Howard Mudd

[BradyManny]

If he said video tape, please show me where and I will stand corrected. I have seen where Johnson and others have said how good Mudd is at stealing signs, but never have I seen one mention of him video taping it.

It's all semantics. What it boils down to is that clowns like Easterbrook and that sort have painted the Patriots at cheating for stealing signals. The Colts steal signals. Do you agree or disagree with that statement? In the eyes of the general sports following public, the fact that a videotape was involved deals with whether or not we broke the rules, not whether or not we cheated. They think: they stole signals, that's cheating.

All Pats fans want is some justice. If the Patriots are tarnished for stealing signals, then the average ignorant fan should be aware that stealing signals isn't illegal, and even teams like the Colts do it.

 

[workhorse]

If the video from the Fox show is still out there, I'll try and find it. I'm being totally serious with you, JJ said he remembers Mudd showing him how to do it back in his KC days and he never found it very helpful.

Edit found a good link

http://buzz.omgili.com/preview/aHR0cDovL2ZvcnVtLmNvbHRzLmNvbS9zaG93dGhyZWFkLnBocD90PTIyMDQ2

It sounds from that interview that the Mudd reference was that he was the best at stealing the actual sign that they signaled it. The advanced scout taped it and they broke it down and Mudd's part was that he was the best at stealing the signal coming in.

This is really the only time that I have heard is name mentioned anywhere close to the use of video. I guess it's a good thing that nobody asked him what he thought about using tape.

 

[workhorse]

It's all semantics. What it boils down to is that clowns like Easterbrook and that sort have painted the Patriots at cheating for stealing signals. The Colts steal signals. Do you agree or disagree with that statement? In the eyes of the general sports following public, the fact that a videotape was involved deals with whether or not we broke the rules, not whether or not we cheated. They think: they stole signals, that's cheating.

All Pats fans want is some justice. If the Patriots are tarnished for stealing signals, then the average ignorant fan should be aware that stealing signals isn't illegal, and even teams like the Colts do it.

Oh I don't doubt that all teams steal signals. It's just a matter of how they do it. The league said don't use mechanical devices to to do it, so teams either find a way to do it without them or they risk getting caught, which is what happened to the Patriots. I think the reason that most people are harping on the Patriots was the memo form the commish had just come out re-enforcing his stance on the issue and that it seemed really bold to go ahead and do it from the sideline. Seriously, they couldn't have just done it from the press box or one of the other camera locations? If they had, this never would have happened.

 

[shmessy]

It sounds from that interview that the Mudd reference was that he was the best at stealing the actual sign that they signaled it. The advanced scout taped it and they broke it down and Mudd's part was that he was the best at stealing the signal coming in.

This is really the only time that I have heard is name mentioned anywhere close to the use of video. I guess it's a good thing that nobody asked him what he thought about using tape.

Using your sematics, then BB never taped it either. Matt Estrella did, and BB had someone merely break it down also. Mudd was there at the time. Are you implying that they had these tapes but Mudd was such a showoff that he never looked at them, but did it all from memory?

 

[Tommysgirl]

It sounds from that interview that the Mudd reference was that he was the best at stealing the actual sign that they signaled it. The advanced scout taped it and they broke it down and Mudd's part was that he was the best at stealing the signal coming in.

This is really the only time that I have heard is name mentioned anywhere close to the use of video. I guess it's a good thing that nobody asked him what he thought about using tape.

I know you're a good Colt troll, but isn't it kind of the same thing? He did use video. The only point here is what another poster pointed out, can everybody just get off the high moral horse and admit we certainly aren't the only ones?

 

[BradyManny]

Oh I don't doubt that all teams steal signals. It's just a matter of how they do it. The league said don't use mechanical devices to to do it, so teams either find a way to do it without them or they risk getting caught, which is what happened to the Patriots. I think the reason that most people are harping on the Patriots was the memo form the commish had just come out re-enforcing his stance on the issue and that it seemed really bold to go ahead and do it from the sideline. Seriously, they couldn't have just done it from the press box or one of the other camera locations? If they had, this never would have happened.

It's a valid point, BB & the Pats really might have brought this on themselves - but do you really think the media coverage and hit to the reputation BB has taken have matched the crime? I don't, and I think a big piece of that is a lot of football fans out there don't think stealing signals happens, and do think that is cheating, and therefore thinks that's the reason why the Pats are cheaters and have won, etc., etc.

 

[belichickaholic]

Oh I don't doubt that all teams steal signals. It's just a matter of how they do it. The league said don't use mechanical devices to to do it, so teams either find a way to do it without them or they risk getting caught, which is what happened to the Patriots. I think the reason that most people are harping on the Patriots was the memo form the commish had just come out re-enforcing his stance on the issue and that it seemed really bold to go ahead and do it from the sideline. Seriously, they couldn't have just done it from the press box or one of the other camera locations? If they had, this never would have happened.

Yes.. The NFL sent a memo out 3 days before the start of the 2007 season, saying, no videotaping from the sidelines.

But the NFL also sent a memo out 3 days before the start of the 2006 season... The difference is that they never enforced it and they wouldn't have enforced it this year either except for "Fredo" Mangini!!

 

[los1sol]

Wow! Good of you to agree with this "Patriots fan". He sounds like the only voice of reason to you, doesn;t he?"

BTW, we WILL dwell as much on Howard Mudd as we like, kapische? We've been bombarded with the Spygate shyte for 8 weeks now from 31 other fanbases, while your SANCTIMONIOUS organization surreptitiously cranks up the volume on the story.

So keep your advice on this story in-house.

Dwell on it all you like, he hasn't broken any rules so what is the issue? Should he be levied a fine for not breaking rules? Should we lose a first-rounder for Mudd not cheating?

 

[Tommysgirl]

Dwell on it all you like, he hasn't broken any rules so what is the issue? Should he be levied a fine for not breaking rules? Should we lose a first-rounder for Mudd not cheating?

Could you maybe read the link? Mudd did (or does) the same damn thing.

 

[TedyB54]

Dwell on it all you like, he hasn't broken any rules so what is the issue? Should he be levied a fine for not breaking rules? Should we lose a first-rounder for Mudd not cheating?

So, if Mudd is the best at signal stealing and has an exceptional photographic memory (as has been implied), then how is that any different then having the defensive signals on tape?

If he's figured out what the other team is going to do defensively and uses that information to alter the outcome of the game, does it really matter how a team gathers the info?

People are slamming the Pats because they say the only reason they were able to win was by taping the other team. Defending Mudd is essentially an admission that you don't need a video camera to change the outcome of a game.

"How" you get the signals has no bearing on the way they are used. It's really that simple.

 

[workhorse]

I know you're a good Colt troll, but isn't it kind of the same thing? He did use video. The only point here is what another poster pointed out, can everybody just get off the high moral horse and admit we certainly aren't the only ones?

I'm pretty sure the Patriots aren't the only ones. I guess I'm glad as a Colts fan that Johnson's comments were about 18 years ago and with the Chiefs.

Using your sematics, then BB never taped it either. Matt Estrella did, and BB had someone merely break it down also. Mudd was there at the time. Are you implying that they had these tapes but Mudd was such a showoff that he never looked at them, but did it all from memory?

That's not what I was implying. I ws pointing out his part in what Johnson was talking about. He could actually still do what he did with using tape though since he is able to spot the signs so well, but that's not what I was saying.

It's a valid point, BB & the Pats really might have brought this on themselves - but do you really think the media coverage and hit to the reputation BB has taken have matched the crime? I don't, and I think a big piece of that is a lot of football fans out there don't think stealing signals happens, and do think that is cheating, and therefore thinks that's the reason why the Pats are cheaters and have won, etc., etc.

I think the media coverage went so overboard due to the fact that it was the Patriots. Had it been the Texans, nobody would have really cared. But the fact that it was the Pats with all the recent Super Bowl history that they have, people were caught off guard that a very successful team would get caught doing taping. Then once the claims from similar incidents happening last year, everyone just ran with it.

Do I think it's the reason why the Patriots are so good? No. Do I think it helped to some extent? Yes. Why else do it? Were they the only ones? Not likely, but they were the boldest ones.

 

[workhorse]

So, if Mudd is the best at signal stealing and has an exceptional photographic memory (as has been implied), then how is that any different then having the defensive signals on tape?

If he's figured out what the other team is going to do defensively and uses that information to alter the outcome of the game, does it really matter how a team gathers the info?

People are slamming the Pats because they say the only reason they were able to win was by taping the other team. Defending Mudd is essentially an admission that you don't need a video camera to change the outcome of a game.

"How" you get the signals has no bearing on the way they are used. It's really that simple.

It all comes down to the league set the rule and they drew the line at recording the other team's signals.