Billadelphia Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 What is the basis for your "players don't respond to him" theory? Thus far it is nothing but speculation. It looked like they responded to him last year. And it looked like they responded to him in '03 after everyone & their brother said that he had lost his team after cutting Lawyer Milloy and getting stomped here on opening day. I just mean that watching him go through this and lie through his teeth ("I didn't think I was doing anything wrong"), the players have to be losing respect for him. People who know nothing about football know that what he was doing was wrong, but the head coach of an NFL football team doesn't know? He's lying to everyone, including his team. I don't think that he's "lost his team". Its obviously just speculation, it's happening right now and it's the offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 I just mean that watching him go through this and lie through his teeth ("I didn't think I was doing anything wrong"), the players have to be losing respect for him. People who know nothing about football know that what he was doing was wrong, but the head coach of an NFL football team doesn't know? He's lying to everyone, including his team. I don't think that he's "lost his team". Its obviously just speculation, it's happening right now and it's the offseason. Losing the players??? Not a chance. It's bunker mentality. The whole team will close ranks even though they know they are guilty as sin. They will just continue to believe they're the victims. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 I just mean that watching him go through this and lie through his teeth ("I didn't think I was doing anything wrong"), the players have to be losing respect for him. People who know nothing about football know that what he was doing was wrong, but the head coach of an NFL football team doesn't know? He's lying to everyone, including his team. I don't think that he's "lost his team". Its obviously just speculation, it's happening right now and it's the offseason. Fair enough. I just think if their fans will find any excuse imaginable to downplay and rationalize the whole thing, the players who got the actual bling bling out of the deal certainly aren't going to act any differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 As Pyrite mentioned, I would give TMQ's special article a read. I think he does a good job summarizing the whole situation. I think this says it all. Footnote: In Friday's Washington Post, NFL reporter Mark Maske quotes former Giants quarterback Phil Simms contending that stolen signals are no guarantee of victory: "'I've been in games where we knew every signal, every call by the other team, and we still lost,' Simms said by telephone yesterday. 'We [the Giants] had the San Diego Chargers' signals in 1980. We knew every signal. We knew every play. We were calling out what they were going to do: 'Here comes this. Here comes that.' They still scored 44 points.'" After more Simms quotes, the article moved to other matters. Who was on the New York Giants' coaching staff in 1980? Bill Belichick and Ernie Adams. He has needed an advatange his entire career. And as far as the 2007 season, they already had the info, how many teams were able to change their signals once the Pats* were exposed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 As Pyrite mentioned, I would give TMQ's special article a read. I think he does a good job summarizing the whole situation. Since Simms admits to having signals with no benefit in 1980, what about the Buffalo SB against the giants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkman Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Anyone who's ever watched a football game knows that even the TINIEST thing can turn the game one way or another (unconscious head out of bounds anyone?). I don't care if the taping helped them one percent. That one percent could easily be the difference in winning a game. Even if that game isn't a super bowl, it could help them advance to the super bowl, or gain better playoff seeding. Think about their first super bowl. So many individual plays that season could have derailed their chance to win the super bowl. Who's to say the taping didn't aid them enough to stay alive? That 1% could have easily put them into FG range, where they won a heck of a lot of games. IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fewell733 Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Since Simms admits to having signals with no benefit in 1980, what about the Buffalo SB against the giants? and we played them during the season that year, in NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Can someone please explain what I'm missing about this whole thing? Time and time again on this board, I see people start sentences like, "I admit he's a great coach, there's no denying that, but he..." or "There's no denying Brady is a great quarterback, but I'm not sure he..." Uh...how can you be so sure? How do we know Belichick isn't the same crap coach he was in Cleveland? Has he not been cheating most of the time he's been in New England? What do we really know about Tom Brady? We know he's accurate, and that he's good in the pocket. We also know these things about Trent Edwards, do we not? And I'd hardly expect someone to say that Trent Edwards is indeniably a great quarterback. We don't know that Brady is at all adept in the mental side of the game, do we? When you know 75% of the defensive calls before you even come to the line, most of that side of the game becomes irrelevant. You simply point and click. No need to think about it. How do we know the Pats* aren't the worst team in the division...the AFC...even the league? Belichick could just be a fool who cheated his way to 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, couldn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Good article. Ryan's better at writing than free speaking. He struggles to formulate immediate responses (PTI, Sports Reporters,etc.) and ends up looking like a stuttering loon. Too much on his mind to reply clearly to a topic. Give him an overnight and he's very solid. Thinking back to our SB vs. Belicheat and the G-Men, all those crazy 3rd down conversions they had sure makes me wonder.. They also damn near forced OT in the reg. season after we knocked Simms out for the year. Hmmmmmmmm....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 this article really points out to me the need for changing up, guarding signals, and a little trickery. i hate the pats and want them all to get a disease that turns their legs into giant puss filled sores, but still our team needs to protect its neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Can someone please explain what I'm missing about this whole thing? Time and time again on this board, I see people start sentences like, "I admit he's a great coach, there's no denying that, but he..." or "There's no denying Brady is a great quarterback, but I'm not sure he..." Uh...how can you be so sure? How do we know Belichick isn't the same crap coach he was in Cleveland? Has he not been cheating most of the time he's been in New England? What do we really know about Tom Brady? We know he's accurate, and that he's good in the pocket. We also know these things about Trent Edwards, do we not? And I'd hardly expect someone to say that Trent Edwards is indeniably a great quarterback. We don't know that Brady is at all adept in the mental side of the game, do we? When you know 75% of the defensive calls before you even come to the line, most of that side of the game becomes irrelevant. You simply point and click. No need to think about it. How do we know the Pats* aren't the worst team in the division...the AFC...even the league? Belichick could just be a fool who cheated his way to 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, couldn't he? Agreed. Belicheat has admitted to cheating. The league has determined they cheated. "Great" coaches don't cheat. He cheated on his wife, cheated with another man's wife, and cheated for at least eight years as a head coach. The word "great" should never be used when describing him unless it is immediately followed by the word "fraud." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Agreed. Belicheat has admitted to cheating. The league has determined they cheated. "Great" coaches don't cheat. He cheated on his wife, cheated with another man's wife, and cheated for at least eight years as a head coach. The word "great" should never be used when describing him unless it is immediately followed by the word "fraud." Prior to all of this, he was a first-ballot walk-in to the HOF. Now the only bust he'll see in Canton will be on a tour of the facility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Prior to all of this, he was a first-ballot walk-in to the HOF. Now the only bust he'll see in Canton will be on a tour of the facility. Not without precedent, either. Six months ago Roger Clemens was considered by almost everybody to be one of the greatest MLB pitchers of all time. A cheat is a cheat. I don't give a crap what kind of semantics Belicheat and the people sucking on his toes want to call it. It's cheating. One man/team got caught doing it. He should be banned from the game and the team should be heavily sanctioned for eight years of benefitting from it. Seems pretty simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 In the past the Pats* were able to attract free agents for less money than they would have got from another team, in order to play for the great Belicheat*, & with the great Brady*. I wonder how this will affect their future signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 The only problem I have with the article is this reference to Kraft like he is a victim here...... Didn't craft give the cheating coach a PAY RAISE to compensate for the fine the NFL levied against him? hmmmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 Agreed. Belicheat has admitted to cheating. The league has determined they cheated. "Great" coaches don't cheat. He cheated on his wife, cheated with another man's wife, and cheated for at least eight years as a head coach. The word "great" should never be used when describing him unless it is immediately followed by the word "fraud." :standingovationsmiley: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts