Pneumonic Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 Keep on defending the cheater... all good man. Like I said... you keep talking about ALL of these other cheaters, but yet where are they? It's a very simple defense much like going to bat for the 10 rioters who get caught out of a crowd of 1,000. The 10 caught are no more guilty than the the others are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
What a Tuel Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) generally speaking, yes i fully agree that if its a rule it should either be enforced as it has a purpose or removed if your not going to enforce the rule. that said, i dont think this qualifies as any type of major infraction and i would put it more in line with the fines seen for playing with an injury report, as opposed to docking draft picks, and suspension. IF he even violated the rule - as weve seen its not clear he did - i think where things are running off the rails a bit are the size of the offense and severity of the punishment. itd probably help the conversation if more people put in what they mean when they say they think he should get penalized. Yeah. I think the point is that by enforcing the rules (catching the cheater), you send a message (literally and figuratively) to all the other teams that this won't be tolerated. I am not sure what the alternative action would be? Ignoring it? Severity of the punishment can be discussed, but no one thinks if it really was against the rules, there shouldn't be repercussions here? Do they? Edited July 15, 2014 by What a Tuel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 I am fairly certain every NFL team keeps in touch with their players. In my opinion I think it is better for the league, players and all to do so. A coach that can text a player to say, "hey, happy birthday John, hows the offseason going?" just makes me feel all fuzzy inside. *raises eyebrow* 33 pages of "hey, happy Birthday Aaron, how's the offseason going?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickedface Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 yeah don't see anything happening from this. i'd be glad to eat those words, but the pats at the most will get a slap on the wrist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 Yeah. I think the point is that by enforcing the rules (catching the cheater), you send a message (literally and figuratively) to all the other teams that this won't be tolerated. I am not sure what the alternative action would be? Ignoring it? Severity of the punishment can be discussed, but no one thinks if it really was against the rules, there shouldn't be repercussions here? Do they? im pretty sure theres 100% agreement that if a rule was violated, that there should be a consequence. that leaves: 1) if a rule was violated (we dont know, but by the verbiage earlier it sounds questionable even if it was football related) 2) if the rule was violated should it be a minor fine, or sweeping and harsh organizational discipline (or somewhere in between) yeah don't see anything happening from this. i'd be glad to eat those words, but the pats at the most will get a slap on the wrist. what would constitute a slap on the wrist, and what would be your fair punishment? are you saying they will get a stern warning, and they should have a moderate fine? are you saying they will get a moderate fine, and deserve something much larger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 So, Belichick cheated. BFD! There isn't a coach in the NFL that hasn't cheated in his career. Yet many target Belichick and asterisk such a thing in relation to the Patriots. Not only is this perplexing but it screams of jealousy... You don't think that every NFL coach has, at some time during their ramp up to the epitome of coaching level in their sport, not once cheated? OK, nothing I say will convince you otherwise. So keep asterisking away You also have no proof that reindeer can fly but common sense prevails eventually. Also, do asterisk any coach or team that you know has been shown to cheat or is this honour only given and specific to the Pats? Sometimes it takes a flying reindeer reference to make a point. FWIW, I actually don't have a problem with asterisking so long as the asterisk rule is applied consistently, to all teams that have been shown to cheat, and is not just done in a manner specific to a certain team that has owned the Bills like a rented mule for the better part of 15 years straight. As I said previous, such action screams of jealousy. Sure, in an ideal world, there would be no cheating. But, in real life, there is cheating. Especially so at the epitome levels of business, such as the NFL, where the combatants are all competing for just 1 of only 32 jobs in existence. It's good that you are not posting your Patriots asterisk due to jealousy. I am not naive enough to believe that not a single coach didn't cheat to gain and advantage at least once in their ascension to be a NFL HC. Even Bud Grant. Is cheating not cheating? All cheating more does is make me a multiple times cheater. In the end, the person who cheated once and the person who cheated twice are still both cheaters. Perhaps, we need clarification on the defn of cheat. Not all cheaters are caught and fined and/or incarcerated though. Yet, they are still cheaters. And once a cheater, always a cheater. Doesn't matter how many more times the cheater, cheats. I understand your dislike for the C word. Just know that it's usage isn't only limited to the military nor was it my intent for it to be construed as such in my post. Apologies if it offended. Just so I'm clear .... you only feel as you do because Belicheat was the only one to have been caught cheating (videotaping)? What of the others who also cheated by videotaping but who didn't get caught? The league brought to the fore the issues of videotaping, which ended up in the spygate fiasco, by issuing a memo to all teams warning them to stop videotaping. There are countless accounts fo teams videotaping all the way to the dawn of video tape including a reference to some things that Jimmy Jonson made on the subject which I posted on page 3 of this thread. It's a very simple defense much like going to bat for the 10 rioters who get caught out of a crowd of 1,000. The 10 caught are no more guilty than the the others are. Why do Patriots Fans (You've admitted it many times, P) feel the need to defend Bellycheat constantly? And why do you care what fans of other teams think of him? Could it be the fact that he hasn't won a Super Bowl since "Spygate"? Could it be the fact that outside of New England (and ESPN HQ) the majority of fans just assume that the only way the Pats* can win a SB is by cheating? It's only because the only way the Pats* have ever won a SB is by Cheating. Buffalo, Minnesota, and New England* all have the same record in Super Bowls where there is no suspicion of one team cheating: 0 - 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 From the article: NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said then “This episode represents a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid long-standing rules designed to encourage fair play and promote honest competition on the playing field,” referring to the coach’s videotaping of his opponents. I was taught in pre school, that "a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid long-standing rules designed to encourage fair play" is also known as cheating. Making an excuse that it's OK because Jimmie Johnson did it too is a dubious argument at best IMHO. But then again I don't think it's OK to do whatever it takes to win wether legal or not. There are worse things than losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CountryCletus Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 It's a very simple defense much like going to bat for the 10 rioters who get caught out of a crowd of 1,000. The 10 caught are no more guilty than the the others are. According to their criminal record they are... Just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRQ_BillsFan Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 I think they should be forced to give up the franchise and suspend all players and team personnel for life. Oh and forfeit every game for the upcoming season. (2 wins is 2 wins after all) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 It's a very simple defense much like going to bat for the 10 rioters who get caught out of a crowd of 1,000. The 10 caught are no more guilty than the the others are. There is no defense for Belicheats cheating ways. Like I said, show me evidence that others have cheated..... Go on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PO'14 Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 Im gonna watch Grumpy Old Men in honour of Bill Billicheat! He sux, his attitude sux, he thinks he is holier than thou. FU BILLICHEAT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KollegeStudnet Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 Sadly, Roger will have all this swept under the rug and won't punish Billy Cheatingchek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 No. All I've done is say that this is hardly cheating. I did state that cheaters should be punished and never did I exclude Bill Belicheck. He was caught once and was punished. If this turns out to be a violation, he'll be punished. What's the problem? He's just the head coach of a rival football team who texted one of his plaers. He's not the !@#$ing leader of al Qaeda. Perspective. That's the only drum I'm beating. I want the Bills to go 19-0 every bit as much as you do. I'm not trying to harp on you or call you out for not being a true fan, I'm not that guy. I'm just surprised by your responses is all. You say you're for perspective, so am I. That's the point I originally made, the actual violation may be ticky-tack but it's yet another incident in a long chain of Bellicheat acting as if he and his team are above the law. At what point does it become a pattern rather than an isolated incident? And at what point will the NFL finally have enough? When spygate broke the NFL was handcuffed, they couldn't go after the *Pats too hard without tarnishing their own brand's recent history. Why else would they burn the evidence if not to protect the *Pats and the league in the process? Now though, if Roger wanted to spike Bellicheat for a pattern (if this recent allegation turns out to be true of course), he has the best opportunity to do so. I don't think he will. Because of all the people who think like you do, that it's just a text rather than a continuing pattern of flouting the rules. This isn't about Bills fans vs *Pats fans, it's about the *Pats legacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) Again as I said, it doesn't matter if you like it or not. Those are the rules. And since he's not a first-time offender… As for Manning, was there proof they talked football? Saban: "Adam was with me through two different college programs (at Michigan State and LSU). And Peyton, we were just talking ball. We talked about particular defenses that give us trouble with the no-huddle. Things like that." The three of them were "talking ball". People may not be interpreting "cheating" the same as a "rule violation"... But I think that everyone is using the two words synonymously and that is a whole other debate... I believe that violating the rules in a competitive setting is cheating... I don't believe that by a student not raising their hand to talk (if that's their rule) is cheating... Lol- was just typing my interpretation of the cheating when you posted that... I'm sure there are reasons for the rule- seems silly to think there are rules that serve no purpose, plus aren't they voted on by the owners? This has nothing to due with the competition committee which typically sets rules for the game and teams. This rule was negotiated into the CBA at the players' request as a way to keep from being pressured into (God forbid) doing anything officially football related during the off season. To call violating this rule "cheating" is absurd. It has nothing to do with football at all. Edited July 16, 2014 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CountryCletus Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Saban: "Adam was with me through two different college programs (at Michigan State and LSU). And Peyton, we were just talking ball. We talked about particular defenses that give us trouble with the no-huddle. Things like that." The three of them were "talking ball". This has nothing to due with the competition committee which typically sets rules for the game and teams. This rule was negotiated into the CBA at the players' request as a way to keep from being pressured into (God forbid) doing anything officially football related during the off season. To call violating this rule "cheating" is absurd. It has nothing to do with football at all. Nothing personal, but I hardly doubt that you are the one to determine whether this is cheating or not... I'm equally as certain that you are not the one to determine whether or not tibia football related Essentially we are all fans with opinions, and when we start declaring things as if they are facts, that's where more problems start.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Nothing personal, but I hardly doubt that you are the one to determine whether this is cheating or not... I'm equally as certain that you are not the one to determine whether or not tibia football related Essentially we are all fans with opinions, and when we start declaring things as if they are facts, that's where more problems start.... Really, it's not a matter of opinion. The rule has nothing to due with fair play--this much is clear. It's part of the CBA. There is no competitive advantage involved in this discussion. There is therefore no cheating. The NFL has rules about how players wear their socks. Violators are not considered "cheaters". This whole discussion is a just red meat.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CountryCletus Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Really, it's not a matter of opinion. The rule has nothing to due with fair play--this much is clear. It's part of the CBA. There is no competitive advantage involved in this discussion. There is therefore no cheating. The NFL has rules about how players wear their socks. Violators are not considered "cheaters". This whole discussion is a just red meat.... Actually, more often than not, I refer to it as violation of league rules... It's got everything to do with fair play.... IF every other team, coach, etc is obeying said rule- the one (for the sake of arguing) that violates said rule gains an advantage at some level... I'm not trying to flex my nuts about this subject, and while trying to remain objective and open minded- sometimes I can't see where some people are coming from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Actually, more often than not, I refer to it as violation of league rules... It's got everything to do with fair play.... IF every other team, coach, etc is obeying said rule- the one (for the sake of arguing) that violates said rule gains an advantage at some level... I'm not trying to flex my nuts about this subject, and while trying to remain objective and open minded- sometimes I can't see where some people are coming from There is no competitive advantage, no issue of "fair play" at all. Why are you claiming otherwise? This is an anti-nuisance rule--a violation of the CBA. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CountryCletus Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 There is no competitive advantage, no issue of "fair play" at all. Why are you claiming otherwise? This is an anti-nuisance rule--a violation of the CBA. Nothing more. You are suggesting that through allegedly 33 pages worth of text messages (font size not with standing) that if they discussed football, there is zero chance of a competitive advantage???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) You are suggesting that through allegedly 33 pages worth of text messages (font size not with standing) that if they discussed football, there is zero chance of a competitive advantage???? I wouldn't say a flat "no chance of any advantage" but I'd guess practically speaking there's little to no measureable upside though. Really the biggest perk would've been if they could have kept him out of trouble.... Which obviously looks like it failed miserably. Edited July 16, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts