Question for Patriots Fans - Please Help me Understand

[speed]

I think you have been put up to this posting by NFL officials, as a way to get us to quiet down. Obviously, our beliefs that the League is out to get us are correct, and this posting is just another example of this.

So, are you man enough to admit it (assuming you are a man)? How much are they paying you to do this? Are you an Indie, Charger, or Pittsburgh fan?

Ed Hockalee is that you?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Sure thing.

Firstly let me state openly, Im not a big fan of Bill Bellichek. As a coach is he the best? Undoubtedly. No question. As a guy, is he a little sour and maybe a bit of an ass? Yes. As such, while Id love him to coach my team, I dont know if Id want to have a beer with him.

PWP: The BB you see in the national media is totally different on a couple local TV and radio shows. Funny, with a dry intelligent wit. Kids around. Still won't answer injury questions or diss any opponent but will talk football details and participate in pranks.

1) He broke a rule that was clearly forbidden by the NFL. No shooting from the other teams sidelines.
2) He was a repeat offender whod already been warned.
3) And this one I think is big, he comes off as a very arrogant kind of guy in his behavior. Should he be? Sure why not hes an amazing coach. But I think his overall attitude might have made it seem like by repeating a previously warned offense, he was saying "Im BB, Im the greatest, Il ldo what I want"
Now #3 is complete speculation and probably SHOULDNT have factored into the decision if it did.

PWP: Pretty much on target. Hubris, yes arrogance and totally underestimating how a neophyte commish would react.

Now for the punishment. Fine Bellichick or fine the team, not both. The taking of the draft pick was WAY over the top. Too much, not necessary.

PWP: He miscalculated how a newbie commish intent on creating an aura of a tough guy would react. Having peanalized players, the commish could not go soft on a coach and team. Also, the national (read NY based) media went ballistic and I think panicked him into a hasty decision.

However, does anyone else agree with me that it was a little dumb of BB to throw a guy with a giant camera on Manginis sideline, knowing he was breaking a rule but more importantly KNOWING Mangini knew he was going to do it? Seems like he was asking to get called out.
And against the Jets? Yeesh. You could play Madden 08 and get as good of a scouting report on that team as video taping the bums would give you.

Yes, it was dumb of BB. His arrogance overrode his intelligence there.

Oh, before I forget...GFY!

 

[upstater1]

Sure thing.

Firstly let me state openly, Im not a big fan of Bill Bellichek. As a coach is he the best? Undoubtedly. No question. As a guy, is he a little sour and maybe a bit of an ass? Yes.

What makes you say this? Because he's not effusive with the media? People that know him personally don't have the same problems you do.

As for enforcing fairly, before I can say that I would need to know if there is a rule on the book that forbids Mangini shooting from where he was. There IS a rule saying stay away from the other teams sidelines, so BB was guilty.
If Mangini was guilty of violating a rule on the book, that someone can show me (I dont want homerism here I want objectivity), then he should get it WORSE than BB.
But Id need to see tha rule.

Just as an FYI, the rule does not forbid taping from the sidelines. It forbids it from everywhere not under an enclosure.

Do I think Mangini is a hyporcite? Yes. If hes taping with permission no problem, but if he actually didnt ask the Pats or was asked not to, and did it anyways, broken rule or not hes an ass.

Permission to break an NFL rule?

The fact is, the NFL had no problem last year when the Dolphins admitted to stealing Brady's signals off a videotape. The NFL's Steve Alic said, "That's football."! That loss to the Dolphins meant that the Patriots would be playing at INDY in the AFCCG instead of vice versa.

One could interpret Alic's comment as causing some confusion in the Patriots. Some innocuous memo gets sent out in early September before the season. How many other memos get sent out? In December of the same season, a NFL spokesman reports that stealing signals off a tape is legal.

What is Belichick supposed to thinK?

 

[FootballFan85]

I repeat:
How many times have YOU "watched the video"? If you really watched the video and were the knowlegeable football fan that you claim to be, you would see the the "tuck call" should not have been called at all.

What should have been called was a 15 yard penalty on Woodson for a head slap on Brady BEFORE his arm came down on the ball. So, the ref blew the call. And a 15 yard penalty would have put the Patriots in a position to score a winning TD instead of kicking the game tieing FG.

Watch it again and tell me that I'm wrong.

You seem to be giving expert opinion on that play. But ignoring the fact that the no call before "the call" would have made "the call" no call at all.

Hey sorry,
I didnt mean to ignore your point.
The video I watch shows Brady from the left side, I.e. his numbers, so the players hand comes down on the opposite side (his throwing side). To me it looks like it comes straight to the ball or if it does contact the helmet its an incidental brush HOWEVER without seeing the play from a different angle (I can only find video from profile. If you can show me from the other sides Ill gladly watch), I cant confirm or deny either way.

I will however, believe you and say that if thats the case, then youre right that shouldve been it.

The entire point though doesnt really matter which side you land on on the enforcement of the tuck rule. If nothing else, you can say the call is controversial. The point is, a call that could easily have gone either way, and that many people view to be a poor use of an obscure rule, went in favor of the Pats.
How easy would it have been for the Radiers fans to have claimed the refs were out to get them or wanted the Pats to win? Very easy! A lot probably did!
The point is thats not the case and that calls go good and bad against every team. Try and remember all the calls you got as well as the ones you didnt. Like I said, ask any poker player, its always easier to remember when you got screwed than it is to remember when your opponent did.


Now Id like to pose a question, and PURELY for discussion purposes because Id like to hear peoples opinions. Lets say that right or wrong, the tuck isnt called and its a fumble. Again forget wether or not it was the right call and just imagine the refs rule the play a fumble and the Pats lose that game.

What happens to arguably the best QB in the league? If Brady doesnt win that game and the subsequent superbowl, does Bledsoe start the next year? Do you think Brady would get his chance and do the same thing? Does Brady get moved to another team and do the same or something different? He obviously has the talent, but if that game goes the other way what happens?
COuld he be a Romo type guy who just doesnt get noticed until its his last chance?

 

[FootballFan85]

The fact is, the NFL had no problem last year when the Dolphins admitted to stealing Brady's signals off a videotape. The NFL's Steve Alic said, "That's football."! That loss to the Dolphins meant that the Patriots would be playing at INDY in the AFCCG instead of vice versa.

One could interpret Alic's comment as causing some confusion in the Patriots. Some innocuous memo gets sent out in early September before the season. How many other memos get sent out? In December of the same season, a NFL spokesman reports that stealing signals off a tape is legal.

What is Belichick supposed to thinK?

Like I said with Mangini, if you can show me that he broke an NFL rule, then I think he should be hit worse than BB. But as of yet Ive yet to hear anywhere (but here of course) that there is a rule on the book against filiming from where he was, as opposed to BB where its clearly stated you can tbe on the other teams sidelines.

 

[speed]

What happens to arguably the best QB in the league? If Brady doesnt win that game and the subsequent superbowl, does Bledsoe start the next year? Do you think Brady would get his chance and do the same thing? Does Brady get moved to another team and do the same or something different? He obviously has the talent, but if that game goes the other way what happens?
COuld he be a Romo type guy who just doesnt get noticed until its his last chance?

No doubt thats a historic moment, but I don't see how it changes anything past that game. For Pure speculative purposes, I say nothing, nothing changes except for that game. It's not like he had one more good year, it's not like he was a borderline good quarterback. I see what your after, I just think it is what it is, in this case.

 

[BoltsFan]

I think you have been put up to this posting by NFL officials, as a way to get us to quiet down. Obviously, our beliefs that the League is out to get us are correct, and this posting is just another example of this.

So, are you man enough to admit it (assuming you are a man)? How much are they paying you to do this? Are you an Indie, Charger, or Pittsburgh fan?

Unbelievable.

 

[FootballFan85]

If your take on the situation was even close to the norm, we probably wouldn't have become such an embattled bunch of jerks over the last couple of months. Most people here have no problem with acknowledging that a punishment was warranted; we just feel that the punishment was too steep, and the ensuing media fallout and asterisk fiasco compounded everything.

The punishment was much too severe and the media loves to jump on winners. When youre at the top the media wants to drag you down. Except the Colts. And I believe thats because Tony Dungy bakes cookies for reporters.

As for the *, I have to admit, I have some Pats fans friends, and I got great joy out of sending them pictures of the "cheaties" box. But it was just that, a joke. There is no way that "spygate" should taint the previous superbowls, although it is fun to tease pats fans about it.

 

[upstater1]

Like I said with Mangini, if you can show me that he broke an NFL rule, then I think he should be hit worse than BB. But as of yet Ive yet to hear anywhere (but here of course) that there is a rule on the book against filiming from where he was, as opposed to BB where its clearly stated you can tbe on the other teams sidelines.

This is called Spygate.

All of Spygate is about the rule.

You write there's a rule clearly stating you can't film on the opposing sidelines.

Challenge to you: find me that rule.

The Spygate rule is the one we are talking about, the one both Belichick and Mangini violated.

 

[FootballFan85]

Ed Hockalee is that you?

I wish!
Have you seen that guy! If I was that buff Id be at the beach not on a message board. haha

 

[PatsfanGlo]

Sure thing.

Firstly let me state openly, Im not a big fan of Bill Bellichek. As a coach is he the best? Undoubtedly. No question. As a guy, is he a little sour and maybe a bit of an ass? Yes. As such, while Id love him to coach my team, I dont know if Id want to have a beer with him.
Now moving on..

I think the big factors were this:
1) He broke a rule that was clearly forbidden by the NFL. No shooting from the other teams sidelines.
2) He was a repeat offender whod already been warned.
3) And this one I think is big, he comes off as a very arrogant kind of guy in his behavior. Should he be? Sure why not hes an amazing coach. But I think his overall attitude might have made it seem like by repeating a previously warned offense, he was saying "Im BB, Im the greatest, Il ldo what I want"
Now #3 is complete speculation and probably SHOULDNT have factored into the decision if it did.

Now for the punishment. Fine Bellichick or fine the team, not both. The taking of the draft pick was WAY over the top. Too much, not necessary.

As for enforcing fairly, before I can say that I would need to know if there is a rule on the book that forbids Mangini shooting from where he was. There IS a rule saying stay away from the other teams sidelines, so BB was guilty.
If Mangini was guilty of violating a rule on the book, that someone can show me (I dont want homerism here I want objectivity), then he should get it WORSE than BB.
But Id need to see tha rule.

Do I think Mangini is a hyporcite? Yes. If hes taping with permission no problem, but if he actually didnt ask the Pats or was asked not to, and did it anyways, broken rule or not hes an ass.

However, does anyone else agree with me that it was a little dumb of BB to throw a guy with a giant camera on Manginis sideline, knowing he was breaking a rule but more importantly KNOWING Mangini knew he was going to do it? Seems like he was asking to get called out.
And against the Jets? Yeesh. You could play Madden 08 and get as good of a scouting report on that team as video taping the bums would give you.

This was overkill from Goodell. He fined Pats for $250k, BB for $500k and took away our first round pick. It was obvious he was trying to make example out of Pats not just for going against that rule but by punishing the best and most talked about coach in the league, he was flexing his muscle as a new commish. I didn't mind this much considering it was clear Pats were indeed violating the rule by taping from restricted area when asked not to. Commish wanted to set the standard and after dealing with Vick, Tank Johnson and Pacman issues entire off-season, I can't blame the guy being in foul mood.

And of course, a lot of media talkheads took this story and ran with it. I have never seen such slander of this grand scale done to a single person. Before this season, BB was viewed as 'stoic, genius, calm' and suddenly after spygate bs, he is 'smug, arrogant, cheater'. May be I'm overreacting a bit as a Pats fan but you can't deny that this is all media talks about. Even against stinking Jests last Sunday, Nance was talking about 'perhaps they should have suspended BB few games' like this was week 2. You see why most Pats can be bit defensive?

In all, this entire episode is largely done by that thankless so called Jests hc. Since Pats kicked out their camera crew last season, instead of doing it privately, he not only decides to pull the same stunt but embarass his mentor on national scale. Yes, BB went against the rule but was all this media hype and national attention really that necessary?

 

[FootballFan85]

This is called Spygate.

All of Spygate is about the rule.

You write there's a rule clearly stating you can't film on the opposing sidelines.

Challenge to you: find me that rule.

The Spygate rule is the one we are talking about, the one both Belichick and Mangini violated.

From what I understand from every source that covered the entire thing, the opposing coaches sideline is protected.

You can film from your own, apparently from the endzone, but the opposing sideline is protected. Thats what every angle of the coverage I heard was from.
Admitedly there are two sides to stories and the coverage in NE may have been very different from around the league.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Hey sorry,
I didnt mean to ignore your point.
The video I watch shows Brady from the left side, I.e. his numbers, so the players hand comes down on the opposite side (his throwing side). To me it looks like it comes straight to the ball or if it does contact the helmet its an incidental brush HOWEVER without seeing the play from a different angle (I can only find video from profile. If you can show me from the other sides Ill gladly watch), I cant confirm or deny either way.

I will however, believe you and say that if thats the case, then youre right that shouldve been it.

The entire point though doesnt really matter which side you land on on the enforcement of the tuck rule. If nothing else, you can say the call is controversial. The point is, a call that could easily have gone either way, and that many people view to be a poor use of an obscure rule, went in favor of the Pats.
How easy would it have been for the Radiers fans to have claimed the refs were out to get them or wanted the Pats to win? Very easy! A lot probably did!
The point is thats not the case and that calls go good and bad against every team. Try and remember all the calls you got as well as the ones you didnt. Like I said, ask any poker player, its always easier to remember when you got screwed than it is to remember when your opponent did.


Now Id like to pose a question, and PURELY for discussion purposes because Id like to hear peoples opinions. Lets say that right or wrong, the tuck isnt called and its a fumble. Again forget wether or not it was the right call and just imagine the refs rule the play a fumble and the Pats lose that game.

What happens to arguably the best QB in the league? If Brady doesnt win that game and the subsequent superbowl, does Bledsoe start the next year? Do you think Brady would get his chance and do the same thing? Does Brady get moved to another team and do the same or something different? He obviously has the talent, but if that game goes the other way what happens?
COuld he be a Romo type guy who just doesnt get noticed until its his last chance?

The Tuck Rule was called in the Pats close game loss to the Jets in Game 2 of that 2001 season. Pats sacked Testaverde of the Jets, stripped the ball and recovered the 'fumble'. Refs invoked the Tuck Rule. Jets ball. Jets won. The rule was applied several times that very season. It's obscure only to those who are casual fans. The rule demands that the ref NOT use judgement. Note that with all the whining, the rule still stands as is today.

BB was big on Brady summer camp 2001. I was there and Brady TOTALLY outplayed Bledsoe but BB coming off a 5-11 season and the owner signing Bledsoe to a $100M contract needed some 'help' geting Drew on the bench. BB would never have started Drew the next season because Brady would have yet again beaten him soundly in training camp. Also documented in the book 'Patriots Reign'.

 

[FootballFan85]

This was overkill from Goodell. He fined Pats for $250k, BB for $500k and took away our first round pick. It was obvious he was trying to make example out of Pats not just for going against that rule but by punishing the best and most talked about coach in the league, he was flexing his muscle as a new commish. I didn't mind this much considering it was clear Pats were indeed violating the rule by taping from restricted area when asked not to. Commish wanted to set the standard and after dealing with Vick, Tank Johnson and Pacman issues entire off-season, I can't blame the guy being in foul mood.

And of course, a lot of media talkheads took this story and ran with it. I have never seen such slander of this grand scale done to a single person. Before this season, BB was viewed as 'stoic, genius, calm' and suddenly after spygate bs, he is 'smug, arrogant, cheater'. May be I'm overreacting a bit as a Pats fan but you can't deny that this is all media talks about. Even against stinking Jests last Sunday, Nance was talking about 'perhaps they should have suspended BB few games' like this was week 2. You see why most Pats can be bit defensive?

In all, this entire episode is largely done by that thankless so called Jests hc. Since Pats kicked out their camera crew last season, instead of doing it privately, he not only decides to pull the same stunt but embarass his mentor on national scale. Yes, BB went against the rule but was all this media hype and national attention really that necessary?

Personally, I would say a fine and short suspension to BB wouldve been far more correct. Maybe still too much, but more correct than fining both him, the team and taking a pick.

If BB made the call to do it, he should bear the punishment, not the team. If someone above BB made the call, BB shouldnt have to deal with the crap and it should be a LARGE fine to the organization but no pick loss and no BB punishment.

 

[FootballFan85]

BB was big on Brady summer camp 2001. I was there and Brady TOTALLY outplayed Bledsoe but BB coming off a 5-11 season and the owner signing Bledsoe to a $100M contract needed some 'help' geting Drew on the bench. BB would never have started Drew the next season because Brady would have yet again beaten him soundly in training camp. Also documented in the book 'Patriots Reign'.

Very interesting info. I had no idea Brady had already showed up Bledsoe. I always assumed Brady got into the game because he had to be and then just really showed what he could do. A lot of guys in sports seem like average prospects and then get a chance and run with it. I guess Brady had shown the talent the whole time and was just waiting for his chance.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Hey sorry,
I didnt mean to ignore your point.
The video I watch shows Brady from the left side, I.e. his numbers, so the players hand comes down on the opposite side (his throwing side). To me it looks like it comes straight to the ball or if it does contact the helmet its an incidental brush HOWEVER without seeing the play from a different angle (I can only find video from profile. If you can show me from the other sides Ill gladly watch), I cant confirm or deny either way.

I will however, believe you and say that if thats the case, then youre right that shouldve been it.

The entire point though doesnt really matter which side you land on on the enforcement of the tuck rule. If nothing else, you can say the call is controversial. The point is, a call that could easily have gone either way, and that many people view to be a poor use of an obscure rule, went in favor of the Pats.
How easy would it have been for the Radiers fans to have claimed the refs were out to get them or wanted the Pats to win? Very easy! A lot probably did!
The point is thats not the case and that calls go good and bad against every team. Try and remember all the calls you got as well as the ones you didnt. Like I said, ask any poker player, its always easier to remember when you got screwed than it is to remember when your opponent did.


Now Id like to pose a question, and PURELY for discussion purposes because Id like to hear peoples opinions. Lets say that right or wrong, the tuck isnt called and its a fumble. Again forget wether or not it was the right call and just imagine the refs rule the play a fumble and the Pats lose that game.

What happens to arguably the best QB in the league? If Brady doesnt win that game and the subsequent superbowl, does Bledsoe start the next year? Do you think Brady would get his chance and do the same thing? Does Brady get moved to another team and do the same or something different? He obviously has the talent, but if that game goes the other way what happens?
COuld he be a Romo type guy who just doesnt get noticed until its his last chance?

Belichick had his mind made up on Brady regardless of "tuck" or fumble.So no, Drew would not have started and would have been traded.

Now the Raiders fans have whined about the tuck repeatedly. But if you go back and see the phanthom roughing the passer call on Sugar Bear Hamilton on Kenny Stable, you will see that they have nothing to complain about. Stabler laughs about it to this day.

Now, going back to then head slap by Woodson. I have seen it over 100 times and it was clearly not "incidental". It was not intentional but that does not matter. So if the right call was made we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

And finally, and I hate to bring this up but its something that really needs to be said. Can a team that benefited from the "tuck rule", something recognized leaguewide (except perhaps in NE) as a mistake, HOW can you complain about the refs so much especially when youre undefeated? Your team is so good, and is winning week in and week out, yet fans still complain. I just dont get it.

I was impressed with your level mindedness and courteous constructive criticism until the mention of the tuck rule.

It has no bearing on this year's officiating and any complaints of it we might have. We are complaining about a consitent lack of perceived fairness, not one questionable call.

The tuck rule was in effect before that game. It went against us earlier in the year when we played the Jets. Exact same situation. You only remember the pats-raiders case because it was a high exposure game and at a critical juncture in that game. I think it is a dumb rule, but it was called consistantly for and against us.

Whipping out the tuck rule smacks of flame baiting IMO.

 

[Fixit]

From what I understand from every source that covered the entire thing, the opposing coaches sideline is protected.

You can film from your own, apparently from the endzone, but the opposing sideline is protected. Thats what every angle of the coverage I heard was from.
Admitedly there are two sides to stories and the coverage in NE may have been very different from around the league.

The NE cameraman was on the Pats sideline, which is why he was able to film the Jets sideline.

You have the rule way wrong, and you apparently didn't follow the story too closely; it has everything to do with the filming area not being enclosed and being accessible to staff during the game.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Very interesting info. I had no idea Brady had already showed up Bledsoe. I always assumed Brady got into the game because he had to be and then just really showed what he could do. A lot of guys in sports seem like average prospects and then get a chance and run with it. I guess Brady had shown the talent the whole time and was just waiting for his chance.

The Boston press and the vast majority of fans (the Bledsoe Krishnas) worshiped Drew and castigated BB bigtime for not replacing Brady once Drew was healthy. BB stuck to his guns and Brady finished the season geting them from 0-2 with Drew to 11-5. Us 'Brady's Ladys' knew the kid could play and wanted Bledsoe with his inability to take what the D offered and uncoachable approach to the game outa there.

 

[FootballFan85]

Whipping out the tuck rule smacks of flame baiting IMO.

Which is why I appologized for bringing it up.

While I dont agree it was the correct call as the rule is written, I brought it up more as a demonstration that what one team considers "the refs out to get them" another team considers "the right call".

When you guys see a player make contact with Randy Moss 6 yards past scrimage, you say "thats a violation, we just got screwed", while the other team sees it as something so insignifiant as to not matter. Its insignifianct but its a rule.

Likewise, when Randy Moss puts his hand on a corner and gives a little love nudge, you guys see it as insignifianct, which it is, BUT its still against the rules. The refs call it, you guys go nuts, the refs dont call it, the other team goes nuts.

It goes both ways and every team around the league has fans that feel THEY are the ones getting screwed.

Thats been my point the whole thread.