Belichick/Patriots Penalty
i've heard some people express the opinion that the penalty was too severe and some people express the opinion that the penalty wasn't severe enough.
i think there is a simple test for this. if you're robert kraft and bill belichick and someone offers to significantly increase your chances of winning 3 superbowls for $750,000 and a first round pick. do you make the deal? of course you do. you don't even hesitate to make that deal.
i think there is a simple test for this. if you're robert kraft and bill belichick and someone offers to significantly increase your chances of winning 3 superbowls for $750,000 and a first round pick. do you make the deal? of course you do. you don't even hesitate to make that deal.
Labels: football
posted by The Mean Guy at 1:12 PM
9 Comments:
I'm still not sure how significant an advantage this was. For instance, I can't imagine JJ's just got 1 sign for blitz. He's probably got 30 different blitzes (zone vs. non-zone, LB vs. corner vs. safety, 5 man vs. 6 man, etc.) so wouldn't he have at least a dozen different signs for them? I'm sure it'd be more effective for the teams you play more often, but not sure if it impacted the Iggles' SB for instance.
But I don't know. I'm starting to think too much is being made of this. Not that they didn't cheat and shouldn't pay for it. Think the penalty fits the crime though.
VIDEO TAPING IN THE NFL IS PERFECTLY LEGAL AND PERMITTED IN DESIGNATED AREAS. NFL rules state “no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches’ booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game.” They also say all video for coaching purposes must be shot from locations “enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead.”
Straight out of the NFL handbook. What does it mean? Video taping IS ALLOWED, but only in designated areas: Belichik’s man was in a nondesignated area. Every other team tapes for signals and formations from the booth. That’s Bill’s only crime: camera location. He may have been pushing the envelope–and he knew it–abut his real crime is not realizing that a fat weeble like Mangini would snitch on him.
Straight out of the NFL handbook. What does it mean? Video taping IS ALLOWED, but only in designated areas: Belichik’s man was in a nondesignated area. Every other team tapes for signals and formations from the booth. That’s Bill’s only crime: camera location. He may have been pushing the envelope–and he knew it–abut his real crime is not realizing that a fat weeble like Mangini would snitch on him.
mangini wouldn't have anything to *snitch* about if belichick hadn't been cheating.
Is anyone else really really concerned about tomorrow's game? McNabb looked so not ready to be back last week and the Skins will blitz the world to keep testing him. In addition, if the Packers DB shut down our passing game completely, then the Skins may erase it. This is a must-win game and I am less than 50% confident they get it done. Only shot is that JJ actually confuses someone for a change and gets some heat on Campbell. I really do not like this Birds team even a little bit right now.
Bumble
The penalty was not for past violations, but for violating when specifically warned not to. Once and for all, the penalty was NOT for past violations.
This was NOT a tradeoff for 3 Superbowl rings for a $750K fine, but a tradeoff for the advantage of 1 game.
In that light, and the likelihood that repeated violations would give rise to greater penalties, it's a just one. In fact, I'd say the Pats were foolish to rish such a severe fine for ONE GAME'S worth of advantage over an inferior team.
Unless they just can't help themselves.
I can't say that I'm confident about tonight's game, but hopefully optimistic. GB showed yesterday they have a real offense, which we completely shut down last week. Our defense might end up being the least of our concerns this year. Not having Sheppard will hurt though.
The penalty was not for past violations, but for violating when specifically warned not to. Once and for all, the penalty was NOT for past violations.
This was NOT a tradeoff for 3 Superbowl rings for a $750K fine, but a tradeoff for the advantage of 1 game.
yes, you're factually correct that the penalty was for the one game offense, but from the patriots perspective, they took the risk of the one game penalty for each game they used the camcorder. so, the net effect is multiple uses for one penalty.
Mean Guy, I respect your opinion. Just to make sure, you'd be happy if the Eagles had cheated their way to 3 Superbowl wins as long as the penalties were not too severe, right? So you approve of the Patriots way of doing things, correct?
well, yes and no. would i be happy if the eagles had their entire "dynasty" run questioned because of getting caught cheating? no.
do i condone cheating? no. definitely not.
do i cheat myself? no. nor would i consider it a small thing if i found out my kids were cheating.
personally, i don't think what the patriots did was that bad and consequently, i wish the eagles had been the ones doing it. everyone is always trying to steal other teams signals and have admitted to doing so. the patriots just happened to be better or more daring or more sinister about it than others. the line between cheating and gamesmanship is subtle and somewhat arbitrary.
unfortunately for the patriots, the line was drawn explicitly by the nfl. they are being punished more for continuing to do it in the face of specific instructions from the commissioner not to, than for the act itself i think.
so not sure if i answered the question or not since i'm running out the door to head out to the game, but i'd have wanted the eagles to be a team that was successful at stealing the other team's signals (when it was ambiguous) but would have liked them to stop when specifically ordered to do so.
my post regarding the tradeoff was not necessarily that i wish the eagles had made the same trade, only that from the patriots perspective, the tradeoff might not be so bad.
Post a Comment
<< Home