Turn Off Ads?
Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 91516171819
Results 271 to 279 of 279

Thread: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

  1. #271
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,850

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    I only used Romeo as an example because it is obvious you are a Browns fan. Obviously it didn't cost Bill his job, he has won 3 Super Bowls. My point is there are a lot more Romeo's than there are Bill's coaching in the NFL.

    Edit, I see blumj covered this while I was typing this post.

    You are right, Belichick knew he would get punished somehow and he did. But now he has mark on his record. Belichick can only guess how much worse the penalty will be if he does it again. For the sake of the discussion you'd have to assume further infractions will only generate a harsher response from the league.

    Quote Originally Posted by GAC View Post
    One game? No. But you're not gonna convince me that Belichick only did this for one game. I believe it was a pattern of behavior. I'm not saying he was doing it every week; but only as he felt it was needed. Depended on his opponent. He finally got caught. Just my opinion.
    I wasn't implying that it was only one game. I know it probably was more. But the penalty handed down by the league was for an infraction during the Jets game, not for a bunch of infractions that many are IMPLYING took place over a number of years. The end result is they taped the Jets and for their trouble they lost a first round pick. The Browns tape the Steelers and they are going to get a similar penalty. If they go and tape every opponent they have and the league finds out, look out.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #272
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,333

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    Quote Originally Posted by MaineRed View Post
    Not wrong. Your quote from Brian Billick just backed me up.
    Nah, it didn't. But after your performance in this thread, I anticipated such a spin attempt. Just posting an update on the situation to Chip who, unlike you, didn't rush to judgment on "snapgate".

    Now Billick has exonerated Mangini and Belichick's still a cheater.

    But do carry on.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  4. #273
    THAT'S A FACT JACK!! GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,668

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    Quote Originally Posted by MaineRed View Post
    You are right, Belichick knew he would get punished somehow and he did. But now he has mark on his record. Belichick can only guess how much worse the penalty will be if he does it again.
    If he is stupid enough to do it again, then even Kraft won't save his job. But I don't think Bill is that stupid.

    It may have put a "mark" on his record, his rep has taken a hit; but IMHO, and I've alwayds felt this way and this incident is not going to change it.... he has been and still is one of the premier coaches in the NFL.

    I realize he has his enemies. Especially among various fans. But I have always respcted the guy and what he has accomplished in his career. I can still remember when he was the LB coach and then defensive coordinator for the Giants under Parcels.

    When the Browns hired him I was ecstatic.

    He didn't get where he was out by cheating. I know some may contend that since this incident, but if so, I'd have to disagree with them.

    They'll lose a 1st rounder because that division stinks, and IMO, they'll coast into the post-season.
    Last edited by GAC; 09-22-2007 at 05:00 AM.
    "panic" only comes from having real expectations

  5. #274
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,850

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    Nah, it didn't. But after your performance in this thread, I anticipated such a spin attempt. Just posting an update on the situation to Chip who, unlike you, didn't rush to judgment on "snapgate".
    Spin is when you claim the Pats paid the NFL to move up in the draft, like your friend Chip.

    BTW, Billick might have apologized but that doesn't take away what he said, just like Belichick apologizing doesn't take away his actions.

    My comment was that all NFL teams, "cheat" in some form or fashion. The exact quote from Billick, "we all do it".

    We all cheat. Just like I told you.

    Continue to refute it. I don't care. The truth is out there.

    I'm done with this conversation.
    When you post this six pages ago and then continue to argue you lose all credibility. Not sure what you think threats to end the conversation accomplish. Did you think I was suddenly going to start agreeing with you over the potential loss of you as a conversation partner?

    Stop acting like someone is holding a gun to your head to get you to post in this thread.

    The thread is about football, not you.
    Last edited by MaineRed; 09-22-2007 at 07:24 AM.

  6. #275
    Member TeamCasey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    TeamBoone's Attic
    Posts
    12,317

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    Have we figured out who can pee the farthest yet?
    Pots and Kettles

  7. #276
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,333

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    Quote Originally Posted by MaineRed View Post
    When you post this six pages ago and then continue to argue you lose all credibility. Not sure what you think threats to end the conversation accomplish. Did you think I was suddenly going to start agreeing with you over the potential loss of you as a conversation partner?
    No, but I had a hope that you'd begin to exhibit some kind of non-fallacious logic during debate. Instead, we got a checklist of argumentum ad homenim (including bouts of circumstancial ad hominem), appeals to ridicule, emotion, common practice, authority, a parade of straw men, a bushel barrel of red herrings. Well, and a whole heck of a lot of pulling partial quotes dramatically out of context. Here's one:

    SteelSD: I'm done with this conversation.
    Here's the actual quote:

    SteelSD: Now, unless you'd actually care to talk about Bill Belichick's cheating rather than everything else that has nothing to do with Bill Belichick's cheating, I'm done with this conversation.
    Hmn. Those two quotes seem to have a completely different meanings. I wonder why? After my next couple of attempts to help you understand the circumstances and reality of the Wade Wilson situation, I determined you had long since jumped the shark on the Belichick topic and I left the conversation. I returned to post an update in reply to a prior post by made by Chip. Had nothing to do with you. Our discussion had long since been over.

    However, I knew you'd probably read that post and attempt to blow the Billick "We all do it." sound byte way out of proportion. Yet I still posted the entire article rather than just presenting a limited quote of: “I was being critical of the officiating,” Billick said. “It had nothing to do with Eric Mangini."

    I did that in order to be intellectually honest, even knowing that you'd attempt to spin.

    See, here's the thing...NFL players consistently attempt to cheat. They try to disrupt snap counts. They hold. They interfere with a receiver (or defender) while the ball approaches. They jump offsides inorder to get a jump on the offense. They flinch in order to attempt to draw a defensive lineman offsides.

    The NFL deals with that by having their officials call penalties. That's what Billick was talking about. It's clear. He said it. Billick was ticked off about something that allegedly happened on the field of play. In no way does Billick (the allegedly offended party) state that he felt Mangini was a part of what he thinks happened on the field of play. Let me give you Mangini's recap of his conversation with Billick just to show you how clear that should be:

    “I talked to Brian and we had a good conversation,” Mangini said. “It was important for me to talk to him and make sure we didn’t have a misunderstanding. We don’t coach things to cause penalties.”
    The bolded portion is incredibly poignant because if Billick disagreed with that assertion, he had every opportunity to hang up the phone and call out Mangini. Such an event would have been akin to an NBA coach calling out another because he felt an opposing coach told his player(s) to cough "Miss it!" while an opposing player attempted a free throw.

    And using your thought process, we don't actually know if the Jets' players were trying to disrupt snap counts. Billick thinks they did, but the officials never caught it. So did it happen? According to you, if no one saw it and no one heard it then it did not. The Jets certainly never received a penalty for it. Yet you've assumed that it did indeed happen and that it was indeed a result of Eric Mangini telling his players to act in such a way to make it happen. All based on press reports that may or may not have been accurate (and ultimately weren't).

    The interesting thing is that you're holding Mangini to an entirely different standard than you're holding Belichick. You've consistently defended Belichick using an methodology that relies on not knowing intent or degree of potential impact. In fact, you've been forwarding a position that excludes Belichick from being labeled a "cheater"; but rather just a rule-breaker. Yet without a second thought, you glommed onto the Jets/Ravens "issue" and immediately labeled Mangini a "cheater" without any evidence whatsoever.

    Were you in the Jets' locker room before the game? Were you there during training camp to hear Mangini tell his players to mimic snap counts in order to disrupt the offense? Those are your standards. Yet, without even considering that you'd be held feet to fire as to that standard, you wrote this on September 19th:

    MaineRed: Thank goodness for Brian Billick. I wonder what bridge Mangini burned that Billick felt compelled to expose Mangini as a cheater.
    Well, Billick was beside himself that he put Mangini in that position with his comments, but you sure glommed onto that description, didn't you?

    The ironic part is that it doesn't matter if anyone else has cheated pretty much ever, because Bill Belichick has now been tried and convicted of cheating. Other assumed bad behavior doesn't excuse Belichick's bad behavior. Unfortunately, the NFL decided they shouldn't enforce a huge penalty and they've now destroyed the evidence the Pats saw fit to give them. Yawn.

    Going forward, every team will have to change up their defensive signals versus the Pats as long as Belichick is their Head Coach. The Steelers were already doing that as they heard the rumblings years prior, but that's an ongoing competitive advantage that really can't be accounted for regardless of the amount of cheating Belichick has done in the past. Heck, it's possible that every team in the league will now have to make modifications to their defensive signals just because they're concerned about being "Belichicked" by some other team.

    In short, Belichick is the poster boy for how a single unethical person could cause a paradigm shift in how games are planned on a weekly basis.

    Stop acting like someone is holding a gun to your head to get you to post in this thread.
    I've never acted as such and I don't at all appreciate yet another misrepresentation. Our conversation was done a long time ago and you only stoked it up again to misrepresent a sound byte from Brian Billick after I responded to someone who wasn't you.

    The thread is about football, not you.
    This thread isn't about football. It's about ethics. Considering your debate style, I understand why you don't realize that.

    I like debate. It's why I hang longer than most when push comes to shove. Considering your attention to detail, you could be good at it should you discontinue a goodly number of really bad angles.
    Last edited by SteelSD; 09-22-2007 at 11:20 PM.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  8. #277
    THAT'S A FACT JACK!! GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,668

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    Quote Originally Posted by TeamCasey View Post
    Have we figured out who can pee the farthest yet?
    It took me a case of beer to get this far! :
    "panic" only comes from having real expectations

  9. #278
    Member blumj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Northern MA
    Posts
    4,609

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    I'm sorry, but it's the toy department. It's my team, I forgive them, and I believe in them. I do not now, nor did I before, believe that the NFL is some mythical paradise where everyone else plays by the rules. They are not some collection of mediocre talents who need to cheat to win. Anyone else who wants to believe that is entitled to believe that. Anyone else who wants to believe that they're the only ones who've ever done anything this bad and gotten away with it, is entitled to believe that. As a certain extremely arrogant and socially inept football coach with very questionable ethics has been known to say, it is what it is.
    "Reality tells us there are no guarantees. Except that some day Jon Lester will be on that list of 100-game winners." - Peter Gammons

  10. #279
    CELEBRATION TIME RBA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    San Marcos, CA
    Posts
    13,984

    Re: Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

    Luckily, I don't have to defend my Oakland Raiders against charges of cheating every week.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25