything and think that Roger Goodell is incompetent, too! The only folks that are butt hurt are the players and fans of every other team that the Pats have spanked (most notably the Steelers, Jets, and Colts - the members of the Colts organization are the biggest crybabies of them all!)

Anyway, ESPN is just stirring the pot. All of these teams lost to the Patriots because they were inferior competitors. I wonder what excuses they will come up with at the end of this season after the Pats whip all of their @sses yet again!

Who is so outraged by this that they won't watch the game tonight?

Just as I expected.. no one.

So it doesn't really matter. The NFL is making so much money no one in the league really cares that much. We can talk about it all we want... it's all about the $$$ and the NFL has no issues there.

(09-10-2015 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Kraft seemingly fails to realize that a Federal Judge saying that the 4-game suspension was unfair because the NFL did not give fair notice of that possible penalty to its players for the offenses of being generally aware of the football tampering and failing to cooperate with the investigation is in no way shape or form an "exoneration" of Brady or the Patriots organization for cheating with the footballs.

Brady and the Patriots still cheated with the footballs.

Quo is on point here.

But there's so much more. It's reported that Goodell burned the spy-gate report [SAY WHAT?]. In it, the NE Cheaters, sent underlings into the other teams locker rooms while they were warming up looking for their playsheets.

The spying reportedly, now, occured 40 seperate times from 2000-2007. If you play 56 home games during that time, it represents more than 70% of the time. [SAY WHAT?]

After the Jets apparently caught on (or perhaps during) the NE Cheaters graduated to underinflating footballs to acheive their unfair advantage [as witnessed by their off-the-charts fumble-to-touches ratio over the past decade].

These are probably the most blatant acts of cheating one can imagine, yet it's the NE Cheaters who act as if they are being unfairly treated.

(09-10-2015 11:05 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-10-2015 08:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Kraft seemingly fails to realize that a Federal Judge saying that the 4-game suspension was unfair because the NFL did not give fair notice of that possible penalty to its players for the offenses of being generally aware of the football tampering and failing to cooperate with the investigation is in no way shape or form an "exoneration" of Brady or the Patriots organization for cheating with the footballs.

Brady and the Patriots still cheated with the footballs.

Quo is on point here.

Quo may be correct. However, it doesn't change the fact that it didn't alter the outcome of that particular game at all. So, that Super Bowl ring still stands - no asterisk necessary! Next time, the rest of the NFL may want to try and play harder. And for God's sake, don't call a pass play at the goal line when you have Marshawn Lynch on your team and all you need to do is run a half yard. I suppose that was the Patriots fault, too. Perhaps they jammed Pete Carroll's microphone and altered the play?

(09-10-2015 11:44 AM)UConnHusky Wrote:  Quo may be correct. However, it doesn't change the fact that it didn't alter the outcome of that particular game at all. So, that Super Bowl ring still stands - no asterisk necessary! Next time, the rest of the NFL may want to try and play harder. And for God's sake, don't call a pass play at the goal line when you have Marshawn Lynch on your team and all you need to do is run a half yard. I suppose that was the Patriots fault, too. Perhaps they jammed Pete Carroll's microphone and altered the play?

What it alters is the fact that they made it to all these Super Bowl/Play-off games in the first place. Why did they need to cheat so comprehensively if they are 'such a great team'?

(09-10-2015 11:49 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(09-10-2015 11:44 AM)UConnHusky Wrote:  Quo may be correct. However, it doesn't change the fact that it didn't alter the outcome of that particular game at all. So, that Super Bowl ring still stands - no asterisk necessary! Next time, the rest of the NFL may want to try and play harder. And for God's sake, don't call a pass play at the goal line when you have Marshawn Lynch on your team and all you need to do is run a half yard. I suppose that was the Patriots fault, too. Perhaps they jammed Pete Carroll's microphone and altered the play?

What it alters is the fact that they made it to all these Super Bowl/Play-off games in the first place. Why did they need to cheat so comprehensively if they are 'such a great team'?

Well, there was Spygate for sure (it may have impacted some games, but even then we don't know to what extent). However, the fact of the matter is that the Pats have been whooping up on teams POST-Spygate! These teams just can't take the fact that they aren't at the top of the NFL mountain. Well, fellas, WORK HARDER for it! Don't try and manufacture excuses and point the finger at the Pats for their success when there may be no more skeletons left to unearth. As I've said before in this thread, "Winners focus on winning. Losers focus on winners."

(09-10-2015 12:10 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  

(09-10-2015 11:49 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(09-10-2015 11:44 AM)UConnHusky Wrote:  Quo may be correct. However, it doesn't change the fact that it didn't alter the outcome of that particular game at all. So, that Super Bowl ring still stands - no asterisk necessary! Next time, the rest of the NFL may want to try and play harder. And for God's sake, don't call a pass play at the goal line when you have Marshawn Lynch on your team and all you need to do is run a half yard. I suppose that was the Patriots fault, too. Perhaps they jammed Pete Carroll's microphone and altered the play?

What it alters is the fact that they made it to all these Super Bowl/Play-off games in the first place. Why did they need to cheat so comprehensively if they are 'such a great team'?

Well, there was Spygate for sure (it may have impacted some games, but even then we don't know to what extent). However, the fact of the matter is that the Pats have been whooping up on teams POST-Spygate! These teams just can't take the fact that they aren't at the top of the NFL mountain. Well, fellas, WORK HARDER for it! Don't try and manufacture excuses and point the finger at the Pats for their success when there may be no more skeletons left to unearth. As I've said before in this thread, "Winners focus on winning. Losers focus on winners."

Regardless of what fans believe the Patriots may or may not have done, I believe that two things are clear.

First, I believe nothing the patriots have been accused of doing would have given them anything but the slightest advantage on the field. Slight enough to be trivial at best.

Second, whether they did them or not, the fact that their opponents seem obsessed by them means they have thoroughly succeeded in changing their opponents focus from winning to complaining about the Patriots. Brady and Belicheck are now living comfortably and rent free inside the heads of everybody in the NFL.

(09-10-2015 11:00 AM)UConnHusky Wrote:  I doubt that the refs are harboring a personal grudge against Tom Brady or the Patriots. They probably hate the NFL league office in regard to practically everything and think that Roger Goodell is incompetent, too! The only folks that are butt hurt are the players and fans of every other team that the Pats have spanked (most notably the Steelers, Jets, and Colts - the members of the Colts organization are the biggest crybabies of them all!)

Anyway, ESPN is just stirring the pot. All of these teams lost to the Patriots because they were inferior competitors. I wonder what excuses they will come up with at the end of this season after the Pats whip all of their @sses yet again!

You're right, those fans are probably butt hurt. Especially if it is obvious to them that they were cheated - as would appear to be the case.

As for the commissioner, I don't think anyone disagrees that Roger Goodell is a lying buffoon. However, he was also a lying buffoon when he helped you destroy the evidence of your initial scam.

(09-10-2015 01:36 PM)ken d Wrote:  Regardless of what fans believe the Patriots may or may not have done, I believe that two things are clear.

First, I believe nothing the patriots have been accused of doing would have given them anything but the slightest advantage on the field. Slight enough to be trivial at best.

If that were true then why would they take so many ENORMOUS risks and dedicate so much time to transcribing notes, having rooms only the coach had access to, etc.? Also, why would they risk sending in people to steal play sheets? What would have happened to them if someone had filmed a guy sneaking in, stealing a play sheet and then delivering it to the Patriots?

That is a LOT of risk to incur to gain a slight advantage. I just have a hard time buying that. If you know all the plays your opponents are going to run ahead of time, that is not merely a slight advantage.

(09-10-2015 01:36 PM)ken d Wrote:  Second, whether they did them or not, the fact that their opponents seem obsessed by them means they have thoroughly succeeded in changing their opponents focus from winning to complaining about the Patriots. Brady and Belicheck are now living comfortably and rent free inside the heads of everybody in the NFL.

That's certainly true. However, I would argue that they were aided by the NFL initially on the condition that they cut the bullshitt. When it was found that they were still cheating after getting a slap on the wrist, that's when things went off the rails.

Look, I am not saying that the Patriots are not a great team. They unquestionably are a great team led by a great coach and quarterback. However, anyone who thinks this cloud of uncertainty won't always be a part of their legacy is just whistling past the graveyard.

People can play the haters gonna hate card all they like and there is some truth to that. Every great team faces jealousy. However, New England isn't the first team to win for a sustained period and these allegations are unique to them. Also, just as haters are gonna hate, investigators are also gonna investigate, especially now that the scent is in the water. If this stuff starts to get corroborated, and if it happened people will begin to talk, NE is going to get the shitt penalized out them for a long time.

If this is all a conspiracy against the Pats they probably have nothing to worry about. If it's something more, then I think I'd worry if I were a Patriots fan.

(09-10-2015 11:44 AM)UConnHusky Wrote:  Quo may be correct. However, it doesn't change the fact that it didn't alter the outcome of that particular game at all. So, that Super Bowl ring still stands - no asterisk necessary! Next time, the rest of the NFL may want to try and play harder. And for God's sake, don't call a pass play at the goal line when you have Marshawn Lynch on your team and all you need to do is run a half yard. I suppose that was the Patriots fault, too. Perhaps they jammed Pete Carroll's microphone and altered the play?

First, cheating always means an "asterisk", it doesn't matter if you would have won anyway. I mean, if I am playing poker and I have an ace up my sleeve and I use it to win a hand, if I got caught using the ace, would I be allowed to keep the pot and avoid getting kicked out of the game (or worse) if it turned out that I would have won the hand anyway without using it? Please.

Second, no it's not the Patriot's fault that the Seahawks gave the Super Bowl to them by throwing that pass. But, it does make the Patriots incredibly lucky. The Seahawks had more total yards, more rushing yards, and fewer turnovers than the Patriots. When you do that, your chances of winning are so high that it basically takes a miracle to lose the game, it had never happened in 80 years of NFL title games. And that's exactly what the Patriots got, a miracle.

Brady and Belichik should have three Spygate rings, not 3 Spygate and 1 Deflategate ring.

(09-10-2015 11:44 AM)UConnHusky Wrote:  Quo may be correct. However, it doesn't change the fact that it didn't alter the outcome of that particular game at all. So, that Super Bowl ring still stands - no asterisk necessary!

Fact? Oh it is a "fact" now that the game outcome was not affected? Do you know for a fact the outcomes were not altered? I will leave you with this excerpt from the piece

ESPN hit piece Wrote:The narrative that paralleled the Patriots' rise -- a team mostly void of superstars, built not to blow out opponents but to win the game's handful of decisive plays -- only increased rivals' suspicions. After all, the Patriots had won three Super Bowls by a total of nine points. Although Belichick admitted to Kraft that the taping had helped them only 1 percent of the time ("Then you're a real schmuck," Kraft told him), the spying very well could have affected a game, opponents say. "Why would they go to such great lengths for so long to do it and hide it if it didn't work?" a longtime former executive says. "It made no sense."

What would be the point of doing all of this if it never helped? that would be the dumbest part of it, and why no one actually believes that, but Patriots fans. It would make Belechick the dumbest coach in the league to go through all of this trouble, for something that doesn't help you.

This is no different than Tim Donaghy, the former NBA ref who was found to have bet on games. He also said none of the games he ref'd had the outcome influenced by his gambling. One, no one believed him. Two, it did not change his punishment.

(09-10-2015 01:36 PM)ken d Wrote:  Well, there was Spygate for sure (it may have impacted some games, but even then we don't know to what extent). However, the fact of the matter is that the Pats have been whooping up on teams POST-Spygate! These teams just can't take the fact that they aren't at the top of the NFL mountain. Well, fellas, WORK HARDER for it! Don't try and manufacture excuses and point the finger at the Pats for their success when there may be no more skeletons left to unearth. As I've said before in this thread, "Winners focus on winning. Losers focus on winners."

Then why do it for 7 years if it had no competitive advantage? Do it once, realise it doesn't work, and move on. No, they did it for seven years until they graduated to doctoring the footballs....again, for years. "Oh, but that's unproved", yeah right, the evidence was destroyed so the NFL and the Cheats could save face. Statistics now show the Cheats turn-over margin to be mathmatically impossible for years.

You've cheated the game for a decade and a half and all you can do is call others 'butt-hurt'. LOL. Everyone's going to be gunning for you cheats. Paybacks going to be hell; then we'll see who's butt hurt.

(09-10-2015 02:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  First, cheating always means an "asterisk", it doesn't matter if you would have won anyway. I mean, if I am playing poker and I have an ace up my sleeve and I use it to win a hand, if I got caught using the ace, would I be allowed to keep the pot and avoid getting kicked out of the game (or worse) if it turned out that I would have won the hand anyway without using it? Please.

But, you can't assume that only one team was cheating. It's like the Tour de France, or the 100-meter race in the Olympics. Unless the winner was the only one doping -- which has never been true -- then you can't just give the title to the guy who finished second. Also, unless the winner was the only one doping or cheating, it's silly to pretend that the "tainted" games never happened, as the NCAA does. The right approach is to say, "Yes, they won, and yes, they cheated (or may have cheated). End of story."

(09-10-2015 02:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  But, you can't assume that only one team was cheating.

There is some truth to this. But that doesn't excuse it. Especially since they were the only ones caught, which would mean either they did it more often than others (more chances to get caught), or they were not very good at it (why they got caught). If more than one team had been caught doing it, then a case could be made that it is widespread. But when you are the only one, and you are caught repeatedly, that really doesn't fly as an excuse.

Now I would add this. Stealing signs on gameday, when signals are being publicly displayed, doesn't bother me. There is a reason teams use signals, and not a chalkboard with the name of the play on it. It is because others are trying to do it. It is when teams have a level of expectation of privacy that is being violated, that it crosses the line. With deflategate, lowering the PSI of the football in and of itself doesn't bother me. But being the one to champion how balls are handled, then taking advantage of the hole in the system you created to alter the balls after inspection, then covering it up when busted on it, that is more of an issue to me than deflating the football itself.

(09-10-2015 02:04 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(09-10-2015 01:36 PM)ken d Wrote:  Well, there was Spygate for sure (it may have impacted some games, but even then we don't know to what extent). However, the fact of the matter is that the Pats have been whooping up on teams POST-Spygate! These teams just can't take the fact that they aren't at the top of the NFL mountain. Well, fellas, WORK HARDER for it! Don't try and manufacture excuses and point the finger at the Pats for their success when there may be no more skeletons left to unearth. As I've said before in this thread, "Winners focus on winning. Losers focus on winners."

Then why do it for 7 years if it had no competitive advantage? Do it once, realise it doesn't work, and move on. No, they did it for seven years until they graduated to doctoring with footballs....again, for years. "Oh, but that's unproved", yeah right, the evidence was destroyed so the NFL and the Cheats could save face. Statistics now show the Cheats turn-over margin to be mathmatically impossible for years.

You've cheated the game for a decade and a half and all you can do is call others 'butt-hurt'. LOL. Everyone's going to be gunning for you cheats. Paybacks going to be hell; then we'll see who's butt hurt.

How did you manage to quote somebody else's post and make it read "ken d wrote"?

And how have I cheated the game for a decade? I don't even have a dog in the fight. What I do have is a strong conviction that cheating in sports is a fundamental aspect of the American character. For that matter, I wouldn't even limit it to sports. There are very few aspects of American life and culture where cheating isn't more the norm than the exception. It's really hard for me to get too worked up about any of this.

(09-10-2015 02:23 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-10-2015 02:09 PM)Wedge Wrote:  But, you can't assume that only one team was cheating.

There is some truth to this. But that doesn't excuse it. Especially since they were the only ones caught, which would mean either they did it more often than others (more chances to get caught), or they were not very good at it (why they got caught). If more than one team had been caught doing it, then a case could be made that it is widespread. But when you are the only one, and you are caught repeatedly, that really doesn't fly as an excuse.

Now I would add this. Stealing signs on gameday, when signals are being publicly displayed, doesn't bother me. There is a reason teams use signals, and not a chalkboard with the name of the play on it. It is because others are trying to do it. It is when teams have a level of expectation of privacy that is being violated, that it crosses the line. With deflategate, lowering the PSI of the football in and of itself doesn't bother me. But being the one to champion how balls are handled, then taking advantage of the hole in the system you created to alter the balls after inspection, then covering it up when busted on it, that is more of an issue to me than deflating the football itself.

I guess I just generally think that the whole idea of taking wins away after the fact is bogus.

The Pats may have been the only team caught filming signals, but many have admitted to "fixing" ball inflation, and it's obvious the NFL refs don't check the balls other than maybe by squeezing. Taking away a title for that is much too harsh; the equivalent would be taking away a World Series win for a pitcher using pine tar on the ball or a batter shaving his bat handle.

Also, if you're going to police cheating, then police it. Regular drug tests for every player including random testing both in-season and out. First positive test gets a two-year suspension as in pro cycling.

(09-10-2015 11:04 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  Who is so outraged by this that they won't watch the game tonight?

Just as I expected.. no one.

So it doesn't really matter. The NFL is making so much money no one in the league really cares that much. We can talk about it all we want... it's all about the $$$ and the NFL has no issues there.

Just like I said.. who cares unless people stop watching the games?

I gave up on the NFL years ago. The salary cap ruined the league. Tell me it brings "parody - play on words :) " and I'll point out that capless league had the Royals in the World Series last year and 4 of the top 5 payrolls watching the playoffs.

I'm sure Brady was using under-inflated balls and from throwing a football I know it makes somewhat of a difference but the level of dictatorship-ism (sorry, I invented that word) the NFL used in handling the case and too much of a penalty made this ridiculous and their inability to follow simple legal guidelines (set forth by their own contract with the players association) made Brady innocent. Pats would have won the Super Bowl anyway (unless the Hawks had just given the damn ball to Marshawn) Case closed.

It's not the NCAA... no one is ever taking down banners in the gym because coach Cal was there

If you really got a problem, hit the NFL where it counts. Stop watching their lousy watered-down product with 8 teams with good QBs and 4 teams tanking and 20 teams all with 7 to 9 wins.