Even my banker hits me with a Spygate thing today

[Fanfrom1960]

Hate to start another ****-gate thread, but I go in there with a Red Sox hat on and he says "the Patriots are in big trouble". I said what do you mean, and he says former Pats players are coming out about the Pats taping the Buccaneers now, as far back as 2000. Is that the Ted Johnson thing? Man, just make it stop.

 

[DaBruinz]

Hate to start another ****-gate thread, but I go in there with a Red Sox hat on and he says "the Patriots are in big trouble". I said what do you mean, and he says former Pats players are coming out about the Pats taping the Buccaneers now, as far back as 2000. Is that the Ted Johnson thing? Man, just make it stop.

You should just tell the idiot that taping from the sidelines wasn't illegal back then and that every team TAPES EVERY GAME. Thats fact.

 

[Roidney73]

He might have been referring to these new articles.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/sports/football/22patriots.html?ref=sports

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-02-21-competition-committee_N.htm

 

[DefenseRules]

If we taped the Bucs in 2000 it didn't help us much. We lost to them TWICE that season.

http://www.patriots.com/schedule/index.cfm?ac=schedule&season=2000

 

[BSR]

He might have been referring to these new articles.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/sports/football/22patriots.html?ref=sports

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-02-21-competition-committee_N.htm

None of which is actually new information.

 

[D-cleater]

but we'll make a brand new post about it anyway, and by acknowledging its a waste of everyone's time and a complete annoyance, that somehow makes it acceptable. I really need to stop visiting this board for a while

 

[PatsFanInVa]

You should just tell the idiot that taping from the sidelines wasn't illegal back then and that every team TAPES EVERY GAME. Thats fact.

I keep seeing this assertion on our site.

I know the league sent around a memo in 2006, emphasizing a rule that was on the books. Are you saying that the rule was not on the books in 2000? Do you have a link to substantiate that?

Thanks

PFnV

 

[tuckeverlasting]

Hate to start another ****-gate thread, but I go in there with a Red Sox hat on and he says "the Patriots are in big trouble". I said what do you mean, and he says former Pats players are coming out about the Pats taping the Buccaneers now, as far back as 2000. Is that the Ted Johnson thing? Man, just make it stop.

i would have told him right there "obviously you're too dumb to be handling my money" and i would have pulled every cent out and gone across the street to a new bank.

 

[DaBruinz]

I keep seeing this assertion on our site.

I know the league sent around a memo in 2006, emphasizing a rule that was on the books. Are you saying that the rule was not on the books in 2000? Do you have a link to substantiate that?

Thanks

PFnV

First of all, its a by-law. That particularl by-law was added in 2004 or 2005. There is no link to add because its never been confirmed.

However, it still doesn't change the FACT that all teams tape games. They just do it from the areas designated by the NFL.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

but we'll make a brand new post about it anyway, and by acknowledging its a waste of everyone's time and a complete annoyance, that somehow makes it acceptable. I really need to stop visiting this board for a while

I hear ya. "I hate to post another spygate thread, but I'm gonna anyways"

We ahve become the new red sox. the fellowship of the miserable wallowing in our own pain and misery

 

[BadMoFo]

You should just tell the idiot that taping from the sidelines wasn't illegal back then and that every team TAPES EVERY GAME. Thats fact.

No need to make things up. It was always illegal and while every team tapes games, they do not tape the defensive coaches giving their signals.

 

[Fanfrom1960]

but we'll make a brand new post about it anyway, and by acknowledging its a waste of everyone's time and a complete annoyance, that somehow makes it acceptable. I really need to stop visiting this board for a while

I said I hated to do it, and I've not participated in any of it for weeks. Mucho apologies. Actually, this board has settled down a lot IMO and is back onto business as usual Patriots stuff.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

No need to make things up. It was always illegal and while every team tapes games, they do not tape the defensive coaches giving their signals.

"why do anything? why study tendencies? why break down film?"

not all teams go to the extent of preparation the pats do whether it's right or wrong.

 

[BadMoFo]

"why do anything? why study tendencies? why break down film?"

not all teams go to the extent of preparation the pats do whether it's right or wrong.

So because we want to be as prepared as possible, we will disregard a league rule? We could have won without doing this. Belichick knew it was against the rules before the Jets game, yet he continued to do it and got busted and know he is saying it really didn't help. I don't buy that answer.

 

[Wildo7]

I keep seeing this assertion on our site.

I know the league sent around a memo in 2006, emphasizing a rule that was on the books. Are you saying that the rule was not on the books in 2000? Do you have a link to substantiate that?

Thanks

PFnV

I agree. I think this is an assumption that everyone on this site wants desperately to make, given the fact that most articles about spygate are poorly written and never mention details such as when the rule was put in place. So I think people have taken the liberty of using this very difficult to prove or disprove (for some reason) assertion that the reminder memo in 2006 means that the rule wasn't on the books for very long before this. I'd be very surprised if the rule hadn't been there for a very long time.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

First of all, its a by-law. That particularl by-law was added in 2004 or 2005. There is no link to add because its never been confirmed.

However, it still doesn't change the FACT that all teams tape games. They just do it from the areas designated by the NFL.

It's never been confirmed that the by-law was added subsequent to the 2000 season, you're saying? In other words, nobody knows when this by-law was added, and it could be from 1970 or it could be from 2005?

Or are you saying nobody's taken the trouble to find out, we just post that the by-law is from 2004 or 2005, as a shared article of faith?

Let me know if there's any substantiation to the claim that this by-law was added in 2004 or 2005. Also, thanks for correcting the term "rule" to "by-law". Is there a significant difference to the two? Are other "by-laws" similar matters of off-field conduct, like tampering, while rules are things like off-sides and the like?

Thanks,

PFnV

 

[DaBruinz]

No need to make things up. It was always illegal and while every team tapes games, they do not tape the defensive coaches giving their signals.

No, it wasn't always illegal to tape games from the sidelines. Nice of you to be the one making things up.

And, yes, they can and do tape defensive coaches calling in plays. You really should listen to the coaches who have actually admittd to it going on. Guys like Jimmy Johnson and Mike Shanahan.

 

[DaBruinz]

It's never been confirmed that the by-law was added subsequent to the 2000 season, you're saying? In other words, nobody knows when this by-law was added, and it could be from 1970 or it could be from 2005?

Or are you saying nobody's taken the trouble to find out, we just post that the by-law is from 2004 or 2005, as a shared article of faith?

Let me know if there's any substantiation to the claim that this by-law was added in 2004 or 2005. Also, thanks for correcting the term "rule" to "by-law". Is there a significant difference to the two? Are other "by-laws" similar matters of off-field conduct, like tampering, while rules are things like off-sides and the like?

Thanks,

PFnV

For the record, I've emailed Mike Reiss and asked him to see if he can find out when those by-laws were accepted.

As for whether there is a difference, obviously BB felt there was, initially.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

So because we want to be as prepared as possible, we will disregard a league rule? We could have won without doing this. Belichick knew it was against the rules before the Jets game, yet he continued to do it and got busted and know he is saying it really didn't help. I don't buy that answer.

it's all an interpretation of the rules.

"Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Wouldn't they have to prove he used it for that game? Seems to me it's guilty before innocent.

Whose to say they don't send some scouts to their next week's opponents game and video tape the signals there?

And this Rams junk... how is a walk through---"during the playing of a game"?

plus this rams stuff isn't even during the given time period stipulated "from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant"


My contention is why do they add the following in the bylaw?

including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."[/

if anything they should ahve made it general to keep people from trying to interpret it.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I hear ya. "I hate to post another spygate thread, but I'm gonna anyways"

We ahve become the new red sox. the fellowship of the miserable wallowing in our own pain and misery

what number are we up to ... #1501?