American Football

[patsfangr]

As a Patriots fan since the team's creation in 1960, I want to come forward with my views on this "Videogate" mess, now that the NFL's decision has come down. Here's a post I just put up in a Pats fan email group that I've belonged to for several years. (Some of it is "group specific", so just bear with me on that.)

1. The Patriots and BB did not "cheat". They are allowed by NFL rules to monitor, and later study, the signals used by opposing coaches. There is no "moral or ethical" violation in the basic act of capturing signals, since the rules allow for video taping of other teams signals, making prohibitions ONLY against the locations from which a team may do so. (Per John Clark's research on NFL.com: "all video for coaching purposes must be shot from locations "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead." The taping itself, is NOT illegal!) The tactic of monitoring and interpreting the signals used by the other team has been common in both football and baseball since the games were created.

2. BB is not a stupid man. He has had far too much success in a very complex game to give credence that idea for even a moment. He is, however, certainly not perfect, and clearly capable of poor judgment.

3. The NFL bylaws, and even the initial letter sent by Goodell addressing videotaping apparently do not, and did not, specifically prohibit the use of video tape for post-game study. However, as John Clark presented in his post: "According to the NFL website the NFL rules state "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." They also say all video for coaching purposes must be shot from locations "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."" Now, I can't see any fuzz on that. BB says that he interpreted it to mean that tape couldn't be used by the coaches during the game for the purpose of making in-game adjustments. Well, if that is true, I'd label his reading comprehension skills as poor, at best. It says "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use ...". I'm afraid that the term "in use" has to be interpreted to mean operating in any manner, whether recording or playing. Further, that initial letter from Goodell did, IMO, make clear that the taping, not the reviewing of the taping, was prohibited from that location during the game. ("Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.") That was "videotaping"; not "reviewing of video tapes."

4. In view of the facts in items 2. and 3., I cannot believe that BB did not fully understand the intent of this rule. I believe that he mistakenly believed that two things would allow him to get away with it. First was the fact that there are most certainly other teams who have done it in the past. I believe that the "honor among thieves" philosophy that someone referenced earlier was in place on this. Since everybody benefits from it; they turn a blind eye to it. Bad misjudgment of the level of bitterness and pettiness within his former protégé, Jets' coach Eric Mangini, on that one! Secondly, I think he believed that he could get away with the "use during the game" interpretation argument, if he was questioned on it by Goody-Two-Shoes Goodell. Again, a very bad misjudgment of a man who has dedicated himself to building an image as the "new sheriff in town" who is going to "clean up Dodge". If BB had not believed at least one, if not both of those things to be true, I am certain in my mind that he would not have been so stupid as to send a man to blatantly, in full public view, violate the rule. Poor judgment. Extremely poor judgment. But he's not stupid.

5. Now to the most difficult issue: the punishment. I must totally concur with Bama and others who say that the forfeit of a R1 draft pick punishes the completely innocent, the fans, more than it punishes the offender, BB. In view of our draft situation next year, it really isn't a crippling hit. With SF's R1, and 2 R3's, we're not stripped of all ability to improve the team. Still, that late (#32!) pick would have essentially replaced the R2 that we traded away for Welker; and the bottom line is that punishment of the fans is both unjust and misdirected. I totally support the fine on BB, and, in fact, would not have objected to a 1 game suspension against him (since this violation was observed in only one game). As described above, he brazenly and publicly violated the intent of a directive from the NFL Commissioner. Such defiance cannot and should not be tolerated in any organization. Let's say that Kraft were to direct BB to wear a suit on the sidelines to present a more professional image; and BB wore a suit ...and covered it with a hoodie sweatshirt. Should Kraft ignore such behavior? I'd say definitely not. BB, and BB alone, should have born the brunt of the punishment for this act, and that punishment should have been severe!

6. As to my emotional reactions to this incident, I am deeply disappointed and angered with BB. I do not believe that we needed to do this to beat the Jets now, or later in the season. I believe that it will result in an explosion of excessive and exaggerated statements, printed, spoken, and screamed, by the tens of thousands of envious, ignorant fans (and sports reporters) around the nation. It will not go away quickly. It will last even longer than the "tuck rule" furor; which generated so much ignorant, incorrect criticism of a proper call enforcing a bad rule. This will motivate chants of "CHEATERS! CHEATERS!", and other such irritating, inaccurate, and hateful noise at most, if not all, road games for years. I would caution those of you who choose to attend road games to be prepared for much more verbal, and possibly physical abuse than has ever before been heaped upon Patriots fans. I won't even be surprised if there are some altercations in Gillette Stadium among those who want to make known their dislike for Belichick, and those who still support him fully.

***** I remain a totally dedicated Patriots fan. I, like Randy, have lost a great deal of respect for BB for this action, and its resulting affect upon the team and we fans. He's a brilliant Head Coach. I am extremely grateful to him for the Lombardi Trophies he was largely responsible for putting in our trophy case. But I will shed no tears if Kraft makes a change after this season, or whenever that change does come. I am hopeful that he can bring us one more this season, not only because I am still a Patriots fan, but also because I would truly like to shove the abuse that is about to be unjustly heaped upon us right down the throats of those who do so.

***** That's my input on the total spectrum of this incident. I hope I've presented it calmly, clearly, and concisely. I won't "harp" on it "ad nauseum" with responses to any reactions you may care to post. I wouldn't want to upset anyone by cluttering their inbox, and taking up their valuable time with repetition. Rather, I'll join Steve in his urging to "move on". This won't die in the press, or in other NFL cities. But I'm done with it here.

***** Let's get ready to beat the Chargers and their loudmouth (but very, very talented) RB and LB. :-)

[CalicoConsulting]

For the record, while I'll always be a Panthers homer, I still have a high opinion of the Patriots. Even though I was spotted 45 points in their Super Bowl against Super Bowl Shuffle and they lost by 46. I only take cheap shots because cheap shots are what I do. And if you'll excuse me now, NFL.com is still selling Rae Carruth jerseys, so I'm gonna stock up.

[CalicoConsulting]

[marshbags]

I,m not a fan but this caught my eye while scrolling an email the Beeb sent to me.

Last Updated: Thursday, 13 September 2007, 12:06 GMT 13:06 UK

BBC Sport to televise Super Bowl

Peyton Manning led Indianapolis Colts to Super Bowl victory in 2007

BBC Sport will broadcast the Super Bowl - American Football's annual showpiece event - for the next two years.

A free-to-air deal signed with the NFL also includes highlights of the Wembley Stadium game between Miami Dolphins and New York Giants on 28 October.

And it will include other NFL London games that may be scheduled in 2008.

Super Bowl XLII will be broadcast live from Arizona on 3 February 2008 and Super Bowl XLIII will be broadcast live from Tampa, Florida in 2009.

Super Bowl XLI saw the Indianapolis Colts beat the Chicago Bears in Miami and reached an estimated worldwide audience of nearly one billion in more than 220 countries.

SPORT EDITORS'BLOG

The Super Bowl is more than just an American sports event

Roger Mosey

Director of BBC Sport

The Super Bowl is also renowned for its spectacular entertainment line-up, featuring performances in recent years by the Rolling Stones, Sir Paul McCartney, Prince, U2, Sting and Beyonce Knowles.

"The Super Bowl is one of the world's great sporting events and we are delighted that after many years of covering it on 5Live, we are now also going to be showing it on BBC Television," said Philip Bernie, Head of BBC TV Sport Editorial.

"The Super Bowl always attracts great interest and we are really looking forward to providing a new showcase for this huge occasion."

Alistair Kirkwood, managing director of NFL UK added: "We are thrilled to be announcing a partnership with the BBC.

"This represents a major landmark in the growth of our sport in the UK and will help us to establish the NFL as a significant part of the sporting landscape here.

"The BBC's reputation in the presentation of televised sport is unrivalled and we are very excited about working closely with them."

Further details relating to the TV presentation and commentary teams, as well as scheduling, will be announced in due course.

Ref url:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_spor...all/6993042.stm

Hope it,s useful and possibly available on " Sattelite " for the lucky ones.

marshbags

Edited September 14, 2007 by marshbags

[Old Man River]

This year, the Pats have a greater incentive to win the AFC championship than just money. If they don't win, their previous victories will always be questioned. It will be a Barry Bonds type of scenario. If they do make it to the SB this year, then it will put everyone on notice that they don't have to cheat to win. It is going to be an interesting year in the AFC.

[keemapoot]

Let's see... The pats spied. They will never be trusted on their previous Superbowl wins. They have lost their legitimacy.

Their previous victories are already questioned. I don't see how they can gain credibility.

[Old Man River]

Let's see... The pats spied. They will never be trusted on their previous Superbowl wins. They have lost their legitimacy.

Their previous victories are already questioned. I don't see how they can gain credibility.

Winning heals all. A very successful season without cheating will show the rest of the league that they don't need to cheat to win. If they don't get to the SB this year, then they will always be remembered as the team that did need to cheat to win, and all their recent SB victories will be always be questioned. This season, they need to show what they are made of.

Note, I am not a Pats fan. I hope they lose big time.

[calibanjr.]

Let's see... The pats spied. They will never be trusted on their previous Superbowl wins. They have lost their legitimacy.

Their previous victories are already questioned. I don't see how they can gain credibility.

Winning heals all. A very successful season without cheating will show the rest of the league that they don't need to cheat to win. If they don't get to the SB this year, then they will always be remembered as the team that did need to cheat to win, and all their recent SB victories will be always be questioned. This season, they need to show what they are made of.

Note, I am not a Pats fan. I hope they lose big time.

Do you believe that the Patriots videotaped during EVERY game they've played since 2001? Just seems quite a leap to me. Yes, I'm a Pat's fan, yes I know about the Green Bay game last year. I don't think that's true, and I don't think the video gives that much of an edge over visual spying, which is legal and goes on all the time. Given that, I'm F'ING P*SSED OFF big time at Bill B. for risking such a predictable result for the team and its fans, for such a small amount of edge. Hubris on steroids, with a brain-fart idiocy chaser.

That being said, I agree, there are people who will, through that supposition, question the validity of games as far back as 2001. I won't go into my ideas about the implausibility of them taping during the Bowls, take up too much space. I also agree, given the jealousy shown by other teams, and ill-will by some of the press, that they have more motivation than EVER to win. As you say, winning heals all, that' why GWB has to keep saying we're winning the you-know-what in you-know-where to "heal" all the ill-feeling about all the dead bodies. Anyway, tough game tonight against a VERY MOTIVATED and VERY TALENTED opponent. This is a very significant game on many levels, for both teams.

Sorry about the mild political demi-digression, from Boston, we're a bit tetched in the head about the Pats and politics.

[kuma]

so a bit of a change of conversation. Does anyone have an update of football in bkk this week, in particular true? will they show any games , and if so does anyone happen to know what time and channel? the schedules i find to be useless at best, with different programs popping up all the time out of synch with what they publish.

thx, and ...bears.

[keemapoot]

You can watch the Colts vs. Titans game starting at midnight and the Broncos vs. Raiders at 3AM tonight on a Bay area CBS feed on TVU. You can download the free TVU player at viidoodotcom and then stream it for free.

[patsfangr]

Let's see... The pats spied. They will never be trusted on their previous Superbowl wins. They have lost their legitimacy.

Their previous victories are already questioned. I don't see how they can gain credibility.

Winning heals all. A very successful season without cheating will show the rest of the league that they don't need to cheat to win. If they don't get to the SB this year, then they will always be remembered as the team that did need to cheat to win, and all their recent SB victories will be always be questioned. This season, they need to show what they are made of.

Note, I am not a Pats fan. I hope they lose big time.

Do you believe that the Patriots videotaped during EVERY game they've played since 2001? Just seems quite a leap to me. Yes, I'm a Pat's fan, yes I know about the Green Bay game last year. I don't think that's true, and I don't think the video gives that much of an edge over visual spying, which is legal and goes on all the time. Given that, I'm F'ING P*SSED OFF big time at Bill B. for risking such a predictable result for the team and its fans, for such a small amount of edge. Hubris on steroids, with a brain-fart idiocy chaser.

That being said, I agree, there are people who will, through that supposition, question the validity of games as far back as 2001. I won't go into my ideas about the implausibility of them taping during the Bowls, take up too much space. I also agree, given the jealousy shown by other teams, and ill-will by some of the press, that they have more motivation than EVER to win. As you say, winning heals all, that' why GWB has to keep saying we're winning the you-know-what in you-know-where to "heal" all the ill-feeling about all the dead bodies. Anyway, tough game tonight against a VERY MOTIVATED and VERY TALENTED opponent. This is a very significant game on many levels, for both teams.

Sorry about the mild political demi-digression, from Boston, we're a bit tetched in the head about the Pats and politics.

I definitely share your anger at Belichick for this stupid act of defiance of the "new sheriff in town." But I am also pissed at Goodell for his decision to punish the fans of the team equally, if not more than Belichick. Goodell said that he decided against a suspension of Belichick because the loss of a R1 pick would be more "long lasting" than a suspension. Yeah, idiot, but against whom?! There is no way for any of us, including Goodell, to know whether Belichick will be coaching the Patriots after this season. Kraft, an extremely "image conscious" guy, could well decide that it's best for his team if Belichick moves on. Should that happen, what's the "long lasting" affect on Belichick from Goodell's removal of a R1 pick?

Belichick should have been suspended for one game. He violated the rule in one game. The imposition of the maximum fine was totally appropriate. But neither he, nor the Patriots "cheated" their way to victory in this, or any other game, as a result of the use of videotape. It is of virtually no use during the play of a specific game. There simply isn't time to make use of it; as there is for the use of reports from a coach with binoculars in the press box, radioing observations to the coaches on the sidlelines - and THAT, Patriots haters, is both legal and common in the NFL. (Did you see John Madden's comments on that point?)

Belichick was guilty of defiance and disobedience of the Commissioner. And, from the point of view of Patriots fans, stupidity and arrogance that has cost, and will continue to cost, our team. But he is not guilty of "cheating". Every win this team has achieved under him was earned by the hard work, intelligence, and physical skills of the players on the field; as developed and directed by Belichick and his staff. Videotape is no more a part of it than any form of game film and Polaroid photo study.

[CalicoConsulting]

It's perfectly legal to count how many times Delhomme licks his fingers before he takes the snap. A minimum of three means he's passing. Less than that, he's handing off.

The old Houston Oilers did something similar by watching Dan Fouts' feet, as documented in a recent Dr Z column. Side by side, he's handing off. One behind the other, he's dropping back to pass.

Convenient radio outages for a play or two when other teams play in Foxboro, however, will now be assumed to be deliberate whether they are or not. See what a mess the Patriots made? Loss of credibility over something that probably didn't help them as much as they thought it did.

Do you think that, next year, the NFL will let defenses have helmet radios like QBs do now? It missed by two votes this time, I think. The Patriots were against it, and I think I read that the Jets were for it. That'd eliminate any possibility of the other team reading the defense's signals.

Speaking of which, Bucs and Raiders in the Super Bowl. Now that was the most flagrant example I've ever seen of one team knowing the other's signals, and cheating had nothing to do with it. Dummies in Oakland forgot to change things when Gruden left. Doh!

[patsfangr]

FOXHOLE BUDDY!

By the way, totally a side issue to Belichick's violation, but worthy of addressing, I think, is the issue of Eric Mangini's ratting out of the man who provided him with the training, experience, and opportunity to be in a position to be hired as a Head Coach in the NFL at such a young age.

Yes Sir! If I had to go into battle, I'd want a foxhole buddy like Eric Mangini covering my back! F***ing A$$hole! While I know it's not possible, I hope he never wins another NFL game for as long as a hopefully very short career lasts.

[CalicoConsulting]

According to Chad Pennington's teammates, he's like an egg back there. He can fall down and hurt himself. That oughta make the Mangini haters feel good, unless it turns out Clements can play. Dang.

Edited September 16, 2007 by CalicoConsulting

[patsfangr]

Do you think that, next year, the NFL will let defenses have helmet radios like QBs do now? It missed by two votes this time, I think. The Patriots were against it, and I think I read that the Jets were for it. That'd eliminate any possibility of the other team reading the defense's signals.

Belichick commented on this in press conference the other day. He said that a big negative about it is that you can't designate any single player as the guy to have a helmet speaker for the defense, as you can for the offense. On offense, the QB is clearly the guy. On defense, the down and distance situations frequently demand different personnel sets, so your guy with the speaker helmet might not be out there. When you think about the fact that, on many teams, the lead signal caller is usually the MLB, who often goes out for a variety of 3rd down packages, that makes sense. They'd have to allow multiple players with speakers. Perhaps they can consider doing that next season.

[CalicoConsulting]

Meanwhile, the real question is, how much videotape would you have to study to decipher Manning's Chicken Dance?

[patsfangr]

So much for my effusive, and VERY premature "Thank you" to Truevisions! The Patriots - Chargers game, far and away the "Game of the Week" in the NFL (for many reasons!), is NOT being broadcast in Thailand. Apparently, the only place for Americans is IN AMERICA!

[CalicoConsulting]

17-0 Patriots in the second, and we can't see any footage of LT crying like a baby. That's just not right.

(Now that I think about it, if I played for a team coached by Norv Turner, I'd have to cry like a baby.)

Edited September 17, 2007 by CalicoConsulting

[patsfangr]

And now it's 24-0. Where the h*ll are they hiding that video camera? :-)

[CalicoConsulting]

Under the hoodie

[patsfangr]

Did you hear the rumor that Belichick, that evil guy, called Brian Billick to give him the Jets signals for use against them in their game today. Clearly, that was the ONLY way that the Jets could have lost!

[calibanjr.]

Watching on SOPcast. End of the half 24-0. Last drive Brady overthrows long on a pretty clear TD, then throws an INT (behind the receiver) to pretty much end the half, OK, Brady's human we know that. But man, there isn't a team (including Indy) that I'd prefer felt the "us against them" wrath of a p*ssed off Pats team.

[calibanjr.]

BTW, not letting the Pats off on the taping deal, but they're actually asking some pretty tough questions of Kraft on this. I wish the press were this interested in asking ANY questions of the Bushsh*t admin about a slightly more serious issue. Now Collinsworth and Costas are carrying on about how the Pats need to be policed further!, there MUST have been further infractions, let's get at 'em. Predictable.

Now I'm kinda p*ssed that Brady didn't make it 31-0 at the half. Believe me, I'll be happy with ANY win here 24-23, whatever, but I hope the Pats can put another 14 on the board and shut out the Bolts. We need it.

Edited September 17, 2007 by calibanjr.

[patsfangr]

But man, there isn't a team (including Indy) that I'd prefer felt the "us against them" wrath of a p*ssed off Pats team.

Ohh, I can't go along with that, Michael. On Dec 16, the New York Jets go to Foxboro. led by their back-stabbing, hypocritical coach, eRAT Mangini. Wherever Mangini goes, he will be the guy that I want to see the Patriots humiliate! Run up the score as much as possible against him, and walk off the field without acknowleding his existence at the end of the game!

And the whining Colts, and THEIR resident hypocrits, Dungy and Polian, remain second on my list.

The Chargers, after all, have really only had the crap from LT and Merriman that they've thrown at us.

[calibanjr.]

But man, there isn't a team (including Indy) that I'd prefer felt the "us against them" wrath of a p*ssed off Pats team.

Ohh, I can't go along with that, Michael. On Dec 16, the New York Jets go to Foxboro. led by their back-stabbing, hypocritical coach, eRAT Mangini. Wherever Mangini goes, he will be the guy that I want to see the Patriots humiliate! Run up the score as much as possible against him, and walk off the field without acknowleding his existence at the end of the game!

And the whining Colts, and THEIR resident hypocrits, Dungy and Polian, remain second on my list.

The Chargers, after all, have really only had the crap from LT and Merriman that they've thrown at us.

\

I should have qualified that with "right now". Of course I revile NYJ and Indy more, but right now, they've wisely kept their mouths shut. SD has been mouthing off about it, in addition to their yakking about losing at home last year in the playoffs. Bummer, the Bolts just scored a TD on an interminable drive (like 8.5 minutes long) on a 4th and goal from the 1. Let's put some points back! Oh, Patsman, it's David over here, not Mike!

[patsfangr]

Well, at least it wasn't loudmouth LT that scored. I have a feeling that the Chargers KNEW that the Pats would give it all up to prevent LT from scoring, and went to the pass to Neal for that reason.

Only 4:18 left in the 3rd. That "interminable drive" of over 8 minutes was GOOD news for our Pats, in spite of the fact that it ended in a score. We are moving the ball again!

[calibanjr.]

Another TD for Moss, medium range, about 25 yards, WFO, thanks SD! 3 mins. left in the 3rd. 31-7

Edited September 17, 2007 by calibanjr.

[patsfangr]

This Patriots team is REALLY PISSED OFF! I LOVE IT!!

[calibanjr.]

Wow, refs need to keep the Bolts in the game. 30 yard pass by Rivers, tipped for an INT, BULLSH!T interference call (even the amiable ref-friendly Madden disagreed). Anyway, keeps the second SD drive alive. End of the 3rd. SD 1st and 10 at NE 15 (or so)

Short TD pass to Gates to open the quarter, NE 31-14, okay, I'm testy, normally I wouldn't care about the score, given that this game is over, bar a miracle, but I'm p'd about the refs handing them a long gain AND reversing a turnover, which would have put a real licking on SD. Given the circumstances of this game, I don't want SD to make this even look respectable.

Turnover on the kickoff SD has the ball! That's how these things play out, no?

Okay, two straight sacks and an incomplete on 3rd and 30, SD punting, go D!

Edited September 17, 2007 by calibanjr.

[TokyoT]

Personally not taking into account if what they did was against the rules or not I don’t see the video taping as a lone incident as that big of a deal. However, it does appear (at least to the NFL) that what happened was indeed against the rules and therefore I don’t have a problem with penalty that has been given (if anything I think the draft pick issue might be a little light). What happened involved more than just Belichick or even just Belichick and Estrella – so I think the punishment has to be more than individual or personal punishments; so I think the taking the draft pick(s) is in line with what happened. As for suspending Belichick I think that is more of a personal punishment than a team punishment (ie Wade Wilson’s suspension for the use of HGH). Additionally I think Goodell wants to be the strong arm commissioner and I think he wants to start making real punishments that have real effects and I think he (Goodell) sees the taking of draft picks as that type of punishment (man that’s a lot of thinking). It is not like he has been soft in his earlier dealings with rules violations, so I am not really surprised at his reaction to this issue.

What is really surprising to me is that basically they were warned after the Green Bay incident, and I don’t really think they need to steal signals to win games. So I scratch my head and wonder why someone who appears to be so intelligent could do something so stupid?

Pats currently kicking the sh*t our of the Chargers – 31-14 in the 4th.

Don’t know what happened to the Saints or the Chargers (well the Chargers now have Turner as a head coach so that might be part of the problem). But neither have been overly impressive so far. Yea the Chargers beat the Bears but not that impressively.

The only thing that seems to be clear this year is the Pats and Indy are in a class by themselves. Then there is the rest of the AFC, and the NFC might be able to line up a few competitive college games (as long as it ain’t Notre Dame).

Side note: ESPN did show the Maryland vs West Virginia game on Friday night. Did not watch that much telly over the weekend so not sure if they showed any other NCAA games.

Side note 2: I hope True traded in the Sunday night game for the Monday night game – me Skins play on Monday.