- Joined
- Jan 22, 2005
- Messages
- 31,035
- Reaction score
- 15,600
Goodell said he considered a suspension, but he felt the draft choice penalty and the fines have a more lasting effect on the franchise. That's a fine premise, but spying affects the outcome of individual games. Taking Belichick out of one game could affect the Patriots' chances of making the playoffs. For example, he's still coaching Sunday's game against the Chargers, and if he wins, he will have a potential home field tie-breaker if the two teams finish with the same record.
Here's the problem with Goodell's decision. Whether by design or not, the Patriots had themselves covered for such a penalty because they are so good at what they do. They acquired the 49ers' first-round pick in a trade that enabled the 49ers to select Joe Staley. They have an additional third-round pick from the Raiders in a trade. They have enough draft choices to survive the loss of one first-round choice.
Initial reaction around the league was negative. At the very least, Belichick should have been suspended one or two games along with the draft choice penalties. Those two games could be the difference between the Patriots making the playoffs or not making the playoffs. They have a tough schedule, and it will be hard for them to win more than 11 games with the quality of opponents they'll face.
Umm . . . if you're arguing that the Pats will have trouble winning more than 11 games, then:
(A) you're already assuming the Pats are probably going to lose to San Diego anyways, so what difference would not having Belichick make?
(B) aren't you're also arguing that the JEST (or, even more improbably, the Bills or Dolphins) can do better in their 12 games against common opponents than the Patriots can?
About the only difference a suspension would have made is whether or not the Pats have a first-round bye, not whether they make the playoffs or not.