Mr. WEO Posted May 18, 2009 Posted May 18, 2009 Knowing a defenses signals is a huge advantage because an offense can then run a play to take advantage of that. After a game in 2001 the Patriots offensive coordinator complimented the opponent's DC, I think it was Tampa Bay, and told him that the Patsies had known all their calls but they still stopped the Patsies and won the game. The Patsies coach considered that very impressive. Now whether video taping is the only way to learn the calls or not is open to question, but the Patsies sure made a regular practice of video taping. But I don't think anyone is implying that is the only or even the main reason they won. It could have been just that little edge they needed to win crucial games. Anyway, Senator Spector, when the Senate held some hearings on the NFL a few months ago publicly reprimanded Goodell for destroying the taped evidence it had against NE. Spector, a former prosecuting attorney, understood that was never the way to handle evidence. Goodell's action made it certain that no one would ever be able, like the US Senate, to look at the evidence against NE again, and possibly draw more damning conclusions. And Goodell's reason for doing so was totally idiotic, that he was afraid the tapes could somehow get in the hands of another NFL team and help them against opponents. You can't just lock them in a vault!!!! And funny as his explanation was, it seems to admit inadvertantly that Goodell (who had watched all the tapes) considered the tapes quite valuable for a team to get a hold of to help them against opponents. Assuming the signals are never changed, there may be an advantage. Whether video taping is the only way to learn the calls is NOT open to question--this has been done with video, without video---ever since DC's thought it would be ok to stand there in full view of the opposing team and make specific gesticulations coded for certain plays. Specter's Senate floor verbose masturbatory exercise reveals a feeble mind. He blusters on and on about what a hardass prosecutor he was yet nearly his entire "investigation" is based on hearsay which he would never be able to introduce in court. He quotes Walsh quoting "others"; he quotes the opinion of a blowhard/idiot like Mark Schlereth; he references a book. He cites the series of games against the Steelers. He notes that Ward says that "they were calling out our signals", yet can't explain how the Steelers crushed the Pats in October of the same year. He mentions the sudden and timely recall of another Steeler, who, 5 years later, believes that the Pats changed their playcalling in the 2002 AFCC game. He doesn't think it's strange that Walsh didn't mention the 2003, 2004, 2005 tapings, simply because he wasn't asked? And Walsh's presence at the walk-through was completely legal and overt. There were hundreds of people in the building at the time. Walsh says he was in plain site wearing his Pats colors and credentials. No one from the Rams ever cleared the building. MArtz's decision to have a walkthrough in this setting was roundly ridiculed by every coach, player, GM who was asked to comment. ANd what was the yield of Walsh's "spying" on the Rams? Faulk would come in to return a kick---like that would be a secret when Faulk came trotting out with the ST'ers. So what? As a lawyer, it should hardly shock Specter that a Pats lawyer was present at Walsh's interview. It happens all the time, actually. In a deposition, the party "being investigated" (deposed) has his lawyer sitting right next to him 100% of the time. Specter, of course, abandoned his phony outrage when he saw that this story clearly lost its legs and his Senate colleagues had absolutely no interest in listening to this Eagles homer on this subject. He jumped ship when it no longer served his political ambitions----EXACTLY as he has recently done by abandoning his party when it became clear he would not be re-elected as a Republican.
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 19, 2009 Posted May 19, 2009 Holding that offense to 19 points was absolutely ridiculous. No current team in the NFL could stack up to that team and I include my hometown Colts in that statement. Like him or not the gameplan that the Giants put together for that game was brilliant. Sorry. Continue with your hatred of the cheater. I will leave the dead horse by the door... That gets one thinking if Parcells/Belicheck cheated in that game?... 1991 was still very much the "video tape" era, just that nobody would have seen it coming at that time. It would take Belicheck (and who's the dude he uses in the box witht he Pats*?) almost 10 years to perfect his system*. Edit: Also, how much easier would that cheating have been especially with the philosophy held by Marv and company. The philosophy that as long as we execute, nobody can beat you. Looking back, Marv would have never did what Coughlin did by taking his team away secretly to practice far from the prying eyes of the Pats*.
NewHampshireBillsFan Posted May 19, 2009 Posted May 19, 2009 In the final analysis, people who adore the Patsies (NE fans and those everywhere who admire winners) and Bellicheat worshipers will always minimize the cheating that happened and try to obfuscate it by bringing out other examples of cheating in the past, etc. by other teams. The NFL management falls into this group as that is the way they handled the investigation. For me it opened my eyes to what the NFL really is. I plan to stick around to see Buffalo rise again and stick it to NE, but long term I predict the NFL will begin to lose some of its prestige. The way they handled this NE cheating episode is but one example of how they will always put their corporate business interests above integrity and fairness to fans of all cities. Meanwhile Patsie fans enjoy your successes, tainted as they are in the minds of many.
The Senator Posted May 19, 2009 Posted May 19, 2009 In the final analysis, people who adore the Patsies (NE fans and those everywhere who admire winners) and Bellicheat worshipers will always minimize the cheating that happened and try to obfuscate it by bringing out other examples of cheating in the past, etc. by other teams. The NFL management falls into this group as that is the way they handled the investigation. For me it opened my eyes to what the NFL really is. I plan to stick around to see Buffalo rise again and stick it to NE, but long term I predict the NFL will begin to lose some of its prestige. The way they handled this NE cheating episode is but one example of how they will always put their corporate business interests above integrity and fairness to fans of all cities. Meanwhile Patsie fans enjoy your successes, tainted as they are in the minds of many. Where are your asterisks, dammit???? Any and all NE* Cheatriettes* successes* during the Belicheat* era are tainted by his* penchant for blatant cheating, and any reference to said tainted victories* requires the appropriate asterisk noting them* as such!!!!! Only reason Belicheat* didn't get schitcanned in Fagsboro* like he* did in Cleveland is this... link
NewHampshireBillsFan Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 Where are your asterisks, dammit???? Any and all NE* Cheatriettes* successes* during the Belicheat* era are tainted by his* penchant for blatant cheating, and any reference to said tainted victories* requires the appropriate asterisk noting them* as such!!!!! Only reason Belicheat* didn't get schitcanned in Fagsboro* like he* did in Cleveland is this... link Sorry about the missing asterisks! I'll remember next time to properly notate references to Belicheat*.
The Senator Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 Sorry about the missing asterisks! I'll remember next time to properly notate references to Belicheat*. Well OK then ... GO YOU FREAKIN' BILLSSS!!!! 19 and 0 baby!!!!! (without cheating!!!!!)
Recommended Posts