DC Tom Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 Pippen was a great tandem player...to Jordan, no doubt. Jordan led Bulls won 3 rings and she Jordan took a year off, no rings. Pippen had a below average year. Jordan comes back and three more rings. Pippen leaves Chicago and disappears into mediocrity. And neither cheated.
Dan Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 ... They got into 3 SBs without any taping. They lost 2 of them with (presumed) "deflated balls" and lost both. They won their only SB in 10 years with regulation pressure balls. That's all I'm saying. They made it to last SB by beating the Colts, from 14 points down, AFTER the balls were reinflated to proper pressure. Pointing out these obvious facts is not "defending" anyone... ... No, they made it to the last SB, and all others, by bending the rules illegally throughout the season allowing them an unfair adavantage which lead to more wins than they should have earned... enough wins to get into the playoffs with home field advantage.
Mr. WEO Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 And neither cheated. Time to flip the record, Tom... No, they made it to the last SB, and all others, by bending the rules illegally throughout the season allowing them an unfair adavantage which lead to more wins than they should have earned... enough wins to get into the playoffs with home field advantage. From deflated balls? In the AFCE? Yeah, that's what did it for them. Did you notice what other team's "plays/fumble ratio" skyrocketed in the years after Manning and Brady and others lobbied for teams to handle/choose balls before games?
Dan Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 Time to flip the record, Tom... From deflated balls? In the AFCE? Yeah, that's what did it for them. Did you notice what other team's "plays/fumble ratio" skyrocketed in the years after Manning and Brady and others lobbied for teams to handle/choose balls before games? I'm not sure what you're arguing. That they only play teams in the AFCE? Or that other teams fumbling the ball more is evidence that they didn't gain an advantage from delfating the balls below regulation allowances? Or perhaps you're proposing the "the cheating didn't help them at all, they just did it because they got bored playing by the same rules as everyone else, so their win/loss record would be the same, ergo it's not really cheating because you can't provide a peer reviewed scientific article to demonstrate the cheating aided in their winning" argument? That team has cheated, systemically, for years. Players, coaches, equipment personnel have all been found guilty. The league determined that fact on multiple occasions and has punished the team on multiple occasions over multiple years. Anyone saying that the cheating doesn't matter and should be forgotten is just ignoring reality, lacks any moral conviction, or is just a troll attempting to ellicit reaction.
MattM Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 To quote an anonymous member of the NFL's Competition Committee in a NYT article post-Spygate "it was just one team, really, brought before us over and over again on suspicion of cheating". He was backed up by another unnamed member of said committee on that as per the same article.
3rdand12 Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 And neither cheated. of course they did you old bat! they all did it. everyone dids. Thats the national pastime. push the envelope till you get caught. what?
DC Tom Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 of course they did you old bat! they all did it. everyone dids. Thats the national pastime. push the envelope till you get caught. what? Yeah? Well...they didn't cheat, and if they did it didn't matter, and the science was "100% flawed" anyway. Or something. Time to flip the record, Tom... The B-side's just Nelson saying "HA-ha!"
K-9 Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 wonderful ; ) Maybe somebody who is well-versed in photoshop can get Brady's face on the guy in the pic. GO BILLS!!!
YoloinOhio Posted June 27, 2015 Author Posted June 27, 2015 @SBNationNFL: Like waiting a long time for things? Good! Tom Brady's appeal won't be settled until late July http://t.co/GPMsaqgImuhttp://t.co/1VOzhtKcfl
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) Wow, you over off your deflated ball post pretty quick. Shocking. Anyway, they made their "illegal substitution" right in front of the refs and the refs announced it on the PA. Harbaugh cried loudly about that play and that was it. please repost what auto correct screwed up. you over off your http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007 Ironically, both studies saw the same exact starting point: 2007 was the first season where things really changed for the Patriots. Something started in 2007 which is still on-going today. The data is jaw dropping, and this visual perfectly depicts what happened http://sports.yahoo.com/news/deflate-gate-triggers-stat-spat-as-analysts-attempt-to-solve-why-patriots-don-t-fumble-003107565-nfl.html the finding trickles down to individual players, in some cases. Kevin Faulk was drafted by the Patriots in 1999 and played in New England through 2011. Up until the 2007 season, Faulk had 23 fumbles. After that point, he had two. Danny Amendola had 10 fumbles in four seasons with the Rams, then came to New England and lost the ball only once in two years. It's a Miracle!!! 0:) 0:) NEXT they made their "illegal substitution" right in front of the refs and the refs announced it on the PA. Harbaugh cried loudly about that play and that was it. FUNNY MR DEFENDER you choose to forget / misremember the ILLEGAL PLAYS immediately after said plays that the NFL said were illegal. Funny but said play is not ILLEGAL I wonder why? http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12556985/new-england-patriots-formation-now-ruled-illegal-substitution New England was down by 14 points twice in the game before using their antics, and what is worse they repeated the cheating play the next week! The New England Patriots**** scored a touchdown in the AFC Championship Game on a play that should have been called back for an illegal substitution, NFL head of officiating Dean Blandino told reporters. http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/01/30/new-england-patriots-illegal-play-ineligible-receiver “In the Baltimore game, [shane] Vereen reported as ineligible several times,” Dungy explained. “If he stays in the game he must report again and continue to be ineligible. He must come out of the game for one play or there has to be a time out for him to play as an eligible receiver. On the touchdown drive Vereen played one play as ineligible and then played the next play in an eligible position. There should have been a penalty.” http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/23/dungy-nfl-needs-to-restrict-new-englands-substitution-game/ repeated cheating season after season Please. please stop defending the abusers of NFL rules do I need to link more stories? Edited June 27, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever
Rockinon Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 please repost what auto correct screwed up. you over off your http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007 Ironically, both studies saw the same exact starting point: 2007 was the first season where things really changed for the Patriots. Something started in 2007 which is still on-going today. The data is jaw dropping, and this visual perfectly depicts what happened http://sports.yahoo.com/news/deflate-gate-triggers-stat-spat-as-analysts-attempt-to-solve-why-patriots-don-t-fumble-003107565-nfl.html the finding trickles down to individual players, in some cases. Kevin Faulk was drafted by the Patriots in 1999 and played in New England through 2011. Up until the 2007 season, Faulk had 23 fumbles. After that point, he had two. Danny Amendola had 10 fumbles in four seasons with the Rams, then came to New England and lost the ball only once in two years. It's a Miracle!!! 0:) 0:) NEXT they made their "illegal substitution" right in front of the refs and the refs announced it on the PA. Harbaugh cried loudly about that play and that was it. FUNNY MR DEFENDER you choose to forget / misremember the ILLEGAL PLAYS immediately after said plays that the NFL said were illegal. Funny but said play is not ILLEGAL I wonder why? http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12556985/new-england-patriots-formation-now-ruled-illegal-substitution New England was down by 14 points twice in the game before using their antics, and what is worse they repeated the cheating play the next week! The New England Patriots**** scored a touchdown in the AFC Championship Game on a play that should have been called back for an illegal substitution, NFL head of officiating Dean Blandino told reporters. http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/01/30/new-england-patriots-illegal-play-ineligible-receiver “In the Baltimore game, [shane] Vereen reported as ineligible several times,” Dungy explained. “If he stays in the game he must report again and continue to be ineligible. He must come out of the game for one play or there has to be a time out for him to play as an eligible receiver. On the touchdown drive Vereen played one play as ineligible and then played the next play in an eligible position. There should have been a penalty.” http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/23/dungy-nfl-needs-to-restrict-new-englands-substitution-game/ repeated cheating season after season Please. please stop defending the abusers of NFL rules do I need to link more stories? The eligible, ineligible game is what has makes Brady look like a world beater at QB. The cheaters are preventing the defense from knowing who to cover on any given pass play. It's always been illegal, but the rule change is now making it a 5yd penalty which doesn't make sense to me. If it was illegal to begin with, shouldn't it have been a penalty anyway? Eligible receivers lining up as ineligible and ineligible receivers lining up as eligible should all ready have been a penalty of some sort! If nothing else, it should be an illegal formation.
dave mcbride Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) Defense is better now? Jordan was a great defender. James would get hammered against the Detroit teams of the late 80's. The Knicks big bruisers in the 90's would have hurt him as well Oakely, Grand Mamma). Coaching is better now? Pop for sure is an HOFer. Back then there was also Daly, Riley, Phil Jackson, even Larry Brown. Now you have guys like Spolstra and Kerr (walks in and wins it all) and jeez...Dave Blatt?? These guys are all coaches of finalist and champs recently. Look around the league at the quality of NBA coaches. Not good. The star power in this NBA finals was pretty dim, other than a few flashes of Curry and James. The MVP was a joke. Neither of these teams takes a game off of the Jordan Bulls, the Kobe/Shaq Lakers, the Bad Boy Pistons, any Bird Celtics heyday team, even the Ewing Knicks or the Reggie Pacers. No way... So....NE SB wins with deflated balls: 0-2, with regulation pressure balls 1-0. What were you saying again? Not sure how much NBA you watch now, but defense and coaching is LEAGUES better than it was before. Teams have breakdowns of every player on how they perform in each little area of the court, and when on defense they push them toward shots that look poor on their spray charts. That just didn't happen in the past (a similar approach has been one of the key contributing factors in the big rise in strikeouts in mlb the last few years, along with the league-wide increase in pitching velocity). The offensive schemes in the nba are more innovative too; just ask Phil Jackson, whose scheme looked dinosaur-like this season. Yes, Jordan was a phenomenal defensive player, and the pistons were great. But I'm talking about the ENTIRE league, not just a couple of dynasties. Watch 10 Rockets games in sequence and you'll see what I mean about the increase in the sophistication of game planning/defending/coaching. You see fewer and fewer former players with simple approaches succeeding as coaches now; that wasn't the case previously. Sabremetrics has revolutionized basketball. As for Lebron, he's an all time great. He was literally a one man team when Irving went down. Edited June 27, 2015 by dave mcbride
Deranged Rhino Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Not sure how much NBA you watch now, but defense and coaching is LEAGUES better than it was before. Teams have breakdowns of every player on how they perform in each little area of the court, and when on defense they push them toward shots that look poor on their spray charts. That just didn't happen in the past (a similar approach has been one of the key contributing factors in the big rise in strikeouts in mlb the last few years, along with the league-wide increase in pitching velocity). The offensive schemes in the nba are more innovative too; just ask Phil Jackson, whose scheme looked dinosaur-like this season. Yes, Jordan was a phenomenal defensive player, and the pistons were great. But I'm talking about the ENTIRE league, not just a couple of dynasties. Watch 10 Rockets games in sequence and you'll see what I mean about the increase in the sophistication of game planning/defending/coaching. You see fewer and fewer former players with simple approaches succeeding as coaches now; that wasn't the case previously. Sabremetrics has revolutionized basketball. As for Lebron, he's an all time great. He was literally a one man team when Irving went down. ?? Half of NBA offenses now run a high screen and roll, with no innovations to their offensive schemes, instead just looking to space the floor. Only a handful of teams run actual "offenses" with more than two or three sets in today's NBA, and while the defenses might be better prepared analytically, the rule changes to how defenders can guard the ball certainly have taken a premium off of defensive play compared to the 90s and 80s when hand checking was legal. I think you're confusing how analytics have helped GMs and the front offices in the NBA get better at identifying talent -- the level of "coaching" in the NBA is no where near what it was because the league, more than ever, is player driven.
dave mcbride Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 ?? Half of NBA offenses now run a high screen and roll, with no innovations to their offensive schemes, instead just looking to space the floor. Only a handful of teams run actual "offenses" with more than two or three sets in today's NBA, and while the defenses might be better prepared analytically, the rule changes to how defenders can guard the ball certainly have taken a premium off of defensive play compared to the 90s and 80s when hand checking was legal. I think you're confusing how analytics have helped GMs and the front offices in the NBA get better at identifying talent -- the level of "coaching" in the NBA is no where near what it was because the league, more than ever, is player driven. ?? The 90s was THE era for isolation basketball. I completely disagree about the league being more player driven now. It is less so because of Popovich and guys like Kerr (who played for Pop). It's simply not true.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 ?? The 90s was THE era for isolation basketball. I completely disagree about the league being more player driven now. It is less so because of Popovich and guys like Kerr (who played for Pop). It's simply not true. Other than Pop, Rivers, and maybe someone like McHale or Kerr, who are these coaches revolutionizing the NBA? Thibs got run out of town, Karl is in a power struggle before he even takes the job, there's no marquee coaches in the league outside of Pop -- and he's an outlier in nearly every way. The majority of NBA teams are running far less sets and offensive schemes than ever. I agree with you analytics changed the game -- but not as much on the sidelines as in the GM's office.
DC Tom Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 The eligible, ineligible game is what has makes Brady look like a world beater at QB. The cheaters are preventing the defense from knowing who to cover on any given pass play. It's always been illegal, but the rule change is now making it a 5yd penalty which doesn't make sense to me. If it was illegal to begin with, shouldn't it have been a penalty anyway? Eligible receivers lining up as ineligible and ineligible receivers lining up as eligible should all ready have been a penalty of some sort! If nothing else, it should be an illegal formation. It was - illegal substitution or illegal formation. The league just had to make it explicitly illegal, because otherwise the Patriots would keep cheating.
dave mcbride Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 Other than Pop, Rivers, and maybe someone like McHale or Kerr, who are these coaches revolutionizing the NBA? Thibs got run out of town, Karl is in a power struggle before he even takes the job, there's no marquee coaches in the league outside of Pop -- and he's an outlier in nearly every way. The majority of NBA teams are running far less sets and offensive schemes than ever. I agree with you analytics changed the game -- but not as much on the sidelines as in the GM's office. Check this out from today's NYT. It's long but great. It sort of supports your point, but my rejoinder would be that tons of teams in the 80s-90s were running really unsophisticated offenses too. I still think more teams run this sort of offense now than before, but it's still a limited number: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/sports/basketball/phil-jackson-knicks-triangle-offense-nba.html?action=click&contentCollection=Pro%20Basketball&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article .
Recommended Posts