Missing the point

[Metaphors]

I don't expect a resolution until late Friday or on Saturday. Kraft and the Commissioner will come out on the same page, with regard to punishment, and with regard to steps going forward. Of course, sooner would be better.

I'm thinking differently (though with no more information or insight than your opinion). I think it is about news cycles and Kraft wants his team on the front page next week for their play, not this garbage. A decision late Friday/Saturday puts this into next week's news cycle. A decision today/early tomorrow lets this story run its course in this weeks news cycle. Both the commissioner and Kraft have to want this so if possible I think they will make it happen. Just a different perspective.

I do want the punishment to be severe. I want this to be behind us. This team is NOT a bunch of substance abusing rule-breakers!!!! Winning at all costs is NOT the motto of the patriots!!!! Given the last month, why should the casual public not believe such characterizations?

I want a reasonable punishment. The severity of the punishment will not change the public perception of this incident. People either get it or they don't. There is reportedly evidence the Pats broke the rules, but there is no evidence that they gained a competitive advantage by doing it. This is not an insignificant point. Did George Brett break the rules with the pinetar incident. He sure did. Did he cheat? Possibly, but without evidence to the contrary it is a reasonable assumption that it was a mistake. Taking away his homerun and ejecting him was appropriate based on the rules violation, but a reasonable punishment would be removal of the bat from play and a follow-up action on how the rule would be policed (letter vs. intent).

Not exactly the same case (don't think having the guy with a camera was a mistake), but the logic does follow. If BB said to the commissioner that he intentionally tried to gain a competitive advantage and got caught, the Pats are going to get slammed. If BB said to the commissioner that this was a mistake in procedures or communications between the front office and the scouting staff (or some other reasonable explanation), then you remove remove the camera guy from play (done) and have a follow-up action on how the rule will be policed.

Since the "Commissioner determines Pats broke rule" news item has been thrown into the public arena (by the commish's office, not the Jets), that reasoned approach is no longer an option. Now there has to be a stern punishment regardless of the Pats' side of things to avoid the stigma of Kraft/BB "owning" the commissioner. Keep this private and all the public has to go on is a general report of a camera on the field...filming who knows what. Any punishment would be explained simply by "we looked at the situation and felt this course of action appropriately dealt with the situation." Much like the Milloy/Redskins and Branch/Jets tampering incidents. Sure they tampered. Everyone does it. Was it worth putting this issue on the front page of the newspapers. Absolutely not...and the stories died a painless death. Turn the page.

Now that page weighs a ton and turning it will be an issue. Everybody loses. Didn't have to be this way.

 

[loosebearing]

Hello everyone !!

The league just made a new rule against you
They informed you just recently to do so would be in violation of the new rule
That a future violation will result in penalty

An with that the Patriots still sent the same camerman with a patriot shirt on over to the Jets side of the field at the first game of the season.

And you all think it is about cheating with stealing signals.

 

[CanadianBoltFan]

The Pats did not break any legal or moral rule. What occurred is called GAMESMANSHIP. In any contest where wins and losses really count, gamesmanship is an accepted reality. There is a long history of stealing signs in the NFL. Shanahan hired lip readers, beginning the process of coaches covering their mouths. Shanahan bent the injury reports, forcing the injury reports to become more stringent. Schottenheimer used scouts to steal signs during games going back to his Cleveland days. Mangini himself engaged in this practice. The difference is that in the past these issues were accepted by league members and kept in house. Coaches took countermeasures and dealt with the Gamesmanship. Only Mangini and the current competition committee, acting on a vendetta with BB, have done differently, breaking the code of silence in order to humilate our coach and team. Wake up.

uh yes the Patiots did break a league rule.

That is why the Commissioner of the NFL will hand them out punishment on Friday.

 

[PonyExpress]

uh yes the Patiots did break a league rule.

That is why the Commissioner of the NFL will hand them out punishment on Friday.

Come back when your whole team gets off roids, you hypocrite.

 

[loosebearing]

uh yes the Patiots did break a league rule.

That is why the Commissioner of the NFL will hand them out punishment on Friday.

Stupid Stupid Stupid People All of you are missing the point on a thread titled "missing the point"


It is not about what happened and what the penalties will be

It is about WHY it happened other than for getting a competive advantage of stealing signs.

The original post (for all of you who only look at the last page) was

It seems that everyone - fans, media, some players who are talking to the media, are really missing the point. This is in a small way about breaking the rules. The bigger issue is the culture in the NFL when it comes to competitive advantage. Teams have been stealing signs and committing other infractions for years and years and from reports I've read over that last few years, just about every team is involved in some kind of rules breaking or going "outside the lines" to gain an advantage. Examples: 1.) A few years ago the Broncos brought their white jerseys to San Diego even though San Diego, being the home team, determined that they themselves were going to wear their white jerseys. In the SoCal heat, this is a big pretty big deal. 2.) Miami purchased recordings of Brady's snap counts and cadence last year and were able to use them to their advantage on defense. 3.) Denver teaches their offensive lineman to cut block, an illegal and dangeous practice, but they do it and their running game benefits. These are just three examples, but if you listen to what long time players and former coaches have to say, these kind of tactics are commonplace and have been for a long time. Sign stealing has become an art and everyone does it their own way. As far as the acceptability of it, that is for the league to decide, but when you know your opponent is doing something against the rules in order to gain an advantage, will you as a team do nothing do gain your own advantage. It reminds me of a quote from a few years from Belichick when he was asked about Patriots corners bumping Colts receivers; he said something like, "You play the game the way the game is played." I took that to mean if that is what is commonplace and accepted, then by all means play that way. I look at the sign stealing and other tactics in a similar way. Now if the league wants to eliminate these practices, great. If they want to use the Patriots as an example and punish them for violating the rules by taking away a draft pick, fine. They broke the rules and should be punished. However, the commisioner needs to know that their are many other teams (if not all) in the league who are violating the rules to gain an advantage and they need to be watched and discplined as well if he wants to achieve his goal of modifiying the way the game is played. This will be difficult when certain team executives and coaches occupy places of influence within the league...particularly the competition committee. This committee has attempted to legislate their way to success against the Patriots before (Ty Law rule emphasis), and while this particular situation is of the Patriots doing, not theirs, it should not be seen as an opening for attempting further unreasonable checks on a successful team. Are the Patriots tainted? In my opinion, they are in a small way because they got caught breaking a rule...but the bigger picture is that all teams are doing this or something like it in their own way and if that is going to get fixed, then the league needs to be equitable in their investigation and disciplinary actions.

 

[mdhprime]

I think people are so wrapped up in perception and what the media is saying that they are missing the forest for trees. This issue goes far beyond the Patriots and speaks to a practice that is league wide (not video recording in particular, but sign stealing.) It is not about the punishment, even though I hope that is equitable and fair, but about what the league is going to do going down the road. If all they do is watch all the sidelines for cameras, then all of this is for nothing. They need to address the multiple ways that all teams attempt to gain an advantage that are either outside the rules or bend the rules, otherwise teams will be forced to continue engaging in this practice, or risk being at a disadvantage every single game. This is really the entire story, not the Patriots, their rule violation and the possible penalty. It is how the league is going to investigate all teams down the road and where they are going to draw the line.

 

[DaBruinz]

mdhprime, point the finger and others is not owning up to what
you did wrong ... rather what our head coach has done wrong.
pointing fingers doesn't cut it with me.

Every one breaks the speed limit but when you get caught speeding do you
think the judge is going to care if you use that as your defense????

It depends on the situation. If you are the one leading the pack and setting the pace for everyone behind you, then yes. However, if you are going with the flow of traffic, then you have a legitimate right to go that speed. Otherwise, you actually put yourself at risk for an accident.

Just like if you get passed by a police officer who is obviously speeding, but doesn't have his flashers on. You can pull behind him and match his speed. If he pulls you over for doing so, his ticket will get thrown out of court on the basis of entrapment.

 

[DaBruinz]

Violation of a rule for the purpose of gaining a competitive advantage (videotape has a perfect memory, unlike humans) doesn't equal cheating to you? What dictionary do you use?

Considering that video playing devices aren't allowing in the locker-rooms or the coaches booth, how are they gaining a competitive edge? Its not like they can take the 12 minutes that they have and go through an hour and a half of tape to figure out what is going on.

And the Patriots had already been beating the Jets handedly without the use of the tape.

 

[DaBruinz]

Nice change of subject. When did the Colts videotape signals like Belichick had done? No one said all competitive advantages are against the rules. Hayden Fry started the tradition of painting pink the visitor's locker room at Iowa. There's no rule against that. Belichick did something that is a clear violation of the rules, after first having been warned to stop violating this particular rule. Please let me know when a Colts coach was in a situation like that.

And, I'm not a Colts fan. I'm a Pats fan. The Pats are bigger than one man. Don't worship Belichick like some beloved autocrat of a backwards nation.

The Patriots, specifically, were not warned about violating that particular rule. The league, as a WHOLE, was warned via a "sternly worded memo." It is being hypothesized that it was because of the Patriots, but there is no proof.

 

[DaBruinz]

No one is as aggressive about stealing signals as the Pats. Every team is clean on stealing signals compared to the Pats. The Pats are like serial killers vs. someone who commits vehicular manslaughter.

This is purely your uneducated assumption based on the media pundits. You have NO proof that this is the case and really should stfu and stop acting like you have a clue.

 

[DaBruinz]

If you are my employer and I am free to leave the company, you can make such a demand and I'd be in violation of your rule. Belichick doesn't have to coach in the NFL if he doesn't want to operate under the league's rules. He can leave and be an AFL coach or whatever.

WOW, you truly are a tool and you missed the entire point. The competition committee changed the rule. It was a change that the entire league DID NOT vote on.

Your whole scenario is friggin absurd.

 

[mgteich]

I'm fine with all that you say.

I'm thinking differently (though with no more information or insight than your opinion). I think it is about news cycles and Kraft wants his team on the front page next week for their play, not this garbage. A decision late Friday/Saturday puts this into next week's news cycle. A decision today/early tomorrow lets this story run its course in this weeks news cycle. Both the commissioner and Kraft have to want this so if possible I think they will make it happen. Just a different perspective.



I want a reasonable punishment. The severity of the punishment will not change the public perception of this incident. People either get it or they don't. There is reportedly evidence the Pats broke the rules, but there is no evidence that they gained a competitive advantage by doing it. This is not an insignificant point. Did George Brett break the rules with the pinetar incident. He sure did. Did he cheat? Possibly, but without evidence to the contrary it is a reasonable assumption that it was a mistake. Taking away his homerun and ejecting him was appropriate based on the rules violation, but a reasonable punishment would be removal of the bat from play and a follow-up action on how the rule would be policed (letter vs. intent).

Not exactly the same case (don't think having the guy with a camera was a mistake), but the logic does follow. If BB said to the commissioner that he intentionally tried to gain a competitive advantage and got caught, the Pats are going to get slammed. If BB said to the commissioner that this was a mistake in procedures or communications between the front office and the scouting staff (or some other reasonable explanation), then you remove remove the camera guy from play (done) and have a follow-up action on how the rule will be policed.

Since the "Commissioner determines Pats broke rule" news item has been thrown into the public arena (by the commish's office, not the Jets), that reasoned approach is no longer an option. Now there has to be a stern punishment regardless of the Pats' side of things to avoid the stigma of Kraft/BB "owning" the commissioner. Keep this private and all the public has to go on is a general report of a camera on the field...filming who knows what. Any punishment would be explained simply by "we looked at the situation and felt this course of action appropriately dealt with the situation." Much like the Milloy/Redskins and Branch/Jets tampering incidents. Sure they tampered. Everyone does it. Was it worth putting this issue on the front page of the newspapers. Absolutely not...and the stories died a painless death. Turn the page.

Now that page weighs a ton and turning it will be an issue. Everybody loses. Didn't have to be this way.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

I'm thinking differently (though with no more information or insight than your opinion). I think it is about news cycles and Kraft wants his team on the front page next week for their play, not this garbage. A decision late Friday/Saturday puts this into next week's news cycle. A decision today/early tomorrow lets this story run its course in this weeks news cycle. Both the commissioner and Kraft have to want this so if possible I think they will make it happen. Just a different perspective.



I want a reasonable punishment. The severity of the punishment will not change the public perception of this incident. People either get it or they don't. There is reportedly evidence the Pats broke the rules, but there is no evidence that they gained a competitive advantage by doing it. This is not an insignificant point. Did George Brett break the rules with the pinetar incident. He sure did. Did he cheat? Possibly, but without evidence to the contrary it is a reasonable assumption that it was a mistake. Taking away his homerun and ejecting him was appropriate based on the rules violation, but a reasonable punishment would be removal of the bat from play and a follow-up action on how the rule would be policed (letter vs. intent).

Not exactly the same case (don't think having the guy with a camera was a mistake), but the logic does follow. If BB said to the commissioner that he intentionally tried to gain a competitive advantage and got caught, the Pats are going to get slammed. If BB said to the commissioner that this was a mistake in procedures or communications between the front office and the scouting staff (or some other reasonable explanation), then you remove remove the camera guy from play (done) and have a follow-up action on how the rule will be policed.

Since the "Commissioner determines Pats broke rule" news item has been thrown into the public arena (by the commish's office, not the Jets), that reasoned approach is no longer an option. Now there has to be a stern punishment regardless of the Pats' side of things to avoid the stigma of Kraft/BB "owning" the commissioner. Keep this private and all the public has to go on is a general report of a camera on the field...filming who knows what. Any punishment would be explained simply by "we looked at the situation and felt this course of action appropriately dealt with the situation." Much like the Milloy/Redskins and Branch/Jets tampering incidents. Sure they tampered. Everyone does it. Was it worth putting this issue on the front page of the newspapers. Absolutely not...and the stories died a painless death. Turn the page.

Now that page weighs a ton and turning it will be an issue. Everybody loses. Didn't have to be this way.

The pine tar incident is a good analogy, but delving onto the origin and history of that rule is a bit enlightening.

The rule was introduced and seriously pushed by Calvin Griffith, owner of the Minnesota Twins. A notorious tightwad, he sought to limit, by rule, the amount of pine tar any of his employees could use on a bat so that it could save him money! He didn't care about other players on other teams. He didn't have a clue as to what pine tar did for a bat or a batter. He just knew what it cost him. For him, it was a cost containment measure enforced by dint of league "rule".

That is the only reason that "rule" went on the books.

So did George Brett "break the rule"? Undoubtedly. But what comes to mind is the old saw, "If the law permits this, the law is an ass".

Shifting focus here, did the Pats "break the rule"? Apparently. Is the rule a good one, designed for the good of the game? At one time, perhaps it was. But there are much more efficient methods of collecting this type of game intelligence.

Maybe BB does in the name of thoroughness, I don't know, but trust me - one way or another, Belichick will get that intelligence to aid his game analysis and planning.

As for the upcoming punishment, we'll see if Goodell and the Competition Committee deem it necessary to bludgeon the Patriots to death for a relatively minor infraction, or if they'll take the longer-term view and try and save the league from inflicting harm on itself by way of delivering a surgical strike against the team that's more in line with political and practical realities.

In any event, I agree with the poster that feels the League office has to gain at the least the acquiescence of Bob Kraft for anything that's coming down. If that doesn't happen, Goodell will find a little down the road that Bob Kraft is a guy you want on your side, not one who opposes you.

 

[upstater1]

Videotaping IS cheating because it's a circumvention of the rules to gain a competitive edge. Stealing signs the way the Pats did is cheating.

You're wrong about this. The NFL disagrees with you, and the quote has already been posted. The NFL spokesman was asked POINT BLANK if stealing signs by taking them from an illegal videotape, then using hem in a game, was illegal. The NFL spokesman said it was perfectly legal.

 

[DaBruinz]

That's how I read it, too. mgteich thinks that the Pats chronically skirt NFL rules and regulations and the NFL needs to put its foot down once and for all.

MG would be wrong for thinking that. Just as you would be. The Pats push the limits of the rules. As anyone does. I can guarantee YOU push the limits of the rules on a daily basis.

Some rules are just plain bad and wrong. I don't know if this is one of them. However, I do know that there are rules in the league that have been broken that are much more egregious than the one the Pats supposedly broke. And the harshest punishment was loss of a 3rd round pick and some fines. IF the Pats are punished, that is the worst it will be. Going forward, though, I would expect the punishment to be worse.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

It seems that everyone - fans, media, some players who are talking to the media, are really missing the point. This is in a small way about breaking the rules. The bigger issue is the culture in the NFL when it comes to competitive advantage. Teams have been stealing signs and committing other infractions for years and years and from reports I've read over that last few years, just about every team is involved in some kind of rules breaking or going "outside the lines" to gain an advantage. Examples: 1.) A few years ago the Broncos brought their white jerseys to San Diego even though San Diego, being the home team, determined that they themselves were going to wear their white jerseys. In the SoCal heat, this is a big pretty big deal. 2.) Miami purchased recordings of Brady's snap counts and cadence last year and were able to use them to their advantage on defense. 3.) Denver teaches their offensive lineman to cut block, an illegal and dangeous practice, but they do it and their running game benefits. These are just three examples, but if you listen to what long time players and former coaches have to say, these kind of tactics are commonplace and have been for a long time. Sign stealing has become an art and everyone does it their own way. As far as the acceptability of it, that is for the league to decide, but when you know your opponent is doing something against the rules in order to gain an advantage, will you as a team do nothing do gain your own advantage. It reminds me of a quote from a few years from Belichick when he was asked about Patriots corners bumping Colts receivers; he said something like, "You play the game the way the game is played." I took that to mean if that is what is commonplace and accepted, then by all means play that way. I look at the sign stealing and other tactics in a similar way. Now if the league wants to eliminate these practices, great. If they want to use the Patriots as an example and punish them for violating the rules by taking away a draft pick, fine. They broke the rules and should be punished. However, the commisioner needs to know that their are many other teams (if not all) in the league who are violating the rules to gain an advantage and they need to be watched and discplined as well if he wants to achieve his goal of modifiying the way the game is played. This will be difficult when certain team executives and coaches occupy places of influence within the league...particularly the competition committee. This committee has attempted to legislate their way to success against the Patriots before (Ty Law rule emphasis), and while this particular situation is of the Patriots doing, not theirs, it should not be seen as an opening for attempting further unreasonable checks on a successful team. Are the Patriots tainted? In my opinion, they are in a small way because they got caught breaking a rule...but the bigger picture is that all teams are doing this or something like it in their own way and if that is going to get fixed, then the league needs to be equitable in their investigation and disciplinary actions.

Your post would be better to read if you try using paragraphs in a post this long.

 

[fillylabinga]

Every one breaks the speed limit but when you get caught speeding do you think the judge is going to care if you use that as your defense????

I'm going to carry the speeding analogy a little further, 'cause I think it fits...

What the Pats did was get caught doing 85 down a crowded highway when everyone else was doing 75.

Yes, the were breaking the rules, but so was everybody else. It's just that the Pats were breaking it more egregiously than the others. And a cop (with some help from another motorist! rat bastard!) happened to pull them over.

Of course the judge isn't going to care. The Pats are going to get punished. They are going to get their ticket. I'm fine with it. I'm not sure if it's totally fair, but they got busted and are going to need to pay the price.

I would say to the cop: "But everyone else was speeding too!"
And the cop would say: "But you're the one I pulled over."

Not fair, but fair enough.

 

[Dragda]

Well written. It is imperative to understand that the issue here is violation of a rule, instead of cheating (as all the media hacks continue to remind us). I know Pats and BB were hated outside of NE, but I did not know, they were hated THIS MUCH!

The media, ESPN in particular, HATES BB.

 

[DaBruinz]

I don't expect a resolution until late Friday or on Saturday. Kraft and the Commissioner will come out on the same page, with regard to punishment, and with regard to steps going forward. Of course, sooner would be better.

I guarantee that anything that you hear from me is mild compared to what the Krafts are telling Belichick and whoever else has been involved. IMHO, the Commissioner isn't embarrassed, he's pi$$ed. It is Robert Kraft and Jonathan Kraft who are embarrassed. They are NFL leaders, whose employees are misbehaving and being non-cooperative on a regular basis. They have worked with the Commissioner for months to stop exactly this type of behavior and attitude.

WOW. This is one of the worst posts you have ever made MG. And its all BS. This is all PURE speculation on your part. All of it.

Its pretty amazing you have already condemned Belichick without all the facts. Usually you are smarter than that. Usually, you take a wait and see attitude.

What employees are mis-behaving and non-cooperative on a regular basis? Where the hell do you get that garbage?

And where the hell do you get that the Krafts have worked with the Commissioner for months to stop this behaviour? You aren't normally one to make things up, but damn, this is total BS.

Teams aren't allowed to have recording devices on the field... The Krafts really, really care about the public relations of the league. Kraft has supported Harrison and Belichick, but the future MUST be different than the past with regard to the team's compliance with the letter and spirit of NFL rules and regulations.

Why? Because YOU say so? BS. Like game, you stretch the rules to the limits. That is part of life. If the rules are BS, you work to change them. You don't COWTOW and bend yourself over the desk and let the pole be shoved up your arse because of the whiners in the league who can't seem to win unless they changes the rules in their favor. And that is exactly what you are saying the Pats should be doing. And its total BS.

I do want the punishment to be severe. I want this to be behind us. This team is NOT a bunch of substance abusing rule-breakers!!!! Winning at all costs is NOT the motto of the patriots!!!! Given the last month, why should the casual public not believe such characterizations?

This is, and will be, a team crafted by the Krafts. The team is the very BEST there is in sports. They WILL start to act with confidence and humility, rather than arrogance.

The Krafts haven't been involved in shaping this team in awhile. In fact, Bob has said that he and Jonathan DO NOT get involved in player issues. Yes, there are basic guidelines that their company has, but that is the extent of it.

Apparently, Belichick didn't understand this as of last Sunday. Belichick WILL understand this by next Sunday, and we will all go forward to the playoffs and the SB.

And how the hell do you know what BB did and didn't understand? How do you know that BB didn't tell Kraft ahead of time that this was going to happen as proof that there is improprieties going on with OTHER TEAMS and that the Pats are unfairly targeted.

This purported arrogance you attribute to Belichick is mind-blowing. Hell, you sound like Wrong Bogus with the crap.

 

[DaBruinz]

You are welcome to cheat on your company's taxes and get sent to prison to be someone's girlfriend. You'd probably enjoy it.

We're talking about cheating-- using an unfair competitive advantage that is explicitly disallowed by the governing body. You can move your business to Antigua just like Belichick can coach in the AFL.

Except they didn't use an unfair competitive advantage. They never had a chance to view the supposed tape that was confiscated.

As you said, you have to actually USE the tape for it to be cheating.