ivanvamp

I wish that so-called spygate would never be discussed again, but sadly, that will probably never be a reality. After SB 46, a lot of people drummed up the old, "The Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since spygate" line. It died down for a few weeks, but has resurfaced with the Saints' bounty scandal. As much as I'd love for this other scandal to make people forget about spygate, it seems like the first thing people think of when they hear about the bounty scandal is, unfortunately, spygate itself. The penalty for taping opposing signals was so harsh that it has become the standard by which all other penalties are measured.

Within the last day, I have heard no less than 10 people say/write, "The Pats haven't won anything since spygate". I'm sick of it and - if for no other reason than that it's therapeutic for me - want to put that tired old line to bed.

To refresh peoples' memories, though it goes back earlier than that, the formal spygate scandal began when Patriots were caught taping signals against the Jets in the first quarter of the first game of the season in 2007, a 38-14 rout of the New York Jets. From the moment they were caught, they (and this has been confirmed by Goodell's office) did not re-engage in the practice.

The Pats have always held that the taping was for the benefit of long-term study on teams; it's a quicker process for intel than simply watching the opposing sideline and writing it down. In fact, it was such a common practice that when the Pats were doing it during Herm Edwards' tenure as HC of the NYJ, Edwards looked at the camera, waved, and smiled. Several prominent football people like Jimmy Johnson came out and said it was extremely common in the NFL to do what the Patriots did. Again, the benefit was a time-saver to gather information for down the road. It had no benefit for that immediate game (contrary to what many idiots in the media suggested).

So, since the first quarter of the first game of 2007, the Pats have won nothing, right? Well, except for this:

- 64-16 regular season record, an .800 winning percentage. That's the best regular season record in the NFL over the last 5 years.

- 4 division titles. They tied for a 5th but lost out on a low-level tiebreaker in the year that Tom Brady was out for the season. No team has won more division titles over the last 5 years than the Patriots.

- 2 AFC championships. No team has won more than 2 conference championships in the last 5 years. The Giants, of course, won 2 (and 2 SBs), and the Steelers won 2.

- Gone 4-4 in the playoffs over that time. Not the best playoff record in the NFL over that time span, but not many teams have won more than 4 playoff games since 2007.

- Regular season + post season record over the last 5 seasons: 68-20 (.772). No team has come close to that record over that time span.

- Came within about 1:30, and two amazing catches, away from adding two more SB titles. Great plays by the Giants, but both of which were historically great plays. In other words, while the Pats did indeed lose 2 SBs, and didn't put forth their A-level performance in either, they still lost in the last minute when the opponent made unbelievable plays to get down the field. So yes, the Pats lost, but they lost in as close a scenario as possible on both occasions, and on both occasions they came within a foot (or a yard) of completing their own miraculous play that would have won the game in the last seconds themselves.

Bottom line: the whole "they haven't won anything" since spygate is a complete crock. In fact, they've won more than any other franchise in the sport since spygate. Not more super bowls, but more everything elses. Of course we all want the SB titles, but hey, in the past 5 years only 4 teams have won a SB anyway, so lots of great teams (Peyton Manning's Colts, Tony Romo's Cowboys, Philip Rivers' Chargers, Ray Lewis' Ravens, etc.) have failed to win a SB.

PatsSox363804

I don't think anyone on this board needs to be convinced of this. As for others, they are just going to hate regardless but that's really what pissed me off the most about losing this past superbowl is that the idiots out there can still use that ridiculous argument. Bottom line is if Samuel and Welker do their jobs we have 2 more rings and actually if Samuel does his Brady probably never gets hurt.

AndyJohnson

If you are sick of hearing about it, why are you creating new posts to validate it?

ivanvamp

I explained why in the second paragraph. I wrote in clear, easy-to-read English. Perhaps you missed it.

Bill B.

The Dolphins haven't won a Super Bowl since they had a crackhead running back. So I guess the Dolphins can't win without a crackhead RB. They tried going the pothead route, but he couldn't get past the hashmarks.

Joey007

So, Welker catches 122 passes over the 2011 season, drops one in the SB, which didn't lose us the game since there were other factors too (Gronk's ankle) he's suddenly terrible?? Oh, and since you pretty much hate the Patriots and their players for the most part why bash them on a Patriots forum??

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Stevan Ridley. Bringing back the art of running the football back to New England since 2011.

upstater1

Your post is inaccurate. Patriots have never violated the league code of conduct for cheating, whatever that is.

upstater1

Patriots have been in 2 Super Bowls since Spygate.

Are people saying the Patriots can't win a Super Bowl without game film of signals?

How does that explain the Super Bowl wins over Carolina and Philadelphia?

Easy to bat down that idiocy with this point.

chicowalker

not exactly a routine catch...

and, no, it isn't a fact that he choked -- it is a fact that he dropped it. Two different things.

AndyJohnson

Didn't get that far. I saw the topic and the length, and posted my thoughts.