look at the definition posted under cheating, it says deceiving tricking ect.
Football fan loses lawsuit over Patriots "Spygate"
- Thread starter televisionarchives
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 101
- Views 7K
- Status
look at the definition posted under cheating, it says deceiving tricking ect.
If you watch an NFL game you will see every team protecting signals. It's not just a video camera but eyes from many parts of the football field in a coaches booth . That's why many questioned the benefit of taping.
If there is no benefit from taping, why does the NFL have a rule against it with such severe penalties?
Sandra
If there is no benefit from taping, why does the NFL have a rule against it with such severe penalties?
Sandra
Wow! You came back for more???
More power to you.......
And yet not one person here can show me the benefit that allowed the Patriots to beat a team by using it. They won almost every game that year and went undefeated during the regular season. Hmm.If there is no benefit from taping, why does the NFL have a rule against it with such severe penalties?
Sandra
You did not answer my question...
If there is no benefit from taping, why does the NFL have a rule against it with such severe penalties for those who violate it?
Sandra
You did not answer my question...
If there is no benefit from taping, why does the NFL have a rule against it with such severe penalties for those who violate it?
Sandra
It's time for him to bring up the lawsuit again!
Before 2007 they didn't. In fact around September 2 of that year they sent out a memo making it clear that nobody should be taping on the sideline. Sometimes it not just because they could use the information but the fact that it could look like they are . Either way after the Camera was removed the Patriots still beat every team they played during the regular season. That proves plenty about what happened and what didn't happen because of the taping.You did not answer my question...
If there is no benefit from taping, why does the NFL have a rule against it with such severe penalties for those who violate it?
Sandra
Is this a serious post? Am I being punked or something?
Where is Ashton Kutcher!!!
Ramy is this you!?!?!?!?!!?
Sandra
Two former players put it best about the whole thing.
"I think it's a lot being made about nothing," Theismann said. "A guy like Trent Dilfer played on five different teams. He had five different playbooks. Why do you think coaches cover their mouths when they're calling the plays? People are aware you're looking at them. Why do you think coaches spend 100 hours a week looking at film? If winning was this easy, no one would work so hard.
"The reason people are doing this is because it's the New England Patriots. If it was the Cincinnati Bengals or the Cleveland Browns, no one would care. They'd say, 'They needed all the help they could get.' At some point, it stops. Fines have been levied. We do not need independent investigations. We do not need Congress involved. Everybody in this sport tries to gain a competitive advantage by looking at signs. What the Patriots did was unforgivable in terms of filming. That's illegal, and they were punished for it. Now let's get on with our lives."
New York Giants quarterback Phil Simms said that knowing what an opponent is going to do on a play isn't always enough. "I've been in games where we knew every signal, every call by the other team, and we still lost," Simms said by telephone yesterday. "We had the San Diego Chargers' signals in 1980. We knew every signal. We knew every play. We were calling out what they were going to do: 'Here comes this. Here comes that.' They still scored 44 points.
"I think it's a lot being made about nothing," Theismann said. "A guy like Trent Dilfer played on five different teams. He had five different playbooks. Why do you think coaches cover their mouths when they're calling the plays? People are aware you're looking at them. Why do you think coaches spend 100 hours a week looking at film? If winning was this easy, no one would work so hard.
"The reason people are doing this is because it's the New England Patriots. If it was the Cincinnati Bengals or the Cleveland Browns, no one would care. They'd say, 'They needed all the help they could get.' At some point, it stops. Fines have been levied. We do not need independent investigations. We do not need Congress involved. Everybody in this sport tries to gain a competitive advantage by looking at signs. What the Patriots did was unforgivable in terms of filming. That's illegal, and they were punished for it. Now let's get on with our lives."
New York Giants quarterback Phil Simms said that knowing what an opponent is going to do on a play isn't always enough. "I've been in games where we knew every signal, every call by the other team, and we still lost," Simms said by telephone yesterday. "We had the San Diego Chargers' signals in 1980. We knew every signal. We knew every play. We were calling out what they were going to do: 'Here comes this. Here comes that.' They still scored 44 points.
Did you see the question yet?
And yet the NFL saw the whole thing a lot differently, didn't they?
Three quarters of a million dollar fine, and stripping the Patriots of their first round draft pick. Pretty harsh.
Sandra
Sure, deceiving and trickery outside the confines of the rules.
Look at the sleeper play in football. Ten guys in the huddle and a team tries to slip in a receiver right off the sidelines. That's against the rules. If the refs missed it, the offense got away with one, but it's still against the rules and it's cheating. Just like the Pats videotaping from the sidelines.
- Status
