You just got owned again.

1. Bill Belichick and the Patriots broke the rules. There is no disputing that. They were punished for it.

2. The question, however, is whether the severity of the punishment was equal to the benefit gained by cheating. How many teams wouldn’t give up a 1st round pick and $750K in fines for three SB titles? And why would Belichick risk getting caught at cheating unless he thought he needed that extra edge?

3. Automatically, critic ASSUMES that the stealing of signals ( which the taping wasn’t considered illegal until 2005, do the math ) correlates into automatic SB Wins. He disregards the seasons they didn’t win, and has disregarded the Patriots being 20-2 post spygate. Essentially, they have a better record since Spygate, and lost on the best play in football history.

—————————————————

1. The implication has been that the taping of signals is the golden lamp which when rubbed, automatically ensures victory. They insist that the advantage gained by these tapes is the single most important factor (even if some faint voices say otherwise) in the Patriots success this decade.

2. Strawman. I have yet to see anyone make anywhere close to such exaggerated assumptions. Automatically? No, only that it helps a great deal. Most important? No, but significant.

3. The critic falls on his own opinion by not only defying Bruce’s alleged hyping of automatically, but forgot he essentially said the cheating gave the Patriots 3 SBs in his first sentence. Hypocritical at least, fumbling idiot at best.

——————————————————

1. Never mind that the stealing of signals has been going on in all sports almost from the beginning.

2.Which ignores a significant detail: the Patriots were caught VIDEOTAPING (and not just “stealing”) signals.

3. Has not noticed that the rule was put into play in 2005, since videotaping was essentially hard to do since the required technology to do it well had yet to be harnessed. What if someone begins to telepathically steal signals? You have to put it in stealing signals category, since their are millions of ways to do it, and none of them, regardless of the efficiency, should be tolerated.

—————————————————

1.Nothing has changed since that day, in fact, the Patriots position has improved, as the notion of the walkthrough video has been dismissed.

2.While the last part of the sentence about the walkthrough is accurate, the rest is not, as it is now clear that Goodell greatly understated the duration and importance of the cheating during his SB presser.

3. Where is this information of the duration and importance? Does that mean the Patriots are just good forever because they stole signals. So when teams change their signals, which they do all the time, the Patriots have an advantage how? This is just a silly response.

——————————————————
1.What that quote is saying is that taping offensive signals in the past was irrelevant – because there are no hand signals to steal.

2.On the contrary, you’re confusing the verb tenses between present/future (”are” and “will be”) and past (”was”). Thus the quote stating that the new system will make hand signals irrelevant implies they were relevant before thereby contradicting your assertion.

3. Therefore the whole taping is irrelevant since they always change, regardless of signals.

————————————————

1. They’ve behaved with the subtlty of a pack of screaming jackals.

2.Blatant ad hominem attack.

3. I think you have a right to an opinion when a team is constantly berated by media with very little evidence. He even goes into detail into each person below. This editorial is meant to attack. That is like if someone tries to shoot someone, and you say ” He’s blatantly trying to shoot them!” Great analysis.

—————————————————-

1. They haven’t even bothered to hide their agendas

2. More ad hominem. Attempting to discredit the sources does nothing to refute what they claim. Otherwise, I could simply refute this entire article by stating that you haven’t even bothered to hide yours.

3. His agenda is to show that the media hyped the story. You can’t refute someone’s opinion, only the evidence from which it is based on.

——————————————

1. Is it too much of a stretch to consider that Bishop wrote the article on Bledsoe’s wine and coffee business ventures as payola for the info in the Feb 22nd article?

A peculiar statement from someone who decries “sensationalism, exaggeration, rush to judgement and opinion”. “Another prime example of ‘Let’s throw something out there without making any effort to check into it at all’” sound familiar?

3. He did go overboard here.

—————————————————

1. Schlereth has convienently not addressed the fact that the Broncos circumvented the salary cap so they could pay John Elway and Terrell Davis $29 million in deferred payments.

2. Tu toque argument. That the Broncos cheated has no bearing on whether the Patriots cheated.

3. He is trying to show relevance to another writer on a similar story. A 5-year old understands this. Trying to latin only makes it weirder.

1. I kind of think this is worse than the taping of signals

2.Why? Because the Broncos did it instead of the Patriots?

3. No. Because the Salary Cap keeps you from hoarding great players. Hoarding great players and stealing signs are two different beasts, but I bet most people would rather Terrell Davis and Elway over the run & shoot schemes of Michael Vick.

——————————————————
1. Tomase’s story is the single most egregious part of this entire matter, and he has skated, scot-free.

2. I agree that he deserves more than a slap on the wrist for writing an unsubstantiated story, but then again, so does Belichick for cheating.

3. Again. Belichick gets fined and loses picks and he deserves more from someone who has never played the sport and understood the importance of the event. The difference is, Tomase made a lie and didn’t get punished. Belichick did. The punishment fit the crime, which he is proving it is overblown in the article.

1. A Real Reason for the Hate is Lack of Access

2.Poisoning the well. Besides, it couldn’t have anything to do with Belichick cheating and basically getting away with it, could it?

3. And he put his argument there already by talking about the other coaches. Did you read this article?

——————————————————-\\

1. Can you sit there and realistically say that had it been Tony Dungy, Jon Gruden or Herman Edwards that did this that the stories and commentary would be as nasty and personal?

2.Pure speculation.

3. That is what Tomase did, and that is what Bruce is doing. It is an editorial. Editorial’s passion are based on speculation.

——————————————————–

1. Regardless of perceived advantage that the filmed signals would’ve provided, the players on the field had to make plays in order for the Patriots to win their championships.

2.Yet cheating makes it easier for them to be in the right position to make those plays. If you disagree, then I suggest a little experiment: why don’t the Patriots tell opposing teams what plays they’re basically going to running before every snap from now on. It shouldn’t matter, because the opposing teams still have to make the plays.

3. You still have to prove if it helped them. If they were losing, I understand. But 20-2, I’ll take that over cheating any day.

1. Knowing the defensive signals didn’t help Ty Law pick off Peyton Manning in the playoffs. It didn’t help Rodney Harrison seal the Super Bowl against Specter’s Eagles with a pick.

2.Which fails to address the possibility that opposing teams might have taken less risks when they had the ball if the Patriots’ offense hadn’t shown a near-miraculous ability to guess what their defenses were going to do (especially near the end of games, for some odd reason) or if the games weren’t as close as they were thanks to the Patriots’ unfair advantage.

3. And in 2007, top 5 defense in the league? They had no clue, and they still won.

1. Whatever the reason, the stench from all of this mess is going to take a long time to wear off.

2.A stench that Belichick and the Patriots well-deserve.

3. Well, they’re 3-1, and a miracle beat them. Try to beat us post-spygate.

Get used to it.

Bill Belichick and the Patriots broke the rules. There is no disputing that. They were punished for it.

The question, however, is whether the severity of the punishment was equal to the benefit gained by cheating. How many teams wouldn’t give up a 1st round pick and $750K in fines for three SB titles? And why would Belichick risk getting caught at cheating unless he thought he needed that extra edge?

The implication has been that the taping of signals is the golden lamp which when rubbed, automatically ensures victory. They insist that the advantage gained by these tapes is the single most important factor (even if some faint voices say otherwise) in the Patriots success this decade.

Strawman. I have yet to see anyone make anywhere close to such exaggerated assumptions. Automatically? No, only that it helps a great deal. Most important? No, but significant.

Never mind that the stealing of signals has been going on in all sports almost from the beginning.

Which ignores a significant detail: the Patriots were caught VIDEOTAPING (and not just “stealing”) signals.

Nothing has changed since that day, in fact, the Patriots position has improved, as the notion of the walkthrough video has been dismissed.

While the last part of the sentence about the walkthrough is accurate, the rest is not, as it is now clear that Goodell greatly understated the duration and importance of the cheating during his SB presser.

What that quote is saying is that taping offensive signals in the past was irrelevant – because there are no hand signals to steal.

On the contrary, you’re confusing the verb tenses between present/future (”are” and “will be”) and past (”was”). Thus the quote stating that the new system will make hand signals irrelevant implies they were relevant before thereby contradicting your assertion.

They’ve behaved with the subtlty of a pack of screaming jackals.

Blatant ad hominem attack.

They haven’t even bothered to hide their agendas

More ad hominem. Attempting to discredit the sources does nothing to refute what they claim. Otherwise, I could simply refute this entire article by stating that you haven’t even bothered to hide yours.

Is it too much of a stretch to consider that Bishop wrote the article on Bledsoe’s wine and coffee business ventures as payola for the info in the Feb 22nd article?

A peculiar statement from someone who decries “sensationalism, exaggeration, rush to judgement and opinion”. “Another prime example of ‘Let’s throw something out there without making any effort to check into it at all’” sound familiar?

Schlereth has convienently not addressed the fact that the Broncos circumvented the salary cap so they could pay John Elway and Terrell Davis $29 million in deferred payments.

Tu toque argument. That the Broncos cheated has no bearing on whether the Patriots cheated.

I kind of think this is worse than the taping of signals

Why? Because the Broncos did it instead of the Patriots?

Tomase’s story is the single most egregious part of this entire matter, and he has skated, scot-free.

I agree that he deserves more than a slap on the wrist for writing an unsubstantiated story, but then again, so does Belichick for cheating.

A Real Reason for the Hate is Lack of Access

Poisoning the well. Besides, it couldn’t have anything to do with Belichick cheating and basically getting away with it, could it?

Can you sit there and realistically say that had it been Tony Dungy, Jon Gruden or Herman Edwards that did this that the stories and commentary would be as nasty and personal?

Pure speculation.

Regardless of perceived advantage that the filmed signals would’ve provided, the players on the field had to make plays in order for the Patriots to win their championships.

Yet cheating makes it easier for them to be in the right position to make those plays. If you disagree, then I suggest a little experiment: why don’t the Patriots tell opposing teams what plays they’re basically going to running before every snap from now on. It shouldn’t matter, because the opposing teams still have to make the plays.

Knowing the defensive signals didn’t help Ty Law pick off Peyton Manning in the playoffs. It didn’t help Rodney Harrison seal the Super Bowl against Specter’s Eagles with a pick.

Which fails to address the possibility that opposing teams might have taken less risks when they had the ball if the Patriots’ offense hadn’t shown a near-miraculous ability to guess what their defenses were going to do (especially near the end of games, for some odd reason) or if the games weren’t as close as they were thanks to the Patriots’ unfair advantage.

Whatever the reason, the stench from all of this mess is going to take a long time to wear off.

A stench that Belichick and the Patriots well-deserve.

Pats fans. Be very thankful.

The media has played into our hands once again.

The Pats will be great again this year in a large part because of the built in motivation.

The media has exposed themselves this year as habitual liars. The best lies mix in a bit of the truth to make it easier to swallow. They are running out of the truth condiment.

Don’t defend the Patriots, they were penalized, heavily.

Attack the media. Make them accountable, if necessary boycott them and just watch the games. Who needs all that commentary anyway? Its not like most of them really understand football anyway, yes even former players.

The Patriots are fun to watch because they play the game of football so well.

It is just amazing how the football gods work; Belichick gets caught cheating on a NY team, NE gets upset about the feedback from the whole situation and runs the table in the regular season almost in spite of everyone chastising them, and then it goes right back to a NY team and the NY team wins it all. Some strange irony there, no way any one predicted the NY Giants would win the Super Bowl at the beginning of the season!

Keep up the great work Bruce!!!