http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/sports/f...&ei=5087%0A</p> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Two crisis-management experts used the same word — fishy — to describe the league’s handling of the situation, saying the destruction of the tapes raised questions about what they contained.</p> “When you destroy evidence, most people assume guilt,”</p> Tortorella points to the N.B.A. in comparison. When the referee scandal surfaced earlier this year, Commissioner David Stern went on national television and gave a sincere-sounding apology. In these different reactions, Tortorella said the N.B.A. came down on its crisis like a “ton of bricks” — the N.F.L. like a “ton of feathers.”</p> “Roger Goodell learned what Richard Nixon did not,” Tortorella said. “If the tapes are destroyed, you keep your job.”</p> “It will eventually die down, all this Spygate stuff,”... “But it’s going to be there for a while. Every time they win, it’s going to surface.”</div></p> <nyt_update_bottom></nyt_update_bottom></p>
No it wasn't handled correctly. There shouldn't have been a fine more than 10,000 bucks for both the coach and the team no picks taken from the team.</p> "ton of feathers"</p> The reporter didn't have to pay the fine so he can say that.</p> </p>
CK is right. It wasn't handled correctly. Belicheck should have been suspended and the Patriots should have lost both 1st rounders or lose one with the second pushed to the end of the first round. That a coach could be found guilty of cheating and not miss a game is hypocritical in light of how players are delt with.</p>
He wasn't cheating, he couldn't have used the tape since it was in the early part of the first quarter. So there you go DolfanDale.</p> Ne never cheated, or shall I say never was caught cheating. Recording someone and not being able to use that is not cheating, its an attempt to cheat which, I say again, every coach and team has and will try to do. (attemt to cheat, gain an advantage over the opponent)</p>
It is illegal to record another teams defensive signals, its not actually listed as illegal to use them if you have them....so he was caught cheating and admitted to it....they should have forfeited the game, been barred from the playoffs for one year, had Belicheck issued a lifetime ban, lost thier 2008 draft class and been fined $10 million....thats how you send a message about cheating....</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> He wasn't cheating, he couldn't have used the tape since it was in the early part of the first quarter. So there you go DolfanDale.</p> Ne never cheated, or shall I say never was caught cheating. Recording someone and not being able to use that is not cheating, its an attempt to cheat which, I say again, every coach and team has and will try to do. (attemt to cheat, gain an advantage over the opponent)</p> </div></p> My mom works at a drug store and she's always surprised when shoplifters expect the store to let them go when they are caught shoplifting. After it's not a crime if they didn't get away with it, right? Maybe you could explain it to her, CK!</p> </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> He wasn't cheating, he couldn't have used the tape since it was in the early part of the first quarter. So there you go DolfanDale.</p> Ne never cheated, or shall I say never was caught cheating. Recording someone and not being able to use that is not cheating, its an attempt to cheat which, I say again, every coach and team has and will try to do. (attemt to cheat, gain an advantage over the opponent)</p> </div></p> My mom works at a drug store and she's always surprised when shoplifters expect the store to let them go when they are caught shoplifting. After it's not a crime if they didn't get away with it, right? Maybe you could explain it to her, CK!</p> </p> </div></p> Dude, those kids were caught stealing.</p> Try again, bring something else to make sense, cause you're not right now.</p> Go back and read what I wrote....he never used the tape so in return he never CHEATED!!!!!!!!</p> </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> He wasn't cheating, he couldn't have used the tape since it was in the early part of the first quarter. So there you go DolfanDale.</p> Ne never cheated, or shall I say never was caught cheating. Recording someone and not being able to use that is not cheating, its an attempt to cheat which, I say again, every coach and team has and will try to do. (attemt to cheat, gain an advantage over the opponent)</p> </div></p> My mom works at a drug store and she's always surprised when shoplifters expect the store to let them go when they are caught shoplifting. After it's not a crime if they didn't get away with it, right? Maybe you could explain it to her, CK!</p> </p> </div></p> Dude, those kids were caught stealing.</p> Try again, bring something else to make sense, cause you're not right now.</p> Go back and read what I wrote....he never used the tape so in return he never CHEATED!!!!!!!!</p> </p> </div></p> They were both caught with ill-gotten booty. Neither got out of store before being apprehended. What's the difference again?</p> </p>
Some of you have to let this thing go. How long has it been? And we're still whining and complaining? Seriously now. It was news a month ago, but I find it amusing how people continue to create threads about this incident.</p>
The focus of the article was the tape destruction. The journalist was right about 1 thing, it will be an issue as long as the Pats keep winning.</p> Dale's shoplifting analogy was spot on... though I don't think the cops destroyed the tape after the criminals got caught & received their punishment</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBeef)</div><div class='quotemain'></p> It is illegal to record another teams defensive signals, its not actually listed as illegal to use them if you have them....so he was caught cheating and admitted to it....they should have forfeited the game, been barred from the playoffs for one year, had Belicheck issued a lifetime ban, lost thier 2008 draft class and been fined $10 million....thats how you send a message about cheating....</p> </div></p> </p> Thats too soft of a punishment.</p> All games retroactive to the first incidents of taping should have been rerecorded as losses (fortunately for patriots fans the tapes have been destroyed to cover up the taint) All the patriots players statistical accomplishments for that period expunged from the record book. i.e brady didnt play any games throw any tds etc, etc. same for dillon, etc. etc. Belichek gets lifetime ban not only from coaching but from any involvement of any kind with any NFL activity. They should have been fined 50 million as a team and had that put as a cap hit over the next 3 years. Loss of the next 6 first rd picks (take a page from sterns punishment of the wolves)</p> </p> Obviously this would have changed super bowl history, as the patriots would still not have won a game as they have been cheating for a long time or godell wouldnt have needed to destroy the tapes if it was just one game.</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder @ Dec 16 2007, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'> The focus of the article was the tape destruction. The journalist was right about 1 thing, it will be an issue as long as the Pats keep winning.</p></div> Was the NFL supposed to let the Patriots keep their video library for future use? They were pretty clear at the outset that they wanted all the videos the Patriots had shot from the sidelines since the first memo so that they could be destroyed. I'm not sure why anyone was surprised by the NFL doing what it stated it was going to do.
You guys are idiots...this is in the past and nobody knows for sure how much of a competitive advantage it really gave to the Patriots. Did the tapes help Vinatieri kick field goals? Honestly..let it go.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ehmunro @ Jan 16 2008, 08:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder @ Dec 16 2007, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'> The focus of the article was the tape destruction. The journalist was right about 1 thing, it will be an issue as long as the Pats keep winning.</p></div> Was the NFL supposed to let the Patriots keep their video library for future use? They were pretty clear at the outset that they wanted all the videos the Patriots had shot from the sidelines since the first memo so that they could be destroyed. I'm not sure why anyone was surprised by the NFL doing what it stated it was going to do. </div> No, no one is stupid enough to suggest that the NFL let the Patriots keep their video library. Get real. Before the tapes were destroyed, the other NFL owners deserved to know what were on the tapes. More than that, NFL fans deserve to know what were on the tapes. Why? Because the NFL is asking us to buy into the integrity of the league. Knowing what is on the tapes would have allowed people to make a better assessment of how much the tapes helped the Patriots cheat their way to wins. Considering the speed with which Goodall destroyed the tapes, I have to conclude that Goodall is trying to protect Kraft and the Patriots and that's not his job. Goodall works for the NFL, not the Patriots.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ Jan 16 2008, 08:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You guys are idiots...this is in the past and nobody knows for sure how much of a competitive advantage it really gave to the Patriots. Did the tapes help Vinatieri kick field goals? Honestly..let it go.</div> 1. Do the personal attacks make you feel like a big man? How about keeping the discussion to football and working on supporting your arguments with substance? 2. Thanks for admitting that nobody knows for sure how much of a competitive advantage the tapes gave the Patriots. It could have been little. It could have been a whole lot. Thanks to Roger Goodall's Oliver North impersonation we probably will never know. 3. It could have have helped Vinatieri kick field goals. If the Patriots got a good rush because of the signals, it could have affected field position and put Vinatieri in a better position to kick field goals. Obviously, Belicheat thought that getting the signals was a competitive advantage or he wouldn't have risked getting caught breaking the rules. 4. Talk to ehmunro about letting it go. This thread was dead until yesterday and I didn't bring it back up.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Jan 17 2008, 12:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ehmunro @ Jan 16 2008, 08:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder @ Dec 16 2007, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'> The focus of the article was the tape destruction. The journalist was right about 1 thing, it will be an issue as long as the Pats keep winning.</p></div> Was the NFL supposed to let the Patriots keep their video library for future use? They were pretty clear at the outset that they wanted all the videos the Patriots had shot from the sidelines since the first memo so that they could be destroyed. I'm not sure why anyone was surprised by the NFL doing what it stated it was going to do. </div> No, no one is stupid enough to suggest that the NFL let the Patriots keep their video library. Get real. Before the tapes were destroyed, the other NFL owners deserved to know what were on the tapes. More than that, NFL fans deserve to know what were on the tapes. Why? Because the NFL is asking us to buy into the integrity of the league. Knowing what is on the tapes would have allowed people to make a better assessment of how much the tapes helped the Patriots cheat their way to wins. Considering the speed with which Goodall destroyed the tapes, I have to conclude that Goodall is trying to protect Kraft and the Patriots and that's not his job. Goodall works for the NFL, not the Patriots. </div> The Patriots were not caught cheating. They were caught breaking a rule. Why do I say this? Because it IS LEGAL to video-tape as long as the video-taping location is enclosed on all sides with a roof. So, technically, BB could have had a guy in a pop-up travel trailer or tent on the sideline taping Mangini and co. and he would have been just fine. If you don't buy this then look it up.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder @ Dec 16 2007, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'> The focus of the article was the tape destruction. The journalist was right about 1 thing, it will be an issue as long as the Pats keep winning.</p> Dale's shoplifting analogy was spot on... though I don't think the cops destroyed the tape after the criminals got caught & received their punishment</p></div> No it wasn't. Not even close. Shoplifting or attempted shoplifting is illegal no matter what. Video-taping defensive signals IS NOT ILLEGAL IF YOU DO IT FROM A LOCATION THAT IS ENCLOSED ON ALL SIDES WITH A ROOF. Period.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Phinsuck @ Jan 17 2008, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder @ Dec 16 2007, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'> The focus of the article was the tape destruction. The journalist was right about 1 thing, it will be an issue as long as the Pats keep winning.</p> Dale's shoplifting analogy was spot on... though I don't think the cops destroyed the tape after the criminals got caught & received their punishment</p></div> No it wasn't. Not even close. Shoplifting or attempted shoplifting is illegal no matter what. Video-taping defensive signals IS NOT ILLEGAL IF YOU DO IT FROM A LOCATION THAT IS ENCLOSED ON ALL SIDES WITH A ROOF. Period. </div> Taping the game that is being played on the field is legal. It's never legal to tape signals.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Jan 17 2008, 12:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ehmunro @ Jan 16 2008, 08:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (blackadder @ Dec 16 2007, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'> The focus of the article was the tape destruction. The journalist was right about 1 thing, it will be an issue as long as the Pats keep winning.</p></div> Was the NFL supposed to let the Patriots keep their video library for future use? They were pretty clear at the outset that they wanted all the videos the Patriots had shot from the sidelines since the first memo so that they could be destroyed. I'm not sure why anyone was surprised by the NFL doing what it stated it was going to do. </div> No, no one is stupid enough to suggest that the NFL let the Patriots keep their video library. Get real. Before the tapes were destroyed, the other NFL owners deserved to know what were on the tapes. More than that, NFL fans deserve to know what were on the tapes. Why? Because the NFL is asking us to buy into the integrity of the league. Knowing what is on the tapes would have allowed people to make a better assessment of how much the tapes helped the Patriots cheat their way to wins. Considering the speed with which Goodall destroyed the tapes, I have to conclude that Goodall is trying to protect Kraft and the Patriots and that's not his job. Goodall works for the NFL, not the Patriots. </div> What was on the tapes was the video shot from the sidelines during the 2006 season. That was what the NFL requested for destruction so that New England wouldn't be able to use the footage. That's what New England turned over and what was destroyed. Teams that played the Patriots can go back and look at their own game tapes and see just what was on New England's tapes.
