Boston Globe Article on Patriots

[Tolstoy]

This is a good read. The Boston sports writers can surprise us sometimes.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patr...most_revealing/

[Billadelphia]

The only thing that I don't like about this article is the assumption that no matter what, they would have won those superbowls and that Belichick is still the best coach.

 

"The sad truth is that he is the best coach. All reasonable people know that the 2007 season was 100 percent legitimate."

 

False. Coaching is so much more than X's and O's. More than anything, it's about your players respecting you enough to go out and do what you say. It's also about being a leader; a figurehead of a team and of a city. What Belichick is doing right now is slowly deteriorating his reputation that's been built up over the years. Everyone knows that he did it, but he still isn't giving in and admitting it.

 

He's slowly peeling the bandaid off the wound rather than just manning up and saying that what he did was wrong. How many times from childhood until adulthood was this lesson pounded into everyone's heads? You steal a candy bar as a kid and your parents take you back to the store and you give it back and admit that what you did was wrong. A teacher finds a cheat sheet on the floor in a classroom, but doesn't know whose it is so the whole class gets punished until the person responsible stands up and takes responsibility. It definitely hurts for a few minutes, but in the end, its the right thing to do, and everyone knows it. It's the kind of stuff that builds character and actually earns you respect, rather than takes away from it.

 

How are his players supposed to go out and listen to him now? I don't think that I could do it knowing that you have a proven liar as your figurehead. What the article should have said is that he's got the X's & O's down pat, but until he admits to his wrongdoings, he's never going to be the "best coach" in the eyes of his players, the media, the fans, and himself.

[Lori]

Surprised? Not me. When he's on his game, Ryan is the best of the best.

 

Great column.

[Pyrite Gal]

Surprised? Not me. When he's on his game, Ryan is the best of the best.

 

Great column.

I like the Ryan approach (though some of the specifics are written to make these concepts even palatable for his NE audience). Gregg Easterbrook is taking a similar approach to understanding the issue in his call (which he assumes will go unheeded because money rules over principle) in his calling for the NFL to suspend BB for a year (or more) for activities which all should agree do not represent the level of sportsmanship the NFL "claims" is its standard and thus calling into legitimate question and in reality the integrity of the game.

 

BB should show that he really has true gonads and resign (actually being tough while serving your own interests is not being tough at all) or if he is just another weenie or simple human being, the NFL should show some fortitude or commitment to principle and suspend BB for actions against the rules which put the game into question.

[ajzepp]

I think it's interesting how people (mainly those in the media) continually refer to the Pats 2007 season as being so great. Do they remember only what happened up until the middle of January and forget the SB? Everyone on the team, and everyone in the media, said all season long that going 16-0 would be fine and dandy, but that it wouldn't mean squat if they didn't win the SB. Well, guess what!

 

Maybe when Tom Brady was laughing under his breath at the notion that the offense would score "only 23 points" during the pre-SB interviews, he and all of the media remained in la-la land that they were unbeatable. The 2007 Patsies got beyotch slapped in front of the world by an overachieving underdog. Why people seem to forget or minimize this little piece of information is beyond me.

[ajzepp]

The only thing that I don't like about this article is the assumption that no matter what, they would have won those superbowls and that Belichick is still the best coach.

 

Yeah, cause the Patsies won those SBs by such HUGE margins....I agree with you, it's a very dubious assumption.

[stephenjames716]

this sums up how I feel

[VOR]

The only thing that I don't like about this article is the assumption that no matter what, they would have won those superbowls and that Belichick is still the best coach.

 

"The sad truth is that he is the best coach. All reasonable people know that the 2007 season was 100 percent legitimate."

I agree. It was legitimate all the way and to and including them losing in the Superbowl. If Ryan's aim were to try and claim that last year proves anything other than they can't win the Superbowl without cheating, he failed. Those Superbowl-winning teams had far less talent that last year's team, yet won...barely.

[Tcali]

The only thing that I don't like about this article is the assumption that no matter what, they would have won those superbowls and that Belichick is still the best coach.

 

"The sad truth is that he is the best coach. All reasonable people know that the 2007 season was 100 percent legitimate."

 

False. Coaching is so much more than X's and O's. More than anything, it's about your players respecting you enough to go out and do what you say. It's also about being a leader; a figurehead of a team and of a city. What Belichick is doing right now is slowly deteriorating his reputation that's been built up over the years. Everyone knows that he did it, but he still isn't giving in and admitting it.

 

He's slowly peeling the bandaid off the wound rather than just manning up and saying that what he did was wrong. How many times from childhood until adulthood was this lesson pounded into everyone's heads? You steal a candy bar as a kid and your parents take you back to the store and you give it back and admit that what you did was wrong. A teacher finds a cheat sheet on the floor in a classroom, but doesn't know whose it is so the whole class gets punished until the person responsible stands up and takes responsibility. It definitely hurts for a few minutes, but in the end, its the right thing to do, and everyone knows it. It's the kind of stuff that builds character and actually earns you respect, rather than takes away from it.

 

How are his players supposed to go out and listen to him now? I don't think that I could do it knowing that you have a proven liar as your figurehead. What the article should have said is that he's got the X's & O's down pat, but until he admits to his wrongdoings, he's never going to be the "best coach" in the eyes of his players, the media, the fans, and himself.

 

I agree Billadelphia......There should be no assumption he would have won those SBs anyway.He could have lost all of them easily. And he may never have gotten to them.

I will go along with the fact that he is a great coach--you can't deny that.Most coaches could cheat all they want and still never win anything.

I also disagree about Pete Carrol. Pete Carrol is an excellent coach who was saddled with DREW THE COACH KILLER.

[ieatcrayonz]

Here is the part that tells you Ryan is in the back pocket of the Patriots:

 

Bob Kraft should be livid.

 

How could anyone not feel sorry for Bob Kraft?

 

Well Bobby I'll tell you how to not feel sorry for the other Bobby. Take a look at the sick profits made from a drink you can't even open, and then the paper towels to clean it up. Add in the fact that it does something strange to the people who drink it, including the moderators of this board and evidently you too Mr. Ryan. This willingness to cheat in the business world surely carries over to the sports world and Kraft probably master minded the whole thing. Drew Bledsoe, Lawyer Milloy and Deion Branch don't drink the Capri Sun? They're gone. Matt Walsh somehow manages to kick the habit? Bye bye.

 

The other day I was in the grocery store because Ginny can't go anymore because of the whole Werther's Original thing that Beerball won't help with. I passed the drink aisle and saw a box of Capri Sun with an ad for "The Naked Brothers Band" on it. How bad must this problem be? Kraft is a pedophile now and advertises it right out in public on Capri Sun boxes? He taunts civilized society with his disgusting business practices and now this? And Bob Ryan thinks he would never cheat at football?

[PromoTheRobot]

Ryan assumes Kraft didn't know....RIGHT! He also assumes 2007 was legitimate. How can we ever be sure? If Belichick continued to tape even after he 2006 warning in Green Bay, can we ever be totally sure he wasn't doing something shady now, and will continue to as long as he's head coach?

 

New England fans tell themselves the world hates them because they're winners. No. We hate your team because they are liars and cheaters, and your coach doesn't know the meaning of good sportsmanship.

 

PTR

[ofiba]

Anyone who's ever watched a football game knows that even the TINIEST thing can turn the game one way or another (unconscious head out of bounds anyone?). I don't care if the taping helped them one percent. That one percent could easily be the difference in winning a game. Even if that game isn't a super bowl, it could help them advance to the super bowl, or gain better playoff seeding.

 

Think about their first super bowl. So many individual plays that season could have derailed their chance to win the super bowl. Who's to say the taping didn't aid them enough to stay alive?

[Rubes]

As Pyrite mentioned, I would give TMQ's special article a read. I think he does a good job summarizing the whole situation.

[obie_wan]

Ryan assumes Kraft didn't know....RIGHT! He also assumes 2007 was legitimate. How can we ever be sure? If Belichick continued to tape even after he 2006 warning in Green Bay, can we ever be totally sure he wasn't doing something shady now, and will continue to as long as he's head coach?

 

New England fans tell themselves the world hates them because they're winners. No. We hate your team because they are liars and cheaters, and your coach doesn't know the meaning of good sportsmanship.

 

PTR

 

The cheaters miked their HGH pumped LBs in 2007 so they could get on the field input on the offensive playcalls.

 

 

Why do think the rest of the league will finally be allowed to mike a defender in 2008?

[drnykterstein]

That article sucked and gave BB way to much credit. Saying that he was was and is a good coach, is very arguable. And what is with the pity party he tries to throw for Kraft? I love how he makes the assumption that Kraft had nothing to do and no knowledge of all of the cheating. He have any prof or statements to back that up?

 

Nope, that was more pats fan drivel. One who is slowly coming to the realization that his teams glory has been taken away.

 

Oh goodnes. Now that the defensive player mic rule is in effect... I really want to see that team go 0-16 and expose their true talent.

[MattM]

The cheaters miked their HGH pumped LBs in 2007 so they could get on the field input on the offensive playcalls.

 

 

Why do think the rest of the league will finally be allowed to mike a defender in 2008?

 

Link on that? (Not saying I don't believe you, but would like to see where that was reported).

 

I personally suspect BB and Co. did much more than what they've been caught at--for ex., remember how when they were caught last year they happened to have 2 extra radio frequencies on their headsets? Anyone who's watched any of our games with them over the last 10 years or so (overlaps a bit with Kraft's ownership, perhaps?) knows first hand that they've had the refs seemingly in their pockets in any game with them that was close (which is when the fix would show itself). I personally suspect that this is the tip of the iceberg and that may be another part of why the League just wants this to go away.

 

I'm also still stunned that no major media outlet has picked up on HBO's statement that a Pats player confirmed much of Walsh's story, including that the taping really did benefit the Pats' offense greatly. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but that seems a bit weird to me, what with all the attention this matter is getting generally.

[drnykterstein]

I think the Pats cheat in a lot of ways, but paying off the refs is a place I won't go. I do not think they have done that.

[Steely Dan]

This is a good read. The Boston sports writers can surprise us sometimes.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patr...most_revealing/

 

Remember the ultimate moral of Watergate: The cover-up is worse than the crime.

 

If Arlen Specter's investigation finds a rats nest at the bottom of the garbage pile everyone involved is going to be very, very upset and the fans are going to be livid. The league should have conducted it's own very public investigation. They should welcome Specter's investigation now. They should embrace it. Any other reaction looks fishy even if Specter doesn't find anything more.

 

 

I think it's interesting how people (mainly those in the media) continually refer to the Pats 2007 season as being so great. Do they remember only what happened up until the middle of January and forget the SB? Everyone on the team, and everyone in the media, said all season long that going 16-0 would be fine and dandy, but that it wouldn't mean squat if they didn't win the SB. Well, guess what!

 

Maybe when Tom Brady was laughing under his breath at the notion that the offense would score "only 23 points" during the pre-SB interviews, he and all of the media remained in la-la land that they were unbeatable. The 2007 Patsies got beyotch slapped in front of the world by an overachieving underdog. Why people seem to forget or minimize this little piece of information is beyond me.

 

I wonder what the outcome would have been if the Pets* had recorded the Giants defensive signals earlier in the year. I think it's obvious they would have won and won handily.

 

 

Anyone who's ever watched a football game knows that even the TINIEST thing can turn the game one way or another (unconscious head out of bounds anyone?). I don't care if the taping helped them one percent. That one percent could easily be the difference in winning a game. Even if that game isn't a super bowl, it could help them advance to the super bowl, or gain better playoff seeding.

 

Think about their first super bowl. So many individual plays that season could have derailed their chance to win the super bowl. Who's to say the taping didn't aid them enough to stay alive?

 

Exactly, if it helps them scrape out two more wins in a season a lot can be gained. Home field advantage for one. I can't remember exactly but how close was it for the Pets* to get into the playoffs the first time?

 

 

I think the Pats cheat in a lot of ways, but paying off the refs is a place I won't go. I do not think they have done that.

 

I agree, I don't think the league sanctioned any cheating or knew about it and turned a blind eye. I think they're just afraid of the problems a full investigation would have brought. As I've said before it would open way too many problems for them to deal with in a manner everybody would think fair.

[Fewell733]

they don't need to pay the refs. The NFL pays them, and the NFL wants the Pats to win. They love their marquee franchises and give them the benefit of the doubt when the decision reached can be plausibly justified.

 

Also I agree with Ryan that 2007 was "clean" - no taping or whatever. The difference this year was though that the Pats roster was absolutely stacked on offense with Moss, Stallworth, Welker(and it helps that the Pats don't get called for holding).

 

The championships they actually won though were eked out - which, to me, casts those seasons under serious scrutiny (since most of the key games came down to a play or two where an unfair advantage could easily change the outcome. It's very possible that they never would have made it to those other Superbowls.

[BuffOrange]

The only thing that I don't like about this article is the assumption that no matter what, they would have won those superbowls and that Belichick is still the best coach.

 

"The sad truth is that he is the best coach. All reasonable people know that the 2007 season was 100 percent legitimate."

 

False. Coaching is so much more than X's and O's. More than anything, it's about your players respecting you enough to go out and do what you say. It's also about being a leader; a figurehead of a team and of a city. What Belichick is doing right now is slowly deteriorating his reputation that's been built up over the years. Everyone knows that he did it, but he still isn't giving in and admitting it.

 

He's slowly peeling the bandaid off the wound rather than just manning up and saying that what he did was wrong. How many times from childhood until adulthood was this lesson pounded into everyone's heads? You steal a candy bar as a kid and your parents take you back to the store and you give it back and admit that what you did was wrong. A teacher finds a cheat sheet on the floor in a classroom, but doesn't know whose it is so the whole class gets punished until the person responsible stands up and takes responsibility. It definitely hurts for a few minutes, but in the end, its the right thing to do, and everyone knows it. It's the kind of stuff that builds character and actually earns you respect, rather than takes away from it.

 

How are his players supposed to go out and listen to him now? I don't think that I could do it knowing that you have a proven liar as your figurehead. What the article should have said is that he's got the X's & O's down pat, but until he admits to his wrongdoings, he's never going to be the "best coach" in the eyes of his players, the media, the fans, and himself.

 

What is the basis for your "players don't respond to him" theory? Thus far it is nothing but speculation. It looked like they responded to him last year. And it looked like they responded to him in '03 after everyone & their brother said that he had lost his team after cutting Lawyer Milloy and getting stomped here on opening day.