"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." It later says: "All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead." This is the rule in question. BB argued that when the rule stated to "be in use" "during the game" he construed "in use" as meaning to use the information on the tapes during the game at hand. I don't buy that argument, but there it is.
BB admitted to taping offensive and defensive signals going back to 2000 when he met with Goodell the first time after the breaking of the rule. So really there is nothing new per se. The media has been focusing on the taping of Defensive signals because that is what they were caught doing on the sideline, but that was not the entire extent of it as we now know more concretely.
guys this easy to understand. Say a thief robs a house and gets caught they catalog all the stuff they find missing. the thief goes to court and gets punished. A couple of months down the road the homeowners notice a few more things missing that they had forgot the first time. Do they bring the thief back to court for those items. No he because he was already punished for that crime. Its call double jeopardy. now if he had murdered the homeowner that would be different
So a Colts fan that makes a point of showing he is not a Packers fan with his user name, comes to a Jet message board to comment on the Pats. I am trying to wrap my brain around that one. Real quick in regards to your other points and I don't see why it is so hard for some to comprehend. What the Patriots did was against the rules, hence they cheated. No matter how many times someone types out the pages of the rule book that is not going to change the fact that they cheated. They were told to stop cheating and they still cheated some more. Further more you state things as if you know exactly what went on in the closed door conversation with Belichick and Goodell. We don't know and probably never will because the tapes were burned and they won't tell us the whole extent of the meeting because to do so would bring more discredit to the NFL and they just feel they can not have that at this time. Since we don't know the extent of the conversation we do not know what Beli told Goodell about the taping specifically but not limited to which games were taped. If he said that he only taped X games and now we have new tapes showing he taped y and z games plus the fact that he said it was only defense that was taped before and now we find there are offensive tapes. This opens up a whole new can of worms. Plain and simple they got caught cheating and they need to pay the consequences. The NFL will undoubtedly decide if the original punishment was enough after viewing the new evidence. This also is not covered by double jeopardy so nice try but no cigar, Chris66
Nice try. A better analogy is the said "thief" gets caught robbing a house and later evidence points to him robbing 8 other houses.
I never said what they did was not against the rules. It's just not nearly as bad as you, and others are making it out to be. And if you want to be dogmatic about it and call it cheating you would have 32 teams that cheat in the NFL. They all break the rules in some sort or fashion. Maybe not as bad in the publics eyes, but if we are being dogmatic then it's breaking the rules and therefore, with your logic, cheating. And yes Goodell DID say that Belicheck told him the taping dated back to 2000. Goodell came out and said as much, as did Belicheck. Goodell also said that offensive signals were included in this as well during a interview with the press after the initial press conference. Furthermore Greg Aiello said friday that the penalty that the Patriots were punished for covered both defensive and offensive signals. Unless there is something else on the tapes that no one knows about, the Patriots will not be penalized. So there is no double Jeopardy because there will be no need. The PAts have already been sentenced for this so called new information (that is actually old news).
Don't waste your breath. These are jets fans. they are tired of sitting in the back seat for the last decade. you and I know come Tuesday this will all be over, but the best part will be seeing all the pissed off posts about it
Don't get me wrong, I really dislike the Pats. I just don't let my dislike for another team cloud me and make it impossible for a rational thought process. And yes, on tuesday this will most likely be over. It just should have been an, almost, non-issue to begin with. But leave it to the Ex Jet employee Roger Goodell to muck it all up.
Hey man I get what your saying . I'm not fond of the colts either, but my point is the game still has to be played on the field. players still have to make plays and tackle. hell in the 06 afcc we could have had the colts playbook and I dont think it would have made a difference in that game. I'm also pretty sure that most teams change their signals when they play a team a second time. especially when opposing coaches are waiving at the camera man. In fact I would bet when the pats and colts play those signals are changed at the half, because that game 9 out of 10 times usually means home field adv.
The proof was obviously there or the Pats and Bellishit wouldn't have been fined 750 gand and a first round pick, now would they? If they thought it was wrong they would have fought ut like hell but they knew it was barely a slap on the wrist for what they had really done.
well to address your point the fine was for video taping, not what they were videotaping. Bellichick told goodell on that thursday after the jets game that he had been taping since 2000. Thats why the penalty was so high. Goodel also stated that none of the tapes had any bearing on the outcome of the games. The only way I see Goodell imposing other fines is if he concludes that these new tapes did have a bearing on the outcome of these games. I would have to say no because they lost 4 games of the 8 that were taped and the afccg game clearly shows it was edited after the game once they received the coaches tape from the nfl
You have to be seriously brain damaged to believe this statement, "Goodel also stated that none of the tapes had any bearing on the outcome of the games." WHY WOULD YOU TAPE YOUR OPPONENT IF IT DID NOT HELP YOU? IF TAPING YOUR OPPONENT HELPED YOU WIN, IT HAD AN EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE GAME.
well guess what my friend. It doesnt matter what public opinion is. If goodell deems it didnt change the outcome of the games then the issue is closed.
If it was closed then we wouldn't be having this discussion now would we. Nor would they be reviewing more tape and having more meetings. And that does not take away from the fact that you would need to be a moron to believe that statement.
Chris66 (and notaCheesehead for agreeing with him below): Here's what the agreement that led to the fine and loss of pick says: <In the statement the league released after it reached a legal agreement with Walsh, the N.F.L. said that Goodell had determined ?the Patriots had violated league rules by videotaping opposing coaches? defensive signals? throughout Belichick?s tenure as head coach.> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/10/sports/football/10nfl.html?_r=1&ref=football&oref=slogin What you both claim the punishment was for clearly not correct. It was for stealing signs with video, not just videotaping. I can't believe we are arguing this at this late date.
So are you gonna believe Goodell or not? In other posts everyone says only a moron would believe goodells statements. NO WHERE in the rule book (actually the "operations manual") does it specify you cannot tape signals. Show me where it says that in the rule book and this will be over.
It does not specify taping. However, it does have an open clause called "Unfair Acts" And there is a manual only the teams have.. Copies of the 2007 manual obtained by The Times show that many of the recent changes concern policies on the placement of cameras and microphones, among other tactics the Patriots have been accused of pressing to their advantage. The manual, which is separate from the playing rules, governs the use of new technologies, in addition to covering mundane matters like the color of yellow that must be painted on goal posts. And for the proof: 1. Page 105 of the NFL Game Operations Manual States: "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." 2. On September 6, 2007, the NFL sent a letter to NFL head coaches stating: "Video taping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent?s offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches? booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game." 3. Belichick received the letter and has a copy of the NFL rulebook. 4. An employee of the New England Patriots was caught on the Patriots sideline videotaping defensive signals, by opposing coaches, in their first game of the NFL season. A review of the tape by the NFL confirmed this.
Yeah the game is played on the field but u can call a running play to the oppisite of a blitz or call a passing play where u know the reciever will be open ats_suck:
Thank you GreenMachine. So is this over now, now that it is established what the "rule book" says about the Pats' rulebreaking?
