John Harbaugh is a cry baby

[Ron Sellers]

I had to read your post a few times and not sure, are you saying the act of taping is legal? . . . if you are then you are incorrect . . . the rule prohibits it .

Videotaping in and of itself cannot be illegal. It is quite apparent that teams still tape and use film to study upcoming opponents and their tendencies. It's not as if they get that film from a dvr of last week's broadcast.

 

[Deus Irae]

I had to read your post a few times and not sure, are you saying the act of taping is legal? . . . if you are then you are incorrect . . . the rule prohibits it . . . i dont know how to double post so i reenter the text

That was re-emphasized in a memo sent Sept. 6 to NFL head coaches and general managers. In it, Ray Anderson, the league's executive vice president of football operations, 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."

yes you are correct in that this excerpt does not include what you can do with it, but it does say you cant do it . . .one has to look at the actual rule which says "yada yada yada [and you cant do this to gain an advantage] "during the playing of the game." . . .

we do know this much tho that video taping was prohibited on at least one level (being reused in the instant game) the only grey area was if this prohibition against video taping also encompassed usage beyond the ingame usage . . .

.

Taping was legal then, and it's legal now, just as stealing signals was legal then and is legal now.

 

[OhExaulted1]

Agreed. That was the one time he should have come out swinging with the media and used the facts instead of just moving forward.

In fact he did. When he told Armen Ketain that it wasn't even in the top 100 things they look at to game plan for an opponent and 70,000 other fans can see the same thing was telling. I forget who the DC was for Clev. at the time when he was out past the hashmarks holding 4 fingers in the air screaming "Cover 4! Cover4!" on one of the tapes.

Meanwhile Sean Payton pulled a Jeff Gilooly on Nancy Kerrigan act towards opposing offenses. We all know what was more egregious, but that moniker will always hang over our success basically due to jealousy. Eff 'em all. If any opposing fan or player thinks they lost a game because of a plastic VHS tape they need to turn in there man card. Games are won on the field face to face, not sitting in a classroom watching tape. (No offense to our awesome lady fans ).

 

[Kontradiction]

It certainly seemed to keep them focussed on the task at hand.

You're not giving your favorite coach enough credit if you don't think that he couldn't have kept the team focused on the task at hand by confronting SpyGate head on right out of the gates.

Its kind of simple really. He made a statement and moved on focussing on the footballl games ahead of him.
I'm not sure what you think it would have done for the 2007 team, the one he was coaching at the moment, for him to give it more publicity than it got.

You do realize that the scorched earth campaign did pretty much the exact same thing, right? In fact, it can be argued that it made post-SpyGate even worse as far as media perception/coverage goes.

His responsbility at the time was to lessen the distraction to the team, not to fight a PR war.

As I said before, I'd love to hear how his actual response to it lessened the distraction to a team that clearly looked weighed down by the weight of the world in the Super Bowl. Confronting it head on wouldn't have distracted the team all that much. Why? Because he's Belichick. As I said, if you don't think that he could have kept the team focused then you're clearly not as big of a fan of his as you thought.

 

[Nordberg]

Spygate....give me a break. I actually like when some knuckle head brings it up. It's so easy to rip apart

The first thing I say is taping "offensive" signals had nothing to do with their success. When they argue it did.....I know right there they have not a clue...because they were busted for taping defensive signals. This happens 90% of time.

Then I ask them how the offense has fared since spygate. Argument over

The offense has been worlds better since spygate

 

[Ring 6]

You're not giving your favorite coach enough credit if you don't think that he couldn't have kept the team focused on the task at hand by confronting SpyGate head on right out of the gates.

So he should allow distraction because he is good at overcoming it?
The reason he is good at overcoming is that he avoids it.
There was nothing to gain for the 2007 team by making it a bigger issue than it already was.

You do realize that the scorched earth campaign did pretty much the exact same thing, right? In fact, it can be argued that it made post-SpyGate even worse as far as media perception/coverage goes.

Actually it was exactly the opposite. It was turning focus inward rather than enabling the distraction.
I'm not sure how you thing focussing on something that would do nothing to help win games is that same as focussing 100% on winning games. The idea that the team played better as a slap in the face to Spygate is silly.

As I said before, I'd love to hear how his actual response to it lessened the distraction to a team that clearly looked weighed down by the weight of the world in the Super Bowl.

His actual response was essentially to dismiss it.
It lessened the distraction by focussing the team on getting to the SB at 18-0. I don't know how you can take 1 loss in 19 games and call that proof the team responded poorly to how it was handled. It seems you are trying to manuipulate reality to fit your conclusion.

Confronting it head on wouldn't have distracted the team all that much. Why? Because he's Belichick. As I said, if you don't think that he could have kept the team focused then you're clearly not as big of a fan of his as you thought.

Since you cannot understand why he would focus on the games in front of him instead of a media circus over the past, then that comment is not surprising because it is clear you have no understanding of how he operates.
The response was to move on. Somehow you seem to think obsessing over the past is what is best for the current team, and that makes absolutely no sense to me.
As I said initially, it would make you feel better, but as far as BB doing his job, paying no credence to it was what was best for the team.

 

[upstater1]

There are about 20,000,000 people in NY and 270,000 of them are in Buffalo.
Yes I have been to Buffalo. Its not a great place to live or visit, but its hardly worthy of stating that those people, not to mention the other 19+ million in the rest of the state have no reason to exist.
You can't seriously think you are better than those people because they live on a depressed economic area. In fact, they are genuinely nice people, very likely nicer people than whereever you are preaching from with your opinion they are not worthy human beings.

I live in Buffalo. I'm not from here. This place is great. Beautiful city. It has its problems, but I've lived all over the northeast and midwest, and there are few cities I'd rather be. Philly and Boston are two, but Providence and Pittsburgh are not. Won't even bother with the Midwest.

 

[upstater1]

Have you ever been to Buffalo? It objectively sucks. It's a crap city with no purpose.

I understand that probably 10,000 of your posts prominently involve ridiculous straw men, but this is a stretch even by your standards.

Why is it a crap city? This is a city with lots of parks, lots of green space, beautiful buildings, one of the few cities on earth with turn-of-the-century architecture. What bugs you about it?

 

[Ring 6]

I live in Buffalo. I'm not from here. This place is great. Beautiful city. It has its problems, but I've lived all over the northeast and midwest, and there are few cities I'd rather be. Philly and Boston are two, but Providence and Pittsburgh are not. Won't even bother with the Midwest.

My impression of inner city Buffalo is that it is downtrodden. But I have not been there in year. I know hte Real Estate market is a mess, and inner city properties have next to no value. The suburban areas are very nice. My memory is once you are a few miles outside of Buffalo it is similar to the suburban areas of any other city.
Of course the snow is a drawback.....

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

FWIW not everyone thinks that, although I'm sure there are a lot of people who believe it.

That was a terrific defense, playing a rookie QB in a major, pressure game. 'Nuff said.

Not everyone, I completely agree.

These stories never go away because there are factions who have a vested interest in never letting it go. Name said media.

What's funny here is that alot of the conspiracy believers I have encountered are also the biggest complainers that Lebeau is the most predictable DC in the league.

 

[upstater1]

My impression of inner city Buffalo is that it is downtrodden. But I have not been there in year. I know hte Real Estate market is a mess, and inner city properties have next to no value. The suburban areas are very nice. My memory is once you are a few miles outside of Buffalo it is similar to the suburban areas of any other city.
Of course the snow is a drawback.....

I live in inner city Buffalo. The street over from mine has this million dollar house for sale. Buffalo shines in its inner-city, that's the standout part of the whole region. Many mansions from the turn of the century. The burbs are like burbs anywhere else, save for one: East Aurora. Down there the Arts&Crafts movement started and they have great natural features too. But it's mostly inner-city Buffalo where the more affluent areas of the region are.

I'm not bagging on you since I think your experience is pretty common for Buffalo. People go to Bills games or else Niagara Falls, but they don't go into the heart of the city so they don't get to see it.

As for the snow, we don't get much in the inner-city. Especially on the West Side where I live. We're buffered because the city is off the lake a little bit. All the snow falls in the southtowns. If you've ever seen lake-effect snow, there is literally a curtain of snow that comes down all at once. You could be standing in a blizzard and there will be not even a flake of snow a block up the street.

I've only been living here for 9 years and in that time we've had exactly one snow storm with 12 inches or more, and that came in October. A freak storm and it all melted away the next two days in 75 degree weather. in that time, my folks in Connecticut have been getting a lot more snow.

 

[IllegalContact]

I live in inner city Buffalo. The street over from mine has this million dollar house for sale. Buffalo shines in its inner-city, that's the standout part of the whole region. Many mansions from the turn of the century. The burbs are like burbs anywhere else, save for one: East Aurora. Down there the Arts&Crafts movement started and they have great natural features too. But it's mostly inner-city Buffalo where the more affluent areas of the region are.

I'm not bagging on you since I think your experience is pretty common for Buffalo. People go to Bills games or else Niagara Falls, but they don't go into the heart of the city so they don't get to see it.

As for the snow, we don't get much in the inner-city. Especially on the West Side where I live. We're buffered because the city is off the lake a little bit. All the snow falls in the southtowns. If you've ever seen lake-effect snow, there is literally a curtain of snow that comes down all at once. You could be standing in a blizzard and there will be not even a flake of snow a block up the street.

I've only been living here for 9 years and in that time we've had exactly one snow storm with 12 inches or more, and that came in October. A freak storm and it all melted away the next two days in 75 degree weather. in that time, my folks in Connecticut have been getting a lot more snow.

I was on my way to toronto and stopped with my kids at the anchor bar. the process of finding it had us drive past some craphole areas......where is the anchor bar in relation to the 'inner-city' you speak of?

 

[Ring 6]

I live in inner city Buffalo. The street over from mine has this million dollar house for sale. Buffalo shines in its inner-city, that's the standout part of the whole region. Many mansions from the turn of the century. The burbs are like burbs anywhere else, save for one: East Aurora. Down there the Arts&Crafts movement started and they have great natural features too. But it's mostly inner-city Buffalo where the more affluent areas of the region are.

I'm not bagging on you since I think your experience is pretty common for Buffalo. People go to Bills games or else Niagara Falls, but they don't go into the heart of the city so they don't get to see it.

As for the snow, we don't get much in the inner-city. Especially on the West Side where I live. We're buffered because the city is off the lake a little bit. All the snow falls in the southtowns. If you've ever seen lake-effect snow, there is literally a curtain of snow that comes down all at once. You could be standing in a blizzard and there will be not even a flake of snow a block up the street.

I've only been living here for 9 years and in that time we've had exactly one snow storm with 12 inches or more, and that came in October. A freak storm and it all melted away the next two days in 75 degree weather. in that time, my folks in Connecticut have been getting a lot more snow.

In any event my point was it was moronic for someone to say the entire state of NY has no reason to exist.

 

[Kontradiction]

So he should allow distraction because he is good at overcoming it?

Are you saying that SpyGate wasn't already a distraction?

The reason he is good at overcoming is that he avoids it.

And again you're taking away from his abilities as a master motivator. It would be incredibly easy to still prepare his team for games in spite of what he said in front of the media to the world. See Freddy Mitchell.

There was nothing to gain for the 2007 team by making it a bigger issue than it already was.

It became a bigger issue than it already was by leaving it alone until he took an interview because it had blown up so much. If you want to deny that, then ask yourself two questions: 1) Why are we still talking about it 5 years later? And 2) Why did he agree to the interview in which that was the primary topic?

Actually it was exactly the opposite. It was turning focus inward rather than enabling the distraction.

Please explain the ensuing media circus regarding the Patriots running up the score, something that, like SpyGate, is still being talked about 5 years later.

I'm not sure how you thing focussing on something that would do nothing to help win games is that same as focussing 100% on winning games. The idea that the team played better as a slap in the face to Spygate is silly.

Actually, I'm asking you to explain how confronting SpyGate head-on right off the bat would have been any worse than the actual response, which was running up the score on even hapless teams. Both would have been distractions in the media. One actually was.

And where did I say that the team only played better as a response to a slap in the face. Please quote that.

His actual response was essentially to dismiss it.
It lessened the distraction by focussing the team on getting to the SB at 18-0. I don't know how you can take 1 loss in 19 games and call that proof the team responded poorly to how it was handled. It seems you are trying to manuipulate reality to fit your conclusion.

Again, how would the distraction have been any different or stronger had he come out and said from the get-go that it was a simple rules infraction and not cheating instead of ignoring it? That's the part of your argument that doesn't make any sense. As for the team performing poorly because of the media circus, I can't say for sure that the circus was 100% to fault, and neither can you. But it certainly couldn't have helped. Anybody with two eyes could see that the team was considerably wound more tight in that than they had been at any point during the 2007 season.

Since you cannot understand why he would focus on the games in front of him instead of a media circus over the past, then that comment is not surprising because it is clear you have no understanding of how he operates.

I understand why he did it. He's BB and that's the way he always does things. However, if there were ever an exception, that was it. There was already a fiasco in which people were running with their own stories. It was already a distraction. He was already going to operate a scorched earth policy in games. He had team leadership in place to help him minimize the distraction. With that in mind, I see no viable reason for why it would have hurt to come in front of the media and put that bad boy to bed. And since you haven't been able to answer the question and have misrepresented my posts numerous times, I'm guessing you can't either.

By the way, that circus wasn't in the past at the time. It was thoroughly in the present.

The response was to move on. Somehow you seem to think obsessing over the past is what is best for the current team, and that makes absolutely no sense to me.

Please quote where I said this.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I live in inner city Buffalo. The street over from mine has this million dollar house for sale. Buffalo shines in its inner-city, that's the standout part of the whole region. Many mansions from the turn of the century. The burbs are like burbs anywhere else, save for one: East Aurora. Down there the Arts&Crafts movement started and they have great natural features too. But it's mostly inner-city Buffalo where the more affluent areas of the region are.

I'm not bagging on you since I think your experience is pretty common for Buffalo. People go to Bills games or else Niagara Falls, but they don't go into the heart of the city so they don't get to see it.

As for the snow, we don't get much in the inner-city. Especially on the West Side where I live. We're buffered because the city is off the lake a little bit. All the snow falls in the southtowns. If you've ever seen lake-effect snow, there is literally a curtain of snow that comes down all at once. You could be standing in a blizzard and there will be not even a flake of snow a block up the street.

I've only been living here for 9 years and in that time we've had exactly one snow storm with 12 inches or more, and that came in October. A freak storm and it all melted away the next two days in 75 degree weather. in that time, my folks in Connecticut have been getting a lot more snow.

The blocks west of Buffalo General is a pretty cool area.

They also have an excellent lineup of resturants in the area.

 

[Pat the Pats Fan]

Harbaugh is a ***ho1e. how quickly he forgets that it was Belichick that called the Ravens owner to recommend he look at Harbaugh as a head coaching candidate. He wasn't even to be considered before that call was made.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Are you saying that SpyGate wasn't already a distraction?



And again you're taking away from his abilities as a master motivator. It would be incredibly easy to still prepare his team for games in spite of what he said in front of the media to the world. See Freddy Mitchell.



It became a bigger issue than it already was by leaving it alone until he took an interview because it had blown up so much. If you want to deny that, then ask yourself two questions: 1) Why are we still talking about it 5 years later? And 2) Why did he agree to the interview in which that was the primary topic?



Please explain the ensuing media circus regarding the Patriots running up the score, something that, like SpyGate, is still being talked about 5 years later.



Actually, I'm asking you to explain how confronting SpyGate head-on right off the bat would have been any worse than the actual response, which was running up the score on even hapless teams. Both would have been distractions in the media. One actually was.

And where did I say that the team only played better as a response to a slap in the face. Please quote that.



Again, how would the distraction have been any different or stronger had he come out and said from the get-go that it was a simple rules infraction and not cheating instead of ignoring it? That's the part of your argument that doesn't make any sense. As for the team performing poorly because of the media circus, I can't say for sure that the circus was 100% to fault, and neither can you. But it certainly couldn't have helped. Anybody with two eyes could see that the team was considerably wound more tight in that than they had been at any point during the 2007 season.



I understand why he did it. He's BB and that's the way he always does things. However, if there were ever an exception, that was it. There was already a fiasco in which people were running with their own stories. It was already a distraction. He was already going to operate a scorched earth policy in games. He had team leadership in place to help him minimize the distraction. With that in mind, I see no viable reason for why it would have hurt to come in front of the media and put that bad boy to bed. And since you haven't been able to answer the question and have misrepresented my posts numerous times, I'm guessing you can't either.

By the way, that circus wasn't in the past at the time. It was thoroughly in the present.



Please quote where I said this.

I don't think it's out of character to speculate that Bob Kraft told BB to zip it. Kraft is known as a conciliator and mediator and as someone whose style is the antithesis of confrontation. That's what I think and I think it was a misjudgment by Kraft. Silent acquiescence damaged the Patriots brand more than a calm, succinct explanation of the situation and respectful clarification of the specific offense being pleaded guilty to.

 

[upstater1]

I was on my way to toronto and stopped with my kids at the anchor bar. the process of finding it had us drive past some craphole areas......where is the anchor bar in relation to the 'inner-city' you speak of?

You drove through the East side, you got off on Best Street and drove maybe through 5 or 6 lights of impoverished and shuttered-up homes.

It is inner-city, but it's not in the center of the city. It's on the East side of town. That side came down when they ran the highway (33) right through the neighborhoods in the 1960s. Beyond Anchor, though, about two blocks over going west, there's a street called Linwood and that's roughly the border for the high value areas of the city.

 

[upstater1]

The blocks west of Buffalo General is a pretty cool area.

They also have an excellent lineup of resturants in the area.

Yes, that's west of the East Side, essentially. East Side is very rundown and they've even done national exposes showing the wealth in midtown and west juxtaposed against the poverty of the east side.

 

[Ring 6]

Are you saying that SpyGate wasn't already a distraction?



And again you're taking away from his abilities as a master motivator. It would be incredibly easy to still prepare his team for games in spite of what he said in front of the media to the world. See Freddy Mitchell.



It became a bigger issue than it already was by leaving it alone until he took an interview because it had blown up so much. If you want to deny that, then ask yourself two questions: 1) Why are we still talking about it 5 years later? And 2) Why did he agree to the interview in which that was the primary topic?



Please explain the ensuing media circus regarding the Patriots running up the score, something that, like SpyGate, is still being talked about 5 years later.



Actually, I'm asking you to explain how confronting SpyGate head-on right off the bat would have been any worse than the actual response, which was running up the score on even hapless teams. Both would have been distractions in the media. One actually was.

And where did I say that the team only played better as a response to a slap in the face. Please quote that.



Again, how would the distraction have been any different or stronger had he come out and said from the get-go that it was a simple rules infraction and not cheating instead of ignoring it? That's the part of your argument that doesn't make any sense. As for the team performing poorly because of the media circus, I can't say for sure that the circus was 100% to fault, and neither can you. But it certainly couldn't have helped. Anybody with two eyes could see that the team was considerably wound more tight in that than they had been at any point during the 2007 season.



I understand why he did it. He's BB and that's the way he always does things. However, if there were ever an exception, that was it. There was already a fiasco in which people were running with their own stories. It was already a distraction. He was already going to operate a scorched earth policy in games. He had team leadership in place to help him minimize the distraction. With that in mind, I see no viable reason for why it would have hurt to come in front of the media and put that bad boy to bed. And since you haven't been able to answer the question and have misrepresented my posts numerous times, I'm guessing you can't either.

By the way, that circus wasn't in the past at the time. It was thoroughly in the present.



Please quote where I said this.

There are 2 real facts here.
1) BB made the decision that he felt was best for his team
2) That decision was to move on from the issue as quickly as possible, and give as little public attention to it as possible.
I believe he did what was in the best interest of the team.
All of the other speculation you are bringing to the discussion, such as some belief that his plan was to run up the score on bad teams as some missed placed way to show the world, or the bizarre notion that BBs way of handling something in September didn't affect his team on the way to 18-0 but suddenly overwhelmed them in the 19th, or how what people are talking about 5 years later has anything to do with what was best for coaching the 2007 Patriots, doesn't really change any of that. As I said initally a different response may have been better for fans but I am talking about what was best for that team, that season.

BB dealt with this distraction the same way he deals with all others by addressing them swiftly, moving forward and not looking back.