Micheal Hurley's piece on NFL, '06 Dolphins TapeGate vs. our '07 CameraGate

scout said:

Can someone provide an explanation of why the vast majority of intelligent and educated sports fans think "spygate" is scandalous. Dan Patrick, who doesn't hide behind sponsors, thinks BB legacy is tainted by Spygate (not interested in Patrick jabs). Taping signals is legal. Why do people treat the Patriots with malice while ignoring Denver's salary cap episode (which is vastly more of a competitive advantage?).

Click to expand...

I work with a die hard very knowledgeable older Dallas fan who was shaking his head puzzled when I brought up the Denver capgate, to combat some advantage nonsense he was talking. He had never heard of it and was shocked when I googled it for him. He was like this is waaaay worse then spy gate why have I never heard of it. It was just not news back then like spygate was and that is a damn shame.

pazrul72 said:

I work with a die hard very knowledgeable older Dallas fan who was shaking his head puzzled when I brought up the Denver capgate, to combat some advantage nonsense he was talking. He had never heard of it and was shocked when I googled it for him. He was like this is waaaay worse then spy gate why have I never heard of it. It was just not news back then like spygate was and that is a damn shame.

Click to expand...

I mentioned the same thing to my cousin who is a pretty knowledgeable fan, and he had no clue. But, what about the guy (Dan Patrick's of the world) who make a living from sports and fails to connect the dots? They have no horse in the race. Other then not getting the interview (BB), what gives?
One more thing......"Spygate". Presents in image of Watergate and Deepthroat. A James Bond cloak and dagger theme. It was filmed in front of 80,000 people and everyone was doing it.

SammyBlueCat said:

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe the Ravens acquired a similar tape to the one the Dolphins used. (?) This is important since Ray Lewis has been acting like an ass recently.

Click to expand...

When has Ray Lewis NOT acted like an ass??

scout said:

Can someone provide an explanation of why the vast majority of intelligent and educated sports fans think "spygate" is scandalous. Dan Patrick, who doesn't hide behind sponsors, thinks BB legacy is tainted by Spygate (not interested in Patrick jabs). Taping signals is legal. Why do people treat the Patriots with malice while ignoring Denver's salary cap episode (which is vastly more of a competitive advantage?).

Click to expand...

Regarding Denver's salary cap violations, those took place between 1996 and 1998, when the internet was beginning to become widely available in the country and well before social media sites that we take for granted today were launched. Also, there was a significant gap between the violation and the penalties, which weren't imposed until 2001 and 2004. It's also not easy to explain to a casual fan why cheating the salary cap is a big deal. In my opinion, stealing a team's signals is a lot easier for people to understand.

As for why media people think the 2007 rules violation by the Patriots was such a scandal, I believe it's a combination of reasons (in no particular order):

• Belichick does not "like" the media and does not make their jobs easier. You can debate whether his approach is right or wrong, but it didn't earn him any friends or defenders. When he was caught doing something wrong, he wasn't a sympathetic figure and there were people ready to pile on. Consider that people on ESPN are making excuses for the Falcons crowd noise (Teams can us a silent count) but no one ever did that about stealing signals (Teams can change their signals.)
• People eventually get sick of a winner. If you win too much for too long, some people will get tired of seeing the same faces competing for the top spot. They want to see the underdog knock the favorite off, until the underdog keeps winning and then they'll root for new underdog. If you give people an additional reason to root against the favorite, then they'll really pull for them to lose.
  
• The Patriots are "new money." New England had some very good teams and HOF players over their history, but they were never a champion or a dynasty, like the Packers, Cowboys, Steelers, or 49ers. If teams like the Raiders, Bills, Vikings or Broncos began contending for and winning championships again, you know we'd be seeing a lot of NFL films footage the glory years of those teams. Compared to those teams, there's just not as much to draw from with the Patriots. To some degree, I think there's some mistrust of a team that doesn't fit in with the "old guard."

PatsFanInVa said:

Better late than never

From some of the membership here. There was once a website - I am sure that it exists in archive form... but here is one thoughtful Mod's salvage of the content.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...resource-to-refute-cameragate-baloney.719333/

Click to expand...

Hey! Thanks for posting that old thread. I had almost forgotten it!

I read upstart1's comment made in 2011 (given below) and can't help but think how his hope is 1/3 achieved and has a good chance of getting fully fulfilled.

-------------
"I'm hoping that in several years I can look back on Spygate and realize that it was the reason why Belichick tore it all down, began building again, and stuck around another 10 years to coach the Patriots to 3 more Super Bowls."
----------------

GO PATS!!

Koma said:

Regarding Denver's salary cap violations, those took place between 1996 and 1998, when the internet was beginning to become widely available in the country and well before social media sites that we take for granted today were launched. Also, there was a significant gap between the violation and the penalties, which weren't imposed until 2001 and 2004. It's also not easy to explain to a casual fan why cheating the salary cap is a big deal. In my opinion, stealing a team's signals is a lot easier for people to understand.

As for why media people think the 2007 rules violation by the Patriots was such a scandal, I believe it's a combination of reasons (in no particular order):

• Belichick does not "like" the media and does not make their jobs easier. You can debate whether his approach is right or wrong, but it didn't earn him any friends or defenders. When he was caught doing something wrong, he wasn't a sympathetic figure and there were people ready to pile on. Consider that people on ESPN are making excuses for the Falcons crowd noise (Teams can us a silent count) but no one ever did that about stealing signals (Teams can change their signals.)
• People eventually get sick of a winner. If you win too much for too long, some people will get tired of seeing the same faces competing for the top spot. They want to see the underdog knock the favorite off, until the underdog keeps winning and then they'll root for new underdog. If you give people an additional reason to root against the favorite, then they'll really pull for them to lose.
  
• The Patriots are "new money." New England had some very good teams and HOF players over their history, but they were never a champion or a dynasty, like the Packers, Cowboys, Steelers, or 49ers. If teams like the Raiders, Bills, Vikings or Broncos began contending for and winning championships again, you know we'd be seeing a lot of NFL films footage the glory years of those teams. Compared to those teams, there's just not as much to draw from with the Patriots. To some degree, I think there's some mistrust of a team that doesn't fit in with the "old guard."

Click to expand...

Okay, really good response. Although, it doesn't explain why a football analyst would have such a lopsided perception of "spygate" when the analyst understands what rules were actually broken.

Maybe if we fans correctly frame it as "CameraGate" - be it when discussing it casually with other fans or writing/mentioning it in written responses to the media - it could change the tone and approach.

Some of us on this forum have been lamenting the use of the 'spy' right from day one, and so use camera-gate always (eg: thread title).

scout said:

Okay, really good response. Although, it doesn't explain why a football analyst would have such a lopsided perception of "spygate" when the analyst understands what rules were actually broken.

Click to expand...

I don't have a good explanation for that. Before I go any further, I should point out that there is plenty of positive stuff said and written about the Patriots. I just seem to remember the negative stuff a lot clearer.

As far as why the media went with a lopsided reaction to the sideline signal taping, three possibilities came to mind, but only the last one might have some truth to it: (1) All the negative stories about the Patriots are true. They're really destroying the integrity of the game. (2) There's a vast anti-Patriots media conspiracy. (3) The media has figured out that negative Patriots stories get a lot more traffic than even-handed stories.

The media has access to more people and information than the fans, so you would think they could produce more nuanced thoughts on situations the Patriots have been involved this year and in 2007. Instead, they try to portray the story in a simpler good/bad, black and white frame.

The article linked by the OP is a good example. Over the course of 10 months, Clayton completely changed his opinion on stealing signals without any explanation. Back when the fake story about the Rams Walkthrough was going strong, John Czarnecki, who was with Fox Sports at the time, wrote that he was on the field during the walkthrough and it wasn't a very intense or organized event. He was the only one to say something like that, but I doubt he was the only media member present that day. Or even if they weren't at the Rams walkthough that year, I find it hard to believe that, for example, Peter King or Don Banks never attended one. They could have offered some insight on whether teams took it seriously or not. Somewhere in the deflate-gate forum there a thread about Boomer Esiason, where Boomer says there's a lot of petty backstabbing in the league, ‘You want to call me out? I’m going to call you out. You want to embarrass me? Guess what I’m going to embarrass you.’ - kind of stuff. He only mentioned this after the SB, but former coaches and players and some of the media had to know things like this happen in the league. None of them mentioned this might be that kind of situation that blew up on the Monday after the AFCCG, though. Along those lines, Palm Beach Pats Fan wrote about a recent conversation he had with a NFL referee. The referee said that a lot of the complaints they hear are groundless and just based on the paranoia of highly competitive coaches. Others are minor incidents that the league deals with quietly. Less often, there's a real problem that makes the news. Again, some people in the media had to have heard similar versions of this from other officials, but if any of them were thinking along those lines with the ball deflation story, they were in the minority.

Koma said:

I don't have a good explanation for that. Before I go any further, I should point out that there is plenty of positive stuff said and written about the Patriots. I just seem to remember the negative stuff a lot clearer.

As far as why the media went with a lopsided reaction to the sideline signal taping, three possibilities came to mind, but only the last one might have some truth to it: (1) All the negative stories about the Patriots are true. They're really destroying the integrity of the game. (2) There's a vast anti-Patriots media conspiracy. (3) The media has figured out that negative Patriots stories get a lot more traffic than even-handed stories.

The media has access to more people and information than the fans, so you would think they could produce more nuanced thoughts on situations the Patriots have been involved this year and in 2007. Instead, they try to portray the story in a simpler good/bad, black and white frame.

The article linked by the OP is a good example. Over the course of 10 months, Clayton completely changed his opinion on stealing signals without any explanation. Back when the fake story about the Rams Walkthrough was going strong, John Czarnecki, who was with Fox Sports at the time, wrote that he was on the field during the walkthrough and it wasn't a very intense or organized event. He was the only one to say something like that, but I doubt he was the only media member present that day. Or even if they weren't at the Rams walkthough that year, I find it hard to believe that, for example, Peter King or Don Banks never attended one. They could have offered some insight on whether teams took it seriously or not. Somewhere in the deflate-gate forum there a thread about Boomer Esiason, where Boomer says there's a lot of petty backstabbing in the league, ‘You want to call me out? I’m going to call you out. You want to embarrass me? Guess what I’m going to embarrass you.’ - kind of stuff. He only mentioned this after the SB, but former coaches and players and some of the media had to know things like this happen in the league. None of them mentioned this might be that kind of situation that blew up on the Monday after the AFCCG, though. Along those lines, Palm Beach Pats Fan wrote about a recent conversation he had with a NFL referee. The referee said that a lot of the complaints they hear are groundless and just based on the paranoia of highly competitive coaches. Others are minor incidents that the league deals with quietly. Less often, there's a real problem that makes the news. Again, some people in the media had to have heard similar versions of this from other officials, but if any of them were thinking along those lines with the ball deflation story, they were in the minority.

Click to expand...

Well thought out, thanks for your response.

NYCPatsFan said:

Maybe if we fans correctly frame it as "CameraGate" - be it when discussing it casually with other fans or writing/mentioning it in written responses to the media - it could change the tone and approach.

Some of us on this forum have been lamenting the use of the 'spy' right from day one, and so use camera-gate always (eg: thread title).

Click to expand...

I've always used "camera" on here, but I think in the broader football fan world, that distinction is lost. The broader lens is necessary, but it looks like at least one writer has started to take a broader "lens" approach to that "snapshot in time."

Interestingly, the apparently faux scandal called "deflategate" might bring ex-post-facto "spygate" skeptics to the fore, especially if the outcome indeed includes a goodell and/or espn apology. It only takes an interested reporter or two to say, "hmm, I wonder whether there was any issue to what happened in 2007."

PatsFanInVa said:

I've always used "camera" on here, but I think in the broader football fan world, that distinction is lost. The broader lens is necessary, but it looks like at least one writer has started to take a broader "lens" approach to that "snapshot in time."

Interestingly, the apparently faux scandal called "deflategate" might bring ex-post-facto "spygate" skeptics to the fore, especially if the outcome indeed includes a goodell and/or espn apology. It only takes an interested reporter or two to say, "hmm, I wonder whether there was any issue to what happened in 2007."

Click to expand...

You were the certainly among the 'some' in my prior response. You might not remember me, but we did exchange a few emails on FrAME back then when we are figuring out the ways to defend the Pats.

I hear you on the possibility that the distinction between cameragate vs. xxx-gate (see how trained I have become? ), is probably lost in the broader football fan world, but your follow-up points are exactly why I am confident that it need not.

Count me among those waiting in the shadows to pounce on the deflategate ending (big expectation that it would prove to the world that we are above some of the scum in the NFL hasty to smear us again) to demand a revist of the witchhunting of the 07 cameragate.

Here are my broad thoughts:

---------------
First, not all those '07 videos have been destroyed.

http://deadspin.com/383677/jay-glazer-owns-the-nfl

Glazer has at least one, and even if he is not willing to it, can he be enticed to release a portion of the contents?

That could set the ball rolling on discussing what was taped, how it probably could never have been used for that game and most certainly for future game references (just read Glazer's interview above).

------------
Second, get these four reporters Curran-Reiss-Hurley-Wilbur first read this (I know, bleacherreport might not be taken that seriously but they provide an awesome insight into this subject):

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...pygate-punishing-success-and-promoting-parity

Would that convince them to start asking the right questions on national media?

----------

Maybe.

That is why as a third step, have Kraft participate/sponsor in some manner for this name -cleansing effort, which will probably motivate the above four more than any passionate fan could do.

--------------

The above might turn the tide in favor of us and have the broader football fan world truly recognize the genius and talent of BB-TB.



FYI in case you didn't catch some splendid columns by Wilbur right @ the beginning of this deflategate:

http://www.boston.com/sports/column...te_stupidity_has_reached_its_fever_pitch.html

And this, another gem from Hurley:

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/02/...o-to-be-banned-from-nfl/#.VNOej6MZqec.twitter

Enjoy!!

And now, I am going to watch the SB again.

Good stuff, NYC... I have a feeling that the blowback against the fake 2014 "gate" is going to reverberate back at everybody who was so holier-than-thou on "xxx-gate." At least to a minor degree.

And then there will be the marching morons bleating "Cheatriots" until their dying day. But they don't have DVDs to watch Gotta do something with that time!

PS, you were right, I did not remember... but going just by memory, I think you turned up a bunch of the original source material, including the Miami tape intro. Apologies if I've still got it wrong!

PatsFanInVa said:

Good stuff, NYC... I have a feeling that the blowback against the fake 2014 "gate" is going to reverberate back at everybody who was so holier-than-thou on "xxx-gate." At least to a minor degree.

And then there will be the marching morons bleating "Cheatriots" until their dying day. But they don't have DVDs to watch Gotta do something with that time!

PS, you were right, I did not remember... but going just by memory, I think you turned up a bunch of the original source material, including the Miami tape intro. Apologies if I've still got it wrong!

Click to expand...

No need to apologize!

Though I did track down a few of the original sourcs and chipped in a bit back then, I wasn't as prolific and a high-level contributor as some of you - like yourself, shmessey, joker etc.

So, to crudely apply Groucho's logic: I would have forgotten myself if it was me.

Really FGGSAND. You dislike my post but can't be bothered to say why??

Seriously, when has Ray Lewis not acted like an ASS?? I've yet to actually see it..

scout said:

Okay, really good response. Although, it doesn't explain why a football analyst would have such a lopsided perception of "spygate" when the analyst understands what rules were actually broken.

Click to expand...

One of the major influences on perception is the size of punishments handed out by the league. The Broncos' infraction occurred over multiple seasons and attracted two separate punishments. The first in December 2001 was for $968,000 and a 3rd round draft pick. It wasn't until almost 3 years later (September 2004) that they were further fined $950,000 and another 3rd round draft pick. The separation is important because time heals all ills, and memory seldom bridges gaps to accumulate punishments.

Although the Saints never suffered a financial punishment, they did receive multiple suspensions and the loss of two second round draft picks (their first pick that year had already been traded to the Patriots). If Payton (and to a lesser degree Loomis) had not dissembled and misled the investigations they might have received smaller penalties in both suspension and draft picks. It is easily forgotten that Bountygate was really two infractions not one.

Finally the Partriots lost a first round draft pick, a $250,000 fine for the franchise and $500,000 for Belicheck. And here is the kicker -

Much of the lopsided perception can therefore be blamed on Goodell's poor judgement in trying to make the punishments fit the crimes. The Broncos committed the longest lasting and most detrimental (to the rest of the league) infractions but the least punished if the punishments are remembered or looked at separately. By Goodell's own words loss of the 1st round draft pick is worse than suspensions, and therefore Belicheck's crime is worse than Payton's oversight and mendacity. Combine that with the general lack of specific knowledge surround Cameragate, and it is unsurprising that the majority of the media harbor such strong negative opinions around one simple infraction. An infraction, incidentally, that held the least advantage of the three.