Welcome to PatsFans.com

Do you wish the Patriots challenged Goodell (like the Saints are doing)?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Armchair Quarterback, Jun 29, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Armchair Quarterback

    Armchair Quarterback Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Should they have challenged this megalomaniac? Called into question his evidence (the destroying of) and motives? They let a fool define their dynasty, their glory years as being earned through "cheating".

    The Saints are doing a fairly good job of exposing Goodell's true colors.
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2012
  2. Joker

    Joker PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    16,127
    Likes Received:
    36
    Ratings:
    +54 / 2 / -1

    My Jersey:

    heh...I'll say YES....
  3. rlcarr

    rlcarr PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    724
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    No, I don't. I would have made any difference and if anything would have made NE look worse. And how could you "call into question" the evidence? NE was unquestionably doing the taping. As for questioning Goodell's motives, I doubt it's wise for a club to start a long-running feud with its league's commissioner.

    As for the Saints, it's the Saints players that are doing the challenging. What have Saints ownership, management, and coaches challenged?
  4. Joker

    Joker PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    16,127
    Likes Received:
    36
    Ratings:
    +54 / 2 / -1

    My Jersey:

    Jets videotaped Patriots last season in Foxborough - NFL - ESPN

    right...wouldn't have made a difference...Pats bad...every one else innocent...tra la la
  5. ausbacker

    ausbacker Brady > Manning. PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    12,962
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #51 Jersey
    No, I don't.
  6. Armchair Quarterback

    Armchair Quarterback Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Problem is the tapes got destroyed so we'll never know what was on it good or bad. Were other teams taping? And did the Pats catch them on tape? Who the hell knows. Fact is the Patriots couldn't have looked worse no matter what was on the tapes and the did nothing to dispute, challenge or confront Goodell. They bent over and politely took everything Goodell gave them. I'm not trying to relive spygate, just asking an opinion as to whether the Pats should have fought back a little. My personal opinion is that a pea brained idiot made a name for himself at the expense of this teams glory years.
  7. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,226
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Let us not forget that it wasn't what was on the tapes, it was where the taping took place. A few yards farther back and it would have been legal. Goodell made it worse by having the tapes destroyed, it looked like there was a cover up.
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2012
  8. ThatllMoveTheChains!!!

    ThatllMoveTheChains!!! Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    The stubborn, asinine, competitive part of me does, but the rest of me knows it wouldn't have changed anything for the better. I think the Pats were in a much better position taking their medicine and moving on from the distraction; the Saints are in a bit different situation since the punishments handed down make it pretty hard to just move along and focus on the season.
  9. Armchair Quarterback

    Armchair Quarterback Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Exactly, it looks like a coverup in the Pats favor where in reality if every last tape was released, the Pats could not have possibly looked any worse than they did and do to this day.
  10. ThatllMoveTheChains!!!

    ThatllMoveTheChains!!! Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Yep the Pats got nailed for breaking the letter of the rule rather than the intent. The innocuous nature of what they were doing was so out of line with the punishment it caused people to invent shenanigans that never happened.
  11. Armchair Quarterback

    Armchair Quarterback Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Unfortunately for me the stubborn, asinine, competitive part of me usually wins out in my decision making process.
  12. pdangle

    pdangle Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    In retrospect yes. I wish the true nature and extent of the offense was hammered home to the public instead of letting the media speculate vaguely and editorialize.

    Do it just to get the facts out. Even if the penalty reduction was nominal or on existent. The pats let a bunch of dumbasses sully their name.

    Again, all in retrospect. Which begs the question, I wonder if their strategy would be the same if they could do it over.
  13. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Not sure what the Saints are doing will reap anything positive, it all looks and sounds good.. but end result is not known.

    Sean Payton and his crew are silent, the players are making noise.

    In the Patriots Case the players weren't even players in the allegation, so it would have been BB and his crew making noise and still do not see it.

    Then you factor in what Blue said..

    So after going around the block, the answer is no...
  14. pdangle

    pdangle Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    In retrospect yes. I wish the true nature and extent of the offense was hammered home to the public instead of letting the media speculate vaguely and editorialize.

    Do it just to get the facts out. Even if the penalty reduction was nominal or on existent. The pats let a bunch of dumbasses sully their name.

    Again, all in retrospect. Which begs the question, I wonder if their strategy would be the same if they could do it over.
  15. SEA_Pat

    SEA_Pat Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    418
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Yes. But without any certainty that this would have brought a better result.

    I understand why they didn't - from my reading of Belichick, there's only one thing that matters, and that's getting ready for Sunday. All else is distraction and results in reduced performance, therefore should be eliminated. Thus, after getting the verdict, they decided to take the medicine and go back to what's important, getting ready to win on Sunday.

    However, when it is now clear that a significant number of people are under the impression that the Pats were penalized for taping the Rams practices before the Super Bowl and other such patent nonsense, surely hammering home that it was a minor technicality would have resulted in a better public perception, and perhaps a reduction in the penalty given the number of coaches who came out and said "everyone does this, it's no big deal". But, having said that, it's likely this perception from outsiders doesn't matter at all to Bill.

    With the 24-7 media, it's hard to predict the results of these things. I'm personally quite surprised that the Saints are fighting this as hard as they are. As more people love the Saints and hate the Patriots, I wonder if they had fought it then it would have had an opposite effect to what's happening with the Saints.
  16. BradfordPatsFan

    BradfordPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,525
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    The amount of people who, in the national media, not fans or even former players but national media, show hosts, reporters, and the like who still bring up this story and lace it with untruths and speculation is truly amazing. The fact that the Saints story is the only real NFL news right now doesn't help as it draws natural parallels and keeps getting rehashed.
  17. lurker1965

    lurker1965 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,519
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    No Mood
    No because I apparently am one of the few that can think straight on this topic.:D

    Let's look at the differences between the two.

    Goodell was going after the team and Belichick. As he was going after the Saints and Payton.

    No players were involved in cameragate.

    If Goodell had vacated Super Bowls and asked for a penny of the post season reward money back, hell yes. But at that point you have nothing left to lose.
  18. Koma

    Koma Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    839
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I'd love to say "Yes" for this, but I'm going with "No" because I think it would have made things worse for the Patriots.

    I think it's important to remember how Goodell was perceived 5 years ago. He came down hard on players like Pacman Jones, which the majority of people agreed with and established himself and the "law and order" commissioner. He built on that reputation by hammering the Patriots, a move which non-New England fans and the media thought was 100% deserved and possibly too lenient. In my opinion, appealing the decision and trying to make their case to the public would have led to even more anti-Patriots venom. They would have gone from "cheaters" to "cheaters who cried after they were caught."

    5 years later, after the "new commissioner smell" has worn off (plus a lockout, some mid-season rule changes, and attempts to reduce some hard hits in the name of making the game safer), Goodell isn't as popular as he once was. Fans and Media are more willing to question/criticize his decisions.

    I do think it's interesting, though, that while people are questioning the league's approach and evidence about the Saints, no one is saying "Did we see the same thing 5 years ago? Did Goodell go overboard then, also?"
  19. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Both Bill and Bob understand that the power of the wolf is in the pack, on and off the field. And the pack is the league. So no, they would not do it differently if they had a do over beyond Bill wouldn't attempt to get one over on the pack based on semantics or technicalities. Because he grasps that it was about culture change, something he should have up to speed or out in front of. Which at this point is what the players and not the organization in NO is attempting to do. Because they are purely, selfishly resisting culture change by attempting to drag the pack through the mud. It just underscores why they will never be full partners. They are transient and short sighted and self absorbed. You will occasionally see an owner or two take that tack, Dallas and the Skins cap shenanigans being an example, but they are quickly brought back in line by the pack. Players unfortunately tend to support (and in turn receive support from) whomever is challenging the pack leader, and in this instance it's the NFLPA. Players don't care that in the long run that leadership would destroy the league because most of them live in the moment and are only in it for the short haul. Heck, if they don't like what they net as it is they just sue after the fact. It's as if they don't grasp they are essentially suing each other and their future peers.

    When Tagliabue retired Goodell was brough in specifically to clean up the image of the league in a new era when transgressions couldn't be swept under the rug or kept under raps. Upshaw was on board with that, as were most veteran players at the time, and that is how the personal conduct policy came to exist. Owners knew they needed a strong presence to keep each other in line and on point, and the union leader and leadership knew they too needed a force to do the unpopular dirty work too. Some are now bristling at the consequences because they are it. That's human nature.
  20. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -1

    My Jersey:

    The Pats handled it right with the Commissioner's office.

    No matter who else might or might not have done the same or similar thing and where and how often they might or might not have done it without being punished, the Pats were caught red-handed violating a pretty clearly drawn league memo, while offering a "the dog ate my homework" excuse built around a fictional and far-fetched "misunderstanding" of when the tapes were to be used or not used.

    Even had they fought it publicly, the Commissioner had the majority of the media, teams and fans calling for far worse penalties, including the suspension of Coach Belichick for a season.

    Most people outside of Patriot Nation still feel that the "fix was in" and that Goodell destroyed evidence of even worse behavior by the Patriots; that, of course, doesn't make it true, but it was part of the equation at the time.

    And, as someone pointed out above, Goodell had a clear agenda to strengthen discipline in the league and, unfortunately, this played right into his hands. As a result, it's fair to say that both the Spygate and the Bountygate decisions were as much political decisions as they were decisions on the merits.

    Finally, we don't know what happened between Mr. Kraft and the NFL Office behind the scenes. The Patriots organization is one of the most powerful and influential in the league, so I think we can assume that they pushed it as far as they could without undermining Goodell's broader agenda.

    The question of whether the Pats should have defended themselves more vigorously in the court of public opinion when the HSPN lies were flying on a daily basis is a separate issue, so this comment applies only to the Pats' relationship with the League office.
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2012
  21. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Robert does care about the court of public opinion substantially more than Bill does. That said, not enough to cut his nose off to spite his face. When spygate resurfaced purely as a media driven vendetta, and he knew there was no substance to the allegations and the league was only investigating them because of media pressure, he did defend himself vigorously and was vindicated publicly (although to what end since as others have mentioned many in the media to this day persist in misrepresenting that, too).
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2012
  22. Joker

    Joker PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    16,127
    Likes Received:
    36
    Ratings:
    +54 / 2 / -1

    My Jersey:

    It DOES matter that teams were caught filming and asked to remove their cameras, just as the Jets were PRIOR to the Spygate incident...this back in 2006.The key is BB did not report this to the league as Mangini did subsequently, an action Mangini regrets on record and one he NEVER meant to balloon into what it did.

    The memo sent out was anything BUT clear and different interpretations were handed out by the NFL itself for chrissakes....why are you making things up that are not true?

    The rule in question has been misstated ad nauseum by the mainstream media since the controversy first erupted. Taping opposing coaches and signals from sidelines is not barred by the NFL rulebook or league bylaws, and the whole controversy about "stealing signals" is stupid to begin with because signals are being flashed in the open - there is nothing sacrosanct about them; what is barred is in-game use of such tape, which is not practical to start with as turnaround time needed to break down recently shot footage is to great to make any use of it; claims to the contrary by former player Mark Schlereth are laughably inaccurate.

    Stockholm syndrome...check it out...you have a pretty severe case.
  23. PatriotDynasty_12

    PatriotDynasty_12 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    445
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    It would have distracted the team for preparing week to week if they did that. (I'm aware, it still was a major distraction, regardless) You know BB's philosophy is always focusing on the next opponent and not talking about anything else. One day, when BB is retired and their doing an interview on the GOAT of coaching in the NFL, I'm sure we'll hear from him what really happened and what was on those tapes.
  24. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -1

    My Jersey:

    We don't disagree. My argument at the time was that the Pats could and should have been more aggressive countering the untruths from ESPN and others because of their long-term impact on the brand. Those who pay close attention recognize indeed what you do.
  25. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,806
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -1

    My Jersey:

    There's way too much water over the bridge and under the dam :) on this one to re-open that debate other than to say that it might be that I live outside New England, but it ain't Stockholm syndrome; I have no empathy at all with those who lied about the Pats and, for one, haven't spent a dime on the Horrald or clicked on the ESPN webpage since.

    On everything else, we'll just have to disagree.
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2012
  26. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    40,755
    Likes Received:
    52
    Ratings:
    +70 / 3 / -1

    My Jersey:

    Yes, and for the same reasons that I stated at the time. It's a bit too late to be worrying about it now, though.
  27. patman52

    patman52 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    The pats handled it right, the NFL office didn't. If BB acted as a coach and not a lawyer it never would have happened.
  28. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    15,901
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +48 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #61 Jersey
    Goodell defined NOTHING about the Patriots' dynasty/glory years. Anyone with half a brain who knows anything about pro football realizes that.

    As for challenging Roger's punishment: that's a tough call. The "cameragate" nonsense all came down during the season and a challenge would've only lengthened the distraction and allowed it to get bigger via asshats like Tomase. But fining BB $500k and losing a first-round pick over it was insane, especially looking back on it five years later. This involved team administration, not players, so any move to challenge would've been Kraft's call. I don't know of Kraft has ever addressed considering that possibility.

    The Saints situation is much, much different. I don't see where Goodell has overstepped himself in that case, if that's why you suggest. What the Saints did was pretty egregious.
  29. flasox27

    flasox27 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    757
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Absolutely
    The commissioner should have punished the Patriots on the same level as the 49*ers and Bronco's for violating league rules I would have no objection. However in his zeal to establish his authority and play up to the NYC media he managed to blow the incident all out of proportion and then destroy any means of exonerating the Pats reputation which has been tarnished by him to this day. As a matter of fact, I am still waiting for that POS to reveal who leaked the films to FOX as he promised. The fact that the former employee of the Jets repeatedly shows his bias in giving them wrist slaps such as in tampering cases and the tripping incident proves my point. Imagine what would have happened to Belichick if one of his coaches tripped an opposing player.
  30. Armchair Quarterback

    Armchair Quarterback Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    This is how I feel too. The Pats disobeyed a memo, as someone else mentioned, BB was trying to play lawyer with his interpretation of that memo. BB probably didn't take the that memo seriously anyway and why should he have - Pats catch Jets filming and the Jets simply deny it - end of story. Dolphins using taped audio and "that's football".

    Goodell, buffoon that he is, made it out to be a much bigger deal than it was, made people question the legitimacy of the Pats SB wins and dynasty, hurt the reputation of the leagues most successful team of the last decade + and invited all the idiots to scream cheaters every time the Patriots are mentioned even years later.

    Everything before and since has met with a collective yawn and a slap on the wrist from the league office. The possible exception being this Saints case. However even in the Saints case there was no rush to judgement, no immediate over the top punishment. No destroying of evidence. And the Saints are at least fighting back a little.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page