Getting really tired of this Pats* cheater stuff.

[Kelso_Helmet]

i really wish the Bills' were good so we wouldn't spend so much time fighting for table scraps from other team's message boards.

[billsfan in n.h]

Pretty noble thoughts from a group that 50% of would have no problem with a junk QB who spent 6 years smashing dogs heads into concrete floors."But he could win some games!!!! He paid his dues!!!"

Please give me other examples of cheating [proven] besides vidio taping a DC.

you know what,he got caught paid his dues kept his nose clean and now he is helping lead his team to victory. you know good and well if he was our qb you would have been jumping out of your chair this past sunday with the game he played

[The Dean]

you know what,he got caught paid his dues kept his nose clean and now he is helping lead his team to victory. you know good and well if he was our qb you would have been jumping out of your chair this past sunday with the game he played

 

 

Please. He was let off with a slap on the wrist from the legal system and virtually no punishment whatsoever from the NFL. And I guess since he hasn't been arrested again since leaving jail, we have to assume he is "keeping his nose clean"? What a farce.

[bills44]

What next? Are we going to have a thread complaining about Wilfork's reputation as a dirty player?

[The_Philster]

Please. He was let off with a slap on the wrist from the legal system and virtually no punishment whatsoever from the NFL. And I guess since he hasn't been arrested again since leaving jail, we have to assume he is "keeping his nose clean"? What a farce.

and that's likely because he has better lawyers now than he had before...he was definitely on the scene when his old buddy got shot...and I still think he had some part to play in the shooting itself

[stony]

I'd rather they laugh their butts off at us than have them think of us as shiftless rule-breakers. At least if you're bad, you have the potential to be good at some point. But the taint of that scandal belongs to the Pats forever.

 

And for the record, I think there's a snowball's chance that we go 0-16 this year. I would take 16 losses, though, over one illegitimate victory.

 

That's not exactly true, look at us.

[The Senator]

Senator, that was awesome! Thanks for a good laugh in this disturbing thread.

My pleasure - I am led to think the part about the visitors' bench is actually true, and will be watching very closely at halftime tomorrow!

 

Marcia* seems to think she'll* have an easier time now that Aaron Schobel's retired...

 

“I’m glad he’s gone,” Brady* said. “He kept me* up a lot of nights before the games. He was a dominant player for them. I’m* glad he’s retired.”

 

link

 

As I recall, Kelsay also put Brady* on her* ass* with great ease and frequency as well - I expect to see a very angry Marcia* post-game presser!

GO BILLSSS!!!!

Edited September 25, 2010 by The Senator

[Punch]

Not trying to defend this - but the league's response puts these two situations in different categories. One - a problem to be solved, the other - a 'crime' to be punished.

 

Of course you're right, if it wasn't illegal at the time then it isn't exactly "apples to apples" with the Patriots' myriad indiscretions... but the fact remains that in using performance enhancing drugs the Steelers willfully stacked the deck in their favor, which is cheating regardless of legality. Mark McGwire will likely never get voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame for using HGH, which was legal at the time that he used it. But his home run numbers are considered artificially inflated and thus he insulted the integrity of the game.

 

The '70s Steelers are not really viewed in that same light, despite the fact they are essentially guilty of the same thing. The NFL has always been much more willing to sweep their dirt under the rug than any other league, while MLB has tended to crucify it's own for the "greater good".

[Malazan]

? I don't get it. Details help the reader.

 

I think most people get it. Only you need the additional details.

[Mr. WEO]

Since there is no rule against stealing signals, what if NE deciphered opposing signals the old fashioned way (the way it has been done by all teams since signalling began)by having staffers record their observations of the opposing signalers? Is that cheating?

 

If the answer is no then what is the moral dilemma being discussed?

 

If the answer is yes, than what team hasn't stolen signals (cheated)?

Any of the righteous want to answer this simple question?

[Punch]

Any of the righteous want to answer this simple question?

 

There's nothing righteous about any of this--- of course it's still cheating.

 

Perhaps stealing signals "the old fashioned way" falls under the notion of "honor amongst thieves" which makes it appear relatively acceptable since "everyone does it". But it's still cheating. Using cameras is a level so far beyond sportsmanlike---- it's the difference between mugging someone at knife point or just shooting them with a gun. Both are wrong but the second one is much worse.

[Mr. WEO]

There's nothing righteous about any of this--- of course it's still cheating.

 

Perhaps stealing signals "the old fashioned way" falls under the notion of "honor amongst thieves" which makes it appear relatively acceptable since "everyone does it". But it's still cheating. Using cameras is a level so far beyond sportsmanlike---- it's the difference between mugging someone at knife point or just shooting them with a gun. Both are wrong but the second one is much worse.

Well if everyone does it (and always has), is it not part of the game? And why would any DC simply give his signals away in broad daylight? Why would they not change their signals?

 

Decades ago, in response to a question as to whether there needed to be new rules or penalties against stealing signals, Wellington Mara said, to paraphrase, "we don't need new rules, we need new signals".

[Punch]

Well if everyone does it (and always has), is it not part of the game? And why would any DC simply give his signals away in broad daylight? Why would they not change their signals?

 

Decades ago, in response to a question as to whether there needed to be new rules or penalties against stealing signals, Wellington Mara said, to paraphrase, "we don't need new rules, we need new signals".

 

Mara was right, of course, because participants are always going to try and find ways to circumvent the rules. The desperation to win games is equivalent to an animal being cornered. An animal will stop at nothing to get out of that corner, including ripping someone/thing's eyes out.

 

But sports have rules, and even though there will always be attempts to get around those rules, they are in place to serve a purpose; namely, to ensure both teams are playing on an even field.

 

I want to watch athletes do anything to win, provided it's fair and legal. But we're not animals.

Edited September 25, 2010 by Punch

[stevestojan]

I mean what did they really do? Video the Jets defensive coordinator in a game they were going to win anyway?

My point is if it's that easy to win in the NFL, WHEN ARE THE BILLS GOING TO START CHEATING. I would love to see them take on that eye gouging, no holds barred attitude. Pay off refs? Fine go for it. Microphone's in the opposing teams locker room? Do it.

Fine put a * next to their SB win. Chan-a cheat has a nice ring to it.

 

Ya know what? I agree with you 100%.

[The Dean]

Mara was right, of course, because participants are always going to try and find ways to circumvent the rules.

 

SOME participants are going to try and find was to circumvent the rules. They are called "cheaters".

 

And to address WEO's typically stupid question, if the Pats* thought taping gave them no better edge than simply stealing signals, why did they bother to do it? Clearly they MUST have believed taping gave them an edge. Otherwise why devote the manpower, tape and risk getting caught? As usual, WEO's "logic" fails to hold water.

[Punch]

SOME participants are going to try and find was to circumvent the rules. They are called "cheaters".

 

And to address WEO's typically stupid question, if the Pats* thought taping gave them no better edge than simply stealing signals, why did they bother to do it? Clearly they MUST have believed taping gave them an edge. Otherwise why devote the manpower, tape and risk getting caught? As usual, WEO's "logic" fails to hold water.

 

Well, of course that's what I intended.

 

I don't really see any room for debate. Cheating is cheating is cheating, whether you plug it in or write it down.

[Mr. WEO]

SOME participants are going to try and find was to circumvent the rules. They are called "cheaters".

 

And to address WEO's typically stupid question, if the Pats* thought taping gave them no better edge than simply stealing signals, why did they bother to do it? Clearly they MUST have believed taping gave them an edge. Otherwise why devote the manpower, tape and risk getting caught? As usual, WEO's "logic" fails to hold water.

It's not really a stupid question, if you think about it. Also, your response doesn't address it at all. Read it again.

 

Regardless, your logic leaves a bit to be desired, Dean. Just because someone believes a certain behavior gives them an advantage, that doesn't make it so. Every superstitious ritual performed by a player before heading out to the field or the batter's box is testament to this, as is obsessive compulsive behavior. No doubt BB felt he had an advantage in stealing signals in this way--no need to state the obvious. But whether he gained an in game advantage (the rule he broke) has been debated outside of TSW.

 

Look, Marv once boasted that he had "the best signal stealer in the league". No doubt Levy was also convinced that stealing signals was to his advantage (as were all other coaches--including Coach Mudd, the Thomas Edison of video taping). How do we know he didn't have a guy in the stands with a foam finger in one hand and a super 8 in the other? Since Marv boldly described he and the Bills as cheaters, did you discount their 4 AFC Championships? Since the crime is illicitly knowing the opponent's signals (cheating is cheating, no?), logic would dictate that you would have to.

 

Just because you smoke a pipe and wear an ascot, you aren't necessarily in a position to label others stupid.

[Green Lightning]

 

Certainly hard to believe he's a Bills fan. I think this is a great idea. Who in their right mind wants their team to cheat as to show passion or will to win? That's just frickin stupid. Jim, this has got to be one of the worst threads this year. Seriously.

 

Amen

[Pneumonic]

And to address WEO's typically stupid question, if the Pats* thought taping gave them no better edge than simply stealing signals, why did they bother to do it? Clearly they MUST have believed taping gave them an edge. Otherwise why devote the manpower, tape and risk getting caught? As usual, WEO's "logic" fails to hold water.

Obviously, since Belichick taped signals he believed their was potential value in doing so. Afterall he's as anal as they come in not leaving a stone unturned.

 

But, taping opposition signals isn't the issue here. It's the manner in which these signals were taped that's the problem. And, Belichick already addressed the reason why he taped them as he did .... because the by-laws, as he interpreted them, don't disallow the taping of the signals provided they aren't used DURING the game. As Belichick stated, he was using them for future contests. All teams advance scouts future opposition.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Pneumonic

[The Dean]

Belichick already addressed the reason why he taped them as he did .... because the by-laws, as he interpreted them, don't disallow the taping of the signals provided they aren't used DURING the game.

 

Yes, I'm sure Bill was very very honest in his "explanation". How DARE we doubt his intentions?