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?

[Doc]

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.

Pregame rituals don't get players into trouble. And usually they're little more than some small gesture, like wearing the same unwashed socks. Doing something you know is wrong (eg. taking PEDs) and for which there are severe consequences (like being suspended, or losing a 1st rounder and $750K) is ONLY done when there is something to be gained from it. Especially if you've been warned previously.

 

As for Levy, who did he have? A guy with a pair of binoculars and the ability to lip-read? Yes, that's something I'd be willing to admit "everyone does it." There's no rule against it though. There is however a rule against videotaping.

 

As for Howie Mudd, like I told you before, some off-hand comment by Belichick's fishing buddy Jimmy Johnson doesn't count for much. That Belichick and the Pats didn't fight the penalty, or offer-up Mudd or the alleged plethora of other teams illegally videotaping speaks volumes.

[Kevin]

I would rather go 0-16 than win a Superbowl under those circumstances.

 

Once you get caught cheating, you're illegitimate. It might not seem like much in the rush of the present, but think in terms of history. Do you honestly want the first Superbowl the Bills ever won to be tainted forever? You can think of football in a lot of different ways, but with the ever increasing emphasis on the NFL as a family oriented game (as evidenced by the increasingly stringent tailgating restrictions), you can't help but think about its impact on the next generation.

 

Do you want to implicitly tell your kids that it's okay to cheat to get ahead, because their favorite team did it and was successful in doing so? What the Patriots did is so much worse than steroid use. Steroids are most often used by an individual to perform at higher level than they could normally achieve, one way or the other. The Pats, however, did something that violated the rules on an organizational level. It was a conscious effort by at least a few powerful people in the Pats coaching staff/front office to do something they knew violated the rules.

 

Or maybe you don't care about winning with honor, dignity, or class. I'm not saying the guys all have to be saints (although I wish they played like they were Saints...), but win the right way. If Buffalo ever won that way, it would break my heart. I'd have to give up rooting for my team.

 

Hopefully you're trolling. If not though, I'm stunned.

 

With all do respect,

 

I am getting sick and tired of professional athletes/organizations sending messages to our kids on what is right and wrong. IT IS NOT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO TEACH MY CHILD THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG. It is MY responsibility! If my daughter looks at what Michael Vick did and thinks it is ok to do that to our dog, THEN I HAVE FAILED AS A PARENT! I have failed myself, my child, and my dog!

 

As a parent, it is YOUR responsibility to teach YOUR kid good sportsmanship, good morals and everything else that is required to be a good human being. Not the New England Patriots, Buffalo Bills, Lance Armstrong, Mark McGwire, etc. etc. etc.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Kevin

[ExiledInIllinois]

With all do respect,

 

I am getting sick and tired of professional athletes/organizations sending messages to our kids on what is right and wrong. IT IS NOT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO TEACH MY CHILD THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG. It is MY responsibility! If my daughter looks at what Michael Vick did and thinks it is ok to do that to our dog, THEN I HAVE FAILED AS A PARENT! I have failed myself, my child, and my dog!

 

As a parent, it is YOUR responsibility to teach YOUR kid good sportsmanship, good morals and everything else that is required to be a good human being. Not the New England Patriots, Buffalo Bills, Lance Armstrong, Mark McGwire, etc. etc. etc.

 

What happens if they don't listen to you and decide to listen to somebody else?

[Rex Ryan's Lapband]

What happens if they don't listen to you and decide to listen to somebody else?

They get a job coaching the New England Patriots.

 

(if they don't luck out with a 6th round, backup college QB... they get a job coaching the Cleveland Browns)

[uforesircher]

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.

 

get over it - they cheated - they got caught cheating - they are cheaters!

[Mr. WEO]

Pregame rituals don't get players into trouble. And usually they're little more than some small gesture, like wearing the same unwashed socks. Doing something you know is wrong (eg. taking PEDs) and for which there are severe consequences (like being suspended, or losing a 1st rounder and $750K) is ONLY done when there is something to be gained from it. Especially if you've been warned previously.

 

As for Levy, who did he have? A guy with a pair of binoculars and the ability to lip-read? Yes, that's something I'd be willing to admit "everyone does it." There's no rule against it though. There is however a rule against videotaping.

 

As for Howie Mudd, like I told you before, some off-hand comment by Belichick's fishing buddy Jimmy Johnson doesn't count for much. That Belichick and the Pats didn't fight the penalty, or offer-up Mudd or the alleged plethora of other teams illegally videotaping speaks volumes.

The point is that people will do something if they perceive an advantage, whether it exists or not. NE was crushing teams like never before and went undefeated into the SB after they stopped taping so what advantage were they really getting (or missing after they stopped)?

 

Levy was absolutely stealing signals-exactly how, we don't know. It's cheating. And, several respondents agree cheating is cheating--stealing signals no matter how is cheating. Everyone did it. "Off-hand comment"? JJ was responding to a direct question. And your persistent "fishing buddy" stuff is laughable. JJ is going to willfully tarnish his legacy and that of the teams he coached and that of a colleague for a guy he may have fished with on occasion (picture BB fishing??)?

 

Mudd never said anything when JJ named him as the guy who invented modern video stealing. That seems very odd. As is the fact that JJ would pick this obscure individual's name out of thin air when answering the question of whether he ever taped signals. As is the fact that not only did the owners not display any outrage over the Pats (and the League?) screwing several of them out of millions in merchandise money (stolen SBs), they publicly praised the League for the way it handled the investigation! Sounds like the owners didn't want to anybody looking too closely at how the rest of their coaches conducted their business. Any suggestion that they "kept quiet to maintain the integrity of the league" makes no sense at all. You don't maintain your integrity by giving the public the impression that you have none. The NFL would be just as popular today if they threw BB out of the league. They were afraid that their dirty little secret (cheating is commonplace in the NFL) would ruin them. They made a example of the most blatant and most recalcitrant (they had begged him to stop!) cheater but they couldn't really punish him too much, given what the owners all knew.

 

And, gee, the Pats didn't fight the suspension? "Hey, everyone else is doing it." Come on! Does that work when you get caught speeding? Why would they bother to prolong a PR nightmare?

[The Dean]

The point is that people will do something if they perceive an advantage, whether it exists or not. NE was crushing teams like never before and went undefeated into the SB after they stopped taping so what advantage were they really getting (or missing after they stopped)?

 

 

I see. So what you are really saying is, even though Belicheat believed he was gaining an advantage by taping teams, he wasn't. So now you think you know more than the coach whose balls you regularly tongue-bath on this board? Damn, you really are arrogant!

[Jim in Anchorage]

For those saying only Bills fans think the Pats* cheated that's a laugh. Anyone who reads a national online publication like PFT for example can see for themselves that fans League-wide despise the Pats* and call them out on their cheating to this day and I don't expect that to end anytime soon (if ever). You're a blind Pats* homer to think otherwise.

 

PS All this talk about the Cheats* made me go back last night before bed and crank up that SB game on my DVR. Best non-Bills game ever....

So you enjoy seeing the GIANTS win a SB? Man I don't know what to say.

[uforesircher]

So you enjoy seeing the GIANTS win a SB? Man I don't know what to say.

 

jim you are mixing apples with oranges now - you are now talking about something that is not congruent with the topic at hand.

 

the title of the thread is: "Getting really tired of this Pats* cheater stuff" - to that end i will say again: get over it. they cheated - they got caught cheating - therefore they are cheaters.

 

and btw - belicheat being on the competition committee is a travesty and a joke!

[Jim in Anchorage]

jim you are mixing apples with oranges now - you are now talking about something that is not congruent with the topic at hand.

 

the title of the thread is: "Getting really tired of this Pats* cheater stuff" - to that end i will say again: get over it. they cheated - they got caught cheating - therefore they are cheaters.

 

and btw - belicheat being on the competition committee is a travesty and a joke!

You might notice I quoted MattM on his rewatching "that" SB, and how much he enjoys it. I assume it was NE/Giants.

I frankly can't imagine enjoying seeing the Giants beat anyone but Dallas

[akm0404]

Was hoping the sour grapes, sore loser, crybaby crowd had given up in here but oh well.

 

You want to talk about teaching your children positive values - I'd speculate that teaching them that when you lose, the best thing you can do is to cry about it and call the other guy a cheater in a pathetic attempt to invalidate your own shortcomings is a good bit worse than pushing the envelope for competitive advantage.

 

But as Bills fans, we know little about pushing for competitive advantage these days. Our biggest organizational innovation in the last decade has been to sell our home games for literal cash money compensation.

 

Yeah, it stinks that the Patriots are so much better than us. But please stop the whole running home to mommy thing - we are already being laughed at on the field. Don't humiliate yourself on some dumb message boards too. Self respect is worth holding on to.

[Doc]

The point is that people will do something if they perceive an advantage, whether it exists or not. NE was crushing teams like never before and went undefeated into the SB after they stopped taping so what advantage were they really getting (or missing after they stopped)?

 

Levy was absolutely stealing signals-exactly how, we don't know. It's cheating. And, several respondents agree cheating is cheating--stealing signals no matter how is cheating. Everyone did it. "Off-hand comment"? JJ was responding to a direct question. And your persistent "fishing buddy" stuff is laughable. JJ is going to willfully tarnish his legacy and that of the teams he coached and that of a colleague for a guy he may have fished with on occasion (picture BB fishing??)?

 

Mudd never said anything when JJ named him as the guy who invented modern video stealing. That seems very odd. As is the fact that JJ would pick this obscure individual's name out of thin air when answering the question of whether he ever taped signals. As is the fact that not only did the owners not display any outrage over the Pats (and the League?) screwing several of them out of millions in merchandise money (stolen SBs), they publicly praised the League for the way it handled the investigation! Sounds like the owners didn't want to anybody looking too closely at how the rest of their coaches conducted their business. Any suggestion that they "kept quiet to maintain the integrity of the league" makes no sense at all. You don't maintain your integrity by giving the public the impression that you have none. The NFL would be just as popular today if they threw BB out of the league. They were afraid that their dirty little secret (cheating is commonplace in the NFL) would ruin them. They made a example of the most blatant and most recalcitrant (they had begged him to stop!) cheater but they couldn't really punish him too much, given what the owners all knew.

 

And, gee, the Pats didn't fight the suspension? "Hey, everyone else is doing it." Come on! Does that work when you get caught speeding? Why would they bother to prolong a PR nightmare?

Again, if everyone truly does do a particular thing to cheat, it's a non-issue since, well, everyone is doing it! This isn't a hard concept to understand for most, doc. That the league levied the harshest penalty possible against the Pats, didn't didn't say "everyone does it, nothing to see here" so as to end the "PR nightmare," and the Pats didn't attempt to clear their name (that's why they would fight it chief, despite the on-going "PR nightmare"), tells us most of what we need to know. That you think they were wrongfully punished for doing something many teams were allegedly doing, yet "took one for the team," is laughable at best. But par for the course when it comes to you and the Pats.

 

Yes, JJ's being a fishing buddy of Belichick means something, because it taints his credibility/objectiveness on the matter. Surely even you know that friends cover for each other, especially when there are NO repercussions for the one sticking-up for the other. I mean, what was anyone going to do to JJ for his comments about Mudd? Take away a 1st round pick? Dock him $750K? Not to mention the allegations about Mudd were from a decade ago and almost as irrelevant as the Steelers using steroids back in the 70's, before they were even banned.

 

But keep on "not defending" the Pats, doc.

 

Was hoping the sour grapes, sore loser, crybaby crowd had given up in here but oh well.

 

You want to talk about teaching your children positive values - I'd speculate that teaching them that when you lose, the best thing you can do is to cry about it and call the other guy a cheater in a pathetic attempt to invalidate your own shortcomings is a good bit worse than pushing the envelope for competitive advantage.

Tell this drivel to Bernie Madoff's clients. "Hey, you lost. Suck it up."

 

But if you want to tell your kids to bend over and take it, go right ahead. It's a free country (for now).

[billsfan in n.h]

dont know if it has been posted but... the cowboys cheated in our 2nd superbowl.so says jimmy johnson. one of their guys was in the stands watching our walk thru and told the "boys" what to look for. like the shuttle pass. PATS STILL SUCK!!!

[ax4782]

Was hoping the sour grapes, sore loser, crybaby crowd had given up in here but oh well.

 

You want to talk about teaching your children positive values - I'd speculate that teaching them that when you lose, the best thing you can do is to cry about it and call the other guy a cheater in a pathetic attempt to invalidate your own shortcomings is a good bit worse than pushing the envelope for competitive advantage.

 

But as Bills fans, we know little about pushing for competitive advantage these days. Our biggest organizational innovation in the last decade has been to sell our home games for literal cash money compensation.

 

Yeah, it stinks that the Patriots are so much better than us. But please stop the whole running home to mommy thing - we are already being laughed at on the field. Don't humiliate yourself on some dumb message boards too. Self respect is worth holding on to.

 

The last sentence of this post was the only one that made sense, and unfortunately, was wholly oxymoronic. When you cheat and win, not once, not twice, but documented cheating before SB games? Where should that person's self-respect be found? In the trash. No one here is "crying to mommy" about the Pats beating the Bills because they were cheating. I'm certainly not. However, there was discussion at the time of the scandal that the Pats were doing this to teams like the Lions. Really? You needed video to beat the Lions in 2004-5? The discussion about the Patriots cheating to win games has nothing to do with the fact that they beat Buffalo all those years. We were so bad, they wouldn't have needed to do that to win. Sorry but that's true and any fan who watched the games here can and should admit that.

 

What the argument is about,is that the NFL and the sports news commentators continue their love affair with the Patriots for being such a great team and how they won all those Super Bowls and all those games etc. etc. The problem is, with all cheaters, their legacy should be tarnished. If a college team had done something like this, their title would have been taken away. That would have been the appropriate message to send to the Pats, taking their titles away for the years there was evidence they cheated. But, instead, they got a slap on the wrist, because the NFL couldn't afford to lose any of their fan base in the Northeast. That's the point of this

 

As for the parenting comments, yes parents are primarily responsible for teaching their children values and morals, and should hope that their children listen. But children have role models in society and people that they look up to. Those persons can influence what children do regardless of what a parent may tell them. And if everyone else tells them its okay to do X (i.e. cheat)but you tell them to do Y (i.e. not cheat) they would, perhaps be conflicted yes? Perhaps not in the perfect polly world where kids do everything their parents do, but in real life, yes. And if everyone is endorsing the idea that cheating is okay, and all you'll get is a slap on the wrist, but nothing else bad will happen to you, what do you think they're going to do? So to suggest that other people besides parents don't have ANY influence in how children make decisions, is perhaps misjudged.