The Wiz Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Sure they would. Hell, no punishment is going to change the fact that Belichick's a slimy egomaniac (ask his ex-wife. Or the Jets.) The only real impact this has is whether or not Brady and Belichick are first-ballot Hall-of-Famers. Right. I'm sure Pete Rose thought the same thing. Only difference between then and now is people had integrity back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanC883 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I'm not sure where the rest of TBD fall on this issue, but personally, I'd rather the Bills never with a championship that cheat to get one. Why is winning a Super Bowl so important to fans that they'd cheat to do it? The Bills don't hand out any money or rings or anything to the fans. It makes no practical difference in their lives. i agree with this. But, i would like to see the cheaters dealt with in some meaningful fashion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 The punishment also needs to fit the crime. Yes, they broke the rule. However, it's a stupid rule which should be tossed immediately. The league wants QB's to be comfortable with the balls they use in the game. They are allowed to practice with them all week, scuff them if they want, choose which ones are used in the game and the team has control of them throughout. Each team does this. I don't understand why there is a rule about PSI of the ball. If you want the QB to be most comfortable with the balls, let them be totally comfortable. I don't believe the Patriots had an unfair advantage, cheating yes, serious - no at all. oh boy...you are about to be skewered as a traitor, communist, and terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhg Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Cheating is and always will be part of sports. People tend to focus only on the most nefarious and clandestine, like Spygate or this football issue (which I find to be mundane and its impact way overstated and am more troubled by lying and refusal to own it). But outside of these major efforts to gain an advantage, holding is cheating. It creates an unfair advantage and if caught a penalty is handed down. But it's cheating. And many times those who cheat in this manner, or pass interference, don't get caught. Often it results directly in a win for the cheater. Yet it goes away a day or so later, only carried on by the team in the short end of the outcome who cry "we got screwed" and everyone else, in the "refs can't see everything, everywhere" camp chalk it up as part of the game, rather easily accepting it. It has pissed off this town twice: No Goal and the Music City Miracle. Both clearly cheating if in fact they were illegal. Now you may say, well it's about intent. In both those case, intent is unlikely. I doubt Hull intentionally was in the crease, like his entire focus was to get in the crease and score. And the MCM was just a bad pass by a non-QB, certainly unlikely to be intentional, but again if cheating is basically the act of eluding being caught for something illegal to gain an advantage, then its cheating. I think this issue is has risen to suck meteoric levels because of who it is. If this was the Buccaneers, now one would give a crap. The Patriots are good, have been for far too long. People want to knock them down and make this into more than it is. Who cares, lets move on. No Goal and Mudic City were not cheating. They were rule infractions during the course of 1 game that should have been called. Way different from the premeditated cheating that is looking like what happened with Brady. No comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) I said it when this came out: there was no downside. I can't think of a franchise that wouldn't trade being caught cheating for a Superbowl win. Kraft and Belichick are thrilled to have gotten away with this for just long enough. And Spygate? Who here would be upset if the Bills traded a half-million dollars and a first round draft pick for a couple years of dominance and playoff runs? The only real incentive is at the league's level, to protect the impression of the game's integrity so that it doesn't devolve into a complete farce. Ironically enough, if sports betting were legalized it might raise the stakes for cheating. So-called integrity of the game becomes even more important when you're trying to convince people to make big wagers on the outcome. Edited May 8, 2015 by Coach Tuesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Take away a college win and remove a banner...and very few people care. They had all the fun, and burned a few cars. Take away draft picks, and lots of them. That hurts in the NFL. (Oh, and give then to the Bills, of course.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 8, 2015 Author Share Posted May 8, 2015 The punishment also needs to fit the crime. Yes, they broke the rule. However, it's a stupid rule which should be tossed immediately. The league wants QB's to be comfortable with the balls they use in the game. They are allowed to practice with them all week, scuff them if they want, choose which ones are used in the game and the team has control of them throughout. Each team does this. I don't understand why there is a rule about PSI of the ball. If you want the QB to be most comfortable with the balls, let them be totally comfortable. I don't believe the Patriots had an unfair advantage, cheating yes, serious - no at all. You are overlooking the fact that under-inflated balls are easier to carry without fumbling. That's a huge advantage. Also, at what point is there too little air in the ball? You're gonna let teams carry a flat ball because they like it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) The Black Sox scandal of 1919 comes to mind, which saw eight (8) players of the Chicago White Sox banned for life. This was because they were throwing games, if this were to happen in the NFL and be proven you can bet there would be similar lifetime bans. A more similar offense in baseball is a corked bat or doctored baseball, which usually leads to what a 5 or 10 game ban? Which as a percentage of the schedule is equal to maybe one NFL half? Edited May 8, 2015 by Captain Caveman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Any fines or suspensions incurred along the way is just a cost of doing business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klos63 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 oh boy...you are about to be skewered as a traitor, communist, and terrorist. I know, I'm ready. You are overlooking the fact that under-inflated balls are easier to carry without fumbling. That's a huge advantage. Also, at what point is there too little air in the ball? You're gonna let teams carry a flat ball because they like it? I enjoy a serious conversation about this topic. It's very complex. So when you decide to be serious, please post again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) That got me thinking about the whole notion of cheating. Has any team ever had a title rescinded because of cheating? Australian Rugby(NRL) took away 2 titles from the Melbourne Storm for salary cap cheating. http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2010/apr/22/melbourne-storm-stripped-nrl-titles I have been baffled at the many, many responses from people recently who seem to think that Brady's cheating warrants only a 1-4 game suspension, and this from people who hate him and think he is guilty. IMO, any premeditated, focused and ongoing attempt to cheat should minimally hold a 1 year ban. Edited May 8, 2015 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 8, 2015 Author Share Posted May 8, 2015 (edited) I know, I'm ready. I enjoy a serious conversation about this topic. It's very complex. So when you decide to be serious, please post again. I an being serious. You called it a stupid rule. But if there is no rule on ball inflation, then a flat ball is legal. Edited May 8, 2015 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klos63 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 I an being serious. You called it a stupid rule. But if there is no rule on ball inflation, then a flat ball is legal. I guess by being serious, I was saying - do you seriously think a team would use of flat ball? Not really going to help the passing game. If you would like , I will state I am totally against having a totally flat ball to be legal. A few months back, I read about someone who was involved in creating this rule. He said it was a poorly written rule and he couldn't even remember why they made it a rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 8, 2015 Author Share Posted May 8, 2015 I guess by being serious, I was saying - do you seriously think a team would use of flat ball? Not really going to help the passing game. If you would like , I will state I am totally against having a totally flat ball to be legal. A few months back, I read about someone who was involved in creating this rule. He said it was a poorly written rule and he couldn't even remember why they made it a rule. Why would a rule standardizing game equipment be a silly rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klos63 Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Why would a rule standardizing game equipment be a silly rule? I don't believe it's standardizing game equipment. Unlike baseball, where the umpire/league is in control of all the balls, it would be crazy to let the pitchers control them, teams are allowed to practice with, break in, and adjust the PSI... , to truly standardize, the balls would be under league control throughout every aspect of the game, teams would not be allowed to control or choose balls to be used and the PSI would be the same for every ball for every team. Is silly the right word? maybe not, but I don't think it is a terribly crucial rule for the betterment of the game. If the league lets the teams control the game balls all week , in order for the qb to be very comfortable for maximum performance, let them put the PSI where the want also. If a QB has exceptionally large hands, is it an advantage to him that the rule allows for a higher PSI than other QB's would be comfortable with? Would that be an unfair advantage ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 It seems like you should definitely be on PED's as a young football or baseball player. They don't even test you extensively until the pros. By then you can already be a high draft pick making tons of money (examples: Merriman, the Boz, every baseball player in the last 20 yrs). The rewards outweigh the penalties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benderbender Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Who cares, lets move on. Who cares? Anyone who can remember the Tuck Rule debacle and Spygate. And with Deflate Gate coming to light, who knows how long they've been cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayoffsPlease Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Sure they would. Hell, no punishment is going to change the fact that Belichick's a slimy egomaniac (ask his ex-wife. Or the Jets.) The only real impact this has is whether or not Brady and Belichick are first-ballot Hall-of-Famers. They are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 The Patriots ineligible receiver trick play was another http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/article-1/Owners-Pass-Ban-On-Patriots-Ineligible-Receiver-Trick/aa52588d-47ff-4b0b-9bf5-65d759694c93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 It seems like you should definitely be on PED's as a young football or baseball player. They don't even test you extensively until the pros. By then you can already be a high draft pick making tons of money (examples: Merriman, the Boz, every baseball player in the last 20 yrs). The rewards outweigh the penalties A good example for the young people as they formulate their approach to life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts