How significant is Spygate?

RE: How significant is Spygate? (OC Michigan Fan)

Sat, 17 May 2008 19:53:21 GMT

Maybe that's how Charlie got the job at ND. As Steve Young suggested on the Dan Patrick show, it must have been a lot easier for Charlie to call plays in the NFL when he knew what the defense was going to do.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (Philc)

Thu, 15 May 2008 08:07:22 GMT

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3395829

But Specter held his own three-hour meeting with Walsh in Washington on Tuesday. He said Walsh detailed how the Patriots used videotaped signals to their advantage: An offensive player would memorize the signals, watch for them on the sideline and pass them on to assistant coach Charlie Weis, who would then inform quarterback Tom Brady.

I wonder Charlie is still doing this at ND? I wonder how ND feels having a head coach implicated in a cheating scandal?

RE: How significant is Spygate? (ScottsdaleBlue)

Wed, 14 May 2008 10:12:20 GMT

Baseball players have been stealing signs for 100+ years.

Coaches have been stealing signals from the press box in football forever.

No new revelations here....

RE: How significant is Spygate? (TK23Blue)

Wed, 14 May 2008 09:41:06 GMT

What a non-story this is. Yaaaaawn..............

RE: How significant is Spygate? (Philc)

Wed, 14 May 2008 00:36:14 GMT

The fest continues-

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=yasinskas_pat&id=3394592

I still maintain that the Patriots aren't doing anything that other teams (including NCAA btw) do. Why do you think they send multiple sets of signals in when calling plays? NE is paying the price for their success. If they were a .500 team this story would have been over months ago.

With that said they had better hope nothing else comes out.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (Conquering Hero)

Sat, 02 Feb 2008 14:24:10 GMT

I dunno...it still smells a bit fishy to me. Now congress is getting involved by having Goodell testify as to why the "evidence" was destroyed by the NFL.

Also, if you think about it, the guy who ratted out hoodie was Mangini, someone from the Pats coaching tree. Hoodie had treated him poorly after he left for his first year with the Jets, and when they came into New Jersey in week 1 and blew out the Jets while cheating, I think Mangini knew this had been going on for years and had had enough and finally called them on it.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (Wolverine4Life)

Sat, 02 Feb 2008 03:44:55 GMT

Means nothing to me personally. I don't see why it even matters since it was the second game of the season. They didn't need it in their first two games and they obviously have done OK since then without breaking the rules. Besides that if everyone is doing it and doesn't get caught should we hold it against the Pats. Remember they didn't get "caught" they got "turned in." How many coaches spoke out against the Patriots again? How many are objecting against their perfect season now?

RE: How significant is Spygate? (kinny18)

Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:32:59 GMT

It's only significant because it gives people something to talk about, but otherwise it is not!

RE: How significant is Spygate? (Edub4Blue)

Fri, 01 Feb 2008 09:21:26 GMT

INSIGNIFICANT

Now Congress is getting involved with the tapes that Goodell and the NFL destroyed after the intitial investigations. It chaps my rear end that our elected officials can't find more important issues to deal with, I mean with the economy being crap and us being in a war and all. What better issues to work on than steroids in MLB and spygate in the NFL. Happy to see my tax dollars hard at work.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (wolverines1again)

Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:35:56 GMT

Right - which is what the Pat's are doing. I've got no qualms with that.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (Philc)

Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:19:06 GMT

quote:
Tell that to Mike Lupica and others who think the Pats have already earned an asterisk on this season, and on the Pats' "dynasty."

*Yawn* Who? I don't need ML or anyone else to validate my opinion.

Let him pander to his New York audience all he wants.

quote:
I think spygate is significant, if only because there was a well documented rule against it, and Belechik/Pat's blatantly disregarded it. It's like the speed limit of 45 on a 4 lane highway. Probably a dumb rule, but if you're going 70, you're going to get busted anyways.

And there's a rule againt holding that gets called arbitrarily and there's rule against tampering and any number of things in the NFL that happen *all* the time.

You get caught, you pay the price, you move on.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (wolverines1again)

Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:53:30 GMT

If the Patriots know exactly what defense is called, and when and where blitzes are coming from, then yes - it's significant. It must be significant enough for there to be a well documented rule against it, and for a 1st round pick to be forfeited. The more and more I hear about the Patriots, the more dirty they seem. First Rodney Harrison has to sit with HGH suspension, Vince Wilfork has about 100k (exaggeration) in fines this year, now Richard Seymour is dirty (according to Charger's center). For awhile there, they were blatantly running up the score on teams that were clearly beat. I mean - going for it on 4th down in the 4th quarter when you're up 30? Are you kidding me? All of this under the under the spygate umbrella. I'm not suggesting the Pat's aren't a great, great team - probably the best the NFL has ever seen. And I'm probably jaded being a non-Pat's fan out here in Boston, but people are going to realize sooner or later that this team is full of a** holes. They may have won, but they haven't done it the right way.

I think spygate is significant, if only because there was a well documented rule against it, and Belechik/Pat's blatantly disregarded it. It's like the speed limit of 45 on a 4 lane highway. Probably a dumb rule, but if you're going 70, you're going to get busted anyways.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (TooBlueForYou)

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:32:39 GMT

quote:
Originally posted by ScottsdaleBlue

quote:
How significant is Spygate?

Not significant at all.

Tell that to Mike Lupica and others who think the Pats have already earned an asterisk on this season, and on the Pats' "dynasty."

RE: How significant is Spygate? (ScottsdaleBlue)

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:34:59 GMT

quote:
How significant is Spygate?

Not significant at all.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (since52)

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:18:07 GMT

And you can more than likely expect a few more nameyour gates prior to Feb 3rd.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (TooBlueForYou)

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:08:06 GMT

quote:
Originally posted by Philc

It doesn't register at all for me.

It must not be all that important, as we have already moved on to "bootgate" with Tom Brady's high-ankle sprain.

RE: How significant is Spygate? (Philc)

Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:06:26 GMT

It doesn't register at all for me.

I put this in the same category as NASCAR teams pushing the boundaries setting up their cars or some other trivial offense.

*IF* the information gathered from such video taping is valuable there is *NOTHING* stopping someone in the crowd from recording the same information and providing to teams.

If NE is interested for a small fee I'll provide the service

If the information is that easy to gather it goes to figure that someone is doing it. The Pats just got busted doing it themselves.

They aren't the only ones doing it- they just for the attention because they're on top right now.

How significant is Spygate? (TooBlueForYou)

Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:22:39 GMT

I really didn't think it was all that much. Possibly because it occurred against the hapless Jets and the Pats have been perfect ever since.

http://www.secsportsfan.com/belichick-spygate-scandal.html

But obviously not everyone agrees:

quote:
... NFL Commissioner Roger Goodall had destroyed the videotapes in question. What the ....!!? Is anyone besides me outraged by that? Does anyone care? Maybe not. Maybe cheating is now perfectly acceptable -- as long as everyone involved is making money.