Forum Topics II - where do we discuss this travesty?

Bottom line, Belichick and Brady will always have a taint on them. I hope Brady has a career ending injury this season and I hope Belichik gets crabs.

why just take out back and tar and feather them. Brady haters... 4 Rings baby. Because no matter what the games are played on the field.

I say any time the Patriots cheat going forward everyone on team is made free agent and Patriots are banned from resigning any of them and lose all their draft picks for a year.

Bottom line, Belichick and Brady will always have a taint on them. I hope Brady has a career ending injury this season and I hope Belichik gets crabs.

why just take out back and tar and feather them. Brady haters... 4 Rings baby. Because no matter what the games are played on the field.

I've always been a Brady fan; it's hard not to be with his amazing skills, clutch performances, and affability. That being said, his being part of this deflating practice--as well as his childish, classless way he's handled himself during the investigation--has diminished my respect for him considerably.

As to games being played on the field, there's an excellent new article in ESPN about how the Patriots taping of opposing coaches' signals--among other things--has been much more flagrant and systematic than anyone--except The Patriots, Arlen Specter, and the other NFL owners--knew. There is also considerable evidence that helped their Super Bowl victories against the Panthers and Eagles. That means the games may have been played on the field, but many of the Patriots' victories were likely won in Belichick's office and video room:

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/ ... iots-apart

There is also considerable evidence that helped their Super Bowl victories against the Panthers and Eagles.

This is the only reference to the Panthers in the ESPN article:

The Panthers now believe that their practices had been taped by the Patriots before Super Bowl XXXVIII in 2004. "Our players came in after that first half and said it was like [the Patriots] were in our huddle," a Panthers source says. During halftime -- New England led 14-10 -- Carolina's offensive coordinator, Dan Henning, changed game plans because of worries the Patriots had too close a read on Carolina's schemes. And, in the second half, the Panthers moved the ball at will before losing 32-29 on a last-second field goal. "Do I have any tape to prove they cheated?" this source says. "No. But I'm convinced they did it."

And this is the bit about the Eagles:

When Spygate broke, some of the Eagles now believed they had an answer for a question that had vexed them since they lost to the Patriots 24-21 in Super Bowl XXXIX: How did New England seem completely prepared for the rarely used dime defense the Eagles deployed in the second quarter, scoring touchdowns on three of four drives? The Eagles suspected that either practices were filmed or a playbook was stolen. "To this day, some believe that we were robbed by the Patriots not playing by the rules ... and knowing our game plan," a former Eagles football operations staffer says.


I don't see ANY actual evidence there, much less considerable evidence. I do see a considerable amount of sour grapes, paranoia, and unnamed sources though.

I don't see ANY actual evidence there, much less considerable evidence. I do see a considerable amount of sour grapes, paranoia, and unnamed sources though.

Yes, I should have said considerable circumstantial evidence, and there was. It was clear Belichick was emboldened by Goodell's cowardly destruction of the tapes, quashing of the investigation of the taping, and stonewalling of the congressional investigation of the cheating, and had continued his taping practices. That--coupled with Belichick making clear there he saw nothing wrong with cheating, as well as Matt Walsh's revealing the very probable taping of the Rams--makes it very likely Belichick would tape the Panthers and Eagles as well. Goodell had already made it clear avoiding bad publicity was more important than punishing heinous cheaters.

As to "sour grapes," if the coaches were right in their estimation, their being "poor sports" wouldn't negate the legitimacy of their complaints. And it would make sense Reid and ownership would disagree, since all NFL owners had already signed off on the pathetic destruction of the tapes and subsequent cover-up. And many sources in investigations of any kind are unnamed sources...e.g. Watergate. That doesn't in any way take away from their legitimacy; it only becomes relevant as to legality in an actual trial.

There is also considerable evidence that helped their Super Bowl victories against the Panthers and Eagles.

This is the only reference to the Panthers in the ESPN article:

The Panthers now believe that their practices had been taped by the Patriots before Super Bowl XXXVIII in 2004. "Our players came in after that first half and said it was like [the Patriots] were in our huddle," a Panthers source says. During halftime -- New England led 14-10 -- Carolina's offensive coordinator, Dan Henning, changed game plans because of worries the Patriots had too close a read on Carolina's schemes. And, in the second half, the Panthers moved the ball at will before losing 32-29 on a last-second field goal. "Do I have any tape to prove they cheated?" this source says. "No. But I'm convinced they did it."

And this is the bit about the Eagles:

When Spygate broke, some of the Eagles now believed they had an answer for a question that had vexed them since they lost to the Patriots 24-21 in Super Bowl XXXIX: How did New England seem completely prepared for the rarely used dime defense the Eagles deployed in the second quarter, scoring touchdowns on three of four drives? The Eagles suspected that either practices were filmed or a playbook was stolen. "To this day, some believe that we were robbed by the Patriots not playing by the rules ... and knowing our game plan," a former Eagles football operations staffer says.


I don't see ANY actual evidence there, much less considerable evidence. I do see a considerable amount of sour grapes, paranoia, and unnamed sources though.

Interesting, in that Henning's case could be that he had a predictable approach in the first half, and that he doesn't take credit for making halftime adjustments that improved things. Teams can figure out opponent game plans without enhanced scouting techniques. God knows, pretty much everyone figures out the Browns week after week.

The Eagles unveil a "rarely used" defensive scheme in the biggest game of the year, against arguably the best team in the league, and it didn't work. Again, maybe it was knowing the game plan, but it is easily conceivable the Eagles weren't adequately prepared to execute the new defense on the big stage.

Actually, teams rarely "figure out" opponent game plans without enhanced scouting techniques, although the best do a good job of seeing substantial trends and predicting particular plays of their opponents, to their benefit, without them. No scout or coach is as prescient and/or precognitive as those with a video tape or digital recording of the actual signals and plays...

Also, not all teams are the Patriots, and not all coaches are Bill Belichick. As the article noted, and as I noted above, the league had a huge amount of tapes proving Belichick had flagrantly and systematically taped numerous teams' signals and plays. And it was also clear Goodell quashed any substantial investigation and penalty of that taping, which emboldened Belichick to do it further.

So, since it was also apparent Belichick had taped the Rams (as well as many other teams), it was highly likely Belichick would do so against the Panthers and the Eagles, particularly since he knew Goodell wouldn't punish him and risk bad publicity. And of course it's "easily conceivable" the Eagles just screwed up. It's also easily conceivable Belichick taped their plays--including that "rarely used" scheme--and used that taping to help himself and the Patriots beat the Eagles in the Super Bowl. The same goes with Henning and the Panthers.

The Patriots did NOT tape the Rams. That was a false story that was discredited a long time ago. ESPN keeps forgetting this though.

Well, the article above sure suggested they did. Do you have a link showing that discreditation?

Either way, if the Rams weren't taped, they clearly have the privilege of being one of the teams Belichick and the Patriots didn't tape...

Here you go bro.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foo ... owl-report