ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
First I am as sensitive to spygate stuff as everyone else and thought he was rough times but on a whole he seemed to be prepared and ask balanced questions for stories he comments on. This morning on Sirius NFL radio channel that changed. He was talking about spygate and specifically Andrea Kramers upcoming interview w/ the assistant golf pro from Hawaii, when he broke the news that according to Walsh the Pats were able to guess correctly 75% of the opponents d plays w/ the help from the tapes. Well this info sent King of on a tangent saying how much bigger this story should be because 75% is such a shocking number what an advantage no wonder the Pats win so much. He was selling it pretty hard and had myself rethinking the magnitude of this until he asked former player Randy Cross if he could imagine how well his teams would have done if they knew 75% of their opponents and Cross without hesitation said he was surprised that it was only 75% because of w/ all of the scouting 75% is barely average every team knows what the other team team is doing and most games are determined by a handful of plays, he was brilliant. What got me upset was Peter King's reaction Cross, he agreed w/ him and said that he made sense, why would that upset me you ask? The is because Peter King is supposed be a professional journalist specializing in NFL this not only should not been a revelation to him but this should have been his follow up question instead exploiting the 75% number because it sounds enormous to the uninformed, and mark my words after HBO's "REAL SPORTS" airs this will be the number that will be sensationalized w/out the benefit of Randy Cross's rebuttal.
Last edited by rhodeislandpatsfan; 05-16-2008 at 02:07 AM..
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Again, Ive lost a lot of respect of Peter King the last 3 yrs, and find him a total media hack... He feels now with the nfl network, and Adam Schefter he is not the main Nfl guy now, and for him its hard to take.. Plus the Pats have shut him out now....
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I think PK has sold his soul to the masses, and his once objective reporting has pretty much gone down the crapper.. all he had done is jump on the Bill Bashing bandwagon without regard for the information at hand. He is stuck on the original BB explanation and firmly believes that this could be used in a game.
__________________ "Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.
The truth is most of these so called NFL experts are no more knowledgeable of football than the average fan. They deal in rumor gathering and gossip. They don't talk x's and o's with any more expertise than the typical barroom conversation. So we shouldn't be surprised when these hacks are exposed for their limited understanding of how the NFL really works.
Poor Peter: King of the Mediots.
Still not getting his Patriot calls returned huh? Awww......
Sure hope Peter: King of the Mediots gets used to it. He's as relevant in Foxborough as John TomasLIE and Sports Tabloid TV (ESPN) is.
He was talking about spygate and specifically Andrea Kramers upcoming interview w/ the assistant golf pro from Hawaii, when he broke the news that according to Walsh the Pats were able to guess correctly 75% of the opponents d plays w/ the help from the tapes. Well this info sent King of on a tangent saying how much bigger this story should be because 75% is such a shocking number what an advantage no wonder the Pats win so much.
I haven't see the Kramer interview or heard the King interview you reference, but the 75% figure you mention from Walsh has been mentioned before:
Quote:
Walsh was told by a former offensive player that a few days before the September 11, 2000 regular season game against Tampa Bay, he (the offensive player) was called into a meeting with Adams, Bill Belichick and Charlie Weis, then the offensive coordinator for the Patriots, during which it was explained how the Patriots would make use of the tapes. The offensive player would memorize the signals and then watch for Tampa Bay’s defensive calls during the game. He would then pass the plays along to Weis, who would give instructions to the quarterback on the field.
This process enabled the Patriots to go to a “no-huddle” offensive, which would lock in the defense the opposing team had called from the sideline, preventing the defense from making any adjustments. When Walsh asked whether the tape he had filmed was helpful, the offensive player said it had enabled the team to anticipate 75 percent of the plays being called by the opposing team.
This was in the context of a single game, not an overall evaluation of how effective the taping was in general. In fact, the player in question thought that taping a pre-season game with TB allowed them to know 75% of the plays the TB defense ran in a regular season game a few weeks later (which they lost anyway). That player was either drunk or TB was incredibly stupid to expose so much of their gameplan in a pre-season game against a team they were playing again soon after.
If I know this, King has to as well. Stating the facts (75% just for one game that they lost anyway) is boring...making up fantasy that sounds like fact (Pats knew 75% of all their opponents defensive calls due to illegal taping) is much more interesting.
I haven't see the Kramer interview or heard the King interview you reference, but the 75% figure you mention from Walsh has been mentioned before:
This was in the context of a single game, not an overall evaluation of how effective the taping was in general.
In addition, the 75% isn't 75% compared to zero, it's 75% (assuming the 75% is accurate minus whatever % they would have known from other analysis, legal tape stealing. I'm guessing the difference between the two numbers isn't very high.
Peter King - yeah, he used to be one of my favorites, now he's just a JAG.
First I am as sensitive to spygate stuff as everyone else and thought he was rough times but on a whole he seemed to be prepared and ask balanced questions for stories he comments on. This morning on Sirius NFL radio channel that changed. He was talking about spygate and specifically Andrea Kramers upcoming interview w/ the assistant golf pro from Hawaii, when he broke the news that according to Walsh the Pats were able to guess correctly 75% of the opponents d plays w/ the help from the tapes. Well this info sent King of on a tangent saying how much bigger this story should be because 75% is such a shocking number what an advantage no wonder the Pats win so much. He was selling it pretty hard and had myself rethinking the magnitude of this until he asked former player Randy Cross if he could imagine how well his teams would have done if they knew 75% of their opponents and Cross without hesitation said he was surprised that it was only 75% because of w/ all of the scouting 75% is barely average every team knows what the other team team is doing and most games are determined by a handful of plays, he was brilliant. What got me upset was Peter King's reaction Cross, he agreed w/ him and said that he made sense, why would that upset me you ask? The is because Peter King is supposed be a professional journalist specializing in NFL this not only should not been a revelation to him but this should have been his follow up question instead exploiting the 75% number because it sounds enormous to the uninformed, and mark my words after HBO's "REAL SPORTS" airs this will be the number that will be sensationalized w/out the benefit of Randy Cross's rebuttal.
peter king is on good terms with brady. So if he has the guts he should come out and say that brady is an avg QB who because he knew 75% of what was being done beforehand.
Plus , Walsh is offering all these football related stories , why is still employed as a golf pro then when tapes from pats games he says he kept for future interviews ?
In addition, the 75% isn't 75% compared to zero, it's 75% (assuming the 75% is accurate minus whatever % they would have known from other analysis, legal tape stealing. I'm guessing the difference between the two numbers isn't very high.
Exactly. And if your coaching staff did their job (changed signals game-to-game, didn't expose obvious tendencies, etc.) the difference would be exactly 0. There was one tape where a DC signaled in numbers that referenced plays on a wristband (which could be changed game-to-game, half-to-half, series-to-series). Simple solution that makes signal stealing impossible.
Backup QB: Coach, they are calling a "five".
OC: What the hell is a "five"?
Backup QB: Well, last game it was a cover-4.
OC: But it is 3rd and inches and they don't even have 4 DBs on the field!
Backup QB: I don't make up the chart, I just read it.
Last edited by Metaphors; 05-16-2008 at 09:20 AM..
My opinion of Peter King has changed
Linear Mode
