Spygate Facts - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

Hardboiled · 10-23-2008, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFL_Truth

In a September 2006 memorandum sent out by NFL Vice President of Football Operations Ray Anderson, though, all teams were told that "videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

What does "any other locations accessible to club staff menbers" mean again? Who does the videotaping if not "club staff members"? And done in locations they can get to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFL_Truth

#1: The Patriots cameraman were kicked out of Lambeau field during the 2006 season and had his video tape taken away because his camera was pointed at the packers sideline before the game begun. Due to this inccident and rumors the Pats had been illegally videotaping opponents, the NFL sent a memo out to all 32 NFL teams prior to the 2007 season warning them that they could not point camera's at opponents sidelines.

Never heard that. One would think such a memo would be quoted over and over.

**Ian** · 10-23-2008, 09:19 PM

I think NFL_Truth is going to be pissed (as will the rest of Colts Nation & Manning Lovers) when he sees the site I'm going to be launching soon

Get ready Patriots Nation...we'll get the last laugh

Ian

Patriot_in_NY · 10-23-2008, 09:37 PM

SPYGATE.............

Welcome to the 2008-09 season retard. Pull up a stool, we'll buy you a drink and get you up to speed on what's actually happening now in the league. Lots of things been happening since you left planet earth. You'll never guess it, but I'll bet you didn't know the Doobie Brothers have disbanded too. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, bro

What a fukcing tard you are NFL_Truff. Wake up and join the new season.

Sivy · 10-23-2008, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFL_Truth

Actually, everything stated above is 100% true. I see that you have nothing to bring to the table in terms of refuting my statements. But I am a respectful and classy poster. I will not bash other board members however I feel that your insults are a bit much in response to me doing nothing but telling the truth. I forgive you for your anger and frustration and wish you the best...

and what about the Jets camera man? And what about you being a douche bag?

***fgssand*** · 10-23-2008, 10:58 PM

In other news.......Sarah Palin plays a mean flute.

***SoCal Pmen*** · 10-23-2008, 11:03 PM

Funny, once faced with all the realities facts NFL Truth is nowhere to be found or comment. Just goes to show, anyone can twist the facts to achieve their agenda.

JoeSixPat · 10-23-2008, 11:21 PM

My my... where to start?... NFL Truth can't handle the NFL truth.

At least he does accept the fact that the NFL sent a clarifying memo out in 2006 - thereby acknowledging that the rule was previously unclear and therefore there's no issue with taping prior to the time of the NFL clarifying memo

He does seem to overlook a few additional facts - such as the NFL manual rule that makes clear that that videotaping of the games is allowed - and continues to be allowed today - as long as it has three walls and a roof over it, and is inacessible to team personnel, etc...

We all nearly know this by heart by now but NFL Truth needs to catch up a bit. Of course what that means is that the NFL condones taping of signals even today as long as its inaccessible during the course of the game - to my knowledge they've still not changed the three walls and a roof rule.

So I guess that means that the NFL still thinks its acceptable to tape signals - as long as its not done on the sidelines.

Gotta wonder if NFL Truth is the least bit curious about which team it was that Matt Walsh witnessed taping from the sidelines as well. No one, least of all the Commissioner, seems willing to ask that question.

I may go back and blow NFL Truth out of the water some other time but for now, I'll just let him embarrass himself further.

Watson's IQ · 10-24-2008, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFL_Truth

Actually, everything stated above is 100% true. I see that you have nothing to bring to the table in terms of refuting my statements. But I am a respectful and classy poster. I will not bash other board members however I feel that your insults are a bit much in response to me doing nothing but telling the truth. I forgive you for your anger and frustration and wish you the best...

In my experience on internet message boards, there's pretty much no surer sign that the opposite of this is true than having to state it yourself.

JoeSixPat · 10-24-2008, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFL_Truth

In a September 2006 memorandum sent out by NFL Vice President of Football Operations Ray Anderson, though, all teams were told that "videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

#1: The Patriots cameraman were kicked out of Lambeau field during the 2006 season and had his video tape taken away because his camera was pointed at the packers sideline before the game begun. Due to this inccident and rumors the Pats had been illegally videotaping opponents, the NFL sent a memo out to all 32 NFL teams prior to the 2007 season warning them that they could not point camera's at opponents sidelines.

#2: The Patriots ignored this order and decided to videotape the Jets signals in week 1 of the 2007 season and were caught for the first time.

#3: The c'mish met with Bill Bellichick and he admitted that he had been videotaping since 2000 as he was unaware it violated league rules. This was an obvious lie as anyone can tell, but none the less, he was orderedto hand over all notes, tapes, and info recieved from spying and he did. The NFL then destroyed all of the evidence. (And admitted to doing so).

#4: The Patriots were fined 250k, Bellichick 500k, and stripped of their first round draft pick. These were by far the heaviest fines in NFL history and never before had any team done anything bad enough to be stripped a draft pick. We have to use common sense here. The Patriots are a brilliant organization and Bellichick is a genius, you agree right? So why would they risk all of this for something that would not be a major benefit? The answer is they would not as it was a crucial factor in them winning those games. They took an educated risk and reaped the rewards of 3 SB's for doing so without ever being caught in that span.

#5: Arlen Spector thought the way the NFL handled the situation was odd, and he was right. The c'mish never talked to Tom Brady. Odd that he wouldn't even investigate enough and talk to the first player in on the entire situation. He also found it odd that they would destroy all of the evidence so quickly and not come forward to what was on the tapes they destroyed. The reason the NFL did this was to play down the fiasco as much as possible. The more the Pats could be exposed as cheaters would hurt the league's reputation as they have been the face of the NFL for a long time now.

#6: Matt Walsh had some tapes he kept after being fired from the Patriots. Bellichick claimed he didnt know him and you could bearly pick him out of a lineup, then photographs surfaced featuring the two together to once again expose Bellichick's dishonesty. The fact that he did not have SB tapes is not relivant because Belichick admited to videotaping during that time. What people don't understand is that they would not likely keep any such evidence after using it. Think about it? If you cheated in the SB, would you keep the tapes and risk exposure or would you destory the evidence? Duh...regardless the NFL destroyed what was left and all Walsh had was some extra tapes left over.

So as you can see, The Patriots did not cheat in only once game. Walsh had tapes from two AFC Championship games for what its worth, but Bellichick admitted to videotaping throughout those 6 years anyway. So the Patriots cheated in a total of 111 games as admitted by Bellichick with all tapes destoryed (admittedly so) and never revealed to the public.

The thought of thinking that they cheated only once and there is no evidence to the contrary is laughable but hey, I guess you try to believe what you got to believe to prevent the shame that this brings.

For what its worth, all of this has nothing to do with Randy Moss who has "never" cheated. The Reason the Pats did so well last year is mostly thanks to Moss and what he did to that offense, as he's made many other offenses and QB's look better then they really are. And dont ever discount the mass amount of knowledge that can be aquired from cheating in that mannor for 6 straight years. Brady knows more about most defenses then any other QB would aquire in 20 years due to the plethora of knowledge that could only be attained so quick thru cheating.

#1 - Kudos for you for pointing out the date of the NFL memo which clarified a rule they admit was in need of clarification. This fact is conveniently overlooked by those who want to assert the 2001, 2003 & 2004 Super Bowls are somehow tainted.

#1a - You failed to note the number of NFL coaches who admit to doing the SAME THING that the Patriots were cited for. Please remember to do so in the future otherwise you might leave some with the impression this wasn't an NFL wide practice.

#3 - You've inaccurately conveyed what Belichick stated to Goodell. Belichick knew of the rule and stated he was interpreting it differently than Goodell - specifically that the rule cites a prohibition on using tape that day - a practice no one has ever accused Belichick of, not to mention proven it. Indeed the Jets game tape was never seen by Patriots personnel period - let alone in that game (well, I guess it was viewed by the Patriots once Goodell leaked it to his wife at Fox News, but I digress). Yet this "fact" doesn't stop some from asserting that the tape had an impact on the 2007 season, proving the stupidity of some fans.

As far as Belichick's different interpretation, the NFL agrees that the rule was unclear and open to different interpretations - hence the clarifying memo that you referred to in #1. Thank you for making our point.

#4 - You've contradicted yourself, stating that the rule was clarified in 2006 and yet you assert the Patriots broke a 2006 rule in 2001, 2003 and 2004. You've moved well beyond "facts" in this case and trample over your own facts.

#4a - You might have noted that the Patriots fines are well short of the fines assessed on the Broncos for cheating not once but twice on the salary cap, with the Dolphins also being docked a first round draft pick for tampering involving Don Shula.

#5 - You've missed some facts regarding Senator Specter - such as the fact that he's the biggest recipient of Comcast campaign donations - a company that has a grievance against the NFL therefore leaving Specter's motivations highly suspect.

#6. Specter's motivations as an Eagles fan are also suspect in that while he chides the NFL for not conducting a "thorough" investigation, he personally interviews Matt Walsh and purposefully chooses NOT to ask Walsh which team he witnessed video taping the Patriots from the sidelines.

Overall, aside from a long litany of spelling and grammatical error's you've committed, you also seem to fall far short in recognizing the difference between "facts" and the speculation or opinion you offer.

The facts are that the NFL admits its rule was unclear until it clarified it in 2006. The fact is that multiple teams and coaches have admitted to engaging in the same practice as the Patriots. The fact is that Belichick was appropriately sanctioned for violating a rule deemed less important by the NFL than the Broncos salary cap cheating. And the fact is that NO ONE, from Goodell to the media to Senator Specter, was willing to ask Matt Walsh the simple question of which team he witnessed engaged in the same practice.

Now, if you're so disturbed by rule breaking or spying in the NFL, you should spend a bit of time reading this article from 1967 illustrating just how far back "cheating" goes and call to question why the NFL has named its AFC Championship Trophy after a coach confirmed by many in the NFL as the godfather of NFL espionage, and go pester the fans of the numerous teams mentioned in this article.

Lee Grosscup - Spying in Pro Football - SPORT magazine - thesportgallery.com

But before you do, please look up the definition of "fact" as distinct from opinion and speculation.

Have fun!

everlong · 10-24-2008, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFL_Truth

But I am a respectful and classy poster.

I knew it was you all along LT and now you've totally given yourself away, "tisk tisk".