FWST LBOH: Media gives cheating Patriots a break

[cajuncocoa]

Cheating destroys the integrity of the game.

Destroying the integrity of the game should be considered a serious offense by the league. It's the reason why Major League Baseball banned Pete Rose for betting on (or against?) his baseball team.

It's that simple for me.

 

[rkstevens]

Now, let's play out an analogy that has already been touched on in this thread.

Barry Bonds under suspicion that steroids aided him in his assault on the home run record. Back in 2001, let's say there was a blood test taken on Barry Bonds. That blood test could tell us all we need to know about whether Barry was on enough steroids to kill a horse or not.

That blood test was sent to the MLB offices for review.... and was destroyed. Bonds was subsequently punished, being suspended for 10 games.

Now, what do you think that blood test revealed to the league? Why was it destroyed?

Well if he's consistent with what he's repeated many times in this thread, he'll say it's irrelevant because you can't PROVE that Bonds benefited from the steroids. As if cheating is okay, as long as you don't benefit from it.

I guess in his world someone can use insider information and cheat in the stock market -- if they end up losing money from it instead of gaining money because the market as a whole went south. Or a kid is okay to cheat off his classmate, as long as his classmate is stupid and he ends up getting a worse grade than he would have had he not cheated.

Call me crazy but cheating is cheating, whether or not you gain any advantage. The fact that you are willing to break the rules to gain an edge ruins your credibility and to me makes you a cheater -- whether you benefit or not.

 

[Rockytop6]

They got punished. They lost a 1st round pick. Bellicek got fined.

Move on.

We are about to witness history. Though I wish it was us and not the Patriots having this success.....it is still kind of cool to watch it unfold.

Someday, I will be able to tell my kids I watched the greatest team of all time play.

If they win you can tell your kids that you watched the team with the best RECORD of all time - not the greatest TEAM of all time. We are living in the cap era.

 

[odog422]

The overriding issue here is that Belichik knowingly and willfully cheated. This point is not debatable. It's well-documented and undeniable.

Belichik blantantly disregarded a league-wide edict only a day after it was distributed. In doing so, he demonstrated a willingness to violate league rules, to disregard the standards that maintain fair competition and competitive balance, if he believe he can gain an advantage.

Exactly. On the money.

And this being the case, JFE's point, as well as mine and many others posting to this thread, is that they got off light.

Message being sent from Goodell: you will be punished more severely for damaging the "image" of the NFL than if you compromise the integrity of any given game by cheating on the field.

 

[peplaw06]

Well if he's consistent with what he's repeated many times in this thread, he'll say it's irrelevant because you can't PROVE that Bonds benefited from the steroids. As if cheating is okay, as long as you don't benefit from it.

And I would counter that there's a reason that this specific act is against the rules. It's like, how can you prove that a corked bat or vasoline under a pitcher's cap aid them in doing their job better?

It's just illegal. If they didn't think you could gain an advantage from it, it would be legal.

I guess in his world someone can use insider information and cheat in the stock market -- if they end up losing money from it instead of gaining money because the market as a whole went south. Or a kid is okay to cheat off his classmate, as long as his classmate is stupid and he ends up getting a worse grade than he would have had he not cheated.

Call me crazy but cheating is cheating, whether or not you gain any advantage. The fact that you are willing to break the rules to gain an edge ruins your credibility and to me makes you a cheater -- whether you benefit or not.

Completely agree. If you didn't benefit from it, why do it, especially if you know it's against the rules?

 

[Apollo Creed]

If the Dallas Cowboys would have been caught for videotaping, it would still receive weekly attention from ESPN.

Don't mark me down as a conspiracy theorist but I do believe in manipulating the media to manipulate the court of public opinion. I just wish ESPN would have put the Pats under the microscope as much as they did to Barry Bonds during his 'record breaking' moment.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

What's your point tyke?

I'm not going to answer every invented argument that you came up with because they're all irrrelevant.

The Pats cheated. Cheating implies gaining an "unfair" advantage against the competition in their pursued goal. In the NFL, that is winning games. No one can prove that cheating helped the Pats win games now. That would require them to go over all of their games played over a period of multiple years, analyze every play with knowledge of the signals they had due to the videotapes and come to a conclusion. That would take several months, let alone less than a week than it took for them to hand over all of the materials and have it destroyed. So, how am I going to prove that video taping signals allowed them to win games when the evidence has been destroyed and I don't have access to the materials?

Are you really this silly?

You're missing the larger issue. The extent to which videotaping signals impacts a game's outcome is completely secondary.

The overriding issue here is that Belichik knowingly and willfully cheated. This point is not debatable. It's well-documented and undeniable.

Belichik blantantly disregarded a league-wide edict only a day after it was distributed. In doing so, he demonstrated a willingness to violate league rules, to disregard the standards that maintain fair competition and competitive balance, if he believe he can gain an advantage.

He's brought his character into serious question, and neither he nor his team seem particularly remorseful about it.

Wow.... guys.... just Wow!! :bravo:


Co-Posts of the Year!

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Well if he's consistent with what he's repeated many times in this thread, he'll say it's irrelevant because you can't PROVE that Bonds benefited from the steroids. As if cheating is okay, as long as you don't benefit from it.

I guess in his world someone can use insider information and cheat in the stock market -- if they end up losing money from it instead of gaining money because the market as a whole went south. Or a kid is okay to cheat off his classmate, as long as his classmate is stupid and he ends up getting a worse grade than he would have had he not cheated.

Call me crazy but cheating is cheating, whether or not you gain any advantage. The fact that you are willing to break the rules to gain an edge ruins your credibility and to me makes you a cheater -- whether you benefit or not.

As far as proving a competitive advantge from using steroids and hitting HR's.... It adds power to your swing which makes the ball go anywhere from 5-15% further than it would have without steroids....so.... a ball park that has a fence depth of 305ft that you hit a ball 290ft + steroids can give it that extra 20-40 feet necessary to go over the fence instead of being caught for an out.

 

[Doomsday101]

You're missing the larger issue. The extent to which videotaping signals impacts a game's outcome is completely secondary.

The overriding issue here is that Belichik knowingly and willfully cheated. This point is not debatable. It's well-documented and undeniable.

Belichik blantantly disregarded a league-wide edict only a day after it was distributed. In doing so, he demonstrated a willingness to violate league rules, to disregard the standards that maintain fair competition and competitive balance, if he believe he can gain an advantage.

He's brought his character into serious question, and neither he nor his team seem particularly remorseful about it.

I do agree with this which is why I wanted the punishment to be stronger. I will say Belichik did a great job of putting this behind them quickly and not let it become a distraction to his team. You talk about being remorseful well they took the punishment and moved on instead of wallowing around in self pity. The NFL waits for no team and the quicker a coach can put this behind his team and move on the better off you are.

 

[big dog cowboy]

The overriding issue here is that Belichik knowingly and willfully cheated. This point is not debatable. It's well-documented and undeniable.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I will say Belichik did a great job of putting this behind them quickly and not let it become a distraction to his team.

Thats one thing I cannot do or say. Belichick did a great job of putting a distraction that he created behind him? Sorry cant do it.

He reverse psychologized himself and the team. Played the role of victim.

 

[Doomsday101]

Thats one thing I cannot do or say. Belichick did a great job of putting a distraction that he created behind him? Sorry cant do it.

He reverse psychologized himself and the team. Played the role of victim.

And got his team to the SB with a perfect record. They did not allow this to distract them from going out and doing the job. You can disagree all you want but the results speak for themselves.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

And got his team to the SB with a perfect record. They did not allow this to distract them from going out and doing the job. You can disagree all you want but the results speak for themselves.

Results??

Results via cheating.

Record should be 17-1 going to SB. Jets game should have been forfeit.

 

[Doomsday101]

Results??

Results via cheating.

Record should be 17-1 going to SB. Jets game should have been forfeit.

I agree and have said that many times. If it was my call to make the Pats would have forfeited the Jets game what does not change is the 17 wins they put up since then and a trip to the SB which is what I'm talking about in regards to results.

 

[tyke1doe]

Marion Jones - cheater = lost gold medal
Boxers - take steroids = lost their decision and/or title

THATS the way it should be. (I capitalized the word for you )

Uh, caught filming game tapes = lost of a first round draft choice.

You were saying?

Just because the entire sportsworld hasnt adopted something like this yet.... doesnt mean it wont... doesnt mean it shoudnt.
That game should have been a no contest. They should not have been awarded a win in a game they were caught cheating in. 25 mins into their game they were tied at 7-7. Pats go up 14-7 right before half. Game was close.

They were punished. You're arguing they should have been punished harsher. But there's nothing to suggest that the Patriots would have lost had they not had the illegal tapes.

Unlike steroids, it is commonly known that steroids give one a competetive advantage physically.

Am I to assume that you think your argument holds more water than the contrary? tsk tsk

You assume correctly.

 

[tyke1doe]

Tyke... I'm sure you know this, but sounds like you need to be reminded.

There's this thing called "circumstantial evidence." It's when you can't really get direct evidence or proof, but you surmise it from the...... wait for it.....

circumstances... (hence the name )

Now, let's play out an analogy that has already been touched on in this thread.

Barry Bonds under suspicion that steroids aided him in his assault on the home run record. Back in 2001, let's say there was a blood test taken on Barry Bonds. That blood test could tell us all we need to know about whether Barry was on enough steroids to kill a horse or not.

That blood test was sent to the MLB offices for review.... and was destroyed. Bonds was subsequently punished, being suspended for 10 games.

Now, what do you think that blood test revealed to the league? Why was it destroyed?

Sometimes you can't have direct evidence of every little thing. Take an affair for example... usually only two people can prove that it happened. Or Roger Clemens for that matter. That's when you have to look at circumstantial evidence. And the legal world couldn't operate without the existence of circumstantial evidence.

Calling people conspiracy theorists (aka... nuts) if they believe that Bonds tests were positive for steroids, or that the tapes that the Pats had were evidence of cheating, after they were destroyed is naive at best.

Thank you for chiming in, my lawyer friend. But here's where I disagree with you.

1.) Barry Bonds is ONE MAN. The Patriots are a team.
It is easier to determine the effects of a drug on one man than the effect of illegal video taping on a team. Surely, you understand this, counselor.

2.) Circumstantial evidence (in this case the existence of the tapes) still would not be able to determine whether the Pats would have won their game without the tapes. You have more moving parts/variables than a direct cause-and-effect relationship involving steroids.

3.) As for your reference to circumstantial evidence, I offer this from Wikipediat:

Also Circumstantial evidence is also used in civil courts to establish or deny liability.
However, there is sometimes more than one logical conclusion inferable from the same set of circumstances. In cases where one conclusion implies a defendant's guilt and another their innocence, the 'benefit of the doubt' principle would apply. Indeed, if the circumstantial evidence suggests a possibility of innocence, the prosecution has the burden of disproving that possibility.

To apply that to this case, even though the tapes could suggest an unfair advantage, one could also argue that based on the Pats' performance this year, that their hard work, experience, preparation, talent, etc., had as much to do with their victories as their taping their opponent.

Again, I don't see where you can make a reasonable argument that taping games helped them win. Too many variables unaccounted for.

 

[tyke1doe]

So then, they have no need to burn the tapes, because whatever they rule is 'fair'....

You keep arguing in circles. I've already answered you.

They destroyed the tapes to send a clear message that what was done was wrong and so the Pats couldn't use copies of the tapes anymore.

Because there was no way to determine how these tapes may have impacted other games and no way to determine whether they actually led to a Patriots win, they weren't useful.

edited for non-sense content.

The fact you would compare HGH and steroids and its impact on a player to this issue reveals your desperation.

But this is what happens when people's arguments lack substance. They search the world for what they think is an appropriate analogy ignoring the glaring differences.

But, carry on.

 

[tyke1doe]

What's your point tyke?

I'm not going to answer every invented argument that you came up with because they're all irrrelevant.

The Pats cheated. Cheating implies gaining an "unfair" advantage against the competition in their pursued goal. In the NFL, that is winning games. No one can prove that cheating helped the Pats win games now. That would require them to go over all of their games played over a period of multiple years, analyze every play with knowledge of the signals they had due to the videotapes and come to a conclusion. That would take several months, let alone less than a week than it took for them to hand over all of the materials and have it destroyed. So, how am I going to prove that video taping signals allowed them to win games when the evidence has been destroyed and I don't have access to the materials?

Are you really this silly?

No more silly than you in ignoring my point.

We've already agreed that the Pats cheated. They have been punished = forfeiture of a first-round draft choice. That's pretty steep.

And because we can't know whether the Pats won other games in "cheating," we leave it at that - a severe penalty of forfeiting a prime draft choice and making sure that they don't benefit from those taps again by ordering them to be destroyed.

There's nothing silly about that unless you don't know the meaning of the word.

 

[tyke1doe]

You're missing the larger issue. The extent to which videotaping signals impacts a game's outcome is completely secondary.

The overriding issue here is that Belichik knowingly and willfully cheated. This point is not debatable. It's well-documented and undeniable.

Who's debating that? Certainly not I.

But you guys keep changing the issue because, IMO, it's more easy to defend.

I agree Belichick and the Patriots should have been punished. And they were.

I disagree with the opinion that the tapes could have yielded anything more to warrant a more severe punishment. The NFL wasn't going to void all the Patriots wins including their Super Bowl wins. That's even stupid to suggest and comes from jealous fans.

So what is the point of keeping the tapes around? Based on what I've argued as to why they should be destroyed, there is no point.

Belichik blantantly disregarded a league-wide edict only a day after it was distributed. In doing so, he demonstrated a willingness to violate league rules, to disregard the standards that maintain fair competition and competitive balance, if he believe he can gain an advantage.

He's brought his character into serious question, and neither he nor his team seem particularly remorseful about it.

So what? They were punished. Are they suppose to lay over and let teams beat them as a form of pentance?

 

[SultanOfSix]

No more silly than you in ignoring my point.

We've already agreed that the Pats cheated. They have been punished = forfeiture of a first-round draft choice. That's pretty steep.

And because we can't know whether the Pats won other games in "cheating," we leave it at that - a severe penalty of forfeiting a prime draft choice and making sure that they don't benefit from those taps again by ordering them to be destroyed.

There's nothing silly about that unless you don't know the meaning of the word.

You have no point. We can't know if I had the answers to a test in my pocket, got 100% on it as a result, only to get caught later as I walked out of the classroom by the principal, because I may have never used it, helped me on the test. That's not going to prevent me from getting suspended or expelled, unless I'm probably a Pats fan and Goodell was the principal.

Yeah they've been "punished". But, unlike you, other Pats fans, and many members of the media, most people think they weren't punished enough, and that they've been given a free pass in the media as a result. "Pretty steep" is a subjective term that the majority of people will not agree with, especially considering that there was no precedent. But, when we look at it from an objective perspective, 250K is relatively insignicant for a multimillionare who got a mulimillion dollar extension as a result, 500K is paltry for a billionaire, and the loss of a first round draft pick for the team is minute when the team already has one, and it happens to be the 7th pick in the draft compared to the one they lost which will most likely be the 32nd pick in the draft.

A slap on the wrist when you consider the fact that cheating may have helped them with three SBs.

They have tarnished their legacy, and only the biggest Pats homers don't see it.