Belichick interview with Armen Keteyian on CBS News [mergedx4]

[TNTitan]

Re: BB interview - 15 min version

The likely reality here isn't that hard to understand:

1) Belichick taped the sidelines within the framework of the letter of the constitution/bylaws. He understood the intent of the rule was to prevent using technology (audio or video) to invade the opposing sideline. By using standard video equipment and not using the information in the same game, he was on the right side of the line the league didn't want anyone to cross.

2) Belichick knew that the taping could be frowned upon by the league and opposing teams. When his video guys were told to leave, they left. Belichick didn't challenge the opposing teams to keep his guys taping. There was no directive to hide the taping, but I'm sure the video guys are told not to make their activities obvious given that opposing teams may raise a stink about it.

3) Belichick knows about opposing teams activities that are significantly worse than sideline video. He has even filed complaints about some of them. The league consistently had no appetite to even investigate these activities...much less discourage or punish them. This is the seed planted in Belichick's mind that would become important later.

4) After the GB and Detroit incidents and subsequent memo, Belichick is now seeing the injustice toward his team. Other teams and their shady operations are tolerated but his filming activities (operating within the letter and intent of the rules) are open to public scorn. Now he is ready to pick a fight and emotions start to override his judgement.

Side note - At this point, Belichick escalates his personal battle with the league and forgets that he represents the Kraft family, the coaches, players and NE fanbase. I believe he was willing to put his reputation and money on the line...but I also believe he truly regrets the collateral damage.

5) After getting bounced out of the playoffs by Indy in the super-warm, super-loud dome, Belichick is pushed over the edge. It doesn't matter if you or I think Indy did anything wrong...I'm sure Belichick can't believe his team, many of them sick, had to play in 80 degree temperatures in January. His guys cramping up all over the field, obviously not hydrated enough. The Colts amazingly well hydrated and able to run all over the field in the 2nd half. At this point Belichick couldn't care less about what the league thinks about his video operations. In his mind, "gamesmanship" had just cost his team a shot at history.

6) Belichick knows the Jets are well aware of the Pats taping and it would be very easy to just avoid taping the Jets in NY. However, Belichick has just had the prize taken out of his cracker jacks and isn't going to back down to anyone now...particularly Mangini. If the Jets raise an issue with the league, the NFL will have to explain why its rules only seem to apply to the Pats and nobody else. Belichick welcomes that fight.

This is where the situation falls apart. The tape is confiscated, the media grabs onto the story as a cheating scandal and Goodell (still finding his way in his job) feels obligated to give the media its pound of flesh to preserve league integrity. A perfect storm that Belichick didn't anticipate. Belichick didn't get the personal battle he was prepared to fight. He brought Kraft's pride and joy into a situation that was both unexpected and unacceptable from a business and personal perspective.

Looking at the situation in this context, Belichick's statements are both accurate and very close to complete. The only part missing is that he really did understand that the league wouldn't openly approve of the taping. He believed he had the letter and intent of the rule on his side and past league inaction on such issues make the activity implicitly accepted.

Belichick is guilty of being human and letting emotion drive him to the point where his actions hurt people he really cared about. The league office drove him to that point. That doesn't necessarily get him forgiveness for his actions, but it should be enough for some understanding.

i've heard it all now

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Re: BB interview - 15 min version

i've heard it all now

Have you heard the one about the coach on the competition committee colluding with another head coach in order to FIX the outcome of a game. Probably not since the coach in question sucks and his team NEVER gets beyond the first round, if he even sniffs the post-season at all.

That's the way it is in the NFL. If you suck, you can do whatever you want.

Go away, and enjoy another mediocre year, cheering for your mediocre team.

I ****ing hate trolls.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Re: BB interview - 15 min version

i've ignored it all now

There, I've fixed it for you.

 

[Metaphors]

Re: Belichick interview with Armen Keteyian on CBS News [mergedx3]

You had me with point 1, 2, & 3, then you lost me. I really don't think that BB was looking to pick a fight (he would know he would lose). I honestly beleive he made a HUGE miscalculation on one point and one point only. As I outlined in THIS POST, I think he thought he had a better leg to stand on then he actually did.

I think we are pretty much saying the same thing. I agree that he thought his explanation would carry enough weight that any punishment would be minimal (warning, maybe a fine).

The part that doesn't make much sense is that his miscalculations in this episode are indeed HUGE. He should have seen a lot of this coming but didn't. The only logical conclusion I can come to is that he had a sizable burr up his butt and that clouded his judgement. "Pick a fight" is probably the wrong words to use, but my point was that he was more than willing to have the league confront him on video operations.

He was playing a game of chicken with someone else's car and that seems out of character for him. What would drive him to that? Besides the AFCC game I already mentioned, 2006 also had the shutout game with the Fins. Excluding the Milloy game, that was the only time the Pats were shut out since Belichick arrived. The Fins sucked and in the 3 games before and 3 games after, the Fins gave up an average of about 19 points a game (the Pats scoring average was over 30 in the same span). Yet somehow the Fins shut out the Pats.

Apparently the Fins had some kind of tape (not league issue) that they claim helped them. I don't know what they had and how it affected the game, but the result sure looks suspicious. No attempt by the league to get that tape or investigate in any way.

I'm not a conspiracy guy, but it sure seemed like Belichick had good reason to believe the league office was looking the other way for everyone else. Add in the Milloy and Branch tampering and Belichick was likely fed up. We won't know how this played into the current situation until many years from now. At some point, Belichick will be free to tell the whole story. Again, no excuse for what he did...but it will help explain the entirety of the situation.

 

[arrellbee]

Re: BB interview - 15 min version

Bill Clinton could sure have used you guys to help explain the definition of "IS" and "SEX" when he got in trouble with Monica.
Bill Belichick ignored the Sept. 2006 memo at his and the Patriot's own peril. The man referred to all of us as the "Genius" knew what he was doing and did it anyways. He was not friendly to the media and had a cold persona so he got no mercy when he got caught.
What keeps this issue fermenting on this message board are the Bill "Apologists". Accept what was done and move on.

I don't think your comments should be left to stand.

The ineptitude of Goodell in this matter is what caused it to be such an enormous issue - over something that should have been routinely taken care of with little overhead or furor.

Let's go back to the basics in this whole affair (courtesy of Mike Reiss who once again was a stellar NEWS reporter giving his readers solid information): http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2007/12/videotaping_rul.html

From Mike's blog item, we get the following - [bolded/underlined print is my emphasis and was not in Mike's blog item]:


'In the league's Constitution & Bylaws, it reads: "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." '

OK. By it's wording, the proscription in this paragraph IS in relation to: that might aid a team during the playing of a game." Ask any English professor if this paragraph can be construed in a more general sense and they will tell you that the last phrase limits the whole paragraph. You probably don't want to go to that trouble, so use a common sense test. If you read it as a general prohibition, note that information-gathering equipment is not to this day prohibited in general - as we all know, teams make full tapes of the games !! So, to reiterate, this paragraph can only be applied in the context of:: that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Now, let's go to the infamous September 6, 2006 memo (again, courtesy of Mike in the above URL reference):

'In a memo to NFL head coaches and general managers on Sept. 6, 2006, NFL executive vice president of football operations Ray Anderson wrote: "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." '

Are you beginning to see something here ?? This paragraph is completely limited in scope by the last phrase: accessible to club staff members during the game. In plain English, you can't generalize beyond that phrase.

So what happened ?? The short and simple answer was that Goodell was an incompetent fool. He was on a power trip where he was going to be the 'new marshall in town' and was primed to 'lay down the law'. It should be obvious to any reader here, that he was ignoring or perhaps had not even read these sections. Either he was going by some staff member saying that the Patriots had 'violated' the rules or he wasn't really reading the material in question - or your guess is as good as mine.

So what should he have done ?

First of all, it is unclear from my reading as to whether he even talked to the Patriots and/or Belichick himself before he came blustering out with his condemnation. But the only competent thing to have done was to have a serious full discussion with the Patriots top people before taking any action and to completely understand why the Patriots felt they were not defying league mandates. If he had done this, it is hard to believe that the Patriots wouldn't have pointed out the plain English of the Constitution/Bylaws and the memo and provided enlightenment about the lack of general prohibition about taping (including coaching signals) as being the basis of the Patriots taping.

It's not even clear to me that this whole incident had made its way to the news media. In which case, it should have been an internal discussion and resolution amongst the league, Patriots, and Jets - with no public announcement even needed.

However, let's assume that it had gotten out to the media that the camera had been confiscated. After complete discussions had been held, he should have simply stated that the Patriots tapes were never used during a particular game to give the Patriots staff any information and that by the letter of the Constitution/Bylaws and the memo the Patriots had not committed any violation. He could have then said that they would from this point issue another more explicit memo and/or refer the matter to the Rules Committee for explicit rules.

So what good did Goodell's actions do ? Absolutely NOTHING.
What harm did Goodell's actions do ? Incalculable.

A true tragedy.

And this is the guy who is going to lead the NFL into it's next confrontation with the Player's Union ? I shudder.

 

[SVN]

Re: BB interview - 15 min version

I don't think your comments should be left to stand.

The ineptitude of Goodell in this matter is what caused it to be such an enormous issue - over something that should have been routinely taken care of with little overhead or furor.

Let's go back to the basics in this whole affair (courtesy of Mike Reiss who once again was a stellar NEWS reporter giving his readers solid information): http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2007/12/videotaping_rul.html

From Mike's blog item, we get the following - [bolded/underlined print is my emphasis and was not in Mike's blog item]:


'In the league's Constitution & Bylaws, it reads: "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." '

OK. By it's wording, the proscription in this paragraph IS in relation to: that might aid a team during the playing of a game." Ask any English professor if this paragraph can be construed in a more general sense and they will tell you that the last phrase limits the whole paragraph. You probably don't want to go to that trouble, so use a common sense test. If you read it as a general prohibition, note that information-gathering equipment is not to this day prohibited in general - as we all know, teams make full tapes of the games !! So, to reiterate, this paragraph can only be applied in the context of:: that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Now, let's go to the infamous September 6, 2006 memo (again, courtesy of Mike in the above URL reference):

'In a memo to NFL head coaches and general managers on Sept. 6, 2006, NFL executive vice president of football operations Ray Anderson wrote: "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." '

Are you beginning to see something here ?? This paragraph is completely limited in scope by the last phrase: accessible to club staff members during the game. In plain English, you can't generalize beyond that phrase.

So what happened ?? The short and simple answer was that Goodell was an incompetent fool. He was on a power trip where he was going to be the 'new marshall in town' and was primed to 'lay down the law'. It should be obvious to any reader here, that he was ignoring or perhaps had not even read these sections. Either he was going by some staff member saying that the Patriots had 'violated' the rules or he wasn't really reading the material in question - or your guess is as good as mine.

So what should he have done ?

First of all, it is unclear from my reading as to whether he even talked to the Patriots and/or Belichick himself before he came blustering out with his condemnation. But the only competent thing to have done was to have a serious full discussion with the Patriots top people before taking any action and to completely understand why the Patriots felt they were not defying league mandates. If he had done this, it is hard to believe that the Patriots wouldn't have pointed out the plain English of the Constitution/Bylaws and the memo and provided enlightenment about the lack of general prohibition about taping (including coaching signals) as being the basis of the Patriots taping.

It's not even clear to me that this whole incident had made its way to the news media. In which case, it should have been an internal discussion and resolution amongst the league, Patriots, and Jets - with no public announcement even needed.

However, let's assume that it had gotten out to the media that the camera had been confiscated. After complete discussions had been held, he should have simply stated that the Patriots tapes were never used during a particular game to give the Patriots staff any information and that by the letter of the Constitution/Bylaws and the memo the Patriots had not committed any violation. He could have then said that they would from this point issue another more explicit memo and/or refer the matter to the Rules Committee for explicit rules.

So what good did Goodell's actions do ? Absolutely NOTHING.
What harm did Goodell's actions do ? Incalculable.

A true tragedy.

And this is the guy who is going to lead the NFL into it's next confrontation with the Player's Union ? I shudder.

send this to florio. lets see if he gets it now or not.

 

[TNTitan]

Re: BB interview - 15 min version

Have you heard the one about the coach on the competition committee colluding with another head coach in order to FIX the outcome of a game. Probably not since the coach in question sucks and his team NEVER gets beyond the first round, if he even sniffs the post-season at all.

That's the way it is in the NFL. If you suck, you can do whatever you want.

Go away, and enjoy another mediocre year, cheering for your mediocre team.

I ****ing hate trolls.

you support a liar

 

[flasox27]

Re: Belichick interview with Armen Keteyian on CBS News [mergedx3]

Hey troll. See if you can get Dungy to throw both games this year. Thats the only way you will make it into the Playoffs this year.

 

[maverick4]

Complete Belichick CBS Interview Transcript Up on Reiss's Blog

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/05/bill_belichicks.html

A GREAT read. Belichick pretty much explained everything. The people who still keep dreaming up conspiracy theories and claim camera-hunt had massive secret cheating, are just crazy.