People should just let it go! Put the Superbowl aside and the Patriots were perfect. Eighteen games won and countless records broken. No videotaped signals could change the fact that the Patriots players played their hearts out in each of their games. Although the wins were not all pretty and they struggled with a few, they were 18-0!

Wether it was a regular season game against the Jets with the Pats illegally videotaping on the sidelines, or in the Superbowl against the Rams and recording a walk through of their opponent it still does NOT take away the Great coaching and superb playing of EVERY one of the Patriots players. If they didn't finish "PERFECT" in the eyes of the rest of the Country, ALL True Pats fans know the season was still a GREAT one!

The more the 2007 NFL Season went by the more apparent it became the the rest of the Country was envious and jealous of what the NewEngland Patriots have which is a GREAT Franchise and the Newest Dynasty in Football and in Sports. People will find anything they can cling to to try and take away what a Great run the Pats are having, but true fans wont stand for it. Diehard Pats fans know the Truth, which is that no matter what any fan, player, coach or member of the media says, the Patriots have a Superior NFL team!

The thing is (as Teddy says) it's not 2007/2008 that's being called into question- it's 2000-2006 that is being questioned and, so far, I can see why fans of all teams that lost to the Patriots thinking it could have more to do with illegal taping than the "great coaching". How hard is it to coach when you know what's coming.

The fact that they then looked completely inept as a coaching staff in SB 42 will just perpetuate the story. Sorry but 18-1 is just not good enough. Not a great season if you can't seal the deal and end up with your pro bowl offensive line playing like a bunch of matadors.

Then the NFL destroys the tapes instead of just locking them away in Goodell's private vault or something??? Something VERY fishy is going on. NFL obviously wants the story to die but will take getting Walsh's evidence and, I think, BB and Kraft heading to Washington to prove they didn't do it. Without that the story will never go away...

The main irony... To fans of 31 other professional football teams- the ending of the 2007-2008 season was "PERFECT" because the Pats got what they had coming to them...

I read and approved your comments last night Shappy, and I was going to respond to the specific points one by one as soon as I got to my laptop Sunday. However, there's not need to...DB said EVERYTHING I wanted to say.

We can bury our heads in the sand and pretend the Patriots are this great dynasty, belonging with the Steelers, Cowboys, 49ers and Packers, but the truth is, they're not. They NEEDED to win this year to be included with those other teams, and not just for the 4 Super Bowl victories. They NEEDED it to make a statement that with video cameras or without, they were the best team, best QB, best coach in the NFL. The 19-0 was just icing on the cake. The Super Bowl is what was necessary to shut everybody up once and for all.

Let me put it this way; think of those 49ers and Steelers teams. Love them or hate them (and believe it or not, there was jealousy of those teams back then, too, as this Cowboys fan can attest to), the football world knew those were the greatest teams fair and square. That's their LEGACY. There is no disputing they ruled their decade, fair and square.

What is the Patriots LEGACY? Forget what we, as Patriots fans, think. What will the rest of the country remember most about the 2000+ Patriots? That they were a very good team? Yes. But also that they cheated to achieve those victories. Fair or not, that is their LEGACY. And if this Walsh character produces those tapes, it's only going to get worse....MUCH WORSE!

Because they failed to win the only game that counts, they've opened the door to the doubters. And quite frankly, judging by the fact the coaching staff was woefully incapable of making halftime adjustments against one of the most mediocre Super Bowl winning teams in history, I have a seed of doubt in the back of my mind as well.

For that, they can blame nobody but themselves.

Teddy
I agree with what you and Db say, The Pats needed this Superbowl to be mentioned in the same sentence as the Steelers, Cowboys, 49ers. What does 3 superbowls get you? Compared to the Giants, who also have 3 Lombardis. The Failure of this team may have ended the "EVER" talk but to think that the Patriots have pulled off this diabolical scheme is a joke.

IT'S NO AGAINST THE RULES TO FILM A DEFENSE'S SIGNALS. ONLY WHERE IT WAS TAPED FROM.

Show me how video taping a sideline from accross the field gives a team more of an advantage then taping from the coaches box, where it is allowed.

You can't.

From what I understand, the locations reserved for teams videotaping are enclosed, presumably to block a clear camera shot to the scoreboard and down and distance indicators on the scoreboard. I guess I'm not qualified to speak on the advantages of doing it, but seeing as they WERE doing it in spite of warnings NOT to, there must have been something to it, right?

Might the difference be that during a game, you can make better halftime adjustments seeing the down and distance situation when the particular signals were given, rather than after a game when you could sync up your illegal tape of the signals with a broadcast feed that would indicate down and distance?

That is what the Patriots were doing on the tape I saw...going from the down and distance on the scoreboard to the defensive signals. Without the down and distance info until after the game, they couldn't make adjustments as quickly, right?

Again, I'm no expert on this, but it sounds plausible, right? And since they did it, you know there's a benefit to it. Belichick isn't stupid. He's not going to do something risky unless there's a benefit to it.

I absolutely agree that a smart caoching staff could use those tapes to pluck little nuances out of the Defensive sets. But, Again, there is nothing that sideline camera can get that a camera in the coaching box (that is closer to a laptop with software to cut and study it) couldn't do.

There is no difference between the 2.

I would rather have a cam in the box feeding directly to a laptop so info could be turned around quicker.

I think that is where people are confused. If you ask most people, they'd say "YES, it's illegal to tape the oposing teams signals"

That would be FALSE.

BTW. Goodell threw the tapes away cuz he didn't want another leak.

Teddy

Plausible? Sure. But thats the basis of this whole BS. Most Football "experts" agree the tapes were for post game review, cuz the other tape had complete games on 1 tape.

There are NO restrictions on what teams can video tape from the coaches box. And with any $100 lens upgrade you could count Mangini's nose hairs.

I still see no HUGE advantage.

LK, here is the exact quote from Goodell's statement when he punished the Patriots back in September:

“Videotaping 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.”

The key words there are "accessible to club staff members DURING the game."

In other words, video shot from the allowed spots can't be accessed and used to an advantage during the game. The illegal tape the Pats were shooting presumably could have. Is it a HUGE advantage? I don't konw. I'm guessing if Belichick felt the need to do it, and kept someone on the payroll to do it, there must be something of value in the tape, isn't there?

Again, I'll ask the same question DB asked; why couldn't the greatest coach at making adjustments make any during halftime of the Super Bowl? Would he have been able to see something in a tape that would have allowed them to better adjust? Am I the only one who watched that game and didn't understand that?

Look, I'm the biggest Pats fan there is, and you can go back and read my posts all year long about how the 2007 Patriots were going to shut everyone the hell up that thought they needed to cheat to win. Unfortunately, all of that presumed that they'd win the Super Bowl, which we all fully expected once they ran the table leading up to it. However, the loss to a TERRIBLE (in terms of Super Bowl winners) Giants team leaves an awful lot of doubt.

Put the shoe on the other foot, and you know very well that New England fans would accuse the "cheating" team of only winning because of their tactics.

TP

The Patriots have said all along that they weren't using the tapes during the game. And no one has proven otherwise.

What big advantage does the video have the next day as opposed to the Polaroids that are taken and printed on the field every minute.

not buying it,

BTW

Belicheck was fined the same amount as Scooter Libby for outing a CIA operative.

Oh, well if Belichick says they didn't use the tapes on gameday, then we'll have to believe him. He'd never lie.
Come on now. You know very well those tapes were used DURING games.

You keep questioning what advantage they are...I've already told you the advantage when used during games. You've thus far avoided my question, which is probably unanswerable, but I'll ask it again anyway. Just like in the movie A Few Men when Tom Cruise asks Jack Nicholoson; "If you gave an order that Private Santiago was not to be touched, then why the need for the transfer order."

If there was nothing on those tapes that the Patriots couldn't get elsewhere, then why the need to have a camera on the sidelines?

I believe what Belichick says cuz it makes more sense. BTW, so does Goodell. The Patriots spare no expense on technology. A camera on a sidline far away from equipment where a tape could be used is MUCH LESS advantageous than a camera in the coaches box directly connected to laptops and coaching software. The feed from the field would be instantaneous. And with Flash drives and removable drives info can be shared and assigned faster than any "tape" process. You're under estimating the technology and Over estimating the value of information that can be obtained legally any other way.

Your honor, I'd like you to direct the witness to answer the question.

Colonel Jessup, if all you say is true, that the Patriots have all this great technology at their disposal, and that the legal camera locations are much more advantageous, making a sideline camera useless in terms of aiding strategy....then why the need for a sideline camera? Why waste an employee doing something that is of absolutely no use to you because you can get the same info, and better, elsewhere? Why the dual cameras? Is the master, Bill Belichick, so reckless that he'd risk his entire reputation and that of his dynasty on a camera placement that does him absolutely no good?

I'd like an answer.

P.S. Did you order the code red hoodie on Super Bowl Sunday?

"why the need for a sideline camera? "

Cuz tapes were used AFTER game, probably week of rematch.

Why waste an employee doing something that is of absolutely no use to you because you can get the same info, and better, elsewhere? "

Exactly. thats why college dropouts with the shooting skille of Mike Janes was hired to do this and I'm sure for the same pay you and I raked in at channel 50.

Why the dual cameras? Is the master, Bill Belichick, so reckless that he'd risk his entire reputation and that of his dynasty on a camera placement that does him absolutely no good? "

The PLACEMENT was the issue, not the taping.

Has your Ron Borges T-shirt arrived yet?

The rest of you, feel free to chime in at any point here!

My friend, I've always known you to be a very reasonable and just man. So you really need to go to a Kool-Aid detoxification center and get off the stuff. As you know from our days at the dearly departed WNDS, I'm not making enough money from these gigs to afford buying all this B.S.

Come on LK...Belichick's story doesn't pass the smell test. You talk about the PLACEMENT being the issue, not the taping, but that's my point. You say the PLACEMENT has no benefit that you can't get elsewhere. In fact, you made the argument other LEGAL placements give you better technological benefits.

So my question, once again, is why would an intelligent man risk his team's reputation and legacy on a useless coaching tool. After all, this is a man who has no use for distractions or trivial matters that do nothing to prepare a team to win. And yet you'll now have us believe he put a camera on the field, against direct orders from the NFL, that does him absolutely no goog.

Does it not make more sense that these illegal tapes offered some sort of competitive advantage, that he knew it, and that he was willing to take the risk because the reward was so great?

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it's a duck.

I guess the problem is that we probably will never know the answer to the question of why did BB agree to/order the sideline taping...

If they (NFL or Patriots) reveal why it was done perhaps other teams will attempt a variation. If they don't explain why it was done then everyone is left wondering why it's such a big deal.

The bottom line is that I think fines as steep as they were ended up being levied in the hopes that the other 31 teams, NFL fans, and everyone else would just accept that the Patriots and BB got slapped with a huge fine and that the story is "over".

Unfortunately for them this story has longer legs than the spider that sat down next to little Miss Muffet and will not be going away any time soon. However- much like "ClemensGate" I don't know that you'll ever find out a) Why the Patriots would risk all that they did to do the sideline taping or b) What sort of advantage did the taping give them. Without answers to either (or both) of those questions it's just going to be a bunch of hot air and I don't think any tapes Walsh has will really help shed any light either - I'll bet the NFL just wants to add them to their "burn pile" and try to move on. Even if he has anything credible to say I don't know that they'll really be listening...

We'll never know why, unless Bill makes a deathbed confession.

However, I think reasonable minds can assume there was a definite benefit to it and a very good reason why the camera was used. If not, BB would never have wasted the time and effort.

Agreed on both counts.

Just trying to wrap my mind around exactly what type of in-game advatage(s) this afforded them to take such a huge risk. Again- I don't think the NFL would want BB to spill those beans even if he were willing for fear of copycats around the league.

Also wonder why BB's main defense is this gray area that it was a "misinterpretation of the rule". How can you misinterpret a rule that says no cameras filming from the sidelines during the game? Why not just say they didn't read page 3,457 of the rulebook and were ignorant of the rule? I guess they were reminded of the rule prior to the season so maybe that's why they couldn't claim ignorance??

Maybe President Bush named the "Patriot Act" allowing government spying to allude to the fact that someone needed to get some bugs into BB's bunker pronto? Nah- he's not smart enough for that (Flamesuit on).