Spygate Information Analyzed

[DaBruinz]

Sorry mate, when it comes to cheating its the accusers job to find proof someone did something not the other way around. Just because the Patriots were the only team to cheat like this does not mean its the job of all other 31 teams to prove they have not. How would you prove you havent cheated? By having no evidence to the contrary. So there you go...

Vikings = no cheating
Patriots = 6 years of cheating

While we're at it, why dont you prove the pats didnt cheat last season? For what its worth i dont think they did but its just as legit of me to ask you that as it was for you to ask me to prove minnesota never cheated.

If it is the "accuser's job" to find the proof when it comes to cheating, please show us "YOUR" proof. I don't mean the stuff you've read on the net. I don't mean the information that you've cherry-picked from other legitimate sources. I mean YOUR proof. Hmm.. That's right. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY. Why? Cause you are just some nimrod who is blinded by his own bias and refuses to see REALITY. Instead, you continue to live in your fantasy world where Breaking a rule is the same thing as cheating. ALL THE TIME. I have news for you. Its breaking the rules for a player to wear the wrong color socks. Tell me how that is cheating. Explain to me how it gives someone an unfair advantage.

 

[PatsFan24]

aw he is a vikings fan, no wonder he is so bitter

 

[JaxPats]

aw he is a vikings fan, no wonder he is so bitter

:youtheman: I think you just nailed it! I'm wondering if he is in fact bitter that Randy had "Syd the Viking" here at the Denver game instead of him. :singing: At least Syd had class. He didn't seem to care about any of this BS "OR", what "allegedly" happened in the past.

 

[Hardboiled]

Sorry mate, when it comes to cheating its the accusers job to find proof someone did something not the other way around.


While we're at it, why dont you prove the pats didnt cheat last season?

Do you even read what you write?

As far as your link goes, that page is as uninformed as you are. Originally, the author thought that stealing signs was against the rules. He also didn't know that NFL teams have videotaping responsibilities.

 

[NFL_Truth]

Do you even read what you write?

As far as your link goes, that page is as uninformed as you are. Originally, the author thought that stealing signs was against the rules. He also didn't know that NFL teams have videotaping responsibilities.

And he was correct in that stealing signals is against the rules.

 

[jmt57]

And he was correct in that stealing signals is against the rules.

Wrong - epically wrong. Congratulations, you just exposed yourself for your lack of knowledge on the subject.

Stealing signals is not against the rules.

 

[Doctor DDS]

Here is the truth. Everyone steals signs or at least tries to. The Pats did tape signals for a number of years. They did it in broad daylight where everyone could see them. The camera was not hidden and it was done in front of thousands of fans. Some opposing coaches apparently even waved to the camera man. There was no stealth involved. If the Pats wanted to cheat why not just have hidden camera's in the visiting locker room at home games or in well placed areas in the stadium? Just have someone in the stands? The most plausible explanation as to why this never happened is that they truly did not think this was a big deal and that BB's explanation that he thought it was OK if not used in the same game is OK. They just used the information as another form of scouting and it did probably save time (thus the motivation to do it) The "they cheated crowd" wants this offense to mean that we were basically in the huddle and knew whatever signals were being called. They want us to believe that teams and coaches used the same signals every game and that not only could we determine which coaches signals were the real ones but then decipher the signals within seconds and relay them to our QB who would then change all the offensive plays. There is no evidence that we consistently scored more in 2nd half of games. There is no explanation as to why the leaked tapes were clearly spliced together (proving it was not used in "real time") no explanation why our team went on to set NFL records after no lopnger being able to "cheat" Everyone wants to sweep under the rug the Jimmy Johnson comments that he did it himself and that he stopped it due to little value (he's just not as obsessive as BB) I doubt every team does it because it truly is not a magic pill. This scandal is the same to me as "tampering" - we all know most teams do it with free agents. (this the 12:01 signings) None of us really care because all it does is speed the process up (same as taping) but of course this issue gets little to no play (nor should it) NFL Truth and other jealous fans are dying to excuse their teams ongoing failures and being able to pin this "scandal" on the Pats makes them feel better.

 

[DaBruinz]

And he was correct in that stealing signals is against the rules.

WRONG. Stealing signals is not against the rules. Its considered part of the game.

 

[jmt57]

Okay, here goes with a response to the original post about “an outstanding job of analyzing the events of spygate” by a blogger that focuses on SEC sports. There are so many holes in this argument it’s difficult to list them all. The site blurs the line between facts, opinions, and speculations so often that I wonder if the author even knows what the differences are between them.

On the second link the author comments about the age of Rodney Harrison and Junior Seau, and the fact that Tom Brady was drafted in the sixth round. He opines that the only way possible for each of them to be successful was to have known the play that was coming. Next he writes about how the Patriots ‘can only screw so many people before it bites them on the backside, such as Deion Branch. I guess I missed the memo that only first round draft picks under the age of thirty who receive whatever contract demand they want are allowed to be successful in the NFL Thanks for that enlightening evidence of ‘cheating’.

The next link insinuates that Matt Estrella was hiding somewhere. Wrong again, Estrella was interviewed extensively by Roger Goodell. Just because he didn’t hold a press conference like Matt Walsh doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

Then the author goes on to state that ‘Robert Kraft was one of the outspoken owners that recommended Roger Goodell.’ Incorrect again; Kraft pushed for somebody else and only backed Goodell at the very end of the process, in order to give the appearance of a united consensus to the choice of Goodell.

In the same link the author states as fact that ‘it would be easy to make halftime adjustments’ with the tape made during the first half. How that is possible to do in twelve minutes, with three different coaches sending in signals, and the possibility that signals are changed at halftime, is beyond me.

Next the author asks us to take a giant leap of faith by alleging that the Pats used an alternate radio frequency to circumvent the twenty-second cutoff. Not only is there no proof, but the author also claims that two national writers would soon (this was written in March) be exposing details of this practice. The fact that we have heard nothing about this since then certainly lessens the writer’s credibility even more.

Now the author goes on to give opinions and claim for them to be fact:
1. “Bill Belichick knowingly cheated” – wrong, he claimed that his interpretation of the rule was that it was okay to tape as long as you did not use that tape during that game.
2. “The NFL refused to seriously investigate the allegations” – it is my opinion that they investigated very seriously.
3. “The NFL destroyed the evidence” – with the insinuation that there was a cover up. A tape had already been leaked to FOX, and Goodell did not want more tapes made public that could possibly aid another team that would soon play the team that was taped.
4. “The NFL rules are … unclear” – yes, that’s right! Even though the author states elsewhere that the rules are very clear on this matter!

Next the author even admits that he doesn’t know the extent of the cheating, the amount of the advantage, or the impact – if any – on games. Despite that, he goes on to say that assuming guilt is a reasonable assumption and that Belichick should be banned and three super bowl wins should be forfeited. How one comes to that conclusion after the previous statements is beyond any rational logic.

To wrap up the column from this website that I had never heard of previously, the writer goes on to contradict himself about the lack of clarity on the NFL rules regarding video taping as well as his lack of knowledge about video taping by all NFL teams. He concludes with the oft-repeated phrases of ‘arrogance’ and contempt’ – once again, opinions not based on fact, but rather rhetoric to back up a pre-conceived notion. The article used by the original poster to open this thread does more to prove that many fans opinions about the Patriots gaining an unfair advantage are based more on wild speculation and bias than based on fact. I suggest you take a look at Fans For Accurate Media as well as ESPN’s apology – buried as deep as possible on their website - for the way they covered the Matt Walsh meeting with Roger Goodell.


The Patriots broke the rules. They were punished. End of story, time to stop beating that dead horse. The vast majority of NFL fans have let it go, as well as the media who benefited from the additional revenue with more page views and higher ratings. Perhaps it's time for you to let it go too.

 

[NFL_Truth]

The author was correct. Belichick did knowingly cheat, the rules were clear, anyone especially him could understand them. If you chose to believe the word of a liar in regards to not using it during the game, fine. Although every answer might not come to light, your certain not to get honestly from the patriots.

 

[JAYHAWKS34]

The author was correct. Belichick did knowingly cheat, the rules were clear, anyone especially him could understand them. If you chose to believe the word of a liar in regards to not using it during the game, fine. Although every answer might not come to light, your certain not to get honestly from the patriots.

How are you not banned yet…….. troll

 

[DaBruinz]

The author was correct. Belichick did knowingly cheat, the rules were clear, anyone especially him could understand them. If you chose to believe the word of a liar in regards to not using it during the game, fine. Although every answer might not come to light, your certain not to get honestly from the patriots.

WOW. You just love making sh!t up.

The rules are NOT clear.

Please explain how they use it during the game when they have NO VIDEO PLAYING MACHINES available to them in the coaches box or in the lockerroom or on the sidelines?

 

[jmt57]

The author was correct. Belichick did knowingly cheat, the rules were clear, anyone especially him could understand them. If you chose to believe the word of a liar in regards to not using it during the game, fine. Although every answer might not come to light, your certain not to get honestly from the patriots.

A.) Once again you are confusing fact with opinion; at this point I am convinced you have no idea what the difference between a fact and an opinion is. For example, your statement "Belichick did knowingly cheat" is opinion, not fact; you have no evidence to support your theory of what Belichick was thinking.
B.) The rules were not clear; in fact the very author of the article you cited as your 'proof' went on at some length to discuss that very fact that the rules are not clear. Based on this admission, that the rules are not clear, the writer is in fact substantiating the theory that Belichick did not realize he was violating the rules!
C.) Every sentence in your comment is your opinion, to which you are entitled. But once again, that is simply an opinion and not a single one is an evidence-based fact.

To show how off-base your logic is, this would be an analogy to your last comment - even if the premise was true, which it is not: NFL_Ticket got a speeding ticket. Therefore, whenever NFL_Ticket drives, he is speeding.

 

[NFL_Truth]

I understand what your saying but sometimes we have to use common sense to learn the obvious even if you don't have 100% proof in front of your eyes. Almost nothing can be proven without a shadow of a doubt, that does not mean that it didnt happen. So using common sense and deductive reasoning can bring fans to many logical conclusions.

 

[DaBruinz]

I understand what your saying but sometimes we have to use common sense to learn the obvious even if you don't have 100% proof in front of your eyes. Almost nothing can be proven without a shadow of a doubt, that does not mean that it didnt happen. So using common sense and deductive reasoning can bring fans to many logical conclusions.

First, and foremost, there is no such thing as "common sense." Its a myth.

Second, you've proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you are a biased hater who has taken only one view and isn't willing to open his eyes to reality. You regularly misconstrue reality. And you are pretty ignorant as well.

 

[jmt57]

I understand what your saying but sometimes we have to use common sense to learn the obvious even if you don't have 100% proof in front of your eyes. Almost nothing can be proven without a shadow of a doubt, that does not mean that it didnt happen. So using common sense and deductive reasoning can bring fans to many logical conclusions.

While I agree that almost nothing can be proven without a shadow of a doubt, it is my opinion that the conclusions you reach would never stand up in a court of law and would never be taken seriously by the scientific community - two examples of places where facts are put together to come up with plausible theories and likely outcomes. For example, to conclude 'they video taped, therefore they jammed radio signals', or 'they video taped, therefore they decoded signals and relayed them to the QB on an alternate frequency' just doesn't stand the test of a proper hypothesis. There is far too much shadow of doubt to accept your theories as facts.

 

[Hardboiled]

And he was correct in that stealing signals is against the rules.

You have zero credibility. Your failure is embarrassing.

 

[captain insano]

I understand what your saying but sometimes we have to use common sense to learn the obvious even if you don't have 100% proof in front of your eyes. Almost nothing can be proven without a shadow of a doubt, that does not mean that it didnt happen. So using common sense and deductive reasoning can bring fans to many logical conclusions.

ive used common sense and deductive reasoning and I've come to the conclusion that your full of sh!t.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Thank you for the partial stick-up. But im not here to convince any pats fans that my views are correct. I know this would be a very unlikely thing to happen without question. I'm only looking to share my views, hear pats fans thoughts directly instead of assuming, etc. I know i've posted alot of Spygate things but that is only to make people more away. I'm layout out the facts, people can "interpret" (no pun intended) them anyway they chose.

I'm not "calling" you anything....but can you say "loser"?

The Pats went 16-1 after the incident. They're 8-5 without Brady and half their other biggest stars...AND, just to pound it into your face...I mean, head, the Pats will win the super bowl next year when Brady comes back.

There are no asteriks and there is no taint on this incredible dynasty.

So eat it buddy!

 

[PatriotsReign]

While I agree that almost nothing can be proven without a shadow of a doubt, it is my opinion that the conclusions you reach would never stand up in a court of law and would never be taken seriously by the scientific community - two examples of places where facts are put together to come up with plausible theories and likely outcomes. For example, to conclude 'they video taped, therefore they jammed radio signals', or 'they video taped, therefore they decoded signals and relayed them to the QB on an alternate frequency' just doesn't stand the test of a proper hypothesis. There is far too much shadow of doubt to accept your theories as facts.

What this guy is forgetting is that spying has been a way of life in the NFL. It doesn't matter who got caught and who didn't, the FACT remains that it was common practice.

Otherwise we wouldn't have had coaches publically saying it was.

It has to take quite a small mind to STILL be consumed by this issue.

One of the things I love about being a Patriots fan is that so many fans around the country hate us...man I love that! I loved how the Pats went around the league last year with their middle fingers held high and ran up the score on as many teams as possible....man that was great!

Even with the loss in the super bowl, I loved every minute of it.