Overseas Bills Fan Posted February 6, 2012 Posted February 6, 2012 Before the Spygate events of 2007, the Pats were 12 - 2 in the playoffs, including three wins off the foot of Vinateri (no, Brady did not win them any of their Super Bowls, their kicker did). Since Spygate, they are 4 - 4 and 0 - 2 in the Super Bowl. Maybe the taping controversy has more teeth than expected, since, if anyone remember SB 39, the Pats were very cavalier in their approach to the game and seemed to know what the Eagles would do even before the Eagles did it. I sincerely believe Spygate helped them in their early success during this run. Now that they can't do it and were exposed, their post season record is much more pedestrian and their Super Bowl record is down right abysmal. Any thoughts?
Jerry Jabber Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Before the Spygate events of 2007, the Pats were 12 - 2 in the playoffs, including three wins off the foot of Vinateri (no, Brady did not win them any of their Super Bowls, their kicker did). Since Spygate, they are 4 - 4 and 0 - 2 in the Super Bowl. Maybe the taping controversy has more teeth than expected, since, if anyone remember SB 39, the Pats were very cavalier in their approach to the game and seemed to know what the Eagles would do even before the Eagles did it. I sincerely believe Spygate helped them in their early success during this run. Now that they can't do it and were exposed, their post season record is much more pedestrian and their Super Bowl record is down right abysmal. Any thoughts? There are a bunch of factors, including Spygate you could use. When the Pats won their 3 superbowls they had: Romeo Crennel as their DC Charlie Weiss as their OC Scott Pioli as their GM Thomas Dimitroff as their Asst. GM Corey Dillon as their RB IMO, those are all important factors on why the Pats haven't been as successful.
Stealth Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Either that or the overall quality of the Pats as a team hasn't been as good. Save their 2007 16-0 regular season they do not have the same kind of defense they had with Richard Seymour/Vrabel/Bruschi/Asante Samuel/Harrison. Hell if I wasn't a Bills fans I'd be re missed if I knew wtf the patriots lb's were and anyone on their front 7 in general outside of Vince Wilfork. Their corners are awful. Their safeties are not much better. Tom Brady has gotten older and has suffered more injuries. With age and injuries comes a bit of a breakdown in physical skills. He's been more prone the past few season's than during their heyday to being inaccurate with ball placement, he's a bit more skittish in the pocket, and not to even mention the overall quality of their wr's outside of wes welker is quite subpar. They got by on gronkowski/hernandez/welker. Spreading the field to allow their craptastic running backs to show some semblance of a running game. No question about it that team overall was better offensively when they had the like of Corey Dillon and Sammy Morris and a healthy Kevin Faulk over Green Ellis and Woodhead. It's great to use spygate to point out "why the pats haven't won" as a fan, but realistically from a football sense is that the pats today are not better than the early 2000 teams
Best Player Available Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Before the Spygate events of 2007, the Pats were 12 - 2 in the playoffs, including three wins off the foot of Vinateri (no, Brady did not win them any of their Super Bowls, their kicker did). Since Spygate, they are 4 - 4 and 0 - 2 in the Super Bowl. Maybe the taping controversy has more teeth than expected, since, if anyone remember SB 39, the Pats were very cavalier in their approach to the game and seemed to know what the Eagles would do even before the Eagles did it. I sincerely believe Spygate helped them in their early success during this run. Now that they can't do it and were exposed, their post season record is much more pedestrian and their Super Bowl record is down right abysmal. Any thoughts? Did anyone ever publish the extent of "spygate"? Also, would such an article/book be the truth? Other than an assistant running around with a camcorder what actually took place? I ask because I don't know and I doubt other than the participants anyone does. I do remember the Pats saying "everyone did it" Is that true? Who knows but more importantly who cares. This a Bills board. Maybe asking the question on a Pats board is the best thing to satisfy your Patriots curiosity.
Doc Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 (edited) Spygate obviously helped them cheat their way to 3 SB wins (by just 3 points apiece). It has nothing to do with the quality of the Pats teams in the past 2 SB's (especially since the Giants were wildcards both years, after going 10-6 and 9-7 in the regular season). They were caught illegally videotaping the year prior to Mangina outing them, were warned, and continued doing it, obviously because it helped them. After getting caught a 2nd time, the league handed-down the harshest penalty they could give, and in a style reminiscent of Nixon, hastily detroyed the tapes. Edited February 7, 2012 by Doc
BuffaninATL Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 On a parallel train of thought, I was blown away by the factoid that during this past regular season, the Pats did not beat a single team with a record greater than .500. - (cited by SportsCenter) I found this to be remarkable.....
Doc Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 On a parallel train of thought, I was blown away by the factoid that during this past regular season, the Pats did not beat a single team with a record greater than .500. - (cited by SportsCenter) I found this to be remarkable..... They wouldn't have beaten a single team with a winning record, if not for Evans blowing the biggest catch of his NFL career.
Dr. Trooth Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Dude... The Pats ranked 31st in defense. Just another example that offense sells tix and defense wins championships. Drive for show, put for dough.
Best Player Available Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Spygate obviously helped them cheat their way to 3 SB wins. It has nothing to do with the quality of the Pats teams in the past 2 SB's. They were caught illegally videotaping the year prior to Mangina outing them, were warned, and continued doing it, obviously because it helped them. After getting caught a 2nd time, the league handed-down the harshest penalty they could give, and in a style reminiscent of Nixon, hastily detroyed the tapes. Do you have link to winning 3 superbowls was "obviously" obtained by cheating? I am no patriot fan at all. But that as a serious charge that should be backed by verifiable fact, or not mentioned. Again, there to my knowledge wasn't even a congressional hearing (LOL like that would bring out the truth). But I think my point is clear. This stuff is more a Urban legend than anything. As much as many would like to believe its the truth. As for the burning of the tapes. Well, the NFL is a private corporation, not the white house. Maybe they burned them because they over stepped and there was nothing damming on them. They slapped the Hoodys hand with a fine. They did not ban him, which you think would happen if he cheated his way to 3 superbowl wins. its just my opinion of a extremely muddy, rumor filled tabloid like scandal.
dave mcbride Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Before the Spygate events of 2007, the Pats were 12 - 2 in the playoffs, including three wins off the foot of Vinateri (no, Brady did not win them any of their Super Bowls, their kicker did). Since Spygate, they are 4 - 4 and 0 - 2 in the Super Bowl. Maybe the taping controversy has more teeth than expected, since, if anyone remember SB 39, the Pats were very cavalier in their approach to the game and seemed to know what the Eagles would do even before the Eagles did it. I sincerely believe Spygate helped them in their early success during this run. Now that they can't do it and were exposed, their post season record is much more pedestrian and their Super Bowl record is down right abysmal. Any thoughts? What I've learned about Pats performances in Super Bowls: it pretty much always comes down to the last minute. At that point, it's 50-50. Sometimes you win, sometimes you don't. Nothing more, nothing less. I wouldn't read too much into it. The record is more or less irrelevant when measured against this basic fact. A couple of freaky plays by the Giants (Bradshaw's fumble being recovered by the G-Men; the Tyree catch) put them over the top; a couple of games in which their opponents didn't make such plays at the end (or in which the Pats had the ball last with a tie). The spygate stuff is completely and wildly overblown. I remember Jimmy Johnson saying that every team tried to look for the same sort of edge before every big game. The coaches would do whatever it took. I know the spygate plays perfectly into the good guy/bad guy narrative, but come on. Since Spygate, the Pats are 64-16 in the regular season. I mean, take off the blinders and give 'em their due.
UConn James Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Dude... The Pats ranked 31st in defense. Just another example that offense sells tix and defense wins championships. Drive for show, put for dough. Actually, it's more like, offense gets/can get you to the championship, but defense wins it.
Rob's House Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Cory Dillon was only there for 1 SB. Their main RB for the first two was a guy named Antowain Smith.
Doc Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Do you have link to winning 3 superbowls was "obviously" obtained by cheating? I am no patriot fan at all. But that as a serious charge that should be backed by verifiable fact, or not mentioned. Again, there to my knowledge wasn't even a congressional hearing (LOL like that would bring out the truth). But I think my point is clear. This stuff is more a Urban legend than anything. As much as many would like to believe its the truth. As for the burning of the tapes. Well, the NFL is a private corporation, not the white house. Maybe they burned them because they over stepped and there was nothing damming on them. They slapped the Hoodys hand with a fine. They did not ban him, which you think would happen if he cheated his way to 3 superbowl wins. its just my opinion of a extremely muddy, rumor filled tabloid like scandal. Tainted is tainted. Bonds took steroids. How many of his HR's were truly aided by them? Exactly how many races by Marion Jones were won thanks to steroids? How much of Merriman's stellar early career was aided by steroids? All, part, none? Again, you don't do something you know is wrong, much less after being warned about it, unless it benefits you, and the NFL's response to it, and the Pats' failure to win another SB only serve to corroborate it.
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Did anyone ever publish the extent of "spygate"? Also, would such an article/book be the truth? Other than an assistant running around with a camcorder what actually took place? I ask because I don't know and I doubt other than the participants anyone does. I do remember the Pats saying "everyone did it" Is that true? Who knows but more importantly who cares. This a Bills board. Maybe asking the question on a Pats board is the best thing to satisfy your Patriots curiosity. This essentially is a Pats board. Just look at the thread titles.
PromoTheRobot Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 I remember watching the Pats D and thinking their players had ESP. It was uncanny how they almost seem to know what was coming. Now we know why. In baseball you can legally steal signs by what you can see. The minute you start using cameras or recording equipment you are cheating. That's what I think the Pats did. PTR
EasternOHBillsFan Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Did anyone ever publish the extent of "spygate"? Also, would such an article/book be the truth? Other than an assistant running around with a camcorder what actually took place? I ask because I don't know and I doubt other than the participants anyone does. I do remember the Pats saying "everyone did it" Is that true? Who knows but more importantly who cares. This a Bills board. Maybe asking the question on a Pats board is the best thing to satisfy your Patriots curiosity. A lot of us care about this because it goes to the very heart of fair play and the NFL's reputation, for which the Bills have a vested interest!!! If you don't want to read about it, you don't have to CLICK the LINK.
Erik Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 There are a bunch of factors, including Spygate you could use. When the Pats won their 3 superbowls they had: Romeo Crennel as their DC Charlie Weiss as their OC Scott Pioli as their GM Thomas Dimitroff as their Asst. GM Corey Dillon as their RB IMO, those are all important factors on why the Pats haven't been as successful. Actually I think the coordinators might be the two biggest factors. The ironic thing about that is supposedly a handful of writers at the Hall of Fame committee used the argument that the only reason that Parcells had a Hall of Fame resume was Belichick and that's why he's not deserving of the Hall...by that logic I guess Crennel and Weis should go in ahead of Belichick.
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 My bet is Billycheat utilized taping back in SB25
dave mcbride Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Actually I think the coordinators might be the two biggest factors. The ironic thing about that is supposedly a handful of writers at the Hall of Fame committee used the argument that the only reason that Parcells had a Hall of Fame resume was Belichick and that's why he's not deserving of the Hall...by that logic I guess Crennel and Weis should go in ahead of Belichick. This isn't directed at you, but that's about the stupidest argument ever. Part of being a good coach is building a staff, and Parcells hired Belichick as his DC. And Weis. And Coughlin. And Crennel. (And Sean Payton later on after he was unjustly fired by Jim Fassel). Again, the stupidest argument ever against Parcells. Think about it: Parcells shouldn't get in because a guy who operated in a hierarchical organization knew how to hire the best assistants ever, and those assistants made the difference.
MattM Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 The Eagles ' D was swearing up and down when Spygate came out that it impacted that SB game--anyone else remember how the Pats* always called a screen at the right time in that game, almost like they knew what was coming? That's all I needed to see to determine how big a bunch of cheaters the Pats* are....
Recommended Posts