Patriots "pushing the envelope" reputation

memento said:

I listed the top accusations I could remember off the top of my head. I don't really care about their validity because I don't put a lot of weight on them anyway. I just enjoy seeing the team play.

Click to expand...

These were really helpful though because every time you ask a hater, their response is "spygate" while reporters simply allude to vague "pushing the envelope" references.

Habitual line steppers?

I don't mind anyone saying they push the envelope, some of that is just being smart. What really bugs me and many in the media has stated it as a known fact is that there IS a "culture of cheating" in the organization. Other than spygate which is misunderstood by many what the freak are they talking about?
I remember Chris Simms did an interview on weei and said that BB follows the rules more than anyone he knows in the NFL, course that doesn't fit the narrative so it never gets repeated.

"Pushing the envelope" is perfectly acceptable to me, some intellectually challenged people will call it cheating, imo it is 'competitive advantage". Conversely teams/mediots will use the term "competitive advantage" when they do it, but call is cheating when the Patriots do it.

Time and time again the mediots get their depends in a bunch, and upon closer review the practice in question has been done before.. and no one noticed until the Pats did it.

This franchise is scrutinized more than any other in the NFL.... we are often imitated, but never duplicated.

cmasspatsfan said:

I don't mind anyone saying they push the envelope, some of that is just being smart. What really bugs me and many in the media has stated it as a known fact is that there IS a "culture of cheating" in the organization. Other than spygate which is misunderstood by many what the freak are they talking about?
I remember Chris Simms did an interview on weei and said that BB follows the rules more than anyone he knows in the NFL, course that doesn't fit the narrative so it never gets repeated.

Click to expand...

The most damaging quote out there that fuels this idea came from Josh McDaniels himself when he stated that cheating was "coached and practiced" in New England. And he said it in response to allegations that he was -- of all things -- behind videotaping other teams' walkthroughs.

Even though the quote has been taken somewhat out of context since (as it was made in reference to Spygate specifically), I can't really blame the media for latching on to that. You can thank McDaniels for that one.

I missed that McDaniels quote, I'll have to look it up to get the full context.

realtime said:

The most damaging quote out there that fuels this idea came from Josh McDaniels himself when he stated that cheating was "coached and practiced" in New England. And he said it in response to allegations that he was -- of all things -- behind videotaping other teams' walkthroughs.

Even though the quote has been taken somewhat out of context since (as it was made in reference to Spygate specifically), I can't really blame the media for latching on to that. You can thank McDaniels for that one.

Click to expand...

I only found one reference to this supposed quote, and that ws from bleacherreport. It appear to me just a throw in misquote to enhance the already sketchy story. I would need more than one quote for this quote to believe it. After all, I am not a sports columnist!

Patstopia said:

I only found one reference to this supposed quote, and that ws from bleacherreport. It appear to me just a throw in misquote to enhance the already sketchy story. I would need more than one quote for this quote to believe it. After all, I am not a sports columnist!

Click to expand...

Jay Glazer was the original source and it was repeated everywhere at the time, not just bleacher report. Below are a couple of additional links. The quote is out there -- and we hired the guy back -- so it is what it is.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...g-staff-differences-between-spygate-i-and-ii/

http://www.boston.com/sports/footba..._coach_belichick_taping_topic_is_closed_gate/

I think most of it comes from rumors that were spread during the 2007 season. Once that is printed or mentioned on tv or radio, many fans accept is fact. There was a ton of stuff thrown out there during the season, and it was if every reporter had to come up with a bigger lie to get attention - culminating in Tomase's fabrication. Most of those in the 31 other fan bases were by then fully convinced the Patriots were guilty of much more. That doesn't even bring into account the lack of understanding of how much (or little) of a competitive advantage the filming provided.

For many if not most fans of other teams, they see or hear it from someone like Mortensen or Clayton, and they accept it as 100% factual. It is not all unlike what is happening now with PSI-gate: many if not most fans outside of New England still fully believe Mortensen's initial claim about 11 of 12 under inflated balls for the Patriots. The counter by Rappaport and the fact Mort has himself shriveled up from that allegation is completely ignored.

I do also find it amusing that more than a few bring up the Tuck Rule in their laundry list of supposed transgressions. To me that's more part of their agenda - to discredit the winners - than to bring any sensible logic to the table.

I would have to put the whole quote in a category of unlikely with a shade towards BS. Or the beginning of a good fairytale by Glazer!

Funny how teams who cheat on the cap like Denver and San Francisco, or tamper repeatedly and trip opposing players like the Jets aren't considered to be pushing the envelope. I guess in Goodell's NFL the capital offense is putting a camera in the wrong spot. Too bad in 2007, Kraft didn't challenge the POS as the Pats' reputation was dragged through the mud. Maybe the former Jets' employees would have thought twice before creating this witch hunt.

Alright, I'm coming clean. I'm actually the inside source for all the Patriots scandals of the last 10 years. I just call up Glazer or Mort and say "Psst, Patriots are using secret radio signals to bypass league communication equip." Or something.

They say "Are you sure?" (In the business this statement is what's known as double checking your source)

And I say:
"Yup, I'm legit, I have inside information."

I'd add that the Pats are widely believed to "redshirt" guys on IR.

Context is important with the Glazer quote. Look at the blurb via PFT again:

“That was practiced, that was coached, that was worked on,” McDaniels said in reference to the Patriots’ past practices, per Glazer. McDaniels also warned his staff to keep their mouths shut. “If this gets out, there are jobs on the line,” McDaniels told the staff, per Glazer.

Click to expand...

Both quotes "per Glazer", so how did Glazer get it? This wasn't a press conference, and he didn't have a one-on-one with McDaniels. Higher in the same article:

Jay Glazer of FOX reports that McDaniels met with his staff on Friday to explain the circumstances surrounding Spygate II

Click to expand...

So McDaniels allegedly said it at a staff meeting. Since we can safely assume Glazer wasn't part of McDaniels' staff, that makes the claim double hearsay.

McDaniels denied the claim:

McDaniels rejected that story to NBC/SI.com. "I didn't try to minimize what we did at all," he said. "What we did is very serious. And I feel bad it's being represented that I have any inside knowledge of the New England situation, because I don't."

Click to expand...

Whom should we believe? Glazer and his anonymous source, or McDaniels directly?

Notice that Mike Florio didn't have McDaniels' denial as part of its story. And of course now in all the retellings of the story - such as by that maniac Steelers fan who wrote the Spygate book - McDaniels' denial is nowhere to be found. People only repeat the story that supports their agenda.

Snapper said:

Context is important with the Glazer quote. Look at the blurb via PFT again:


Both quotes "per Glazer", so how did Glazer get it? This wasn't a press conference, and he didn't have a one-on-one with McDaniels. Higher in the same article:

So McDaniels allegedly said it at a staff meeting. Since we can safely assume Glazer wasn't part of McDaniels' staff, that makes the claim double hearsay.

McDaniels denied the claim:

Whom should we believe? Glazer and his anonymous source, or McDaniels directly?

Notice that Mike Florio didn't have McDaniels' denial as part of its story. And of course now in all the retellings of the story - such as by that maniac Steelers fan who wrote the Spygate book - McDaniels' denial is nowhere to be found. People only repeat the story that supports their agenda.

Click to expand...

I personally believe Glazer. McDaniels was a few weeks away from being fired and in desperation mode. He made comments he shouldn't have made to a staff he did not fully control and then tried to deny it after they became public. No big deal, but it certainly doesn't help in the fight against the "culture of cheating" accusations.

realtime said:

I personally believe Glazer. McDaniels was a few weeks away from being fired and in desperation mode. He made comments he shouldn't have made to a staff he did not fully control and then tried to deny it after they became public. No big deal, but it certainly doesn't help in the fight against the "culture of cheating" accusations.

Click to expand...

See, this is what I'm talking about. You start applying your own speculation (McDaniels in "desperation mode") to the story to support your suppositions. What is McDaniels' recourse here? He directly denied the story given by Glazer's anonymous source. Why is two-party hearsay more credible than McDaniels' word?

Sure, McDaniels might have lied. But Glazer getting the story wrong is at least equally a possibility. The conventional wisdom always seems to be to go with the take that casts the most doubt on the Patriots.

Snapper said:

See, this is what I'm talking about. You start applying your own speculation (McDaniels in "desperation mode") to the story to support your suppositions. What is McDaniels' recourse here? He directly denied the story given by Glazer's anonymous source. Why is two-party hearsay more credible than McDaniels' word?

Sure, McDaniels might have lied. But Glazer getting the story wrong is at least equally a possibility. The conventional wisdom always seems to be to go with the take that casts the most doubt on the Patriots.

Click to expand...

That is not a direct denial. A direct denial would have been, "I never said that -- Glazer's sources have it all wrong". Instead, he says that he wasn't trying to minimize what the Broncos did (without denying that a actually made the alleged statements) and follows that up with the incredible (IMO) claim that as a trusted, senior, former member of BB's staff he has "no inside knowledge of the New England situation."

Under the circumstances, I find the Glazer report completely credible. The fact that even a die-hard Patriot fan like me feels that way underscores why this report is so problematic in the fight against the "culture of cheating" aspersions.

realtime said:

That is not a direct denial. A direct denial would have been, "I never said that -- Glazer's sources have it all wrong". Instead, he says that he wasn't trying to minimize what the Broncos did (without denying that a actually made the alleged statements) and follows that up with the incredible (IMO) claim that as a trusted, senior, former member of BB's staff he has "no inside knowledge of the New England situation."

Under the circumstances, I find the Glazer report completely credible. The fact that even a die-hard Patriot fan like me feels that way underscores why this report is so problematic in the fight against the "culture of cheating" aspersions.

Click to expand...

Long time?

realtime said:

That is not a direct denial. A direct denial would have been, "I never said that -- Glazer's sources have it all wrong".

Click to expand...

You misunderstand. "Direct" as in he himself said it directly to the press, as opposed to the indirect, second-party manner Glazer's claim came about. It's hearsay vs. straight from the horse's mouth.

Instead, he says that he wasn't trying to minimize what the Broncos did (without denying that a actually made the alleged statements) and follows that up with the incredible (IMO) claim that as a trusted, senior, former member of BB's staff he has "no inside knowledge of the New England situation."

Click to expand...

Saying he has "no inside knowledge of the New England situation" IS the denial against Glazer's claim he said "that was practiced, that was coached." And again, you're projecting your own suppositions ("incredible claim that as a trusted, senior member") onto whether you believe it or not. It's almost as if you're taking the "that was practiced, that was coached" line as a given, then measuring McDaniels' denial against it. "How can he say with a straight face that he has no inside knowledge when we know it was practiced and coached?"

Under the circumstances, I find the Glazer report completely credible. The fact that even a die-hard Patriot fan like me feels that way underscores why this report is so problematic in the fight against the "culture of cheating" aspersions.

Click to expand...

Ah, the impenetrable anecdotal evidence. I'm just as much a die-hard Patriots fan as you. The fact I feel the way I do underscores why Glazer's report is likely bull****.

Ross Tucker wrote an article some years back where he was talking about his time as a guard in New England. The Patriots were (according to him) practicing guys who were on IR, and when he complained about it in a conversation with Troy Brown, Brown brushed it off, "ah, every team in the league does that!" Tucker made the point that, unlike Brown, he had actually been with other teams, and told him he was wrong.

The other thing I heard, back when PFW was still around (or maybe it was deadspin), was that the Patriots apparently have some group of favored agents that they use. They steer UDFA's they like towards these agents, and the agents give them sweetheart deals in exchange for the business (I assume UDFA's because I can't see how they could do this with established and in-demand FA's, but the article didn't specify). So there is, or at least was, a bunch of NFL agents out there who hate/d the Patriots for supposedly running this exclusionary racket.

You've got all these hard-as-balls, hyper-masculine football coaches who do and say unspeakable things behind closed doors (remember Gregg Williams and the bounty program?), and then the moment a camera gets in their face they turn around and whine about how the Patriots are "destroying the integrity of the game" or whatever. It's seriously pathetic.

John Harbaugh got his job because Belichick gave him a reference, and he's gonna turn around and whine to the media because the Patriots got him with a few clever formations? And then continue the crusade with whomever else to the point where the league enacts a rule change? How does he go to training camp now and look a player in the eye, and tell him to "suck it up" or "be a man"?

Sorry, a little rant there.