Spygate or Saints worse

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from part-timer. Show part-timer's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : Nonsense. Of course people, Pats' fans especially, will make comparisons of the two situations because they are both rules violations by the management of the respective teams that are/were subject to league punishment. Just because you have some never talk about it hangup doesn't mean other people should share that dysfunction.
    Posted by BabeParilli


    Dysfunction! What type of A$sh0le have you graduated to being? Lets see you as a perported Pats fan dredge up the violations of Denver,Pitts,Dallas, Miami. NO BUT YOU would defend the right to dig up ancient history to besmirch the team of your supposed favorite to support. The saints situation is far above any and all recognized violations in the NFL yet YOU wish to find a way to tie that abomination of human behavior ( pay for inflicting intentional injury) to any thing the Pats may have done. Maby your extreme youth preclude you from being aware of the multiple admitted and realized violations and embarrassments of the NFL but don't let your ignorance to any of them be an excuse to remain fixated upon the one other violation you happen to be aware of. BABY your aggressive confrontational approach defending your right to constantly criticize the pats might be appreciated more on many opposing team boards but, you might blend in to much as you are obviously begging for as much attention as possible, be it negative or negative. Talk about dysfunction.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : You mean you can gain a competitive edge over an entire defense by taunting?
    Posted by UD6


    Here we go again, UD serving up some more of his poopoo pie.
    What is this competitive edge you speak of?  As far as I know, it's never been defined.
    I heard a lot of; well if "B' & "C" happened then "A" maybe, might could happen.
    Awesome!  But where is the definitive proof?  There is none!
    Others (NFL coaches that have done that very thing) have come out and said that there is "NO" or at best minimal advantage gained and simply not worth it.  What reason would people have for ignoring the opinion of EXPERTS?  Why would people ignore that such beneficial tapes never left the camera during the game?  Why was this so-called-rule never enforced before in the history of the NFL when it had apparently been going on for years? 
    Answer: People with agendas see what they want to see.
    Here's the reality.  It doesn't matter if a coach has a photographic memory and ESP and knows every single play a team is going to run in every single situation, it still boils down to blockers making their blocks and QB's making the throws and receivers making their catches.
    All the knowledge in the world won't help unless those things happen.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ChasaB. Show ChasaB's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    what the saints are doing is worse because:
    1.)the nfl said speficially dont do it, and investigated the saints, at which point the saints GM Lied tot eh NFL, and the saints owner told everyone "If this IS happening stop it right now"
    2.)The saints took what the nfl and owner said and said screw that noise and KEPT doing it
    3.)the saints paid players off the books which violates ANOTHER rule.

    Basically the saints are straight F'd
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    what the saints are doing is worse because: 1.)the nfl said speficially dont do it, and investigated the saints, at which point the saints GM Lied tot eh NFL, and the saints owner told everyone "If this IS happening stop it right now" 2.)The saints took what the nfl and owner said and said screw that noise and KEPT doing it 3.)the saints paid players off the books which violates ANOTHER rule. Basically the saints are straight F'd
    Posted by ChasaB



    Yup, it appears legal ramifications could happen:
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/michael_mccann/03/03/saints.bounty.system/index.html?sct=nfl_t11_a0
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    Steelers were first to finger the Colts for crowd noise, but Indianapolis continued on with it.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ChasaB. Show ChasaB's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : The common refrain is Bill Belichick is a genius.  Bill Belichick is the smartest guy in football.  Bill Belichick doesn't waste his time on useless things.  If these are true, then why would he continue to do something against the rules where no advantage is gained after being likely warned by the league regarding the Packers incident and after the leaguewide memo was sent?  It doesn't pass the smell test.  Why is it that before being caught from 2001-2006 the pats avg'd more points per game in the playoffs than when they had a better offense from 2007 to present?  Why did the pats have a 14-2 record during the 2001-2006 run before being caught, but only a 3-4 record since?   Look, forget about the record and the points - there are other possible ideas to explain that, but what can't be discarded is why the smartest genius coach ever chose to continue an illegal practice against likely multiple warnings that served no purpose.
    Posted by UD6

    So what you are saying is that the patriots cheated, but only in the playoffs?

    "spygate era" the patriots went 56-24 for a .700 win%
    After spygate the patriots went 64-16 for a .800 Win%

    Maybe you are just grasping at straws here, because to me it looks like the patriots have been Better since spygate and have just run into better teams in the playoffs.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    The common refrain is Bill Belichick is a genius. Bill Belichick is the smartest guy in football. Bill Belichick doesn't waste his time on useless things.

    If these are true, then why would he continue to do something against the rules where no advantage is gained after being likely warned by the league regarding the Packers incident and after the leaguewide memo was sent? It doesn't pass the smell test.
    Because BB's interpretation of the rule the way it was written was different than what was meant to be interpreted.  In fact, I have read many of attorneys accounts say that if taken to court, BB would have won.
    He referenced this and admitted he could have asked for clarification.

    Why is it that before being caught from 2001-2006 the pats avg'd more points per game in the playoffs than when they had a better offense from 2007 to present? Why did the pats have a 14-2 record during the 2001-2006 run before being caught, but only a 3-4 record since?
    This is the stoopidest argument of all.  The Pats average points per game have increased throughout the seasons and so have their wins.   Are you arguing that the perceived advantage only helped in the play-offs and not the regular season?  Also I seem to remember TB playing hurt in all those games, not to mention the D is not what it used to be.  Are those not valid reasons?
     l
    ook, forget about the record and the points - there are other possible ideas to explain that, but what can't be discarded is why the smartest genius coach ever chose to continue an illegal practice against likely multiple warnings that served no purpose
    BB loves to study film.  He earned his status by doing just that. Perhaps he had aversion to adapting to the new digital technology available.  I don't know, can only speculate.
    That still doesn't make him guilty of cheating or gaining any advantage.
    It only means that he saw a perceived loop hole and exploited it.
    If the commish wanted it stopped and BB was the reason for it, why didn't he take him aside and give him a warning?  They specifically warned the Saints, didn't they?  That's a little more than sending out a conflicting memo to the league as understood, the memo was not the same as the origional by-law. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Salcon. Show Salcon's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : So what you are saying is that the patriots cheated, but only in the playoffs? "spygate era" the patriots went 56-24 for a .700 win% After spygate the patriots went 64-16 for a .800 Win% Maybe you are just grasping at straws here, because to me it looks like the patriots have been Better since spygate and have just run into better teams in the playoffs.
    Posted by ChasaB


    You know, Trolls like UD really need to do their homework on the whole Spygate crap before they continue to bring it up as a point of contention.

    If you really take the time to do the research on the subject you'll find that it wasn't what ESPN and their ilk made it out to be.

    I'm not going into all the reasons why.  I'm over it and ignore all the Trolls who are not.  If they actually knew what they were talking about they just wouldn't post about the subject at all and make themselves look like bitter fools in the process.  
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    I am fairly certain the two situations are totally different. So, UD6 is not right at all.

    One has a rival, jealous team using an opportunity to frame the rival and use the media, leaking a tape, etc in order to frame something worse than it is. That, 8 months AFTER that same rival broke the same rule and went unpunished.

    The Saints, meanwhile, on the heels of an NFL lockout and lawsuits building due to former players' injuries sustained on the field, are paying players past the salary cap to try to injure other players. 

    One example is minor with no intent or attempt at deception, the other is sinister and has advantages on the field during the playing of the game.  This doesn't even account for players' careers being ruined by said pontential intential injuries.

    What the 1997 and 1998 Broncos did and what the Saints have done here are, unequivocally, moves that are more sinister at the core, as compared to an adjustment in a rule with regards to legal video scouting procedures.

    Not even close, actually.

    Watch carefully how the media covers this, however, as compared to the witch hunt via the media in 2007 in 2008 with what became known as "Spygate". 

    Sean Payton and Greg Williams aren't as villified through the media as Belichick because they aren't seen as "meanies" to the media. So, the media while try to make excuses for the Saints, etc.  Also, there is no grey area or convoluted wording in an illegal bounty tactic. It's flat out BANNED from the NFL, while team video scouting is not.

    The NFL is currently fighting on field injury related lawsuits with more to come and just addressed the Legacy Fund, which was long overdue.  Negligence from Loomis, Payton and Williams putthing themselves above the league rules is not something the league wants.

    Suspensions, fines and docked picks-a-coming.  Loomis will likely be fired since Benson told him to have Payton put a stop to it.  This will sink the Saints for a decade.

    I did find one accurate article so far on the matter:

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7645118/saints-coach-sean-payton-gm-mickey-loomis-deserve-fired-bounty-program
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    Everybody does spying, the Patriots got caught.  Everybody plays dirty, the Saints got caught institutionalizing their system for cash.

    The Saints are worse because this will keep on going for a long time!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    How do you get "caught" do something legal in the open? Paying out cash to players for trying to injure is clearly not something that is authorized by the NFL, while video scouting is. 

    Why are teams allowed to employ video coordinators then? Are all 32 teams allowed 100K for a 16 game season, to hand it to players who successfully injure the opponent? I don't think so.

    The only thing the NFL cares about is those game day tapes not being used during the game that day. That's why the rule says you can't film signals from those locations. The locations were put itno the rule to defend against the potential for visibility of any potential, beneficial in-game footage for use.  The sidelines are in fact not legal. Yes.   That's where Belichick was technically wrong, or apparently, many other coches/teams who didn't really bother to ask for a specified spot on the road.

    However, there is no way a wide ranging, panning camera will never capture a coach's signals, at some point over a 3 hour game. It's impossible. If you're told to film certain elements of a game, you're going to eventually catch coaches or players motioning with their hands.  Just by following a play on the sideline and a tackle out of bounds, will capture hand signals on the next play.

    Also, Goodell said other teams didn't follow the rule cleanly either, which proves, the rule wasn't really upheld technically for years, but the main concern was the intern ejecting a tape or showing a coach what he had captured.  Scouting is legal and allowed with CAMERAS.  This was why the NFL asked Walsh is he ever ejected tapes. Under oath, he said "no", predictably so.  Of course this wasn't some master plan to use advanced video scouting during games. 

    Again, this stuff is always going on during games.  If the NFL was truly concerned about some mystery advantage, they would not allow teams to film games to avoid this supposed potential for advantage. There are far too many former coaches backing Belichick for them all to be liars.   Knox, Johnson, Parcells, Shula, Johnson and Cowher aren't all lying for the heck of it.

    Please learn the rule and read the whole rule.  The whole reason why the road team HAS to be given a spot to film from is so the home team isn't seen as having a scouting advantage just by being the home team.  This part of the rule proves that NFL teams want to be able to film games, but each has to be able to do so from the specified spots. 

    Why is this so confusing years later?  I get it's purposely confusing for the fans who want to remain jealous of the Pats, but all the facts are out there.  You can't deny the facts.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ChasaB. Show ChasaB's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    Im waiting for UD6 to start demanding the second colts superbowl ring since the saints are cheaters. Come on lamebrain mcnabb this place up.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    If you should have a 1099 coming and you didn't file it... I'd say that the Saints are worse off.

    I still want to know how an O coordinator can afford to pay a hundred grand over the season.  Like in any fun scandal or in politics you need to follow the money.
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from couldntthinkofone. Show couldntthinkofone's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : You mean you can gain a competitive edge over an entire defense by taunting?
    Posted by UD6

    obtuse

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts