I think we should be a little more skeptical of the photograph. Just because someone posts a photo, circles a cameraman and claims he's a spy doesn't make it true. That being said, if the allegations are true, this seems like a really big deal to me- maybe on par with the whole barry bonds thing. the closest we have to a dynasty in the nfl has allegedly been filming and relaying defensive playcalls for who knows how long or how often. No wonder we couldn't touch Brady on sunday. If this is true, why shouldn't they have to forfeit the game in addition to giving up picks?
For all of you that think that this information would be too difficult to use please watch Alias to see how it could be done easily. I bet Belichick has hired Gennifer Garner and her handler to get all of the information compiled and into Bellichik's hand with many seconds to spare. Seriously, I don't care if they were using it live or not and getting a competitive advantage. If it's against the rules and they had been told specifically not to do it then they should be punished severely. Just like people who say about Steroids that "Bonds doesn't need steriods" to hit HR's. I don't care if it really helps him or not. If it's against the rules and he (or anybody else) is caught then they should be punished regardlesss of the effect. Since BB is under investigation because of the betting Ref I would imagine that the NFL would want to deal with this swiftly and make sure that if there is proof that they set an example - and it's not that I'm a Jets fan and its the Pats being accused.
The NFL are the ones looking into this, it isn't something the Jets floated out there. The guy was there, he wasn't supposed to be there. The teams are already very familiar with each other, something like this would create quite an advantage for one side. Whether or not the Pats needed to do this is beside the point, if they didn't need to then why do it? Then again, the game was 7-7 about a minute before the half so who knows?
Fellaz.. One lil tidbit that I haven't seen on this thread.. At what point in the game was this camera confiscated? Was it in the first qtr, 2nd qtr, 3rd qtr, or 4th qtr? Does anyone know?
cool- I didn't click on that link on my first run through of this thread. it's just a blog and not cnn but it builds a pretty good case. the point about red vests is interesting too. Part of me still thinks though that the cameraman is so blatantly obvious that it couldn't possibly be true. could the patriots really be that reckless after already being accused several times?
The competition committee is full of Patriots haters so I would expect in the end they will lose a minimum of 1 pick..maybe more as this isn't their first time getting caught.
I haven't heard, Pats Nation, and I've been listening for more info on the radio and TV. I think if this thing is now "under investigation," I suppose none of this will be revealed until the investigation (if there even is one) is complete.
This type of thing also raises some other questions about this whole fiasco... - how long have they been doing this? 2 years? 4 years? - have they been doing this during all of their games? Including Super Bowls? - do they do this during their home games as well? I'm not sure if the opposing team's security personnel would be at away games to spot this. If this is proved to be true that they were, in fact, stealing signals and breaking the rules then they should pay the heaviest consequences allowable.
All you need to know is that no one is allowed to film on the sideline except the broadcast team. So -- that guy is pointing away from the game action on the field, which is suspicious, but how do we know he isn't from CBS. Other than that, if anyone from the pats organization is filming on the field, then this time they might be in some deep trouble.
Welcome to Goddard Era! Where in years past an unfair advantage would have been over looked. I make no excuses for our poor play. But if these Scum bags were atcually stealling defenseive signals they deserve to suffer the penalty!
not sure why that would be relevant.....the outcome of the game was what it was........ if it comes out to be proven thay were caught doing this, that would be pretty f'ed up, and like someone else mentioned, the real question would be how long have they been doing this?
Yeah, if proved to be true, this raises some pretty interesting questions, doesn't it? Good point. If the allegations are founded and proof is discovered in the tapes from this supposed camera, I can see the investigation expanding to reviewing SB tapes of the sidelines, etc. If they've been doing this right along, Holy Shit!
This article on yahoo has the same quote from the league official saying no cameras are permitted: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/recap?gid=20070909020&prov=ap but later the article contradicts itself while discussing the incident vs the packers: "Teams are allowed to have a limited number of their own videographers on the sideline during the game, but they must have a credential that authorizes them to shoot video, and wear a yellow vest. But Packers spokesman Jeff Blumb said the person in question didn't have the right credential and wasn't wearing a yellow vest, so Packers security asked him to put away the camera." I'm not sure which is the truth. If the yellow vest rule is true then I'm not sure any of this is a big deal. the crime then becomes forgetting to wear a vest as opposed to filming in a place where cameras are absolutely prohibited.
