PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Peter King's guess on Pats punishment on HBO'S Inside The NFL


Status
Not open for further replies.
From what I took of it I heard King say a 1 game suspension is a possibility - but not definate,He did not rule out suspension,and neither do I considering Goodell's previous punishments.

what did the other characters say on the show ? marino etc ?
 
A suspension will mean that Belichick won't get paid. Kraft will not object.

But you can fine Belichick just as many game checks for the same effect. The league including under Goodell have fined players game checks and not suspended them. Goodell did that with Joey Porter.

If the goal is to have Belichick take a financial punishment for his part in this, you don't need to suspend him to do so.
 
what did the other characters say on the show ? marino etc ?

Most of them didn't seem like it was that big of a deal. Marino said he knew that teams which he said he wouldn't name that he played in the past had their signals (he played in an era where even offensive signals were guestered in from the sidelines). Both Collinsworth and Carter both basically made it sound like it happens all the time.
 
Last edited:
Yeh Salisbury said it happens all the time too. He said good teams change their signals for the second half.
 
what did the other characters say on the show ? marino etc ?


I tuned in as Peter was just talking about it - I missed the earlier part,May catch it tomorrow evening,its on again
 
Peter King was just on HBOs Inside The NFL and says the Patriots are very likely to get heavily punished for this scandal and says if Vick. ,Jones and the others who were severely punished for doing something OFF the field and as an individual then imagine what Goodell will do if its an ON-field violation as a whole team and one that has the possibility of having affected opposing teams across the league.

Peter King goes on to say it will be a high end pick the Patriots will lose which he estimates as their 2nd rounder and a 1-3 game suspension of Belichick may be likely along with other sanctions.

I think Goodell may very well take away our San Francisco aquired pick and maybe a round 3 pick and a very large fine but I just don't see him suspending Bill unless the other allegation of tapping some conversation of the Jets is also penalized.

Peter King is one of the best NFL media guys in the business,I respect his opinions and he is probably right on some things,Hopefully not so on a suspension

are you crazy?!? you have to be out of your mind to think that! denver CHEATED on the salary cap, and lost ONE 3rd round pick... they allowed players on their team, who should not have been there... we simply (if even) recorded signals which are LEGAL to steal... no suspension (that is only a ridiculous joke from media pundits who dont like BB since he isnt a big talker)... and MAYBE lose a 6th or 7th rounder at MOST... this is a VERY minor deal; not a major one
 
OK, I'll stop using the word cheating if you will. Belichick a large accumulated record of pi$$ing off Kraft's hand-picked Commissioner. Disobeying and making fun of NFL rules is a Belichick specialty. Yes, I think that the Commissioner could suspend Belichick for a couple of games for breaking the rules. Why should the team and owner be punished, with no punishment for Belichick?

how do you know BB had anything to do with it? i can record a game and throw the camera to Pat Patriot in exchange for next weeks tickets any time i want... did BB know i did that? stupid comment mg
 
Don't understand. Because King is well respected, then his suppositions are more accurate? Again, let's see what the comish decides, as no one has any inside info on this. I like Peter. I don't like speculative Peter.
 
A few things:

1. It won't be a first round pick. Clayton and Salisbury mentioned that the league would never take away a first round pick, because it would reduce the number of first rounders and thus the numbe rof players receiving first round money, which would bring the union into this.

2. You can say that this is just semantics, but no one from the league, or from the Patriots in the organization's defense, has mentioned anything about cheating. Only the talking heads have used that word in connection with the story. The incident has always been framed as simply "a violation of league rules." If they believed it was cheating, you would hear more language from the league about an unfair competitive advantage, which still has only been said by the talking heads. I don't think anyone could believe that this taping, especially because the tape was seized/stopped before it could get into the locker room at halftime, affecte dthe outcome of this particular game. For this reason I dont think Goodell will come down with all his might.

3. Kraft is the most powerful owner in the league, and judging by his strong statements Tuesday, I don't think he sees this the way the media is painting it. For this reason I dont think the punishment will be severe, because even if it is, I think Kraft will fight it.

4. I probably shouldn't have buried this all the way down here, but I really, really REALLY hope that Goodell pursues tampering cases from now on. If the "everybody is doing it" excuse doesn't work for the videotaping of signals, it should no longer work for tampering. Kraft has asked for investigations into The Redskins and Jets organizations involvement in tampering with players, one charge that was made while Goodell was commissioner (I believe). I am sure that Kraft will bring that up in any discussions with Goodell.

I think this is an accurate assessment. I also think that the league does not see the action as cheating, although it is likely to consider it against the competitiveness of the league. This is a fair, and in my opinion accurate, assessment of the matter.

BB has apologized not because he thinks he cheated, but because his competitive nature, which has constantly driven him to push at the envelope of what has been considered "competitive" and "fair play", has, in this case, brought down a great deal of aggravation, and genuine pain, on the team and the fans, which he clearly had not anticipated.

I will also say this, and it is in some way directed at the nay-sayers. BB is not, as some coaches in the league are, a genuine "sportsman". He does not, I think, hold traditional sportsmanship sacred. His own attitude has been that of the military planner, and his art is not that of the rec room but of the war room. He is a man who believes that competitive activity should be conducted according to manuals such as Liddell-Hart's Strategy, and Sun Tzu's Art of War. In fact, he is on record as holding such manuals essential.

What BB does value, and what I consider also deeply worthy of respect, is teamwork--the importance of the unit, and the family. Compare him to a general (with the caveat that of course football can not compare to actual battles); compare him, if you want, to Michael Corleone. BB believes that the game should be played a certain way; he believes in obtaining as much information as possible, in foreseeing every possibility, and in practicing situational football to such a degree of perfection that a game such as last year's contest in San Diego could be decided, for his team, by players making the sorts of instinctual plays that I believe few other teams in football history would have made. The idea that we were gathering information that, in the spirit of fair play and competitiveness, is better left unobtained by video technology, is reasonable, and I think the New England Patrioots team should be glad to apologize, and willing cease the activity, and comply with both the letter of the rule and the punishment; however: the idea that such information would lead to easy advantages and easy victories, that somehow any other team with such information could have won twenty-one games in a row, and set a standard for excellence and teamwork that few teams in history have rivalled, is a joke, full stop. Such information, once gathered, might allow for a slight advantage in certain gametime situations (again, situational football), but only to a team which is already insanely well-prepared, well-coached, and well-laden with intelligent and talented players who have bought into a system which places the team, the unit, above the self.

BB is a great coach, one of the greatest to have ever walked the sidelines. He is not, as Michael Holley once wisely wrote, necessarily a great man. His weaknesses, his flaws, are, I think, fairly clear. His intensely competitive nature, his easy anger, his quick-to-surface contempt for people who are poorly-prepared, poorly-informed, and who value sensationalism, drama, personality, and popular opinion over committment, leads him to be rude when courtesy would be more just, and leads him into self-absorption, when the situation calls for a generous spirit. If I seem to give short-shrift to actions, or personal misdeeds, which some think more appalling, I can only say that for Belichick, his committment is to something other than what you hold dear.

And it is his sense of committment that few understand, and even fewer possess. It is not, as is Tony Dungy's, to a higher purpose than the game of football. Coach Dungy has made his own priorities clear, and one can laud him for that. He is a different man, and a different coach. BB's committment is not, as is true for many coaches, to a cult of personality, or to maintaining the status quo, or to some nebulous and tentacled network of supporters and aides. Attractive or not, BB's committment is to football, and to winning football above all. For him, such a committment to winning leads him into maverick ways, maverick modes of thinking. But it has also led him to victories, and to a level of football excellence that few have ever matched.

I will say it again: for one to believe that Coach Belichick is a cheat is to misunderstand the man and his purpose. He is a man of war; one clad in sweats and not fatigues, and a lesser warrior than any of the men and women who serve our country in times of battle--but a warrior nonetheless. That is the way his mind and spirit work. The product of military discipline, of a loyal and gifted father, of an elite education, and of a long and tireless pigskin apprenticeship, one that has led, there can be no doubt, to mastery. He may be a disdainful warrior, one given to disregarding the acceptable, and, at times, given to error. He is human--he has erred, and will again. But, for me, there is no one I would rather lead us, no one I would rather trust. Because we know where his committment lies--it is to the team, the Patriots, and to victory.

It was the great Vince Lombardi who was supposed to have said "Winning isn't every thing, it's the only thing." I imagine Coach Belichick would add that if it isn't, it's pretty damn close.

Apologies for the lengthy post--I needed to let out some steam.
 
I think this is an accurate assessment. I also think that the league does not see the action as cheating, although it is likely to consider it against the competitiveness of the league. This is a fair, and in my opinion accurate, assessment of the matter.

BB has apologized not because he thinks he cheated, but because his competitive nature, which has constantly driven him to push at the envelope of what has been considered "competitive" and "fair play", has, in this case, brought down a great deal of aggravation, and genuine pain, on the team and the fans, which he clearly had not anticipated.

I will also say this, and it is in some way directed at the nay-sayers. BB is not, as some coaches in the league are, a genuine "sportsman". He does not, I think, hold traditional sportsmanship sacred. His own attitude has been that of the military planner, and his art is not that of the rec room but of the war room. He is a man who believes that competitive activity should be conducted according to manuals such as Liddell-Hart's Strategy, and Sun Tzu's Art of War. In fact, he is on record as holding such manuals essential.

What BB does value, and what I consider also deeply worthy of respect, is teamwork--the importance of the unit, and the family. Compare him to a general (with the caveat that of course football can not compare to actual battles); compare him, if you want, to Michael Corleone. BB believes that the game should be played a certain way; he believes in obtaining as much information as possible, in foreseeing every possibility, and in practicing situational football to such a degree of perfection that a game such as last year's contest in San Diego could be decided, for his team, by players making the sorts of instinctual plays that I believe few other teams in football history would have made. The idea that we were gathering information that, in the spirit of fair play and competitiveness, is better left unobtained by video technology, is reasonable, and I think the New England Patrioots team should be glad to apologize, and willing cease the activity, and comply with both the letter of the rule and the punishment; however: the idea that such information would lead to easy advantages and easy victories, that somehow any other team with such information could have won twenty-one games in a row, and set a standard for excellence and teamwork that few teams in history have rivalled, is a joke, full stop. Such information, once gathered, might allow for a slight advantage in certain gametime situations (again, situational football), but only to a team which is already insanely well-prepared, well-coached, and well-laden with intelligent and talented players who have bought into a system which places the team, the unit, above the self.

BB is a great coach, one of the greatest to have ever walked the sidelines. He is not, as Michael Holley once wisely wrote, necessarily a great man. His weaknesses, his flaws, are, I think, fairly clear. His intensely competitive nature, his easy anger, his quick-to-surface contempt for people who are poorly-prepared, poorly-informed, and who value sensationalism, drama, personality, and popular opinion over committment, leads him to be rude when courtesy would be more just, and leads him into self-absorption, when the situation calls for a generous spirit. If I seem to give short-shrift to actions, or personal misdeeds, which some think more appalling, I can only say that for Belichick, his committment is to something other than what you hold dear.

And it is his sense of committment that few understand, and even fewer possess. It is not, as is Tony Dungy's, to a higher purpose than the game of football. Coach Dungy has made his own priorities clear, and one can laud him for that. He is a different man, and a different coach. BB's committment is not, as is true for many coaches, to a cult of personality, or to maintaining the status quo, or to some nebulous and tentacled network of supporters and aides. Attractive or not, BB's committment is to football, and to winning football above all. For him, such a committment to winning leads him into maverick ways, maverick modes of thinking. But it has also led him to victories, and to a level of football excellence that few have ever matched.

I will say it again: for one to believe that Coach Belichick is a cheat is to misunderstand the man and his purpose. He is a man of war; one clad in sweats and not fatigues, and a lesser warrior than any of the men and women who serve our country in times of battle--but a warrior nonetheless. That is the way his mind and spirit work. The product of military discipline, of a loyal and gifted father, of an elite education, and of a long and tireless pigskin apprenticeship, one that has led, there can be no doubt, to mastery. He may be a disdainful warrior, one given to disregarding the acceptable, and, at times, given to error. He is human--he has erred, and will again. But, for me, there is no one I would rather lead us, no one I would rather trust. Because we know where his committment lies--it is to the team, the Patriots, and to victory.

It was the great Vince Lombardi who was supposed to have said "Winning isn't every thing, it's the only thing." I imagine Coach Belichick would add that if it isn't, it's pretty damn close.

Apologies for the lengthy post--I needed to let out some steam.

I think this is the best post I have ever read on this forum.
 
I think this is an accurate assessment. I also think that the league does not see the action as cheating, although it is likely to consider it against the competitiveness of the league. This is a fair, and in my opinion accurate, assessment of the matter.

BB has apologized not because he thinks he cheated, but because his competitive nature, which has constantly driven him to push at the envelope of what has been considered "competitive" and "fair play", has, in this case, brought down a great deal of aggravation, and genuine pain, on the team and the fans, which he clearly had not anticipated.

I will also say this, and it is in some way directed at the nay-sayers. BB is not, as some coaches in the league are, a genuine "sportsman". He does not, I think, hold traditional sportsmanship sacred. His own attitude has been that of the military planner, and his art is not that of the rec room but of the war room. He is a man who believes that competitive activity should be conducted according to manuals such as Liddell-Hart's Strategy, and Sun Tzu's Art of War. In fact, he is on record as holding such manuals essential.

What BB does value, and what I consider also deeply worthy of respect, is teamwork--the importance of the unit, and the family. Compare him to a general (with the caveat that of course football can not compare to actual battles); compare him, if you want, to Michael Corleone. BB believes that the game should be played a certain way; he believes in obtaining as much information as possible, in foreseeing every possibility, and in practicing situational football to such a degree of perfection that a game such as last year's contest in San Diego could be decided, for his team, by players making the sorts of instinctual plays that I believe few other teams in football history would have made. The idea that we were gathering information that, in the spirit of fair play and competitiveness, is better left unobtained by video technology, is reasonable, and I think the New England Patrioots team should be glad to apologize, and willing cease the activity, and comply with both the letter of the rule and the punishment; however: the idea that such information would lead to easy advantages and easy victories, that somehow any other team with such information could have won twenty-one games in a row, and set a standard for excellence and teamwork that few teams in history have rivalled, is a joke, full stop. Such information, once gathered, might allow for a slight advantage in certain gametime situations (again, situational football), but only to a team which is already insanely well-prepared, well-coached, and well-laden with intelligent and talented players who have bought into a system which places the team, the unit, above the self.

BB is a great coach, one of the greatest to have ever walked the sidelines. He is not, as Michael Holley once wisely wrote, necessarily a great man. His weaknesses, his flaws, are, I think, fairly clear. His intensely competitive nature, his easy anger, his quick-to-surface contempt for people who are poorly-prepared, poorly-informed, and who value sensationalism, drama, personality, and popular opinion over committment, leads him to be rude when courtesy would be more just, and leads him into self-absorption, when the situation calls for a generous spirit. If I seem to give short-shrift to actions, or personal misdeeds, which some think more appalling, I can only say that for Belichick, his committment is to something other than what you hold dear.

And it is his sense of committment that few understand, and even fewer possess. It is not, as is Tony Dungy's, to a higher purpose than the game of football. Coach Dungy has made his own priorities clear, and one can laud him for that. He is a different man, and a different coach. BB's committment is not, as is true for many coaches, to a cult of personality, or to maintaining the status quo, or to some nebulous and tentacled network of supporters and aides. Attractive or not, BB's committment is to football, and to winning football above all. For him, such a committment to winning leads him into maverick ways, maverick modes of thinking. But it has also led him to victories, and to a level of football excellence that few have ever matched.

I will say it again: for one to believe that Coach Belichick is a cheat is to misunderstand the man and his purpose. He is a man of war; one clad in sweats and not fatigues, and a lesser warrior than any of the men and women who serve our country in times of battle--but a warrior nonetheless. That is the way his mind and spirit work. The product of military discipline, of a loyal and gifted father, of an elite education, and of a long and tireless pigskin apprenticeship, one that has led, there can be no doubt, to mastery. He may be a disdainful warrior, one given to disregarding the acceptable, and, at times, given to error. He is human--he has erred, and will again. But, for me, there is no one I would rather lead us, no one I would rather trust. Because we know where his committment lies--it is to the team, the Patriots, and to victory.

It was the great Vince Lombardi who was supposed to have said "Winning isn't every thing, it's the only thing." I imagine Coach Belichick would add that if it isn't, it's pretty damn close.

Apologies for the lengthy post--I needed to let out some steam.

Excellent, excellent post and description of Belichick. Regardless of your views on the book, I see the guy as like Howard Roark in 'Fountainhead'.

I hate the use of the word 'cheating' that is being bombarded in the media. Conan O'Brien even opened his show tonight with this, calling it cheating and despicable.

I hope Goodell has enough balls to make the right judgement call in the face of a rabid mob.
 
Last edited:
selective enforcement?

It appears to me that this stuff has been going on for quite a while, based on the ex players, coaches and even a former team video guy's comments. If this was a CIDER HOUSE RULE (one that is posted, but largely acknowledged to be ignored by everyone) then the Pats have been victim of a tremendous sand bagging by their snake of an ex-D coordinator, Mangini.

As others have stated, the league cannot want this issue to see the light of day and have to be furious with both the Jets and Pats for airing the league's dirty little secrets in public. If I were the Jets, I'd be making sure that I was squeaky clean for the rest of the season and possibly beyond.

If the Pats are severely sanctioned, the NFL MUST investigate EVERY team and SANCTION every team that they find stealing signals. Short of that, this is SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT and little more than a witch hunt, instigated by and perpetuated by rivals of the Pats.

The league has been unwilling to investigate tampering and prior signal stealing, but they cannot take the lazy way out on this one and simply say "It's only the Pats doing this." If they want to condemn us, they need to conduct a full and thorough investigation of the entire league without tipping off the other teams.

There's been a lot of talk of "the integrity of the game" but penalizing one team because the violation was presented gift wrapped by a rival team, only enables weasels like Mangini. The fact that the competition committee will have a say in this is not a good indication that the league understands that these decisions SHOULD NOT BE MADE BY RIVALS of the team being investigated.
 
I think this is an accurate assessment. I also think that the league does not see the action as cheating, although it is likely to consider it against the competitiveness of the league. This is a fair, and in my opinion accurate, assessment of the matter.

BB has apologized not because he thinks he cheated, but because his competitive nature, which has constantly driven him to push at the envelope of what has been considered "competitive" and "fair play", has, in this case, brought down a great deal of aggravation, and genuine pain, on the team and the fans, which he clearly had not anticipated.

I will also say this, and it is in some way directed at the nay-sayers. BB is not, as some coaches in the league are, a genuine "sportsman". He does not, I think, hold traditional sportsmanship sacred. His own attitude has been that of the military planner, and his art is not that of the rec room but of the war room. He is a man who believes that competitive activity should be conducted according to manuals such as Liddell-Hart's Strategy, and Sun Tzu's Art of War. In fact, he is on record as holding such manuals essential.

What BB does value, and what I consider also deeply worthy of respect, is teamwork--the importance of the unit, and the family. Compare him to a general (with the caveat that of course football can not compare to actual battles); compare him, if you want, to Michael Corleone. BB believes that the game should be played a certain way; he believes in obtaining as much information as possible, in foreseeing every possibility, and in practicing situational football to such a degree of perfection that a game such as last year's contest in San Diego could be decided, for his team, by players making the sorts of instinctual plays that I believe few other teams in football history would have made. The idea that we were gathering information that, in the spirit of fair play and competitiveness, is better left unobtained by video technology, is reasonable, and I think the New England Patrioots team should be glad to apologize, and willing cease the activity, and comply with both the letter of the rule and the punishment; however: the idea that such information would lead to easy advantages and easy victories, that somehow any other team with such information could have won twenty-one games in a row, and set a standard for excellence and teamwork that few teams in history have rivalled, is a joke, full stop. Such information, once gathered, might allow for a slight advantage in certain gametime situations (again, situational football), but only to a team which is already insanely well-prepared, well-coached, and well-laden with intelligent and talented players who have bought into a system which places the team, the unit, above the self.

BB is a great coach, one of the greatest to have ever walked the sidelines. He is not, as Michael Holley once wisely wrote, necessarily a great man. His weaknesses, his flaws, are, I think, fairly clear. His intensely competitive nature, his easy anger, his quick-to-surface contempt for people who are poorly-prepared, poorly-informed, and who value sensationalism, drama, personality, and popular opinion over committment, leads him to be rude when courtesy would be more just, and leads him into self-absorption, when the situation calls for a generous spirit. If I seem to give short-shrift to actions, or personal misdeeds, which some think more appalling, I can only say that for Belichick, his committment is to something other than what you hold dear.

And it is his sense of committment that few understand, and even fewer possess. It is not, as is Tony Dungy's, to a higher purpose than the game of football. Coach Dungy has made his own priorities clear, and one can laud him for that. He is a different man, and a different coach. BB's committment is not, as is true for many coaches, to a cult of personality, or to maintaining the status quo, or to some nebulous and tentacled network of supporters and aides. Attractive or not, BB's committment is to football, and to winning football above all. For him, such a committment to winning leads him into maverick ways, maverick modes of thinking. But it has also led him to victories, and to a level of football excellence that few have ever matched.

I will say it again: for one to believe that Coach Belichick is a cheat is to misunderstand the man and his purpose. He is a man of war; one clad in sweats and not fatigues, and a lesser warrior than any of the men and women who serve our country in times of battle--but a warrior nonetheless. That is the way his mind and spirit work. The product of military discipline, of a loyal and gifted father, of an elite education, and of a long and tireless pigskin apprenticeship, one that has led, there can be no doubt, to mastery. He may be a disdainful warrior, one given to disregarding the acceptable, and, at times, given to error. He is human--he has erred, and will again. But, for me, there is no one I would rather lead us, no one I would rather trust. Because we know where his committment lies--it is to the team, the Patriots, and to victory.

It was the great Vince Lombardi who was supposed to have said "Winning isn't every thing, it's the only thing." I imagine Coach Belichick would add that if it isn't, it's pretty damn close.

Apologies for the lengthy post--I needed to let out some steam.

I think this is the best post I have ever read on this forum.

I concurr, GREAT post! You are truly a genuine fan.
 
as much as i'd like to see goodell go gansta on NE, i think he's just going to slap them on the wrist.

And WHY would you like to see Goodell go gangsta on NE? Could you share your reasons with us please?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Wednesday Patriots Notebook 5/1: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Jerod Mayo’s Appearance on WEEI On Monday
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/30: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Drake Maye’s Interview on WEEI on Jones & Mego with Arcand
MORSE: Rookie Camp Invitees and Draft Notes
Patriots Get Extension Done with Barmore
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/29: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-28, Draft Notes On Every Draft Pick
MORSE: A Closer Look at the Patriots Undrafted Free Agents
Five Thoughts on the Patriots Draft Picks: Overall, Wolf Played it Safe
Back
Top