Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 I think the key assessment questions are: 1. How would you feel if your opponents did this playing your team? 2. How would you feel if your team did this? My answers are: If an opponent did this to me I'd feel that they were pretty ticky-tack and unprofessional. This action is not a full scale violation of th rules (ex. they regularly made use of performance enhancing drugs but this clearly is a violation of both letter and intent of the rules setting up an equal playing field. One can argue and have reasonable difference of opinion whether this formal violation is driving 1 mph, 5 mph, or 20 mph over the agreed upon speed limit but yes this is a violation of the rules. It really changes the nature of the usual sports argument from how good are these Pats teams to how big should their asterisk be. 2. If my team di8d this to win the SB I would be a bit embarrassed. They didn't do it to win the SB. It was stupid and unnecessary. There's no way in hell it helped secure any win(s). This is akin to having pine tar on a baseball bat an inch too close to the barrel. It's not changing any games, but it's still against the rules. To answer your questions - I wouldn't give a crap if it was done against the Bills and I wouldn't give a crap if the Bills did it.
BarleyNY Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 Calling this cheating is like calling someone driving 66 in a 65 speeding. I totally disagree. Look at their fumble numbers over the years. I don't have time to do it again right now, but I compared the Pats number of fumbles (best in the league for years!) to the average number of team fumbles across the NFL. IIRC it netted out to between 6 and 8 lost fumbles a year. Some of those games would have been close enough for one turnover to make the difference in the outcome. A loss or two can change the playoff picture with differences in home field advantage - or even making the playoffs. The actual infraction might seem like a very small thing, but the overall impact was very big. I wish someone in the media would run with it. I will rework the numbers if I have time.
Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 I totally disagree. Look at their fumble numbers over the years. I don't have time to do it again right now, but I compared the Pats number of fumbles (best in the league for years!) to the average number of team fumbles across the NFL. IIRC it netted out to between 6 and 8 lost fumbles a year. Some of those games would have been close enough for one turnover to make the difference in the outcome. A loss or two can change the playoff picture with differences in home field advantage - or even making the playoffs. The actual infraction might seem like a very small thing, but the overall impact was very big. I wish someone in the media would run with it. I will rework the numbers if I have time. They ran the ball less than most teams over the years. They're just better than most teams. As much as people hate to hear that, it's true. The better teams usually win the most games.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 not guilty.............................(laffin) we all expect that to be the obvious answer..... but we can wish I totally disagree. Look at their fumble numbers over the years. I don't have time to do it again right now, but I compared the Pats number of fumbles (best in the league for years!) to the average number of team fumbles across the NFL. IIRC it netted out to between 6 and 8 lost fumbles a year. Some of those games would have been close enough for one turnover to make the difference in the outcome. A loss or two can change the playoff picture with differences in home field advantage - or even making the playoffs. The actual infraction might seem like a very small thing, but the overall impact was very big. I wish someone in the media would run with it. I will rework the numbers if I have time. I have stated this a number of times myself! They ran the ball less than most teams over the years. They're just better than most teams. As much as people hate to hear that, it's true. The better teams usually win the most games. how does one explain the HUGE leap in performance WRT fumbles after they Cheaters Championed that each team control their own balls after 2006? receivers fumble too. It's not just the RB's
Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 we all expect that to be the obvious answer..... but we can wish I have stated this a number of times myself! how does one explain the HUGE leap in performance WRT fumbles after they Cheaters Championed that each team control their own balls after 2006? They're better. Better players, coached by better coaches. You don't create a dynasty be deflating balls by 2 psi.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 They're better. Better players, coached by better coaches. You don't create a dynasty be deflating balls by 2 psi. No, creating a dynasty requires illegally video taping other team's practices, illegally keeping the headsets in the QBs helmets on longer than the rules state, and deflating balls below their legal levels. It also requires fluke luck of the "the tuck rule" and drafting your franchise QB in the 6th round. The *pats have always been cheating, have never stopped cheating, because Belichick is a cheater. It's what he does in his professional life and his personal life. He's a bum.
Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 No, creating a dynasty requires illegally video taping other team's practices, illegally keeping the headsets in the QBs helmets on longer than the rules state, and deflating balls below their legal levels. It also requires fluke luck of the "the tuck rule" and drafting your franchise QB in the 6th round. The *pats have always been cheating, have never stopped cheating, because Belichick is a cheater. It's what he does in his professional life and his personal life. He's a bum. Maybe he's just dumb for getting caught. You can't possibly think that most, if not all, teams have done all of these things (except draft Tom Brady - that doesn't happen much).
Deranged Rhino Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 Maybe he's just dumb for getting caught. You can't possibly think that most, if not all, teams have done all of these things (except draft Tom Brady - that doesn't happen much). The cheaters are the only ones to get caught -- repeatedly -- for such infractions. Once, you can overlook it. Twice, coincidence maybe. Many, many times? That's a pattern. And it's funny they didn't win another title until they found new ways to cheat/bend the rules. Belichick is a great coach but a horrible human being with questionable ethics. He's driven only by winning and will do anything, even cheating, to get what he wants. Some may find that endearing, especially if you live in New England, but I find it repulsive. He's a cheat, a known cheat, and will always be a cheat. The *pats legacy will be tarnished forever because Belichick can't restrain himself from cheating.
Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 The cheaters are the only ones to get caught -- repeatedly -- for such infractions. Once, you can overlook it. Twice, coincidence maybe. Many, many times? That's a pattern. And it's funny they didn't win another title until they found new ways to cheat/bend the rules. Belichick is a great coach but a horrible human being with questionable ethics. He's driven only by winning and will do anything, even cheating, to get what he wants. Some may find that endearing, especially if you live in New England, but I find it repulsive. He's a cheat, a known cheat, and will always be a cheat. The *pats legacy will be tarnished forever because Belichick can't restrain himself from cheating. A horrible human being? He's a football coach, for Christ's sake. I find it hard to label someone a horrible human being over a game.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 A horrible human being? He's a football coach, for Christ's sake. I find it hard to label someone a horrible human being over a game. If you look into his personal life a bit, you might come away with a much different outlook. He's a bum off the field.
Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 If you look into his personal life a bit, you might come away with a much different outlook. He's a bum off the field. I can see that he's had a couple issues with being faithful to women. But, still ... hardly a horrible human being. In my opinion, of course.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 I can see that he's had a couple issues with being faithful to women. But, still ... hardly a horrible human being. In my opinion, of course. Mine too. If he were on fire I'd put him out because I don't wish the guy dead. But attitude reflects leadership. It's not a coincidence that a man with his deplorable ethics is constantly being proven a cheat. But he wins, so no one questions it. That's fine, but let's not pretend the guy is a saint. His professional and personal record prove without question he's a cheater with compromised ethics and his team reflects that. !@#$ the *pats.
Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 Mine too. If he were on fire I'd put him out because I don't wish the guy dead. But attitude reflects leadership. It's not a coincidence that a man with his deplorable ethics is constantly being proven a cheat. But he wins, so no one questions it. That's fine, but let's not pretend the guy is a saint. His professional and personal record prove without question he's a cheater with compromised ethics and his team reflects that. !@#$ the *pats. I don't think he's a saint. I do think he's the greatest coach in the history of the game. I also think Brady is the best QB in the history of the game. Hard to lose games when you've got those two things going for you. The cheating ... I think it's indicative of the same flaw that guys like Bonds, A. Rodriguez and Manny Ramirez have .... it's not enough to be the best - they want to annihilate the competition. Winning isn't enough to people like that. That's the part that's always confused me about BB. He was already good enough to win playing fair/square.
Direhard Fan Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 It was all a big misunderstanding. The guy in the locker room etc. and he gets fired and end of story. We are truly sorry. We are working harder on our new caper and will be more careful about getting caught.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 I don't think he's a saint. I do think he's the greatest coach in the history of the game. I also think Brady is the best QB in the history of the game. Hard to lose games when you've got those two things going for you. The cheating ... I think it's indicative of the same flaw that guys like Bonds, A. Rodriguez and Manny Ramirez have .... it's not enough to be the best - they want to annihilate the competition. Winning isn't enough to people like that. That's the part that's always confused me about BB. He was already good enough to win playing fair/square. I can't give him the title of the greatest coach in the game, it's like giving Sammy Sosa the title of greatest baseball player in the game while he was juicing. Rewarding a guy for cheating by proclaiming him the best in the game only reinforces the idea that it's okay to cheat so long as you win while you're doing it. It goes against everything good sportsmanship is supposed to be about -- which I grant you BB doesn't give a turd about -- but that doesn't mean fans shouldn't. Don't twist this as me saying he's a bad coach or the *pats are a bad team. Clearly they aren't. But they're our rivals and known cheats. Those two strands get woven together mighty tight (as they should), !@#$ the *pats.
Gugny Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 I can't give him the title of the greatest coach in the game, it's like giving Sammy Sosa the title of greatest baseball player in the game while he was juicing. Rewarding a guy for cheating by proclaiming him the best in the game only reinforces the idea that it's okay to cheat so long as you win while you're doing it. It goes against everything good sportsmanship is supposed to be about -- which I grant you BB doesn't give a turd about -- but that doesn't mean fans shouldn't. Don't twist this as me saying he's a bad coach or the *pats are a bad team. Clearly they aren't. But they're our rivals and known cheats. Those two strands get woven together mighty tight (as they should), !@#$ the *pats. I can agree with this. When it's all said and done, I don't think he can be considered the best, ever, because he did get caught. That's what's perplexing to me ... I honestly think he would have been the best ever without the cheating.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 he's done more with less than any other HC The NFL burned the evidence ans fined them no suspensions The Luck of the Tuck gave them the first advantage Using illegal plays continuously opponents communications devices often have issues he is a genius to pull all of that off
mannc Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 I am very surprised the Commissioner has not weighed-in in this thread. Long overdue, I think.
Mr. WEO Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 The cheaters are the only ones to get caught -- repeatedly -- for such infractions. Once, you can overlook it. Twice, coincidence maybe. Many, many times? That's a pattern. And it's funny they didn't win another title until they found new ways to cheat/bend the rules. Belichick is a great coach but a horrible human being with questionable ethics. He's driven only by winning and will do anything, even cheating, to get what he wants. Some may find that endearing, especially if you live in New England, but I find it repulsive. He's a cheat, a known cheat, and will always be a cheat. The *pats legacy will be tarnished forever because Belichick can't restrain himself from cheating. Actually, of you are to be believed, they were doing the deflating for years, yet they won no SBs. This season, once the proper ball pressures were re-established half way through their first playoff game, they won out. So deflated balls had nothing to do with winning a SB.
die hard bills fan Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 Then why do it at all if it offers no competitive edge and risk being caught? Brady admitted he likes the balls under-deflated and numerous players have pointed out the advantages of using them. I think most agree that the balls did not/should not just deflate by themselves. I don't think the pats will be punished severely if at all but there are just too many unanswered questions to think there wasn't any cheating.
Recommended Posts