Page 9 of 19 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 363

Thread: Saints "May" Be Disciplined for Bounty Program

  1. #161
    [QUOTE=jetssjumets;4383502]Agree on all counts. :D Btw, as a kid growing up, I remember the Jets playing up in Foxboro and Sullivan stadium was not even 1/2 full. I guess I am making that up too? :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    You are correct, I used to drive up to Foxboro with my buddies years ago when the Jets played the Pats. The stadium was not full and there were plenty of Jets fans in the stands.

    Prior to Parcells turning them around, they were one of the teams mentioned about possibly relocating to LA because they weren't drawing and playing in that poor facility named Sullivan Stadium.
    Last edited by JetsFanatic; 03-04-2012 at 11:37 AM.

  2. #162
    [QUOTE=JetsFanatic;4383504]You are correct, I used to drive up to Foxboro with my buddies years ago when the Jets played the Pats. The stadium was not full and there were plenty of Jets fans in the stands.

    Prior to them lucking out and drafting Brady in the 6th round, they were one of the teams mentioned about possibly relocating to LA because they weren't drawing and playing in that poor facility named Sullivan Stadium.[/QUOTE]

    Yup. Thanks. In the 80s, even when the team made a Superbowl appearance, the stadium had more empty seats than fans in them. For the trolls who claim they were going to games (Grickhead) in the 60s when NE was in the AFL and have been lifelong fans, where were they in the 80s? Even in the early 90s that place was a ghost town. Yet, these trolls will have you believe that their franchise has a legacy as storied as Pittsburgh, Dallas, etc. The only legacy NE will be known for is the "greatest cheating scandal in NFL history," and arguably, all of sports.

  3. #163
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,827
    Pats fans, loyal since 2001.

  4. #164
    [QUOTE=jetssjumets;4383499]
    As for Spygate, once again, we do not know the true extent/scope of NE's cheating and the outcome of all games -- including Superbowls -- until there is a complete investigation. Something that has not occured. 5 years later, with evidence destroyed, we will probably never know. [B]That's the point[/B].[/QUOTE]

    You could save yourself a lot of words if you just say this. We all know the Pats taped opposing signals. But we don't know exactly for how long they did this, and how often they did. And more importantly, we don't know exactly what they did with those tapes, to what extent they used them to gain a competitive advantage in a game. No side is convincing the other without a more thorough understanding of this, and neither side has true authority on the issue. Until then, we end up with this ****show of a thread.

  5. #165
    [QUOTE=DDNYjets;4383493]Bottom line is the Patriots are cheaters and their "fans" are ghey enough to belong to another team's forum.

    Mods are ghey for not perma-banning the trolls.

    BTW nearly all these "fans" will lose their interest once Tammy chooses Giselle's strap-on over playing.[/QUOTE]

    I disagree with everything you say!

    Except the part about the ghey mods.

  6. #166
    [QUOTE=jetssjumets;4383499]NO players have said that it was not to injure players but an incentive to make big plays. Until it is proven that a player was injured as a result of the bounty, then all that is there to discuss is NO violating NFL rules. It is a PR issue for the League because Goodell has been pushing player safety. Again, this was not an issue years ago.
    [/QUOTE]

    The allegations by the NFL are not about bounties for "big plays," they are bounties for "knockout" and "cart-off" plays, specific intent to injure. Big difference. It's a PR problem in any era for any sport if coaches are authorizing players to specifically intend to remove that player from the game. And you don't have to prove a player was injured as a result of a bounty, you just have to prove that bounty was posted in the first place.

    Would it be acceptable in any era of baseball for a pitcher to receive a bounty
    for throwing at a player's head with the intention of removing him from the game? What about hockey players receiving a bounty for taking a guy out of the game by intentionally hacking at his knee with his stick?

  7. #167
    [QUOTE=BleedinGreenNC;4383513]Pats fans, loyal since 2001.[/QUOTE]

    Lol.

    I just posted in another thread about the quality of life down in tobacco road. If that pic represents the local flavor....nothing more to say. :yes::D

  8. #168
    [QUOTE=ASG0531;4383527]The allegations by the NFL are not about bounties for "big plays," they are bounties for "knockout" and "cart-off" plays, specific intent to injure. Big difference. It's a PR problem in any era for any sport if coaches are authorizing players to specifically intend to remove that player from the game. And you don't have to prove a player was injured as a result of a bounty, you just have to prove that bounty was posted in the first place.

    Would it be acceptable in any era of baseball for a pitcher to receive a bounty
    for throwing at a player's head with the intention of removing him from the game? What about hockey players receiving a bounty for taking a guy out of the game by intentionally hacking at his knee with his stick?[/QUOTE]

    As I previously posted very early in this thread, NO broke the rules and should be punished. My post was very clear.

    The NE trolls got upset because I posted that "bountygate" is not as profound as Spygate, as the latter speaks to the integrity of the game especially on its biggest stage, the Superbowl.

    Good point on the other sports. Yes, in MLB and hockey, players have gone after opposing players, as you said, throwing a fastball at a hitters head. I am sure that players have made side wagers among their colleagues during a professional sporting event.

    This bounty issue is just the latest example of the media pile on during a slow sports news cycle. Once FA begins, this story will diminish greatly.

  9. #169
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Oceanside, Long Island
    Posts
    10,966
    Once again the Patriots fans cherry pick the issues they want to talk about and conveniently skip over the ones that they don't.

    (1) If the defense knows what is coming then they can be in a position to "load up on" the offensive players many times per game. This almost certainly lead to injuries on opposing offensive players. It is far more serious than whatever the Saints players are accused of doing here.

    (2) The Patriots are the ONLY TEAM that has ever been found to be guilty of this kind of cheating by the Commissioner's office. The ONLY TEAM. So no, everybody does not do it. Everybody has not done it. ONE TEAM has done it. ONE.

    (3) The reason video recording is different from trying to steal signs in real time by eyeballing them is that this kind of signal stealing permits regression analysis. In other words you can figure out the signals and then use the taped evidence to prove you are correct. This is why it is a fundamentally different kind of thing than the stealing that "everyone has been doing" forever. And any intellectually honest arguing of the facts here would acknowledge as much.

    The difference between the two is like allowing someone to sketch the Mona Lisa from memory after a visit to the Louvre or permitting someone to bring in high resolution digital scanning equipment. The two things are very VERY different and Patriots fans fully understand this and they have ALWAYS understood this.

  10. #170
    [QUOTE=EM31;4383588]

    (3) The reason video recording is different from trying to steal signs in real time by eyeballing them is that this kind of signal stealing permits regression analysis. In other words you can figure out the signals and then use the taped evidence to prove you are correct. This is why it is a fundamentally different kind of thing than the stealing that "everyone has been doing" forever. And any intellectually honest arguing of the facts here would acknowledge as much.
    [/QUOTE]


    When are they running this "regression analysis?" Mid-game? Half-time? I'm genuinely curious because you seem to have this figured out when everyone else is upset that Spygate and its actual workings were shrouded in secrecy by the league.

  11. #171
    [QUOTE=FF2;4383524][B]I disagree with everything you say![/B]

    [/QUOTE]

    That's why he is right about everything!

  12. #172
    [QUOTE=ASG0531;4383597]When are they running this "regression analysis?" Mid-game? Half-time? I'm genuinely curious because you seem to have this figured out when everyone else is upset that Spygate and its actual workings were shrouded in secrecy by the league.[/QUOTE]

    Another NE troll looking for every excuse to diminish the stench of the "worst cheating scandal in NFL history" and probably all of sports.

  13. #173
    [QUOTE=jetssjumets;4383603]Another NE troll looking for every excuse to diminish the stench of the "worst cheating scandal in NFL history" and probably all of sports.[/QUOTE]

    Far from it. You said it yourself, without an investigation into everything they were doing, they can't be cleared.

  14. #174
    [QUOTE=JetsFanatic;4383600]That's why he is right about everything![/QUOTE]

    Ignore the trolls. Some, not all, are liars and make up facts to try and prove their point. They cite obscure sources but when presented with facts, they shut up, put their tail between their a$$ and disappear for a while. Then will pop up again after several posts and try to change the subject hoping they do not need to reply to their erroneaous post from earlier. These trolls do it time-and-time again in many threads when discussing the cheating Pats. Why can't they just go on their own message board and have their fantasy love fest with the other idiot Pats fans and GTFO.

  15. #175
    [QUOTE=ASG0531;4383604]Far from it. You said it yourself, without an investigation into everything they were doing, they can't be cleared.[/QUOTE]

    Agreed. I have said that from the time the NFL employed that b/s penalty on NE for Spygate. I honestly believe this warrants a complete independent investigation; not a whitewash ruling from the NFL. Why has the government investigated MLB, NBA, Olympics, etc but not Spygate?

  16. #176
    [QUOTE=EM31;4383588]Once again the Patriots fans cherry pick the issues they want to talk about and conveniently skip over the ones that they don't.

    (1) If the defense knows what is coming then they can be in a position to "load up on" the offensive players many times per game. This almost certainly lead to injuries on opposing offensive players. It is far more serious than whatever the Saints players are accused of doing here.

    (2) The Patriots are the ONLY TEAM that has ever been found to be guilty of this kind of cheating by the Commissioner's office. The ONLY TEAM. So no, everybody does not do it. Everybody has not done it. ONE TEAM has done it. ONE.

    (3) The reason video recording is different from trying to steal signs in real time by eyeballing them is that this kind of signal stealing permits regression analysis. In other words you can figure out the signals and then use the taped evidence to prove you are correct. This is why it is a fundamentally different kind of thing than the stealing that "everyone has been doing" forever. And any intellectually honest arguing of the facts here would acknowledge as much.

    [/QUOTE]

    (1) I honestly don't get this one. There are many "legal" ways to know the opposing teams plays, including stealing signals by legal means and by educated guesswork. That happens many times, per side, per game. Otherwise, teams' conversion rates on 3rd and short would skyrocket. Are you saying that the Patriots knew the other teams' plays more often per game as a result of videotaping than those who did not videotape? If so, how do you know that?

    (2) I think the "everybody does it" comment refers to sign stealing generally which is why, for example, NFL OC's cover their mouths when calling plays, regardless of whether they are playing the Patriots. I don't think any Patriots fan could seriously suggest that any other team engaged in sideline videotaping of the type the Patriots did (except for maybe the McDaniels-led Broncos, but he is obviously an apple from the Belichick tree).

    (3) The advantage the Patriot got from videotaping, IMO, is that it enabled them to steal signs (as is legally permitted) by more efficient means (which were not permitted). I would have thought that the same information could be obtained by still photos and visual observation, just with more effort. I guess you are saying it is impossible to obtain the same information without videotape? How do you know that?

    The usual "I will never convince you, you will never convince me, all for the sake of discussion" caveats apply :D.

  17. #177
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Oceanside, Long Island
    Posts
    10,966
    [QUOTE=ASG0531;4383597]When are they running this "regression analysis?" Mid-game? Half-time? I'm genuinely curious because you seem to have this figured out when everyone else is upset that Spygate and its actual workings were shrouded in secrecy by the league.[/QUOTE]
    No Dopey. Mid week in advance of the game. Once you have a full video profile on a team (as the Patriots did) it should only take moments during the actual game to figure out which of the several schemes they are rotating into at game time ("are they speaking French, Chinese or English this week Bob?"). Teams may have three or four sets of signals but not 53 or 54.

    The one variation on this is the Superbowl where a team might just be capable of coming up with something totally new for that game. In that case the Patriots might have to risk taping a practice or two... Of course they never accused of doing such a thing... Oh wait...

    Also the "totally new signals for the Superbowl" idea is a double-edged sward and might or might not be true since your team would be risking implementing a completely new and untried system in the biggest game of their lives for many of them. But, it is possible particularly if your team has reason to think the Patriots are going to cheat. I wonder what reason a team might have for thinking that?

    This is obvious and all Pats fans intrinsically understand all of this. Everything else including your response above is a dishonesty that is as rampant in the fan base as it is in the team management and a dishonesty which appears to be alive and kicking today even after the Front Office has promised to stop being dirty cheaters.

  18. #178
    [QUOTE=jetssjumets;4383499]The bounty issue has existed in the NFL before I was born. Again, everyone knows football is a violent sport. NO players have said that it was not to injure players but an incentive to make big plays. Until it is proven that a player was injured as a result of the bounty, then all that is there to discuss is NO violating NFL rules. It is a PR issue for the League because Goodell has been pushing player safety. Again, this was not an issue years ago.

    I am not excusing NO. Hit them and hit them hard. However, let's not make this out to be much more than what it really is. NE fans are trying to remove the stench of Spygate scandal and tag another franchise with "the greatest cheating scandal" in the NFL, and arguably all of sports.

    As for Spygate, once again, we do not know the true extent/scope of NE's cheating and the outcome of all games -- including Superbowls -- until there is a complete investigation. Something that has not occured. 5 years later, with evidence destroyed, we will probably never know. That's the point.[/QUOTE]

    There was a complete investigation. One instance of cheat does not give the league the right to investigate the Patriots from top to bottom to try to find other incidents of cheating.

    Yes, videotaping something that over 60,000 in the stadium people can witness with their own eyes is clearly worse than Tim Donaghy calling games to affect the outcome, the White Sox purposely blowing the world series in 1918 because they were paid off by the mob, and other cheating scandals. :rolleyes: Thanks for your "unbiased" and proving my point that a lot of Jets fans have blown up this event as much or more than Patriots fans try to minimize it.

    Spygate was a common occurrence prior to Spygate. Don Banks wrote about it two months before Spygate in an article about cheating in the NFL. Here is an exerpt from his article on July 25, 2007 (Spygate happened in September of that year):


    [QUOTE]The "stealing'' of signs -- both on offense and defense -- is the area that's most often cited as fertile ground for cheating. T[B]he most common practice is for a team to videotape an opponent's signal-givers on the sideline, and later marry up those indications to the game tape in order to identify tendencies or patterns.[/B]

    Though no disciplinary action by the league ever resulted, the Patriots last year were reportedly the impetus of a sternly written letter from the league office to all teams, reminding them that it was illegal for an advance scout or personnel official to bring a video recording device of any kind into the press box for the purposes of taping a potential opponent's signals or play-calling gestures from the sideline.

    Teams have also been chastised for having a second camera in the press box-area video box, with one camera shooting the game action and the other one being trained on the opposing team's signal-givers. On offense, that's why coaches have taken to holding their play-calling charts in front of their mouths when they're sending in the play to the quarterback via the radio headset system.

    On defense, teams have gone to having two different signal callers, with one being a dummy signaler and other being responsible for the "hot,'' or real, call. Other teams use different color wrist bands during a game, with the defensive captain switching to a different color before each series, and the defensive signal-caller calling formations and blitzes from a list that corresponds with that color.

    [B]"That type of sign-stealing goes on a ton in the league,'' said one NFL source who was both a former coach and player in the league[/B]. "From a coaching standpoint, you know who's signaling in the personnel on the opposing sideline, and then there's another guy making the play calls on the headset. Defenses used to watch the play-caller, and if a guy spoke for a real long time, that was usually a pass, because the calls take longer. A run is always a shorter call. So coaches shield their mouths when they're calling plays now. If you make your calls out in the open, the other team will steal your signals and your tendencies.''[/QUOTE]

    [url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/don_banks/07/06/cheating.nfl/[/url]

    I am tired of arguing this tired old story. It is over and Jets fans seem to not be able to let go. Go and spout the fact the Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since Spygate, but what you should be more concerned about is that the Jets haven't won a Super Bowl since before Watergate.

  19. #179
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Oceanside, Long Island
    Posts
    10,966
    [QUOTE=AFCEastFan;4383622](1) I honestly don't get this one. There are many "legal" ways to know the opposing teams plays, including stealing signals by legal means and by educated guesswork. That happens many times, per side, per game. Otherwise, teams' conversion rates on 3rd and short would skyrocket. Are you saying that the Patriots knew the other teams' plays more often per game as a result of videotaping than those who did not videotape? If so, how do you know that?

    (2) I think the "everybody does it" comment refers to sign stealing generally which is why, for example, NFL OC's cover their mouths when calling plays, regardless of whether they are playing the Patriots. I don't think any Patriots fan could seriously suggest that any other team engaged in sideline videotaping of the type the Patriots did (except for maybe the McDaniels-led Broncos, but he is obviously an apple from the Belichick tree).

    (3) The advantage the Patriot got from videotaping, IMO, is that it enabled them to steal signs (as is legally permitted) by more efficient means (which were not permitted). I would have thought that the same information could be obtained by still photos and visual observation, just with more effort. I guess you are saying it is impossible to obtain the same information without videotape? How do you know that?

    The usual "I will never convince you, you will never convince me, all for the sake of discussion" caveats apply :D.[/QUOTE]
    1. The work was done in advance. Possibly at half time as well but mostly in advance. Once you have a library of team plays AND THE SIGNALS THAT LED TO THEM, then you can reverse engineer a pretty good understanding of the signals or sets of signals that are used by that team. On the day of the game I am sure it was little more than confirming which signal set was in use that day. Stealing by eyeball in real time permits none of this.

    2. Agreed but Patriots fans have offered up the "everyone does it" rationale (which is completely true) to be the same thing as "everyone does everything that we are doing" rationale (which is completely untrue). 31 other teams were NOT doing this.

    3. Agreed on the efficiency. But again, once this becomes film for analysis then I am sure the codes in use are easy to crack. Do we really expect our OC's around the league to be cryptographers? No. They probably use a fairly straight forward substitution pattern which is likely good enough to defeat real-time eyeball stealing but is probably like a clear pane of window glass once taping and advance analysis methodology is used.

    Finally and once again every Pats fan have not addressed the issue that an increased likelihood of injuries to offensive players if the defense knows what is coming. To me this is the biggest and most damning single aspect of this.

  20. #180
    [QUOTE=AFCEastFan;4383622](1) I honestly don't get this one. There are many "legal" ways to know the opposing teams plays, including stealing signals by legal means and by educated guesswork. That happens many times, per side, per game. Otherwise, teams' conversion rates on 3rd and short would skyrocket. Are you saying that the Patriots knew the other teams' plays more often per game as a result of videotaping than those who did not videotape? If so, how do you know that?

    (2) I think the "everybody does it" comment refers to sign stealing generally which is why, for example, NFL OC's cover their mouths when calling plays, regardless of whether they are playing the Patriots. I don't think any Patriots fan could seriously suggest that any other team engaged in sideline videotaping of the type the Patriots did (except for maybe the McDaniels-led Broncos, but he is obviously an apple from the Belichick tree).

    (3) The advantage the Patriot got from videotaping, IMO, is that it enabled them to steal signs (as is legally permitted) by more efficient means (which were not permitted). I would have thought that the same information could be obtained by still photos and visual observation, just with more effort. I guess you are saying it is impossible to obtain the same information without videotape? How do you know that?

    The usual "I will never convince you, you will never convince me, all for the sake of discussion" caveats apply :D.[/QUOTE]

    One last point. To your point two, I agree not everyone did what the Pats did, but there is plenty of evidence that it was far more common than people are willing to admit. I posted the Don Banks article that came out nearly two months prior to Spygate saying it was a common practice. Adam Schefter and Peter King had reported just after Spygate that up to 8-9 teams have done the same thing. Jiimmy Johnson, admittedly is a friend of Belichick, says he had direct knowledge that other teams did it and even his Cowboys tried it for a time but saw no advantage in doing it and stopped.

    To that point, Gregg Williams was probably not the only coach implementing bounties. I'm sure there are other teams. Tony Dungy accused Jeff Fisher of doing it. The Saints were just the ones that caught, and just like the Pats, the team that gets caught pays the punishment even if others were doing it.

    The argument that only one team got caught doing something doesn't mean that no other team did it. It just means no other team got caught.
    Last edited by Rob0729; 03-04-2012 at 02:59 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us