Spygate or Saints worse

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : I have never seen anybody so enraged with jealousy in my life. You can't possibly be dumb enough to believe what you just typed. Don't you ever get tired of making a fool of yourself? We are all SOO sick of you and your childish antics. Everyone here hates you. No one respects or wants you here- including the mods who have banned you several times. Yet you continue to show up here every day. What the hell is wrong with you? I just don't get it.This is crazy.
    Posted by df5[/QUOTE]
    LOL - df5 - nice deflection.  You didn't even answer the question.  A bluster no bite. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]I am sitting in my living room in New Orleans as I type this. You cannot believe how bad it is here. True who dat saints fans are devastated that their boys are in serious trouble. A huge majority are calling for the heads of Loomis and Payton. Sure, there is a small number who think that this is much ado about nothing but they are few and far between. I took a ration of shoot 5 years ago over spy gate and this would make it very easy to give it back. I can't. This is all they have their half arsed basketball team included. As much as a Boston boy can love his four teams, Saints fans spend two days getting ready for a game. It's serious stuff to them. Deep down they know they are going to pay an enormous penalty. But right now, it's sad to see them sitting there shaking their heads.
    Posted by nonola[/QUOTE]

    Wow, quite a difference between pats fans and saints fans.  When spygate happened everyone on this board circled the wagons and defended the coach even amidst the transgressions, but not in NO.  
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : Oh man Underdogg- Remember that video ya found that time where Ty Law picked off that Peyton Manning pass 1 handed, and all the while cradled it into his body with that 1 hand when he fell to the ground after leaping to get it (all the while supporting his body with the other hand)?  Hey, and remember when Bill Belichick was RIGHT there on the sideline goin' nvts because he had absolutely ZERO idea IF Law intercepted it (because he was cradling it with 1 hand and the oppossing direction), And so Belichick was dancin' and jumpin' and runnin' after Marvin Harrison on the sidelines (after doin' a double-take on Law), Looking- Desperately looking to see WhereTH the ball actually went?!?  Hey, and remember when you started that ignorant thread where you purported that Belichick was attempting to get in the way of Marvin Harrison the entire time, even though by the time Harrison (who was casually trotting along the sidelines near the bench AND behind Pats players off-field)- OR Belichick finally deciphered what went down and realized superman Ty Law actually picked that pass off 1 handed, Ty was already runnin' the opposite way...? Wait- This- this isn't what you're actually refering to, is it?  No...nooo, you don't wanna look that silly in 2 seperate instances on the excat same subject....Do you? 
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]
    come on laz - when that whole jets wall thing happened, don't you remember that they said they learned it from a former pats player who said the pats utilized it?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : No The Colts usually only cheated for big games, like churnin' the heat up to a buck 20 in the playoff game where a half dozen + Pats players were listed on the injury report with the flu, or by turning the up the stadium volume 220 decibels when the other offense was on the field...  Nope, other than that and against individual teams in any single game, The Colts Refs manage most of the rest (faceguarding-non-existant penalty, 4th and 2 where Welker had forward progress before getting hit, that NE perfect season year where NE had 185 penalty yards to the colts 15 penalty yards, and finally in any given season for the past 10+ years <minus only 1 single year now /> where Indy, unlike any other team ever, ranks in the bottom 5 to dead last on penalties called and penalty yardage).   No other than these instances of Indy "not cheating", As a standard Rule under The Colts Front Office's modus operandi, they only believe in "not cheating" only in instances wherein them "not cheating" affects Each & Every one of the 31 seperate franchises (rather than just 1 lone team in 1 game), whenever Polian decides to make one'a his pushes to reinvent or just rewrite The NFL RuleBook...  So no dogg, your franchise is golden...angelic choirboys who spend their off time building charitable low-income houses while helping old ladies cross the dirt streets of Indy, potmarked with deep wagon wheel rivets...  
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]

    ah yes the heat.  Love this one.  It wouldn't have been so obvious if the colts players were wearing air conditioners during that game, right?

    I just don't get the value of this assertion if the colts have to play in the same conditions, unless of course you think the colts gave the pats the flu. 

    Oh and the crowd noise - you mean the time when the Pats business partner - CBS claimed responsibility - that time?

    4th and 2 - and it was faulk not welker - sorry, not a first down. 

    keep them coming, though.  we all know belichick has more tricks in his book than any other coach could conceive. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : And there were plenty of comments from authoritative persons saying taping was common.
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]
    Yep, and nearly everyone here thought the pats shouldn't have been punished.  So now some of the board is hoping for the worst kind of punishment for the saints, and not all because of the act itself but because the pats were so severely punished.  Not much integrity there.  

    Ultimately my opinion on this is Goodell protecting the league for the future.  He's also got his own integrity on the line because of spygate.  

    x-players are going to continue to sue the NFL regarding their post playing days health and wellbeing.  The NFL cannot sit idly by, and allow incentivized head hunting or it will be out of the business of football due to judgment obligations very quickly.

    When the x-players run out of money due to their own mismanagement of funds, you can be sure there will be an ambulance chaser at their door telling them I can help you get some money.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : Babe is right.  And this memo was issued just before the Patriots violated it.  So, it had absolutely no impact on the previous Superbowls, when videotaping outside of these guidelines was widespread.
    Posted by Will-Redd[/QUOTE]

    Will, the memo was sent because there was evidence that it had been taking place against the rules, the pats, in particular had been fingered by the packers.  I am willing to bet that the pats had been warned and the memo was sent - not as a new rule - as a reminder.  Belichick blatantly disregarded it.
     
  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:
    [QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]

    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:
    [QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]

    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:
    [QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]


    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. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : 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.
    Posted by pezz4pats[/QUOTE]

    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.
     
  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:
    [QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]

    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:
    [QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]

    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. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : Wow, quite a difference between pats fans and saints fans.  When spygate happened everyone on this board circled the wagons and defended the coach even amidst the transgressions, but not in NO.  
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Dogg's right people...  I mean, I can understand and forgive in a single instant, some organized program whose lone reason for existing from the moment it came in to existance, Was in order to pay people large sums of money in order to place other people inside hospitals... 

    But some things in this world, are simply unforgivable, even upon being penalized far greater than anyone else in who mighta made a mistake once, in your chosen industry...ever-
     
    For instance:  Like when a pro football head coach doesn't bother to care about- not the 1st...nor the 2nd- But the 3rd "Stop Taping" memo (each & every one expressing TOTALLY different & contradicting guidelines which should be adhered to) which was sent to head coaches (over the course of 2 years mind you time-wise...while coaches continued taping after the 1st 2 memos), And said person simply continues taping another team's changing-every-game, sideline signals (like many of his peers had done for 2 decades + time), And said person turns that video-camera on for All of an extra full 1 Quarter of play after everyone else had ceased (except Indy...the most brilliant coach Indy ever had, created The Cover 2 defense; Which upon seeing how a Cover 2 is diagrammed, It is hands down no doubt, something a brain-damaged homeless man wouldn't admit to authoring, for fear of being labeled a "ret#rd"; I don't think Indy Coaches know what tv is, so the subject videotaping will forever be a non-issue to stone-age people). 

    This?  I'll never forgive Belichick until the end of time, and his life, his kid's lives, and evetyone whom ever spoke 1 word to him in person, Will forever be tarnished with the worst of the most despicable forms of sinning...

    But attempting to deliberately hurt people for a decent-sized payment...?  M-ehh...in my book, they've already been forgiven (unless they ever in the future, consort with Bill Sat#n Belichick)...  
     
  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. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]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.

    This is what we've been reduced to in this world.  No longer is it about the spirit of rules, but whether the rules written have been "lawyered" sufficiently to consider every possible "alternate" interpretation.  Its a joke.  Everyone bashes the NCAA for punishing athletes over miniscule infractions, but it is exactly the kind of "how can 'interpret' language in order to get what I want" mentality advanced by Pezz that requires them to do so.  I respect Belichick for his x's and o's and his ability to motivate players to play their best, but he got his just desserts for his egregious efforts to "interpret" his way around rules especially after being warned.  If you want the coach who's going to look for every loophole, then don't complain and expect punishment for others who do the same thing.     

    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?  look, forget about the record and the points - there are other possible ideas to explain that,  -

    as I noted in italics - forget about what I said regarding the records, other things can be used 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. 

    The point you made, however, was that experts said no advantage could be gained from taping.  so why would he do it?  Further, how do we know Belichick wasn't warned previously.  We know that the pats were caught taping the packers.  Since we are in the speculation game, I am going to speculate that Belichick was likely talked to privately by the league about this incident without punishment.  If that's the case, then Belichick disregarded not only the private conversation, but also the memo.  Unlike many here, I don't think that the league operates only to stick it to NE.  Its not good business to do that.  
     
  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:
    [QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
    obtuse

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    I want to make myself clear here.  I am not defending the saints.  In fact, I fully expect them to get a penalty that will make pats fans blush.  If not, their penalty will be at least a bad, but I expect it to be much worse, and I think they deserve. 

    Whether or not this was commonplace in the league doesn't matter.  The Saints were caught.  I heard today on NFL radio that the league has been investigating this for at least a year, but did not have what they needed to punish until now. 
    Don't worry pats fans, imo, you will feel vindicated after this thing gets settled, and I think the firestorm is only just beginning.  The league is in full on protection mode as it relates to injuries.  With former players coming out of the woodwork to sue for the physical and mental ailments that they claim were a direct result of playing in the league, the NFL will stop at nothing come down on anyone that fosters a program like this.

    You can guarantee it.   
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate or Saints worse

    In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate or Saints worse : obtuse
    Posted by couldntthinkofone[/QUOTE]

    No more obtuse than comparing spygate to taunting.
     

Share