Forum: foot
Page 4928
Subject: Pats busted cheating. Again.

  Posted by: Perm Dude - [49836128] Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 09:49
Pats violated rules by videotaping Jets signals.

At this point, I think a clear sign needs to be made. Suspend Coach B for two games. Take away a draft pick. Or even overturn the game.
 
1Mattinglyinthehall
      Leader
      ID: 01629107
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:01 		As much as I or any Jets fan would love to see a win taken from the Pats, that doesn't sound right. Is there any precedent for that?
 
2Perm Dude
      ID: 49836128
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:22 		None. But a message needs to be sent, and there is no way the Pats can say that their cheating made no difference in the game.
 
3Ender
      ID: 5963859
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:23 		I'm not aware of any precedent, but though extreme it seems a reasonable possiblity. If you cheated to ge the win, they ought to be able to take that win away. I'm not saying I think that's appropriate in this particular case, but I think it's a logical consequence.
 
4sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:29 		Goodell should take a draft pick or even suspend Belichick, who's iron-fisted leadership means no employee would dare try this without his knowledge. Stealing signals via the human eye is one thing. Having an employee use a video camera speaks to an operation that is both brazen and premeditated.

I think that paragraph says it all really. No way Belichick didnt know about it. With it being done, no way it wasnt with his tacit consent/permission or possibly even endorsement. 4 game suspension would be fitting in my minds eye. Thats 4 weeks, where Beli is barred form the training facility, barred from the sidelines and barred from ANY communication with ANY staffer/member of the NE organization.

 
5Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:31 		I seriously doubt that they take the win away. Now could there be a huge (1M+) fine, along with loss of draft picks and suspending coaches and execs.

In the original ESPN article it implied that the Patriots had already been caught doing this, the Green Bay game.

What would be even worse would be listening in on the QBs helmet radio. Apparently it is an "honor" system to not listen in. Seeing how much honor exists in the NFL I wouldn't be suprised if opposing teams were listening in.
 
6Barilko6
      ID: 46637248
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:40 		How stupid is Belicheck??? Seriously. Against the Jets?!?

I mean he could have at least waited until this week to do it against the Chargers.
 
7Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:46 		New England has been doing this for years apparently and theyw ere told not to do it. NE has always denied it. Then they caught them last year against Green Bay and the NFL warned not only them but every team that if anyone did it, there would be serious consequences. Then the same employee who was caught at the GB game was caught Sunday and the video tape proved the fact.

This info, esp. along with the pre-snap and in-play photos, can really change the game. NE has a history of this and has continued to do it. I like Goodell, man--he doesn't play around. I think he's fair but firm. I cna't see him forfeiting the game, but I expect a huge penalty. Maybe multiple draft picks and fine. How would NE feel if they lost say their first three draft picks? Or their #1s the next three years? Harsh perhaps, but how long have they been getting this competitive advantage through electronics though explicitly prohibited?
 
8Perm Dude
      ID: 49836128
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:48 		I think the penalty should include making Brady play a quarter with his non-throwing hand tied behind his back.
 
9Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:54 		I think the penalty should include making Brady play a quarter with his non-throwing hand tied behind his back.

So would Brady be better or worse than Grossman taking snaps with one-handed?
 
10KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 15023167
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:55 		How stupid is Belicheck??? Seriously. Against the Jets?!?

The first two tie-breakers for the playoffs involve intra-division records (head-to-head and W-L-T within the division). Going into the season, many would have said that New York was New England's toughest intra-division competition.

Stupid for doing it and/or getting caught? Yes. Stupid for doing it and/or getting caught against NYJ? No.

I have a feeling Goodell's going to come down with multiple draft picks and a very large fine; the kind that makes people say things a bit more graphic than, "WOW!" He'll certainly make other teams think twice before following New England's footsteps if his recent history is a guide.
 
11sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 10:55 		couldnt fumble away as many as McNair did Monday night, even with BOTH hands tied to his waist.
 
12Barilko6
      ID: 46637248
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:02 		Re: 10

I was joking about the Jets part. Kind of like me needing to cheat to beat Sarge's team in the Pat Tillman league. If I was going to cheat, I would save it for a tough matchup...
 
13sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:10 		ummmm just who was it finished behind me in the standings last year Barilko???? Let me think...oh yeah. It was YOU!!!!!! :)
 
14Barilko6
      ID: 46637248
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:21 		What the heck? Quit living in the past Sarge.

Next thing you know you will be walking down the street in your red leather diamond studded jacket with the fringe things hanging down, your Flock of Seagulls hairdo, playing with your Rubik's Cube mouthing the words to some old Milli Vanilli song...
 
15sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:25 		<----doesnt have enough hair left, for a FoS do.
 
16Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:30 		From ESPN.com

How it came to light?
NEW YORK -- A story in Wednesday's New York Daily News claims that Jets coach Eric Mangini, a former New England assistant under Bill Belichick, came armed with keen knowledge of the team's surveillance methods -- and finally decided to act.

"[The Jets] knew they did it," the Daily News wrote, citing a person with knowledge of the situation, who sent the newspaper an e-mail. "They caught the guy a year ago, but couldn't do anything about it. When Eric came, he said that's what they used to do. Bill is going to be [ticked] at Eric. He kissed and told."

Sunday's game was the fifth time Mangini has coached against Belichick since joining the Jets.

-- ESPN.com news services
 
17Great One
      Sustainer
      ID: 053272014
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:31 		re:why the Jets?

Probably has more to do with Belicheck's ego and wanting to stick it to Mangini.
 
18Species
      Dude
      ID: 07724916
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:50 		Shame on Belichick for not changing things up going against a former assistant. That's like a baseball manager using the same signals against a former teammate on the mound or in the dugout! Dumbass! lol

So do I downgrade Moss now since NE won't have the defenses beforehand?
 
19Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 11:58 		Funny that it finally comes to light when an ex-Belichick disciple "snitched" on his mentor.

I wouldnt be surprised if every team does it though. Its just like trying to steal signs in baseball by watching the 3rd base coach or tipping pitches. There will always be teams jockeying for that edge...shit I know I would be!

As for eliminating the problem. Why don't teams put that stupid green dot on the MLB to identify a radio in their respective helmets??? Then, the problem is solved. They can call plays in, instead of using hand signals. In the age of technology this is ludicrous that the NFL still embraces such ancient tactics!
 
20Perm Dude
      ID: 49836128
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:03 		Its just like trying to steal signs in baseball...

I think this is a step beyond. There is no rule against looking at the other team and trying to steal their signs, but there is a rule against videotaping their signs (presumably for later viewing and analysis).
 
21wolfer
      ID: 24148211
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:03 		What's even funnier is that they also did it against (at the time) was a not that good Packer team last year.
 
22Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:05 		The ESPN article talks about the fact that the owners don't want to pay the money for the radio units in Defensive players helmets. Which is much more complex since while the starting QB plays every snap, the defensive "QB" could change on a fairly frequent basis.

There was a specific rule against using video cameras, and it was emphasized prior to the season.

Comparing using a video camera to the naked it eye is a stretch. It's a lot easier to do analysis when you can replay a sequence over and over again.
 
23Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 454491514
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:14 		If Belicheck is suspended, it would be nice for his suspension (or part of it) to be served during week 15, when the Jets come to Foxboro.
 
24Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:34 		PD, I could just as easily act as a scout and videotape the 3rd base coach giving signs by purchasing a ticket to the games...but I was just citing something as arbitrary as what the patriots are accused and guilty of doing.

per chicagobears.com as of 8/15/07:
The radio communication between the quarterbacks coach and the quarterback cuts off with 15 seconds left on the play clock. I spoke to Rex Grossman about the radio communication and he told me that about 10 times a season the play call gets cut off and he has to come up with his own. He also told me that about 90 percent of the communication involves the play call...

Based on the above, it is virtually impossible to communicate the entire play and then notify of a last minute change (such as a defensive hand signal) on the fly.

My personal contention is that Belichick & the Patriots were doing that to "leave no stone unturned" in the event that Pats are behind and forced to go into a two minute drill to win the game. That way they can leverage their prior research in deciphering hand signals to effectively attack a given defense such as the Jets, possibly in the playoffs. By no means did the videotaping help them beat the Packers last year (as referenced by JS Online) or the Jets this past weekend. Each team was clearly overmatched.

As for their punishment. I really think they should heavily fine the Patriots (maybe help fund the communications system for defensive players), definitely suspend Belichick from the complex for one full week, and a loss of a 3rd round pick and work your way up from there. I think a 1st round pick is a tad excessive considering their is no precedent for this.
 
25Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:42 		I don't thin a 1st is excessive at all based on teh fact that they were caught doing it before and caused all 32 teams to be warned and teh same guy did it again as was busted clearly in disregard to said directive. Coach B is obviously the one behind it.
 
26Perm Dude
      ID: 49836128
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:50 		I agree. If you are awaiting a precedent, none would ever occur. The Pats are known cheaters and a hard line needs to be drawn, IMO.

pd
 
27Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 12:54 		Bill Belichick released a statement regarding the videotaping allegations Wednesday.

"Earlier this week, I spoke with Commissioner Goodell about a videotaping procedure during last Sunday's game and my interpretation of the rules. At this point, we have not been notified of the league's ruling. Although it remains a league matter, I want to apologize to everyone who has been affected, most of all ownership, staff and players. Following the league’s decision, I will have further comment."
Source: Patriots.com
 
28Frick
      ID: 21041187
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 13:52 		I wonder what his interpretation was? Was it similar to no bumping past 10 yards when the Patriots were tackling Indy receivers regardless of where they were on the field prior in the play-offs. Well we're going to keep doing it until you catch us.

I guess it's simpler to say, it's only cheating if you get caught.
 
29Perm Dude
      ID: 49836128
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 13:53 		His interpretation was "It doesn't apply to me."
 
30sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 13:59 		His interpretation was "It doesn't apply to me."

Bill "George Bush" Belichick??
 
31Mark L
      ID: 25155512
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 15:01 		If Belichick hadn't been caught cheating at Lambeau last year the Packers might have scored.
 
32smallwhirled
      ID: 541151619
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 15:14 		This whole thing just really pisses me off. Makes me hate Belichick and the Pats even more. I'm just tired of their whole story and their mini-dynasty 3 SB in 4 years. I can't root for them at all. The tackling of WRs in the secondary, the smug attitude, what happened in the San Diego game last year, the way Belichick dresses, the way he can't even shake Mangini's hand after a game. I could go on forever.

I hope the punishment is harsh.

I was watching a segment yesterday where Mark Schlereth (sp?) gave a rough outline of how something like this could be used in a game situation. That segment made me cringe.


The team I like isn't even a rival of the Patriots, and I still can't stand them.

....and I'm this pissed? Imagine if I was a Jets fan! Pure hatred.

I can't judge this objectively.
 
33Alex
      ID: 8718115
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 15:19 		I don't even follow football closely and this pisses me off. I think they should forfeit the game AND lose draft picks. Even his apology sucks - he's apologizing to those who were HELPED by the cheating (Patriots owners, players, and fans) rather than those who were hurt (other teams). I think he really is only sorry he got caught.
 
34JTSERB
      ID: 312231116
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 16:03 		I don't know how much it really helped the Pats I mean they should have beat the Jets anyway, but to compromise the integrity of the game like this is very bad. Goodell should act quick and strong, I say Pats should lose every draft pick next year. You cannot forfeit the game. I think this is good though that all these illegal happenings have been coming out this year. IE: the ref cheating and the pats. Everyone knows there has been cheating going on for years, but it was never spoke of. Im sure goodell will give an appropriate penalty, he has done a good job so far
 
35Ender
      ID: 5963859
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 16:46 		I think it's naive to think that they only did this against Green Bay and the Jets. This is pretty apparently (at least to me) a systematic thing and has been going on for quite some time. It's therefore nearly irrelevant as to whether it aided them in thes 2 specific games. That shouldn't even be taken into consideration as far as punishment goes.
 
36sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 16:53 		Have to agree there Ender. Those two particular games, are simply the two where they got caught. To even propose that it was the only two times they tried it, is naive to the extreme. (Not to mention unsupported by any sort of logic at all.)

Belichicks "apology" as it were, reminds me of Vicks apology. Insincere, incomplete and grossly insufficient.
 
37Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 17:03 		Throwing more fuel to the fire...

from profootballtalk.com:
DID PATS USE RADIOS ON DEFENSE?

Now that the entire pro football community is atwitter over the allegations/proof of cheating by the New England Patriots, we're hearing more rumors on the NFL grapevine regarding the extent to which this stuff went on.

In addition to the rumor we heard on Wednesday that the Pats were putting microphones on defensive players in 2006 to pick up audibles and offensive line calls, we're now hearing that there has been a rumor for years that the Patriots have inserted a radio in the helmet of one or more defensive players for the purposes of direct communications with the coaching staff.

Such a tactic, if true, would be an even more significant violation of the rules, in our opinion. As several readers have pointed out, the only thing illegal about the signal-stealing issue is the use of the electronic equipment to record the images. Nothing prevents a team from using low-tech means to track signals and connect them to the defensive coverages used. It's simply harder to do it via the naked eye, especially since the video can be used later to confirm the specific signals given, if/when the team with the video is preparing to face the same opponent in the future -- or a member of that coaching staff who might use the same signals in a new city.

So the only competitive advantage is that it's a better way of doing something that already can be done.

In contrast, using radios in the helmets of defensive players gives the team access to something that folks who follow the rules simply can't use.

Keep in mind that this new twist is only a rumor, one of many that are now on the NFL grapevine as this story continues to percolate. Still, given the events of the last 48 hours, it's hard not to rule out anything at this point.

If the above proves to be true, what are your guys thoughts????

 
38sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 17:14 		IF true...take action similar to what the NCAA would take. Bar the team from post season play for a year or two. Boot Belichick to the curb, and dont look back.
 
39Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 17:21 		you know what sarge...thats actually a great idea and one of the only posts so far that I've wholeheartedly agreed with!

Too bad that will never happen b/c of the Ratings their media market brings in via advertising dollars.
 
40Kyle
      Donor
      ID: 052753312
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 17:26 		I also agree Sarge. If they kick out players for breaking the rules why not kick a team out for breaking the rules? It would be extremely tough though, since in college the players are playing so they can get drafted. The players in the NFL are playing for the playoffs, so what would be the reason for NFL players to play hard if there was no playoffs in sight?
 
41holt
      ID: 587112719
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 17:33 		can't give an opinion without knowing what the rule is. qb's can use radios but defenses can't?

smallwhirled, I totally agree. for numerous reasons (more than I have time to explain) the Patriots have been my most hated team in the NFL for a few years now, and they aren't even a rival of the two teams I pull for (rams/steelers).

My hate started with the "tuck rule" game, and grew with every garbage 3-pt win they piled up after it. I can't judge this objectively either. I hate the very mention of the names Brady, Bruschi, Belichik, etc.
 
42Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 18:07 		Ladies and Gentlemen, the 2008 Los Angeles Patriots!

I'm a Colts fan, to think that Manning could have 3-4 rings now and Brady would have 1 isn't in the realm of my understanding. If the microphone rumor is true it suddenly seems those great ballplayer moments of NE defenders always being in the right place are a bit cheapened if not fraudulent.


More fuel for the fire, the Rodney Harrison HGH story hasn't brought nearly the firestorm I expected.
 
43Electroman
      ID: 73332719
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 18:26 		Wouldn't other teams be aware of this, like the Jets(Mangini), Browns(Crennel) and all of the other teams that have plucked from the coaching staff.
 
44Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 18:52 		That depends on if they talked. This was the 5th or 6th meeting between Jets and Pats since they hired Mangini.
 
45Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 454491514
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 18:55 		http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm
Rumors also are swirling that Jets coach Eric Mangini, who was with the Pats through the 2005 season, began to spread the word to other teams in 2006 regarding the tactics that Bill Belichick employs. But even after a close call last year in Green Bay, the Patriots kept doing it.

 
46Electroman
      ID: 73332719
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 18:58 		Are these allegations of the mics from last year, this year, since Belichick was coaching them? The D-coordinator would have to know about it. Mangini was for a year. Just seems that if the Pats were doing it, the Jets, Browns etc. must do it also. It must not work to well for the Browns though:)
 
47sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 19:07 		When Clev tried it, their Defensive guys kept tripping over the strings they used to connect the dixie-cups to one another. So they abandoned the idea early on.

:)
 
48smallwhirled
      ID: 541151619
      Wed, Sep 12, 2007, 19:22 		I agree Frick. Could Peyton Manning have a few more rings? Definitely a possibility.

The Patriots record versus a team the 2nd time they play them in a season is supposedly substantially better the 2nd time around. There are certainly many other factors involved such as momentum, injuries, legitimate pre-game adjustments made by a coaching staff, etc.....but this kinda bothers me.

Sometimes I wonder when watching the Patriots how the offense moves the ball so efficiently (in the past) with what I'd call a lack of playmakers. How Brady would go through games almost untouched facing top tier defenses who generally pressure the QB at will. The whole "no-name" thing on the offensive side of the ball especially. That's what pisses me off. Of course, they went out and bought some free agent WRs this year...but this all kinda bothers me.


I hear ya holt, how about Mike Vrabel ever cracking any playing time in Pittsbrugh before we dumped him? How about castaways like Chad Scott who was horrible for the Steelers at the end of his stay, to become a guy the Patriots picked up and actually helped them one year. Again, all this kinda bothers me.


I'm way too invested in this whole thing right now. It's really bothering me, when I really shouldn't care that much about this.
 
49Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 00:41 		HBO's Peter King said on Inside the NFL that he expects the league to take action against the Patriots for stealing signals by as soon as Friday.

King speculates that the Patriots will most likely lose a second-round pick at least. Other scenarios have coach Bill Belichick being suspended one game.
 
50TB
      Sherpa
      ID: 031811922
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 01:51 		I recorded ESPN tonight so I could see the bit on this news. Honestly, I have to record it these days so I can fastforward whenever they let Sean Salisbury speak. He was on the "hot-seat" tonight talking about it so I forced myself to watch. He really is an idiot. Summed up he basically said that everyone tries to cheat so it's a non-issue. Toss Belichick a fine and move on. Complete fail.

I will be upfront and say I hate Belichick and the Patriots. I still have nightmares about the tuck-rule and there will always be an asterick on that *championship to me. Belichick has come across as a jackass (Pitt game a couple years ago comes to mind) and he sucked as a coach until Brady came along. Now he is a genius?

I don't think so. I'm sure there are other ways he's found to cheat. At another football forum, I carried around a sig from Dan Le Batard that went something like this, "Bill Belichick, for example, was Dave Wannstedt before stumbling upon Tom Brady in the 6th round." That is so true.

The rest of the ESPN fluff pieces seemed to try to show all these other past examples of past cheating to perhaps soften the blow. I'd love to see him suspended for a lenth of time and a loss of some draft picks. Man, I hate Vrabel too.

LT2 was funny when he was asked about it. I'm looking forward to seeing how the Pats do against the Chargers this week. I can't believe I will be rooting for the Chargers to spank them.
 
51Seattle Zen
      ID: 86541617
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 02:16 		I really didn't realize the amount of animosity Belichick has generated.
 
52Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 11:42 		New breakfast cereal debuts...

link
 
53Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 11:46 		Wow, nice find Guru!

SZ, go to Czabe.com to read a good commentary on why there is so much animosity towards Bellicheck.

 
54sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 12:49 		roflmao at #52!
 
55Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 16:09 		The league has always seemed to cower to him. As did the refs. I couldn't believe how they let their defenders hang all over the receivers and get away with it. Manning wasn't great in that playoff game, but what if they had called the obvious PIs?!?! Owners across the league were pissed as were coaches that it led to a very tight PI rule and that finally helped.

In comes Goodell who doesn't play that. I didn't know if Goodell was the answer or not but man, I'm becoming a huge fan quickly. Even most of the players are tired of the crap going on. I'm actually hoping for OVERKILL from the NFL on this issue. To violate a rule is one thing, but to blatantly disregard it after being caught before needs to be dealt with severely. We're all counting on you Roger. Don't let us down! Somehow, I don't think he will. But I would be absolutle shocked if he forfeited the game. In fact, I would say the chances of that are nil. I am rooting for a huge fine, multi-game suspension and loss of multiple draft picks--including a first rounder for this year. Does the punishment fi the crime? Probably not, but it is needed in this case.
 
56Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 16:36 		Jim Rome said Goddell will suspend him and rip off a very high draft pick. It's commentary, but it's inline with my thinking as well. Calling him "The Hoodie" and saying that he has been doing this ever since he was in Cleveland and has done it every single game since. Wow! Rome is ripping him hard. Talking about his 3 rings are a joke, etc. Saying the real Coach B is starting to leak out.
 
57Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 16:48 		http://www.profootballtalk.com/photo.htm

check out the new patriots logo...*laughs*
 
58Frick
      Donor
      ID: 3410101718
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 17:19 		In a completely unrelated note the Williams F1 team was just fined 100M and had all of their championship points taken away. They went from leading the constructors championship to not being removed. Apparently they will also not be eligible for the prize money that comes from the constructers championship. The FIA (ruling body) also stated that additional penalties could be handed down. The drivers for Williams were granted immunity in return for their testimony.

What would be an equivalent penalty for in the NFL? A huge fine, no TV money, and no play-offs?

I'm pretty sure that the no TV money would quickly have every owner putting a stop to crap like this in a heartbeat, but it will never happen.
 
59KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 15023167
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 17:21 		Belichick better be glad he's not part of F1. McLaren fined $100m for spying.
 
60sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 19:09 		I still say susopend the organization from post season play, even only for one year.

What 1st or 2nd rd quality collegiate player, is going to sign with a club where the playoffs are absolutely, 100% OUT of the equation? They can have their "picks". Now lets see them sign the players.

Oh yeah...and boot Beli to the curb...permanently. Lifetime ban from all things NFL. No announcers job of NFL games, no working as a player agent, no working in the front office of ANY NFL team.
 
61BoNkA
      Donor
      ID: 019742310
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 20:48 		From ESPN:

Bill Belichick was hit with a $500,000 fine Thursday night -- the maximum allowable by NFL by-laws -- for violating the league's policy on videotaping the Jets defensive signs Sunday. In addition, Roger Goodell notified the Patriots that they would forfeit a 2008 first-round draft choice if they reach the playoffs, or second- and third-round picks if they do not qualify for the playoffs. The club was also fined $250,000.
 
62tastethewaste
      ID: 37871020
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 21:21 		No Suspension??
 
63holt
      ID: 587112719
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 21:23 		I was just thinking, what becomes of the guy who had the job of doing the videotaping. Couldn't help but think of the John Candy scene in Stripes. "Sarge, does this mean we're through for the day?"
 
64holt
      ID: 587112719
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 21:48 		here's an article that's almost 3 years old. it makes it pretty clear how heavily Belichik relies on computers, basically because it's a way to get an edge that doesn't count against the salary cap. the article is pretty long. here is the relevant section:

The Secret Of Their NFL Success
Lesley Stahl Talks To Super Bowl Coaches Belichick And Fox


Both Belichick and Fox are like that. They're complete and utter detail freaks, something a coach has to be to win in the NFL today.

"They have it down to what is eaten on the plane," says LaMonte. "What the player can have on the way home. What the socks look like in pre-game. What the meals are like at training table, breakfast, lunch, and dinner and the snack at night. …Some coaches have been so compulsive, they change the toilet paper to make it right in the bathrooms."

"There's really nothing, no decision is made that doesn't cross my desk," says Fox.

Coaches have always been field generals, of course. Think Vince Lombardi.

But today's game is far more complicated and strategic, and one reason is that these generals have a weapon Lombardi never had: the computer.

NFL teams have more software engineers today than water boys. The Patriots, the Panthers -- every team spends millions on special video player-super-computers that allow every coach to scout every opponent's every move.

Fox showed Stahl a game the Green Bay Packers played last year. "I could actually pick every game they've played and we can store up to three years," says Fox.

Who knew that Vince Lombardi and his film projector would turn into this? The technology lets you go back, slow-motion, even sort by player. "If I'm evaluating a wide receiver, say his number is 85, I can push that, load it in and basically pull out all the plays he was involved in," says Fox.

Fox spends endless hours at this. And Belichick comes to work at 5 a.m. to fire up his computer, and analyze his opponents.

This instant-replay scouting helps them keep track of a league that's constantly changing. Ever since free agency came into effect 10 years ago, players are always jumping from team to team.

"When I was defensive coordinator with the Giants in the '80s, we had the same defense every year. It was the same players playing the same positions against the other team's players," says Belichick. "They were the same players, so, you know, that's different."

Belichick, the economics major, is a master at managing free agency and another football science, "Capology." The NFL has a salary cap that limits what every team can spend on players. But there's no cap on coaches. Belichick seems to know just when to unload an overpriced veteran and sign an inexpensive young prospect.

"The NFL's really a little bit more like college, because in college, you turn your players over every four or five years," says Belichick. "In the NFL, you turn the majority of your team over in five years. Not everybody, but, you know, a high percentage of it. And…I look back to when I came here five years ago, and there's maybe six players."

"You can't have a team full of Pro Bowlers anymore, because monetarily, you can't keep them all in the budget. So when they have success, there's only so much to go around. They gotta go," says Fox. "Our average game is won by six points or less, so if all of them are close, coming up with that little edge is coaching."

Every coach now tries to find that little edge in the computer. They all have assistants with a new job title -- "quality control coach." They don't really coach at all. They spend all day entering and analyzing data. And consistent winners like Belichick and Fox are just able to do more with that data.

In addition to being able to call up a game on video, they can pull up any statistic to match that play. "What you do is chart the tendency of that coach, so that you can tell your team that 'in this situation it'll always be a run or always be a pass,'" says Fox. "So your team knows what to expect."

Of course, the other coach is probably doing the same thing, so he most likely knows as much about you as you know about him.

"There's a whole lot of the chess-game element involved in this," says Fox.

However, this computerized chess game threatens to get so out of hand that the NFL has tried to rein it in.

"We can't use any of this system on game day," says Fox. "They still want the human element. By game day, the coaches have crammed so many details into their brains and onto their clipboards that they themselves are walking computers."
 
65Perm Dude
      ID: 40851312
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 22:35 		We've reached the penalty phase...

Big-ass fine, lost draft picks. Nice.
 
66TB
      Sherpa
      ID: 031811922
      Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 22:42 		I wish he would have been suspened for a few games as well, but at least he was smacked pretty hard.
 
67tastethewaste
      ID: 37871020
      Fri, Sep 14, 2007, 18:08 		I actually dont like the penalty at all. Can Goodell prove the Pats were involved in the cheating? I dont like that the team gets punished but Bellichek is pretty much left alone. Bellichek has the loyalty of a rat. He could leave the pats minus 1 or more draft picks and suck up the 500,000 loss and make it up with a new team. Or Kraft at the end of the year can just give bellichek a nice 500,000 raise for winning 3 or by that time maybe 4 Superbowls.
The Pats also already have SFs 1st round pick. So they lose one of their 2 picks. They still have one.
 
68Perm Dude
      ID: 138411411
      Fri, Sep 14, 2007, 18:15 		It was a Patriot's employee who was busted, that's how they tied it to them. He had a Pats access pass hanging around his neck. I do agree with you on Bellichek getting off, but it is probably because they couldn't directly tie the employee to Bellichek.
 
69Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Fri, Sep 14, 2007, 18:21 		They could tie it to B. B even admitted that it as under his direction. He said he misinterpreted the rule. Of course he couldn't just say, you caught me. Players get suspended for blantantly violating rules. If you want to send a real message, sit the coach down.
 
70Frick
      ID: 21041187
      Fri, Sep 14, 2007, 23:34 		You mean like the sat Wade Wilson down for 5 games and 100k for taking an illegal substance for a medical condition? His excuse that he didn't realize the rule applied to coaches as well as players is much more believable than a misinterpretation of the rules. After a memo was sent out saying "Don't do it!"
 
71sarge33rd
      ID: 99331714
      Sat, Sep 15, 2007, 10:28 		"Don't do it!"

But thats so ambiguous.....That memo could have meant anything, depending on how you define it.

;)
 
72Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Sun, Sep 16, 2007, 11:30 		The Pats are also under investigation apparently for using 4 extra audio frequencies and three of them are illegal for sure according to Chris Mortensen of ESPN. The league put out a memo for this week warning all teams against those illegal communications.

ESPN is also reporting that the Pats also have to turn over all files, tapes, etc. of every game since Belichick took over the Pats. Anything short of full-compliance may lead to more sanctions--including suspension.
 
73Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 15:53 		ESPN's Sal Paolantonio reports that if ex-Patriots employee Matt Walsh is in possession of the Rams' walkthrough video from Super Bowl XXXVI, coach Bill Belichick will be suspended for one season.

Apparently commissioner Roger Goodell informed Belichick, upon fining him $500,000 and stripping the Patriots of a first-round pick, that a second strike would cost him an entire year. The odds on Walsh having the video seem slim, and a war of words between Walsh and the Patriots likely wouldn't result in any punishment if Walsh couldn't produce evidence.
 
74Perm Dude
      ID: 251231317
      Wed, Feb 13, 2008, 21:03 		Senator Spector is awfully unpleased with Goodall's handling of Spygate.
 
75Myboyjack
      ID: 56039812
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 10:42 		Sen. Specter needs to find something better to do with the resources of the US Senate or else resign.
 
76Farn
      Leader
      ID: 451044109
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 10:43 		agreed. He should get involved in the steroid hearings for baseball. We don't have enough people wasting money on that topic. :)
 
77Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 10:50 		I do think Specter's intentions are good and I'll admit that he's asking the same things that crossed my mind when I read that the NFL destroyed "all" evidence.
 
78Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 14:02 		RE: 75 - At first I would agree with that statement, but based on what I will provide below...Congress absolutely should be involved.

From Peter King's MMQB Tuesday Edition (2/5):

The NFL has a congressional antitrust exemption. That makes the NFL's business Congress' business. The antitrust exemption imposes on the NFL a sort of public trust. If teams [as opposed to individual players] are engaged in organized cheating and the league itself is doing nothing about it, it calls the credibility of the entire sport into question. The NFL is big business, and the Super Bowl is the biggest cultural event of the year. If the Pats cheated in 2002, and the league knows or willfully chooses not to know, then Congress might be protecting a tainted product from competition. In that case, it's more like professional wrestling than sports.

While I have no interest in seeing the NFL fail, I agree with Sen. Specter that the league's destruction of the evidence is highly suspicious, and was handled in a way that does not provide the viewing, paying public with confidence that what we are watching on the field is the product of two teams matching skills and wits on a level playing field. If the league cannot guarantee to the public the integrity of the product, then Congress is justified in re-thinking the antitrust exemption.

Farn - you sound as if these politicians don't do anything else but exclusively devote their time to investigating the NFL's Antitrust Agreement with Congress. I'm sure they can multitask...its just that the media doesnt show that side.

Now as for the point Ref makes...I think someone else in congress should be the one carrying the baton. Afterall, Specter is in bed with Comcast (the main reason all of us who have cable, along with Cablevision, don't have NFL Network). To me, that provides a significant conflict of interest. The whole thing stinks and eventually I think Belichick gets suspended for a year or just walks away all together.
 
79Myboyjack
      ID: 8216923
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 14:44 		but based on what I will provide below...Congress absolutely should be involved.


Uh...you think that because the NFL might have a anti-trust exemption that this justifies the resources of the US Senate being wasted on this silliness? I don't care if Roger Goodell, himself, has personally requested the US Senate take over the day to day operations of the NFL; I don't want ant of the 100 most powerful kegislators in the Universe taking up business time worying about whether the Pats had tapes of the Steelers D Cord. signals or whatever.

If this is the most pressing thing that Arlen Specter has on his plate he should move on. Maybe he could come arbitrate the new USA Swim rules for 8 and under swimmers.
 
80Balrog
      Dude
      ID: 02856618
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 14:51 		Arlen Specter is there to serve his constituents. I'd wager that in Pittsburgh there are more people (Pat-haters) that want this looked into than people who want water-boarding banned. It may not be pretty, but it is what it is.
 
81JTSERB
      ID: 481020120
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 15:00 		If I was Roger Goodell, I would release the following statement to congress.

Don't you have far more things to worry about? Like perhaps, a war to end? or maybe a economy to fix?
 
82Ref
      Donor
      ID: 539581218
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 15:52 		Are you nuts?
 
83Farn
      Leader
      ID: 451044109
      Thu, Feb 14, 2008, 16:01 		Farn - you sound as if these politicians don't do anything else but exclusively devote their time to investigating the NFL's Antitrust Agreement with Congress. I'm sure they can multitask...its just that the media doesnt show that side.

I watch plenty of what the Senate does besides football. And they don't solve much of that stuff either. So why do they have time to deal with football?

You want Congress to keep an eye on it? Pick a few interns from each office and let them ask questions. They don't get paid so we will waste far less tax dollars on this garbage.
 
84JTSERB
      ID: 481020120
      Sat, Feb 16, 2008, 09:08 		Obviously Ref, I was a joke and of course he wouldn't say something like that, but I was trying to prove a point. There are far more things that congress needs to look at than the sports world