American Football

[patsfangr]

Geez man, take a breath and take pride in an excellent season and a fine orginization. Giants had a charmed game. Hats off!

I grew up a Raiders fan. How do you think I've been feeling the last few years. Bring on the draft, camp and the next season!!!!

First of all, Raiders' fans don't "grow up"! (Total "smack" there. Just couldn't resist a little fun with a fan of my most hated team.)

Seriously, I know exactly how you've been feeling for the last few years. I've been a Patriots fan since the team was created in 1960. I went through a hel_l of a lot of misery before the Belichick era arrived; much more, in fact, than Raiders' fans, who had a lot of good years back in the day.

On the other hand, only fans of the Dolphins, in 1972, can even come close to knowing how I, and other Patriots fans, felt going into this Super Bowl. We had the chance to make history. And, in our case, we waited 42 years for our first SB win, unlike the very young Miami franchise. Add to that all of the abuse and ludicrous accusations and innuendo blasted at the Patriots throughout this tumultuous season. Believe me, nobody can fully understand the intensity felt by avid New England Patriots fans going into this game.

That said, it follows that nobody can fully understand the depth of our despair over this shocking loss. I've been an NFL fan long enough to grasp and accept the "any given Sunday" adage. But, in this particular case, with this particular coach and team, I honestly believed that only the most outrageous bad luck, or poor officiating, could result in a Giants victory. No one who has followed the history of the Patriots under Bill Belichick could possibly believe that they'd fail to play their best game in this, the most important game in the history of the team (if not the league!).

But that is exactly what they did. They failed in areas where they had had consistent, often spectacular, success throughout the season. Their pass protection had been superb. It sucked in this game. Brady had easily overcome pressure, to fire accurate passes to his receivers. He was off target with a great many passes in this game. The defense had played with a lot of "bend" throughout the first 3 quarters in most games; but consistently made the big play to preserve victory in the 4th quarter. They allowed the Giants to move steadily down the field to two TDs in the 4th Quarter of this game, the last with the Giants on their own side of the 50 yard line, and less than 2 minutes to play.

They choked. There is no way to deny that. As a dedicated fan of this team (and I'll still be one next season!), I cannot view their performance in this game any other way; nor can I deny the pain that it caused me, and other long-time Patriots fans. This was not just another Super Bowl loss. I've been through two of those. They were going to make history. This is almost certainly not going to happen again in my lifetime, if ever.

It doesn't change my life. It's not a national disaster. As the saying goes, in the department store of life, sports is the toy department. But, within the confines of that toy department, this was a devastating loss.

[Old Man River]

The Best Team Won

By way of introduction of my comments, I will tell you that I turned off the

TV just as Bill Belichick stepped onto the field to congratulate Tom

Coughlin. I went upstairs to just lie down, and let the emotion ebb. That

was at about 10:15 AM here, I think. I came back downstairs, after a few

short naps, and a lot of bad memories, at about 6:00 PM. I read the handful

of comments in my email inbox, and turned of the laptop at about 8:00 PM. I

have not yet read any of the notes that arrived in my inbox after that time,

nor have I visited any websites. I relate all of that to set up the fact

that what I am about to say is relatively uninfluenced by comments from

anybody else, professional or personal. So, here are my thoughts about Super

Bowl XLII.

As stated in the title, my opinion is that the best team won. As I did in

February of 2001, I define the best team as the one that brings its' 'A'

game to the field, and puts out physical, emotional, and mental effort that

exceeds that of its' opponent. The Giants did that in Super Bowl XLII. The

Patriots did not.

You'll notice that I didn't mention scoring. I do, in fact, believe that the

best team on a given day can lose a game due to circumstances beyond its'

control; such as crazy weather conditions, lop-sided officiating, or,

literally, an unlucky bounce of the ball at a game-deciding moment. None of

those things happened in Super Bowl XLII. The Giants simply outcoached and

outplayed the Patriots, and fully deserve congratulations, and the honor of

taking home the Lombardi Trophy.

As for the Patriots, I can not, in good conscience, apply any term other

than "choke" to their performance in the game. There is simply no way, IMO,

that the Patriots 'A' game on offense could be held to 14 points by any

defense in this particular NFL season. I believe that they were unable to

handle the pressure the "historic potential" in the game. They played

tentatively, afraid to make errors, in some cases, and playing out of

control in others. I'm not a psychologist, and others may have different

opinions about that. Just for the record, that's mine.

The offensive line was simply overwhelmed. This is the same offensive line

that had been able to limit opponents to 12 sacks of their QB through 18

previous games. They surrendered 5 to the fired up Giants defense in this

one game.

Tom Brady succumbed to that pressure from the Giants, and failed to fire his

passes with the accuracy that was necessary to beat the tight coverage the

Giants secondary applied throughout the game. Nearly all of his incomplete

passes were due to poor location, not drops by his receivers, or great plays

by the defenders.

The defense, in a reversal of the pattern we had seen in most games this

season, played superbly for 3 quarters, and failed to make big plays when it

mattered most, in the 4th Quarter, as they allowed the Giants to overcome

4-point deficits twice, with long drives, and earn the victory.

The final Patriots possession was a microcosm of the entire game. The

Patriots took the kickoff, trailing by just 3 points, and were unable to

open a lane for a big return against the fired up Giants. They were stopped

at their 24 yard line, which would have left them with a need to gain about

45 yards to have any shot at a game-tying FG. However, they also committed a

holding penalty on the play, moving them back to their 11 yard line, and a

need for about 60 yards to try a FG. Brady then proceeded to throw a series

of hopelessly desperate passes, into double coverage, rather than seeking 3

or 4 intermediate yardage completions, with a couple of their 3 times out

called when needed, and move the team into FG position. It was panic, and

desperation; rather than the calculating precision that had been the

trademark of this team all season. Coaches and players choked in this

series, just as they had throughout most of the game.

It was a game that was not decided by one outstanding play in a critical

situation by the Giants; or by one glaring error in a critical situation by

the Patriots. (Although CB Ellis Hobbs did clearly establish the accuracy of

the label on him as the Patriots weak link on defense.) The game was decided

by consistently better play, in every way you can define it, by the Giants;

and consistently poor play, relative to their proven ability, by the

Patriots.

I am deeply disappointed; angered, and, as a very vocal and demonstrative

fan, embarrassed, by the performance of the Patriots in Super Bowl XLII.

They choked. There is nothing more of any consequence that I can say.

George

Geez man, take a breath and take pride in an excellent season and a fine orginization. Giants had a charmed game. Hats off!

I grew up a Raiders fan. How do you think I've been feeling the last few years. Bring on the draft, camp and the next season!!!!

Lordofdelusion, I am with you on this.

Patsfangr, although I took the Cowboys loss to the Giants hard, especially since the Cowboys had beaten the Giants twice during the season, it is still a game and in a month or so all you will be thinking of is next year just as I am. The Pats are a wonderful team and will always be remembered for how good they were this year. A year is a long time to wait, but the Pats will be back winning again next year.

I don't think the Pats choked. I think they were simply overconfident and it showed when, during the game, some of the Pats were inviting Giant players to their houses after the game for their superbowl parties. They figured that one way or another they would win it in the end just like they always do.

In addition, as it turned out, Neal's injury devastated the offensive line. It put pressure on everyone to compensate and given the Giants speed, that was impossible. Players that never have penalties, had penalties and players who never miss blocks, missed blocks. I don't think any team can prepare a game plan for this type of key injury during a game. In the pocket, Brady was a sitting duck. Also, while downplayed, we have no idea how much Brady's ankle hurt.

So, if you were drafting players for the Pats, who would be your draft choices and why?

[lomatopo]

I also strongly disagree with the choke tag. This really takes a lot away from a fine NYFG team and fails to take into account the sheer intensity and exertion of will the Giants brought to this game. The Patriots defense did OK; sure they broke, as opposed to bending, on the last drive but they still held the Giants to 18 fewer point that they did in week 17. And to some, it looked like the Patriots failed to execute on offense, but in my opinion the Giants defense had the stronger desire to win, and exerted their will on the Patriots. Tom Brady has never been a mobile quarterback so expecting him to instantly become one in the face of intense pressure is unreasonable. When the other team beats my team by playing well I just don't consider that choking. But maybe we all have different definitions of "choke"?

I say congratulations to the New England Patriots on an excellent season, and the same to the New York Giants. Most New England sports fans are resilient, and even admire opponents when they beat our teams (Yankees excluded), so after a brief period of mourning will move on to give the Celtics (best record in the NBA) the attention they deserve, while we wait for the defending World Series Champion Red Sox to begin their 2008 season. In Japan?

Still in shock, but moving towards acceptance.

[patsfangr]

Lordofdelusion, I am with you on this.

Patsfangr, although I took the Cowboys loss to the Giants hard, especially since the Cowboys had beaten the Giants twice during the season, it is still a game and in a month or so all you will be thinking of is next year just as I am. The Pats are a wonderful team and will always be remembered for how good they were this year. A year is a long time to wait, but the Pats will be back winning again next year.

I don't think the Pats choked. I think they were simply overconfident and it showed when, during the game, some of the Pats were inviting Giant players to their houses after the game for their superbowl parties. They figured that one way or another they would win it in the end just like they always do.

In addition, as it turned out, Neal's injury devastated the offensive line. It put pressure on everyone to compensate and given the Giants speed, that was impossible. Players that never have penalties, had penalties and players who never miss blocks, missed blocks. I don't think any team can prepare a game plan for this type of key injury during a game. In the pocket, Brady was a sitting duck. Also, while downplayed, we have no idea how much Brady's ankle hurt.

So, if you were drafting players for the Pats, who would be your draft choices and why?

I hope you read my response to lordofdelusion on his comments, OMR. I tried to explain the difference between this potentially historic game, and any other SB loss (let alone the Divisional Playoff loss the Cowboys suffered at the hands of the Giants). This wasn't "a game", OMR. It was HISTORY waiting to happen. Whatever the Patriots may do in the future, the likelihood that it will be anything even close to the achievement that was there for them in this game is so remote as to border on impossible.

Understand, as I detailed to lordofdelusion, that I am not a "casual", or even a "big" fan of the Patriots. I'm in that small, borderline psychotic group of fans who assign much more importance to a sports team than can be justified with common sense. I'm not defending that. I'm simply presenting it as a fact. I've been a fan of the team for all 48 years of its existence, and I literally cried when they won their first SB, 42 years into that existence, in February of 2002. Silly old fool? Guilty. But I hope that helps you understand why I can't simply pass over this loss by saying "it is still a game." I accept that well enough in my head to be far from doing myself, or anyone else, harm over it. But, in my heart, there is a hel_l of a lot more pain than the vast majority of fans ever feel for a loss by their team.

On a couple of specific points, I also disagree with you. I don't think the Pats "will always be remembered for how good they were this year." I am certain that the primary point that will be repeated for years is that they let history slip through their fingers by losing the Super Bowl to a team that "everybody" considered inferior to them. There is no question that the media as well as the more "vocal" fans of other teams will harp on that point; and not repeatedly salute the Patriots for their offensive records, and their 18-0 record going into the Super Bowl.

Next, Neal's injury did not devastate the OL. The guy who replaced him, Hochstein, actually played the entire game against the Giants in the final game of the regular season, as well as several other games. Neal was injured, and did not play at all in that one, or in a few others this year. Hochstein is a 6 year vet, who has a lot of starts for the team throughout his career. This injury was not a death blow for the Patriots OL. Not at all. And remember that the Giants sacks came primarily from the ends, through or around OTs Light and Kaczur. Only one, late in the game, came over Hochstein.

Your reference to "players that never have penalties had penalties" is also, I'm afraid, totally erroneous. The Patriots had 5 penalties called on them. Two were False Starts on OLT, Matt Light, who is notorious among Pats fans for his tendancy to jump at least once in nearly every game. One was a False Start on Ben Watson, who has the same problem all too frequently. The other two were an Off Hold on Watson, negating a 15 yard completion to Kevin Faulk of no major consequence (the 1st Down would have moved the ball only to the Pats 41); and a Hold on Hochstein during the final Giants kickoff, following their winning TD.

No, OMR, it wasn't injury, and it wasn't penalties, and it wasn't Brady's ankle that kept the Patriots offense down. It was a combination of the great, inspired effort by the Giants, AND a failure of the Patriots to play their best game. I don't believe that the Giants were capable of playing any better than they did. And they won by 3 points. I am absolutely certain that the Patriots can play better than they did. The Patriots 'A' game would have beaten the Giants 'A' game. The Patriots didn't bring it, and that, as I define it, is a "choke".

[patsfangr]

I also strongly disagree with the choke tag. This really takes a lot away from a fine NYFG team and fails to take into account the sheer intensity and exertion of will the Giants brought to this game. The Patriots defense did OK; sure they broke, as opposed to bending, on the last drive but they still held the Giants to 18 fewer point that they did in week 17. And to some, it looked like the Patriots failed to execute on offense, but in my opinion the Giants defense had the stronger desire to win, and exerted their will on the Patriots. Tom Brady has never been a mobile quarterback so expecting him to instantly become one in the face of intense pressure is unreasonable. When the other team beats my team by playing well I just don't consider that choking. But maybe we all have different definitions of "choke"?

I say congratulations to the New England Patriots on an excellent season, and the same to the New York Giants. Most New England sports fans are resilient, and even admire opponents when they beat our teams (Yankees excluded), so after a brief period of mourning will move on to give the Celtics (best record in the NBA) the attention they deserve, while we wait for the defending World Series Champion Red Sox to begin their 2008 season. In Japan?

Still in shock, but moving towards acceptance.

LT, I am definitely not taking anything away from the Giants. I said, very clearly, that they put forth their best effort physically, mentally, and emotionally; and that, as was the case for my Patriots when they beat the heavily favored Rams in SB 36, that level of effort made them deserving of the win.

But, as you said yourself, it appeared that "the Giants defense had a stronger desire to win". That's the "emotional" element of the 'A' game they brought. The Patriots failed to match that level of desire. They failed to keep their poise, and their focus, and that made the difference. The Giants deserve all the credit in the world for playing their best. But I honestly believe that they Patriots would have won, had they also played their best.

And I also have one specific correction for you, LT. I did not say that Brady should have magically transformed into a "mobile QB". His forte, not just in this game, but throughout his career, has been his ability to make very quick, short distance moves in the pocket, and to release the ball very quickly, and on target. It was that skill that he failed to demonstrate in this game, primarily the very last part of it. He was not on target. No amount of pressure has prevented him from hitting his spots in the past. That lack of accuracy was a clear indication that he was not playing at his very best.

I'll also add that his young Offensive Coordinator, Josh McDaniels, contributed to Brady's problems by not calling enough of the type of plays that had made the team so successful throughout the season. Where were the 3 step drop quick slants and outs? Where was the no-huddle offense? Where were the middle screens and check downs? The Patriots, including the coaches, failed to play their game.

Sincere congratulations to the New York Giants. The only way they had any chance to win was to play their best game. That's what they did. But no one can convince me that the Giants "best game" would have been good enough to beat the Patriots "best game".

[Old Man River]

Lordofdelusion, I am with you on this.

Patsfangr, although I took the Cowboys loss to the Giants hard, especially since the Cowboys had beaten the Giants twice during the season, it is still a game and in a month or so all you will be thinking of is next year just as I am. The Pats are a wonderful team and will always be remembered for how good they were this year. A year is a long time to wait, but the Pats will be back winning again next year.

I don't think the Pats choked. I think they were simply overconfident and it showed when, during the game, some of the Pats were inviting Giant players to their houses after the game for their superbowl parties. They figured that one way or another they would win it in the end just like they always do.

In addition, as it turned out, Neal's injury devastated the offensive line. It put pressure on everyone to compensate and given the Giants speed, that was impossible. Players that never have penalties, had penalties and players who never miss blocks, missed blocks. I don't think any team can prepare a game plan for this type of key injury during a game. In the pocket, Brady was a sitting duck. Also, while downplayed, we have no idea how much Brady's ankle hurt.

So, if you were drafting players for the Pats, who would be your draft choices and why?

I hope you read my response to lordofdelusion on his comments, OMR. I tried to explain the difference between this potentially historic game, and any other SB loss (let alone the Divisional Playoff loss the Cowboys suffered at the hands of the Giants). This wasn't "a game", OMR. It was HISTORY waiting to happen. Whatever the Patriots may do in the future, the likelihood that it will be anything even close to the achievement that was there for them in this game is so remote as to border on impossible.

Understand, as I detailed to lordofdelusion, that I am not a "casual", or even a "big" fan of the Patriots. I'm in that small, borderline psychotic group of fans who assign much more importance to a sports team than can be justified with common sense. I'm not defending that. I'm simply presenting it as a fact. I've been a fan of the team for all 48 years of its existence, and I literally cried when they won their first SB, 42 years into that existence, in February of 2002. Silly old fool? Guilty. But I hope that helps you understand why I can't simply pass over this loss by saying "it is still a game." I accept that well enough in my head to be far from doing myself, or anyone else, harm over it. But, in my heart, there is a hel_l of a lot more pain than the vast majority of fans ever feel for a loss by their team.

On a couple of specific points, I also disagree with you. I don't think the Pats "will always be remembered for how good they were this year." I am certain that the primary point that will be repeated for years is that they let history slip through their fingers by losing the Super Bowl to a team that "everybody" considered inferior to them. There is no question that the media as well as the more "vocal" fans of other teams will harp on that point; and not repeatedly salute the Patriots for their offensive records, and their 18-0 record going into the Super Bowl.

Next, Neal's injury did not devastate the OL. The guy who replaced him, Hochstein, actually played the entire game against the Giants in the final game of the regular season, as well as several other games. Neal was injured, and did not play at all in that one, or in a few others this year. Hochstein is a 6 year vet, who has a lot of starts for the team throughout his career. This injury was not a death blow for the Patriots OL. Not at all. And remember that the Giants sacks came primarily from the ends, through or around OTs Light and Kaczur. Only one, late in the game, came over Hochstein.

Your reference to "players that never have penalties had penalties" is also, I'm afraid, totally erroneous. The Patriots had 5 penalties called on them. Two were False Starts on OLT, Matt Light, who is notorious among Pats fans for his tendancy to jump at least once in nearly every game. One was a False Start on Ben Watson, who has the same problem all too frequently. The other two were an Off Hold on Watson, negating a 15 yard completion to Kevin Faulk of no major consequence (the 1st Down would have moved the ball only to the Pats 41); and a Hold on Hochstein during the final Giants kickoff, following their winning TD.

No, OMR, it wasn't injury, and it wasn't penalties, and it wasn't Brady's ankle that kept the Patriots offense down. It was a combination of the great, inspired effort by the Giants, AND a failure of the Patriots to play their best game. I don't believe that the Giants were capable of playing any better than they did. And they won by 3 points. I am absolutely certain that the Patriots can play better than they did. The Patriots 'A' game would have beaten the Giants 'A' game. The Patriots didn't bring it, and that, as I define it, is a "choke".

OK, OK, call it what you will, but if the Patriots were the type of team to choke they would have choked numerous times during the season. Any team that goes 18-0 does not choke. They were overconfident and this was clearly shown by their player's comments during the game. Still, if you want to call overconfidence choking then so be it.

For me, I am putting this season behind me and looking forward to the draft and next season. For you, unfortunately, you still have to go through discussion about a potential senate judiciary committee hearing on the Pats alleged cheating and a possible NFL cover up. None of this will be good for the game.

[patsfangr]

For me, I am putting this season behind me and looking forward to the draft and next season. For you, unfortunately, you still have to go through discussion about a potential senate judiciary committee hearing on the Pats alleged cheating and a possible NFL cover up. None of this will be good for the game.

We are in agreement on these points, OMR. First, I am also putting this season behind me, except as a reference for the Pats needs next season. We can disagree all we want on the semantics used to describe the Patriots failure to play their best game. The reasons, right or wrong, don't change the fact that the Giants won, and deserved the victory. On to next season.

Regarding the potential Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, I consider that ludicrous to the point of being nearly criminal itself. The activities of the NFL are NOT a matter for the attention of the US Senate! How can anyone even consider wasting the time and attention of our government, not to mention the money, on the issue of whether or not a football team "cheated", or the league "covered it up"?!

The NFL is treated by the government as a single entity. They share revenue. They are, in fact, a single organization, with individual "profit centers" that operate with a specified degree of independence. If one team violates a rule - ANY RULE - that is a matter for the NFL to address within its' organizational walls. It is no more a matter for public scrutiny than would be a rule violation by one part of any business against another part of that business.

In my opinion, if there is a thorough investigation, it will reveal that the same, or similar "rule violations" have been committed by many NFL teams over the years; and that the NFL, with the knowledge and acceptance of the teams in the league, has swept all of it under the rug. The NFL will come out with a stink that will have the media in an absolutely orgasmic frenzy over all the print, audio, and video bullsh*t it can generate about it. And guess what? Nobody will care. The effect upon the attention of the fans to the game will be virtually unaffected. The fans will continue to flock to the stadiums, and tune their TVs to the games. The money will continue to flow from the fans to the teams and the league. And most fans will have another reason to be disgusted with the media; which, also, will not change a thing.

The whole issue is a waste of time, both within, and outside of the NFL. Dozens of present and former NFL people have made it very clear that most, if not all, NFL teams have taken and used video tape that was obtained in a manner that violated league rules. All of them have used methods within the rules to try to "steal the signals" of opposing teams. The fact is that the Patriots were not penalized for "cheating", they were penalized for violating the directive of the Commissioner that forbid taping in that manner. It was, as many NFL people now state both publicly and privately, an error in judgement by the Commissioner to open this Pandora's Box. He was motivated by his ego and arrogance to stomp on Belichick for daring to defy his authority.

But, agree or disagree with any or all of that last paragraph, the fact remains that this is NOT a matter for the time, attention, and money of the US government!

[calibanjr.]

And I also have one specific correction for you, LT. I did not say that Brady should have magically transformed into a "mobile QB". His forte, not just in this game, but throughout his career, has been his ability to make very quick, short distance moves in the pocket, and to release the ball very quickly, and on target. It was that skill that he failed to demonstrate in this game, primarily the very last part of it. He was not on target. No amount of pressure has prevented him from hitting his spots in the past. That lack of accuracy was a clear indication that he was not playing at his very best.

I'll also add that his young Offensive Coordinator, Josh McDaniels, contributed to Brady's problems by not calling enough of the type of plays that had made the team so successful throughout the season. Where were the 3 step drop quick slants and outs? Where was the no-huddle offense? Where were the middle screens and check downs? The Patriots, including the coaches, failed to play their game.

Sincere congratulations to the New York Giants. The only way they had any chance to win was to play their best game. That's what they did. But no one can convince me that the Giants "best game" would have been good enough to beat the Patriots "best game".

I'm not sooooo wiped out. I've seen the Patriots' success after 2001 and the Red Sox 2nd WS win as just gravy for me personally. Eight years ago, if you told me we'd have won 1 SB and one WS (especially the WS), I'd have been set for life!

That being said, the loss jolts a bunch of facets in the Pats' world. Junior and Bruschi could have retired at the pinnacle. The perfect season would be in the books, and <deleted> to Mercury Morris. Randy Moss' fragile psyche wouldn't be as much of an issue next year as it might now become (hello Chad Johnson?). Brady tied with Joe M and Terry B. with 4 SB's (really not that big a deal, as I figure Brady wins between 1 and 4 more).

Tell me, was that not the WEIRDEST Super Bowl you've ever seen? Strange momentum shifts, funky bounces (that slapping the ball forward penalty), the "too many men" for a first down for the Pats, the strange INT deflection then a 3 and out (good work by the Giants). The whole thing seemed surreal, and when the "helmet prayer" catch occurred, all of my old "Red Sox Disaster" neurosis came barrelling back, knew it was a bad day gonna happen in the end.

Many strange decisions by Belichick. But as you mention, the thing that really STILL confuses me is what was missing, the in-game adjustments! The Pats' calling card is to change on the fly in the face of what IS working for the opponent and keep them off-balance. I felt really kind of confident coming out of half-time that, as usual, the Pats' would make adjustments in formation, motion, plays, even personnel to get the ball moving. Yes, they seemed uninspired on the field, but I give the D great grades and were one Asante (<deleted>!) dropped INT from getting out alive. Leaving Plax 1on1 in an obvious passing down and NO safety help at all! <deleted>?!

Brady is as close as I GET to actual man-love (after Larry Bird), but he was inaccurate, even the few times he had decent time to throw. A couple of really nifty catches by Welker and Faulk made his numbers look better than he deserved. Remember a wide open Moss in the left side of the end zone that Brady missed? Luckily for him, we subsequently scored with Moss to the right side, but if they don't get in, that miss to Moss would be etched in everybody's mind forever.

O played uninspired NON-ADAPTIVE ball, they get a C-/D+. D held them to 17 on such a bad day for the offense (Time of possession, tiring our D out) they get a B+. That ain't gonna win it when the Giants D had an A+ game and the Giants O had an A- game!

Edited February 6, 2008 by calibanjr.

[Old Man River]

Regarding the potential Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, I consider that ludicrous to the point of being nearly criminal itself. The activities of the NFL are NOT a matter for the attention of the US Senate! How can anyone even consider wasting the time and attention of our government, not to mention the money, on the issue of whether or not a football team "cheated", or the league "covered it up"?!

The NFL is treated by the government as a single entity. They share revenue. They are, in fact, a single organization, with individual "profit centers" that operate with a specified degree of independence. If one team violates a rule - ANY RULE - that is a matter for the NFL to address within its' organizational walls. It is no more a matter for public scrutiny than would be a rule violation by one part of any business against another part of that business.

In my opinion, if there is a thorough investigation, it will reveal that the same, or similar "rule violations" have been committed by many NFL teams over the years; and that the NFL, with the knowledge and acceptance of the teams in the league, has swept all of it under the rug. The NFL will come out with a stink that will have the media in an absolutely orgasmic frenzy over all the print, audio, and video bullsh*t it can generate about it. And guess what? Nobody will care. The effect upon the attention of the fans to the game will be virtually unaffected. The fans will continue to flock to the stadiums, and tune their TVs to the games. The money will continue to flow from the fans to the teams and the league. And most fans will have another reason to be disgusted with the media; which, also, will not change a thing.

The whole issue is a waste of time, both within, and outside of the NFL. Dozens of present and former NFL people have made it very clear that most, if not all, NFL teams have taken and used video tape that was obtained in a manner that violated league rules. All of them have used methods within the rules to try to "steal the signals" of opposing teams. The fact is that the Patriots were not penalized for "cheating", they were penalized for violating the directive of the Commissioner that forbid taping in that manner. It was, as many NFL people now state both publicly and privately, an error in judgement by the Commissioner to open this Pandora's Box. He was motivated by his ego and arrogance to stomp on Belichick for daring to defy his authority.

But, agree or disagree with any or all of that last paragraph, the fact remains that this is NOT a matter for the time, attention, and money of the US government!

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what you or any of us average citizens say. The senate was involved in the baseball drug scandals and they are now involved in the alleged spying scandal and potential NFL cover up. If proof is brought forward by the former Pat's coach that he filmed the Rams walk through then the defense that everyone is doing it won't be enough (especially since not everyone has done it). Realistically, this could cost Belichick is career.

[Old Man River]

Regarding the potential Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, I consider that ludicrous to the point of being nearly criminal itself. The activities of the NFL are NOT a matter for the attention of the US Senate! How can anyone even consider wasting the time and attention of our government, not to mention the money, on the issue of whether or not a football team "cheated", or the league "covered it up"?!

The NFL is treated by the government as a single entity. They share revenue. They are, in fact, a single organization, with individual "profit centers" that operate with a specified degree of independence. If one team violates a rule - ANY RULE - that is a matter for the NFL to address within its' organizational walls. It is no more a matter for public scrutiny than would be a rule violation by one part of any business against another part of that business.

In my opinion, if there is a thorough investigation, it will reveal that the same, or similar "rule violations" have been committed by many NFL teams over the years; and that the NFL, with the knowledge and acceptance of the teams in the league, has swept all of it under the rug. The NFL will come out with a stink that will have the media in an absolutely orgasmic frenzy over all the print, audio, and video bullsh*t it can generate about it. And guess what? Nobody will care. The effect upon the attention of the fans to the game will be virtually unaffected. The fans will continue to flock to the stadiums, and tune their TVs to the games. The money will continue to flow from the fans to the teams and the league. And most fans will have another reason to be disgusted with the media; which, also, will not change a thing.

The whole issue is a waste of time, both within, and outside of the NFL. Dozens of present and former NFL people have made it very clear that most, if not all, NFL teams have taken and used video tape that was obtained in a manner that violated league rules. All of them have used methods within the rules to try to "steal the signals" of opposing teams. The fact is that the Patriots were not penalized for "cheating", they were penalized for violating the directive of the Commissioner that forbid taping in that manner. It was, as many NFL people now state both publicly and privately, an error in judgement by the Commissioner to open this Pandora's Box. He was motivated by his ego and arrogance to stomp on Belichick for daring to defy his authority.

But, agree or disagree with any or all of that last paragraph, the fact remains that this is NOT a matter for the time, attention, and money of the US government!

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what you or any of us average citizens say. The senate was involved in the baseball drug scandals and they are now involved in the alleged spying scandal and potential NFL cover up. If proof is brought forward by the former Pat's coach that he filmed the Rams walk through then the defense that everyone is doing it won't be enough (especially since not everyone has done it). Realistically, this could cost Belichick is career.

This is an update on Spygate I and II:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AoTG...p&type=lgns

[lomatopo]

But, agree or disagree with any or all of that last paragraph, the fact remains that this is NOT a matter for the time, attention, and money of the US government!

Agreed. Arlen Specter (Sen. R-PA) is still upset that the Pats beat the Eagles in Superbowl 39, hence he's all over the NFL for destroying the NE spygate tapes. It is odd that he seems uninterested in the CIA's destruction of waterboarding tapes. Go figure.

Edited February 16, 2008 by lomatopo

[koheesti]

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what you or any of us average citizens say. The senate was involved in the baseball drug scandals and they are now involved in the alleged spying scandal and potential NFL cover up.

I thought that MLB had more oversight by Congress than other sports because they were given some sort of exemption for being a monopoly? Notice there are/have been different pro leagues for football, basketball, hockey over the years but not baseball.

There is no reason for the gov't to be involved in the NFL case. Because unlike MLB which has shown they can't self-govern and IGNORED steroid use for decades, the NFL does take action on its issues as they already have on spygate.

[edit: just found this link which gives some insight on MLB's anti-trust exemption http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2003/fal..._zimbalist.aspx ]

Edited February 16, 2008 by koheesti

[patsfangr]

But, agree or disagree with any or all of that last paragraph, the fact remains that this is NOT a matter for the time, attention, and money of the US government!

Agreed. Arlen Specter (Sen. R-PA) is still upset that the Pats beat the Eagles in Superbowl 39, hence he's all over the NFL for destroying the NE spygate tapes. It is odd that he seems uninterested in the CIA's destruction of waterboarding tapes. Go figure.

It's much easier to "go figure" than you might realize, LT. You see, Comcast, which is embroiled in a BIG BUCKS fight with the NFL over the rights to the "NFL Network" cable TV channel, also "just happens" to be the biggest contributor to the campaign fund of the "honorable" Sen Specter. Is that "figuring" any easier for you now?

[patsfangr]

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what you or any of us average citizens say. The senate was involved in the baseball drug scandals and they are now involved in the alleged spying scandal and potential NFL cover up.

I thought that MLB had more oversight by Congress than other sports because they were given some sort of exemption for being a monopoly? Notice there are/have been different pro leagues for football, basketball, hockey over the years but not baseball.

There is no reason for the gov't to be involved in the NFL case. Because unlike MLB which has shown they can't self-govern and IGNORED steroid use for decades, the NFL does take action on its issues as they already have on spygate.

[edit: just found this link which gives some insight on MLB's anti-trust exemption http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2003/fal..._zimbalist.aspx ]

That points out the reason why the US government has a legitimate reason to be involved in investigating activities within MLB. The anti-trust exemption makes MLB subject to legal intervention by the government. The NFL does NOT have an ant-trust exemption. They are simply a privately owned major corporation, and, as I said, violoations of their internal rules are, or should be, an internal affair. The US government has no business in their busiiness!

[Old Man River]

But, agree or disagree with any or all of that last paragraph, the fact remains that this is NOT a matter for the time, attention, and money of the US government!

Agreed. Arlen Specter (Sen. R-PA) is still upset that the Pats beat the Eagles in Superbowl 39, hence he's all over the NFL for destroying the NE spygate tapes. It is odd that he seems uninterested in the CIA's destruction of waterboarding tapes. Go figure.

It's much easier to "go figure" than you might realize, LT. You see, Comcast, which is embroiled in a BIG BUCKS fight with the NFL over the rights to the "NFL Network" cable TV channel, also "just happens" to be the biggest contributor to the campaign fund of the "honorable" Sen Specter. Is that "figuring" any easier for you now?

Be that as it may, the issue should not be whether the US Senate has jurisdiction over the NFL, but whether the NFL Commissioner is guilty of a cover up as it relates to Spygate I and more importantly, whether the Patriots filmed the St. Louis Rams walk through just prior to the Rams upset loss to the Patriots in the superbowl (Spygate II).

Regardless of the reasons why, if the senate wants to look at these issues they will (and they are).

[patsfangr]

Be that as it may, the issue should not be whether the US Senate has jurisdiction over the NFL, but whether the NFL Commissioner is guilty of a cover up as it relates to Spygate I and more importantly, whether the Patriots filmed the St. Louis Rams walk through just prior to the Rams upset loss to the Patriots in the superbowl (Spygate II).

Regardless of the reasons why, if the senate wants to look at these issues they will (and they are).

Of course they can, OMR. The question I asked is whether it is an appropriate use of US government resources to do so. Specter pounds his puppet fist on the podium in indignance (with Comcast pulling his strings), and the national visibility of, and interest in, the NFL, stirs up the always hungry media. Now we need a congressional investigation of an independent sports league?

As to the question of the alleged, and totally unproven, taping of Rams practice; are you aware that the practice in question was a run through of the Rams "red zone" offense, ,and that the Rams SCORED the ONE time that they ran plays inside the red zone? So, IF the Patriots taped it, and studied it, it had absolutely NO affect on the outcome of the game. Makes the entire thing not only moot, but ridiculous, doesn't it?

I personally hold to the belief that the larger point in all of this is whether a US Senator is suggesting the commitment of major congressional resources solely, or at least primarily, because his largest financial contributor is encouraging him to do so. That is a much larger issue, it seems to me, than whether or not the NFL is playing dirty tricks, or deceiving the media, inside its' organization, whether by the commissioner, a coach (or coaches), or anybody else.

Let me present a hypothetical situation, just for discussion and opinions. Let's say that Goodell, when first questioned by the government, admitted that he covered up evidence that Bill Belichick, as well as other coaches in the NFL (as some have already admitted) broke NFL rules by videotaping certain activities of other teams, including in-game signals, and practices. Now what? What would/should the US government do about that? Should all coaches guilty of that rule violation be imprisoned? Exiled? Shot? What? Should Goodell receive the same (or worse) federal punishment for initially refusing to reveal this information to the media? hel_l, perhaps the NFL itself should be banned?

Back tracking a bit, what if the NFL had discovered such activity. What should it have done? Should it have taken retro-active action against every coach and team that ever committed such acts? Should it have fired and banned all active league employees proven to have participated? Should it have removed all individual and team awards given in games or seasons where such acts were committed?

Interesting questions, I think. I'm not suggesting any answers here. I'm just asking the questions.

[Old Man River]

As to the question of the alleged, and totally unproven, taping of Rams practice; are you aware that the practice in question was a run through of the Rams "red zone" offense, ,and that the Rams SCORED the ONE time that they ran plays inside the red zone? So, IF the Patriots taped it, and studied it, it had absolutely NO affect on the outcome of the game. Makes the entire thing not only moot, but ridiculous, doesn't it?

I am not going to get into the issue as it relates to Specter and the US Senate as this is a sports forum.

The red zone walk through would have covered short yardage plays. On the Rams one time into the red zone you make it sound like the Rams scored easily and a filming of the plays would have had no impact on the game. That is impossible to say, even for you. Short yardage plays are used throughout the game and as it relates to the Rams one time in the red zone, on fourth-and-goal, Warner scrambled, was tackled by Roman Phifer, and fumbled. Tebucky Jones picked up the ball and raced the length of the field for an apparent touchdown, but the play was negated by Willie McGinest's holding penalty. Warner then scored from the two.

The bottom line is, political discussions aside, if Belichick had the walk through filmed (as stated - not yet under oath - by the former Patriots coach who has said Belichick told him to film the walk through) then Belichick is and should be history.

[TokyoT]

Well I have held off on the spygate discussion for some time, but thought I might just add my two bits. But first I would like to thank the football gods for allowing the Giants to win the superbowl. As a life long fan of the sport of football I was truly dreading a Pats win – why? Because every time their perfect season would be mentioned we would have to relive spygate – not good for the game, not good for the fans, not good for anybody. I think even Pats fans would start to grown at having to try and defend the reputation of the perfect season. Believe me being glad the Giants won the superbowl – or even cheering for the Giants in any game (except when they play the Cowboys) is a real stretch for a life long Skins fan.

That being said I am a bit up on the air in regard to Senator Specter, but not in regard to Goodell. I think the destruction of the items related to the original spygate issue stinks to high heaven – and that if this whole deal does turn into a big deal that Goodell should be the first one to be shown the door.

As to the use of US Government resources – take a look and I think you’ll find millions if not billions of wasted taxpayer dollars flushed down the drain on any number of government investigations and programs. If this investigation by Sen. Specter reveals a real cover-up then I will consider it money well spent. If the investigation by Sen. Specter turns into just a wild goose chase then I will consider it just a typical bungling of taxpayer funds – not unlike quite a lot of other government investigations/programs.

As for US government penalties for anything resulting from all of this – I doubt there will be any, unless it is related to perjury charges based upon testimony given under oath during thie investigation (none of which has taken place that I am aware of). However, as I stated earlier if it turns out that Goodell was involved in some kind of cover-up I think he should be the first one shown the door by the NFL. And if indeed there is proof that other NFL teams that are/were doing the same thing then I think they should be punished similarly to what has been doled out to Belichick and the Pats. As for Belichick I think any additional punishment for him should related to any potential perjury charges that could develop (as to date I do not think he has given any form of testimony under oath so not an issue as of yet) as it relates to possible US government charges. And any additional penalties imposed by the NFL will really hinge on what he says between now and when this whole thing finally gets resolved. If he sticks to his guns and denies any additional involvement or cover-up, and indeed nothing torrid did transpired obviously there would be nothing more for him to answer to. On the other hand if he sticks to his guns and denies any involvement (under oath or even in basic statements to the NFL/ Sen. Specter/ fans/ team/ press), and indeed some kind of cover-up is discovered then I think he too should be shown the door – right along with Goodell. Especially if there was some kind of deal struck between Goodell and Belichick to limit the punishment that was doled out by the NFL in exchange for Goodell destroying all the information, and Belichick keeping his mouth shut about what transpired (this sounds a bit fishy because the punishment for Belichick was not light).

As for what they NFL should have done if this indeed is some kind of league wide plague, and there was an effort to cover it up rather than deal with it. Then I think the first place that needs a good house cleaning is the front office of the NFL. If indeed it was wide spread then I think the proper action would have been to impose equal fines/ penalties on all parties involved from every team involved. If all 32 teams were involved then this action would have basically resulted in a zero sum deal in regard to any draft related actions – but I think a good thing to have done with the fines imposed/collected would have been to put it into a fund to help support retired non-modern era players – especially those that have developed physical or mental problems since leaving the game. I doubt it was quite that wide speard as there would be little motivation to punish Belichick and not other parties that have done similar things - I simply don't see Belichick taking the fine and letting others who have done the same or similar get off scott free.

[patsfangr]

APOLOGY: I am sending this message to several distribution lists that I use

for various reasons. Some of you are on more than one list. Therefore, you

may receive this message more than once. I am sorry for the inconvenience

that may cause. I hope you'll understand that, given my illogical, and

perhaps mentally unbalanced dedication to the New England Patriots, I am

most anxious to present this information to everyone I know who has even a

peripheral interest in the NFL - or in me, for that matter. :-) That said,

please read on.

----------------------------------------------------------

I address the subject line to the Patriots haters who may or not be among

you. Of course, some of you may recall a former President's adamant

assurance to the world that "I did not have sexual relations with that

woman!"; and choose to place the statements by Bill Belichick and Scott

Pioli into the same category. I have no further proof than their clear,

specific statements that what they say is true. I leave it to you to take it

for what you deem it to be worth. But I hope that you will acknowledge that

this is a lot more specific than a simple "yes" or "no" answer to question.

I further hope that you will fold all of it into your consideration and

opinion of this whole series of events and accusations. Beyond that, I

offer no further comments at this time. I ask only that you read the entire

article before you respond to this; OR before you make any further comments

or judgments about Bill Belichick, or the on-field accomplishments of the

New England Patriots. I will sincerely appreciate your agreement to do so.

If you choose to respond, please do so with the "Reply to All" option, so

that we may all engage in any on-going discussion of this issue.

I must offer one further comment. The author of this article, for those who

aren't familiar with his work, is recognized as among the most talented,

respected, and objective sports journalists in Boston. He is not a "Patriots

shill", in any sense of the term. We Patriots fans consistently turn to his

columns for "the facts" on any related subject or report, before accepting

the words of any other Boston "sports writer".

----------------------------------------------------------

By Mike Reiss

Globe Staff / February 18, 2008

FOXBOROUGH - Patriots coach Bill Belichick and vice president of player

personnel Scott Pioli broke their silence regarding taping procedures and

suggestions of improper conduct from former employee Matt Walsh yesterday,

with Belichick saying he "couldn't pick Matt Walsh out of a lineup" and

Pioli noting that part of the reason for Walsh's firing was because of him

secretly tape-recording conversations.

Since the days leading up to Super Bowl XLII when Senator Arlen Specter, a

Pennsylvania Republican, questioned the NFL's destruction of tapes that

resulted in record fines against Belichick and the Patriots, the club's

taping procedures - and Walsh's potential role in them - have ignited a

public firestorm.

The Boston Herald, citing an anonymous source, reported Feb. 2 that the

Patriots had taped the Rams' walkthrough prior to Super Bowl XXXVI. The

Patriots and NFL strongly denied that story, and Belichick further addressed

it yesterday.

"In my entire coaching career, I've never seen another team's practice film

prior to playing that team," he said. "I have never authorized, or heard of,

or even seen in any way, shape, or form any other team's walkthrough. We

don't even film our own. We don't even want to see ourselves do anything,

that's the pace that it's at. Regardless, I've never been a part of that."

Belichick added that in his "entire coaching career, I have never filmed a

walkthrough, our own. I've never been on a staff that has filmed a

walkthrough. I'm talking about when I was a head coach. As an assistant,

I've never seen a head coach film a walkthrough the day before a game."

Pioli said Walsh was terminated in January 2003 after he discovered Walsh

was "se cretly tape-recording conversations between him and me." Pioli said

he learned of the recording because "two other employees saw him doing it,

and I checked after, and heard it on the tape myself."

Walsh's lawyer, Michael Levy, disputed Pioli's story last night. After

speaking with Walsh, he called it a "complete fabrication."

"This is a predictable and pathetic effort to smear Mr. Walsh's character

rather than confront the truth about the Patriots' conduct," Levy said from

his Washington, D.C. home.

Walsh has hinted he has materials that could prove damaging to the Patriots,

and Levy said Walsh will turn them over to the NFL if the league provides

him complete indemnification, protecting Walsh from being sued. But Levy

said the NFL's most recent offer leaves Walsh unprotected legally against

unfounded or unproven allegations.

Belichick further detailed his interpretation of the NFL's taping rules from

the league's Constitution & Bylaws (article 9) and scoffed at a "Spygate"

reference yesterday because what the team taped was in view to everyone.

The rule states: "Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the

finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any

communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type

cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without

limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any

other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of

a game."

Belichick felt the Patriots' actions were in compliance with NFL rules,

saying, "My interpretation was that you can't utilize anything to assist you

during that game. What our camera guys do is clearly not allowed to be used

during the game and has never been used during that game that it was shot."

At the time the Patriots were fined during the season, it was theorized

coaches were utilizing the film of opposing signals to make halftime

adjustments. Belichick said that was "never, never" the case.

He described the impact of the tapes as "minimal" to the Patriots'

preparations, rating it a "one" on a scale of 1 to 100.

"On the tape of the signaling that we talk about, that film usually wasn't

even completed until Thursday or Friday of the following week. It was that

low of a priority," he said. "In other words, the video guys had so much

other stuff to do on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday getting ready for the other

game, that a lot of times that film wasn't even processed until later in the

week."

Asked, then, why the Patriots conducted the taping, he responded by saying:

"Why do anything? Why study tendencies? Why study stances?"

In the NFL, it is commonplace for scouts to attend games of future opponents

and study signals. Detailed records are kept of those signals, including

which coach is delivering them.

The Patriots' videotaping of signals was deemed to cross the line, which

Belichick apologized for yesterday.

"I respect the integrity of the game and always have and always will," he

said. "I regret that any of this, or to whatever extent it has in any way

brought that into question or discussion or debate. The decision was made by

the commissioner, the practice was immediately stopped, and we're not doing

it.

"Just going back over the whole taping incident, if I contacted the league

and asked them about the practice, I'm sure they would have told me - as

they have done - that it is not permissible. Then I could have avoided all

of this.

"I take responsibility for it," he continued. "Even though I felt there was

a gray area in the rule and I misinterpreted the rule, that was my mistake

and we've been penalized for it. I apologize to everybody that is involved -

the league, the other teams, the fans, our team, for the amount of

conversation and dialogue that it's caused.

"I misinterpreted the rule. The commissioner made his ruling and we've been

penalized for it and tried to move on."

Belichick explained why he felt yesterday was the right time to address the

issue, and not during the season when it happened.

"I wasn't comfortable talking about it earlier in the year because my No. 1

job is to win football games," he said. "The more distractions there are, I

think the harder it is to prepare. I thought the more conversation about

this would just take away from what my primary job and our primary job is,

which is to win football games.

"I felt like now, the season has been over for a couple weeks, there are

certainly a lot of questions out there about it, I thought this would be the

timely point to address it as opposed to during the season, at any point. Of

course, it came up a number of times."

In the days leading up to this year's Super Bowl, Walsh's potential role in

the taping became a hot topic. Yesterday, Pioli detailed the work Walsh did

in the personnel department.

"He had come from video, so the first few months his job was to make

highlight tapes of draft-eligible players, guys who were going to be free

agents," he said. "It's like the entry-level position that we have all the

scouting assistants in. It's essentially the same job that I did 15 years

ago, which was making copies, picking people up at the airport, data entry,

more of the highlight tapes of the players, the draft-eligible guys."

Pioli said reports that indicated Walsh was an "area scout" were incorrect.

Their relationship ended abruptly, according to Pioli.

"The job he was doing, there were two other guys doing it, so essentially

the work he was doing wasn't up to the same level as the other people, in my

opinion. However, I found out he was secretly tape recording our

conversations and he was fired," he said.

Asked if he confronted Walsh for an explanation, Pioli said: "There was

never a confrontation. He was just released."

Mike Reiss can be reached at [email protected].

[Old Man River]

During this past season there was some debate as to whether parity was finally reached between the AFC and NFC. I think it interesting that going into the Superbowl, they had played 64 games, and the AFC had won 32 and the NFC had won 32. The Giants victory in the Superbowl gave the NFC the slight edge of 33 wins and 32 losses for the season.

It sure looks to me that the NFL has finally achieved parity between the two conferences.

[patsfangr]

During this past season there was some debate as to whether parity was finally reached between the AFC and NFC. I think it interesting that going into the Superbowl, they had played 64 games, and the AFC had won 32 and the NFC had won 32. The Giants victory in the Superbowl gave the NFC the slight edge of 33 wins and 32 losses for the season.

It sure looks to me that the NFL has finally achieved parity between the two conferences.

IMO, OMR, this will always be cyclical. It's dependent upon the players and coaches in any given season. As an original AFL fan, I was very into the competition between the two leagues. For the first few years following the merger, the NFL had clear superiority, because it had the majority of the top players and coaches. As the revenues grew, the distribution of coaching and playing talent levelled off between the conferences; and transformed into what it is now.

It's really no different between the conferences within the leagues than it is between the divisions within the conferences. And now, with free agency, there's no way to predict which division, or which conference, will have the most talent in a given season. IMO, the old "AFC vs. NFC" comparisons are meaningless now. It's every team for itself.

[Old Man River]

During this past season there was some debate as to whether parity was finally reached between the AFC and NFC. I think it interesting that going into the Superbowl, they had played 64 games, and the AFC had won 32 and the NFC had won 32. The Giants victory in the Superbowl gave the NFC the slight edge of 33 wins and 32 losses for the season.

It sure looks to me that the NFL has finally achieved parity between the two conferences.

IMO, OMR, this will always be cyclical. It's dependent upon the players and coaches in any given season. As an original AFL fan, I was very into the competition between the two leagues. For the first few years following the merger, the NFL had clear superiority, because it had the majority of the top players and coaches. As the revenues grew, the distribution of coaching and playing talent levelled off between the conferences; and transformed into what it is now.

It's really no different between the conferences within the leagues than it is between the divisions within the conferences. And now, with free agency, there's no way to predict which division, or which conference, will have the most talent in a given season. IMO, the old "AFC vs. NFC" comparisons are meaningless now. It's every team for itself.

Agreed on this, although I am not sure you could deem it cyclical. It is really the luck of the draw plus free agency. Still, at least for this year, you can't get any closer than 33-32 out of 65 games. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out next year.

[patsfangr]

Agreed on this, although I am not sure you could deem it cyclical. It is really the luck of the draw plus free agency. Still, at least for this year, you can't get any closer than 33-32 out of 65 games. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out next year.

Yeah, you're right. Poor word choice on my part. It depends totally on those two "crap shoot" factors, and, of course, on the coaches. I think that, over the years, it's been proven beyond a doubt that coaching makes a significant contribution to the level of success a team can achieve. While even the best coach can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear; a very good coach can definitely maximize the production of a team with decent players.

This, by the way, is the most "painful" time of every year for me. I deeply hate the free agency meat market. I'll go to my grave missing the days when teams had exclusive rights to players. Sports, for me, is in a different world from ordinary business. The continuity of teams is/was a major part of the enjoyment of the sport for fans. Most of that is gone now. I call this the "Wall Street Journal" part of the NFL year. Who makes how much? Who has how much cap room? I really couldn't care less. I'm a fan of the GAME, not the finances!

[Old Man River]

Agreed on this, although I am not sure you could deem it cyclical. It is really the luck of the draw plus free agency. Still, at least for this year, you can't get any closer than 33-32 out of 65 games. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out next year.

Yeah, you're right. Poor word choice on my part. It depends totally on those two "crap shoot" factors, and, of course, on the coaches. I think that, over the years, it's been proven beyond a doubt that coaching makes a significant contribution to the level of success a team can achieve. While even the best coach can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear; a very good coach can definitely maximize the production of a team with decent players.

This, by the way, is the most "painful" time of every year for me. I deeply hate the free agency meat market. I'll go to my grave missing the days when teams had exclusive rights to players. Sports, for me, is in a different world from ordinary business. The continuity of teams is/was a major part of the enjoyment of the sport for fans. Most of that is gone now. I call this the "Wall Street Journal" part of the NFL year. Who makes how much? Who has how much cap room? I really couldn't care less. I'm a fan of the GAME, not the finances!

I agree, this is the down time for fans of the NFL, but don't complain too much. You guys signed Randy Moss again! Since you mention coaching, my guess is that Zach Thomas' signing by the Cowboys will ultimately lead to him becoming a Cowboy defensive coach when he retires (which should be soon given his injury record). He would make a great defensive coach if he wants to go that route.

[Calico]

I'm back with nothing to say. Just trying to move this topic back to the top for a bit.

[dclaryjr]

I'm back with nothing to say. Just trying to move this topic back to the top for a bit.

Training camp is just around the corner!!

[HydeParke]

First of all, the US government does NOT belong anywhere near the AFL/NFL. Face it, only one play, ONE MISSED TACKLE, cost the Pats the game. I don't recall any better football days than when Fran Tarkenton and Carl Eller and company ran the Vikings; unfortunaltey they couldn't pull off a Super bowl win (4x) ....I was there in row 10....Sad day. Hyde Parke

[Calico]

I was in Tampa when Doug Williams threw that TD to Kevin House against the Rams in the NFL Championship, which the officials mis-called as not a TD, meaning the Steelers won their Super Bowl ring by whipping the Rams instead of whipping the Bucs. Oh yeah, the Steelers would have obliterated Tampa, but that's not the point. Where was the US government then?

In other words, Hyde Parke, Specter's being silly.

I'm ready for some football.

[patsfangr]

We are now entering the most dormant month of the year for those of us who are hopelessly addicted to the NFL. Think about it. July-August has training camp, with all those decisions about who starts, and all that excitement about how the new guys (rookies and free agents) look. The season runs from September into early February. Immediately after the Super Bowl, all the way through February, March, and most of April, we start watching the Free Agent market, and preparing for the Draft. We read and discuss the results of the Draft through early May, and usually see a reasonable amount of additional activity in the Free Agent market. Then comes June. Oh, sure, there's a very short mini-camp early in the month. But, beyond that, June has nothing for NFL fans to chew on. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! hel_l, even the witch hunt on Bill Belichick has faded away, now that Walsh has been exposed as a lying, money grabbing, back-stabbing worm; and the rest of Congress has told Specter to shut up, and focus on REAL concerns of the US government!

So, thanks for the wake up call, Calico. But I think I'll roll over and go back to sleep for about a month! :-)

[Calico]

That would be logical.