Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

scarletfire1970

Joey Porter says Patriots are cheats!

Recommended Posts

Thats bull**** how they have been cheating for years, and it seems like nobody cares. All they got was a slap on the wrist in my book. So they're saying, if I cheat on tests in school, and noone knows until senior year, that I earned my diploma? The NFL is just sweeping it under a rug, and I think thats bull**** for the fans of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You wouldn't be convinced if Vince Lombardi rose from the dead and smacked you in the head with it. No real football fan can belittle the actions of those cheaters (that's not directed at you as I am sure you are just stirring the pot like you have in the past).

So because I disagree with your position, I'm not a real football fan? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So because I disagree with your position, I'm not a real football fan? :huh:

Yes, believing that cheating the game is not a big deal does make you a bad fan if not a bad person all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, believing that cheating the game is not a big deal does make you a bad fan if not a bad person all together.

That's funny. Dramatic, but funny. Joey Porter gets arrested for clocking a Bengals player, but because he thinks there needs to be an asterisk, he's a good guy.

I'm not a member of the "everyone's doing it" club, but if you think this practice was invented by one team, used by one team and perfected by one team, you are extremely naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's funny. Dramatic, but funny. Joey Porter gets arrested for clocking a Bengals player, but because he thinks there needs to be an asterisk, he's a good guy.

I'm not a member of the "everyone's doing it" club, but if you think this practice was invented by one team, used by one team and perfected by one team, you are extremely niave.

Agreed. The Pats got caught. Does it excuse the action? No. Does it set them apart from the rest of the league in terms of being "cheats" and "bad guys"? Probably not. Many have said that this kind of thing goes on in many organizations. Something the league needs to look into for sure, but no asterisk needed IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then read everything but the word "asterisk" and take into context that he is an active player.

I don't really think it makes a difference that he's an active player. Porter is a loudmouth, always has been, and he's not saying anything new or ground-shaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. The Pats got caught. Does it excuse the action? No. Does it set them apart from the rest of the league in terms of being "cheats" and "bad guys"? Probably not. Many have said that this kind of thing goes on in many organizations. Something the league needs to look into for sure, but no asterisk needed IMO.

I agree. And I've been one of few Pats defenders since this came out, but I never argued against the punishments the Pats got. They did break a rule, and therefore were deserving of what they got. Now it's time to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's funny. Dramatic, but funny. Joey Porter gets arrested for clocking a Bengals player, but because he thinks there needs to be an asterisk, he's a good guy.

I'm not a member of the "everyone's doing it" club, but if you think this practice was invented by one team, used by one team and perfected by one team, you are extremely naive.

I fail to see why Joey Porter's fight with Levi Jones has anything to do with the Patriots cheating. Is Joey Porter no longer allowed to talk because he got into a fight? Or should we not listen to anything he says because he got into a fight? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about we listen to Steve Young then. I am pretty sure he hasn't gotten into a fight:

STEVE YOUNG WONDERS ABOUT WEIS

Posted by Michael David Smith on May 19, 2008, 2:59 p.m.

Notre Dame coach Charlie Weis doesn’t want to talk about what he knows about the New England Patriots’ practice of taping its opponents’ signals while Weis was the Patriots’ offensive coordinator.

But one person who seems to think Weis should talk is Hall of Fame quarterback Steve Young, who’s now an ESPN analyst. Young appeared on Dan Patrick’s radio show today, and he said he’s re-assessing his thoughts about Weis.

"I remember thinking to myself during some of the runs, ‘Charlie Weis is a genius,’” Young said. "I mean, I remember saying that to people: ‘This guy is uncanny, how he’s able to make these adjustments and just come out and dominate in the second half.’ What it’s left me to do is, well, I don’t know. Did it matter? I could see how it could matter if you put it all together. So it’s a tough one. I think that people earn it on the field, and I think you’ve got to move on and move forward and just recognize that it’s not a good thing at the time.”

When Patrick asked Young how big an advantage it would be to know what play the defense was about to run, Young answered, "The game would be over. If I knew what was coming, that’s the whole game.”

Young acknowledged that NFL teams always try to get an edge over their opponents, but he seemed to think the systematic way the Patriots collected tapes of opponents crossed a line.

"There’s gamesmanship all the time. In a game, you take whatever advantage you can get,” Young said.

Because of the kid-gloves treatment that Notre Dame’s program gets as the only school with its own TV network, Weis probably won’t have to answer a barrage of questions about Spygate. But the questions are out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fail to see why Joey Porter's fight with Levi Jones has anything to do with the Patriots cheating. Is Joey Porter no longer allowed to talk because he got into a fight? Or should we not listen to anything he says because he got into a fight? :rolleyes:

I was hoping it'd be more obvious, but the comment was made because I was told I'm a bad person basically because I don't hate the Pats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about we listen to Steve Young then. I am pretty sure he hasn't gotten into a fight:

STEVE YOUNG WONDERS ABOUT WEIS

Posted by Michael David Smith on May 19, 2008, 2:59 p.m.

Notre Dame coach Charlie Weis doesn’t want to talk about what he knows about the New England Patriots’ practice of taping its opponents’ signals while Weis was the Patriots’ offensive coordinator.

But one person who seems to think Weis should talk is Hall of Fame quarterback Steve Young, who’s now an ESPN analyst. Young appeared on Dan Patrick’s radio show today, and he said he’s re-assessing his thoughts about Weis.

"I remember thinking to myself during some of the runs, ‘Charlie Weis is a genius,’” Young said. "I mean, I remember saying that to people: ‘This guy is uncanny, how he’s able to make these adjustments and just come out and dominate in the second half.’ What it’s left me to do is, well, I don’t know. Did it matter? I could see how it could matter if you put it all together. So it’s a tough one. I think that people earn it on the field, and I think you’ve got to move on and move forward and just recognize that it’s not a good thing at the time.”

When Patrick asked Young how big an advantage it would be to know what play the defense was about to run, Young answered, "The game would be over. If I knew what was coming, that’s the whole game.”

Young acknowledged that NFL teams always try to get an edge over their opponents, but he seemed to think the systematic way the Patriots collected tapes of opponents crossed a line.

"There’s gamesmanship all the time. In a game, you take whatever advantage you can get,” Young said.

Because of the kid-gloves treatment that Notre Dame’s program gets as the only school with its own TV network, Weis probably won’t have to answer a barrage of questions about Spygate. But the questions are out there.

If that's the case, then the game "should be over" when a team is successful at stealing a signal the legal way. We need to remember here. Stealing signals is not illegal. Using a video camera is. And Young's comment doesn't show how using video gives a team the extreme advantage that everyone seems to think exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If that's the case, then the game "should be over" when a team is successful at stealing a signal the legal way. We need to remember here. Stealing signals is not illegal. Using a video camera is. And Young's comment doesn't show how using video gives a team the extreme advantage that everyone seems to think exists.

So you don't think Brady knowing the play the opposing defense is running at just about every snap is a benefit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's funny. Dramatic, but funny. Joey Porter gets arrested for clocking a Bengals player, but because he thinks there needs to be an asterisk, he's a good guy.

I am not calling Porter a good guy. But is Osama Bin Laden wrong if he tells you the sky is blue just because he's a piece of ****? No. Joey Porter has credibility here regardless of your feelings about him.

I'm not a member of the "everyone's doing it" club, but if you think this practice was invented by one team, used by one team and perfected by one team, you are extremely naive.

I don't think they invented cheating, but that has no impact on my point. There is no gray here, only black and white.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was hoping it'd be more obvious, but the comment was made because I was told I'm a bad person basically because I don't hate the Pats.

You weren't called anything. You asked for the criteria and the shoe just happened to fit. Its more of a coincidence than an accusation. :D

If that's the case, then the game "should be over" when a team is successful at stealing a signal the legal way. We need to remember here. Stealing signals is not illegal. Using a video camera is. And Young's comment doesn't show how using video gives a team the extreme advantage that everyone seems to think exists.

You're in denial. Simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you don't think Brady knowing the play the opposing defense is running at just about every snap is a benefit?

If it is, the results don't show as much as people think it does. Many of the tapes Walsh produced were of games the Pats lost, or won by very small margins. And the tape of the 02 AFCCG, the Pats scored one offensive TD, and a whopping 3 points in the 2nd half. If this is as big a benefit as people think, then they should be winning by much larger margins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not calling Porter a good guy. But is Osama Bin Laden wrong if he tells you the sky is blue just because he's a piece of ****? No. Joey Porter has credibility here regardless of your feelings about him.

If that's the case, then those who share my opinion have just as much credibility as well, reguardless of how you feel about them.

You weren't called anything. You asked for the criteria and the shoe just happened to fit. Its more of a coincidence than an accusation. :D

Really? Hardly a coincidence when you set your own critera. First and only person I've seen to say someone is a bad fan and a bad person because they disagree with you.

You're in denial. Simple as that.

Care to elaborate on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be much more impressed if Porter actually backs his words up at some point this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll be much more impressed if Porter actually backs his words up at some point this year.

Agreed. It'll be interesting to see how he fairs in this system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it is, the results don't show as much as people think it does. Many of the tapes Walsh produced were of games the Pats lost, or won by very small margins. And the tape of the 02 AFCCG, the Pats scored one offensive TD, and a whopping 3 points in the 2nd half. If this is as big a benefit as people think, then they should be winning by much larger margins.

You clearly don't understand the use of the tapes. They are used for future games.

If that's the case, then those who share my opinion have just as much credibility as well, reguardless of how you feel about them.

If they are offering unsolicited opinions with experience and expertise on the subject then yes my feelings about them are irrelevant. That was the entire point I was making so your argument is lacking.

Really? Hardly a coincidence when you set your own critera. First and only person I've seen to say someone is a bad fan and a bad person because they disagree with you.

Its not as far-fetched as you are making it out to be. If you disrespect/disregard the integrity of the game then you are a bad fan. That seems pretty obvious to me. If you argued with me that racism was good you would be wrong and a bad person because of your opinion, not because you disagree with me.

Care to elaborate on that?

Not really, you clearly lack logic or you haven't understood what we are talking about. Me posting it over and over again will never change your mind. You're in argument mode and clearly are more interested in that than understanding the situation. Its a fact that they cheated and its a fact that they thought it would benefit them. The opinions on how much it would benefit them (in this thread) are coming from a pro-bowl defensive player and a hall of fame quarterback who understand the game better than you or I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You clearly don't understand the use of the tapes. They are used for future games.

Um, I knew that a long time ago. I'm the one that argued from the beginning that it would have been too difficult to try and study a tape of signals in a 12 minute halftime, for use in the same game.

If they are offering unsolicited opinions with experience and expertise on the subject then yes my feelings about them are irrelevant. That was the entire point I was making so your argument is lacking.

My point was not on anyone's expertise or experience. It was on the idea that their opinion on this issue defines them as a person.

Its not as far-fetched as you are making it out to be. If you disrespect/disregard the integrity of the game then you are a bad fan. That seems pretty obvious to me. If you argued with me that racism was good you would be wrong and a bad person because of your opinion, not because you disagree with me.

This to me is an extrememly weak argument. Stealing signals is an accepted part of the game. What's not is the use of a video camera to do so. Personally, I don't think it's as big a deal as it's made out to be, and I have yet to see a valid argument that using video gives you an extreme advantage over the accepted method of stealing signals. And for all those who piss about the integrity of the game being compromised, that's a joke as well. You and I both know very few, if any, fans will stop watching the game over this issue, so spare me the dramatics there.

Not really, you clearly lack logic or you haven't understood what we are talking about. Me posting it over and over again will never change your mind. You're in argument mode and clearly are more interested in that than understanding the situation. Its a fact that they cheated and its a fact that they thought it would benefit them. The opinions on how much it would benefit them (in this thread) are coming from a pro-bowl defensive player and a hall of fame quarterback who understand the game better than you or I.

There's a difference between me not understanding what you are talking about, and not agreeing with you. Clearly you're arguing with me as well, so what's the point of mentioning that?

There are also opinions of those (not in this thread) who understand the game better than you or I, who share my opinion, so again, we're back to square 1 on that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Um, I knew that a long time ago. I'm the one that argued from the beginning that it would have been too difficult to try and study a tape of signals in a 12 minute halftime, for use in the same game.

Then why mention the Patriots' success/failure in the games that were taped if you understand that they were not the games that would be affected by the videotaping?

My point was not on anyone's expertise or experience. It was on the idea that their opinion on this issue defines them as a person.

Mine is that their expertise/experience validate the addition of their comments to the debate, unlike joe schmoe who just feels like sounding off (like you and me).

This to me is an extrememly weak argument. Stealing signals is an accepted part of the game. What's not is the use of a video camera to do so. Personally, I don't think it's as big a deal as it's made out to be, and I have yet to see a valid argument that using video gives you an extreme advantage over the accepted method of stealing signals. And for all those who piss about the integrity of the game being compromised, that's a joke as well. You and I both know very few, if any, fans will stop watching the game over this issue, so spare me the dramatics there
.

You and I both know that the NFL could put swastikas on the players' helmets in honor of Adolf's birthday and people would still watch the games. This is an obvious exaggeration but we've both heard the term that the NFL can "print its own money". If they brush the issues aside effectively everything will go back to business as usual.

The argument is firm, the NFL levied the worst penalty for any offense ever because of the Patriots blatant disregard for the league's rules in spite of the fact that they are clearly printed and that they were reminded of them after accusations had been made that they had cheated in the past. The fans' reaction to this has zero impact on whether it was wrong or right. Just the facts.

There are also opinions of those (not in this thread) who understand the game better than you or I, who share my opinion, so again, we're back to square 1 on that point.

I don't remember any non-Patriots players coming out and minimizing this (former players like Willie McGinest don't count). I have heard Eagles players make comments about it (Sheldon Brown and I believe Brian Dawkins). The people who should not be listened to are owners, GM's and coaches because it is in their best interest to move on for the good of the league (and they were informed of that in a closed-door meeting before the Pro-Bowl if you remember Adam Schefter talking about that on NFLN's coverage of the week before the game). I'll be waiting for another hall of fame QB like Steve Young to come out and defend Tom Brady and Spygate. I know other former players like the 72 Miami Dolphins are more than willing to comment on the Pats cheating ways. They may have been the first to publicly insult their accomplishments with the * comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then why mention the Patriots' success/failure in the games that were taped if you understand that they were not the games that would be affected by the videotaping?

Most think it did serve an ingame purpose. The fact that Walsh and now you confirm that they weren't used in the same game blows a major hole in the idea that most people have that we were cheated out of our ring. This of course is assuming they were even taping our signals in that SB.

Mine is that their expertise/experience validate the addition of their comments to the debate, unlike joe schmoe who just feels like sounding off (like you and me).

I don't disagree, but I still don't see how that's relavent to my original point that one's opinion on an issue makes them a good or bad person.

The argument is firm, the NFL levied the worst penalty for any offense ever because of the Patriots blatant disregard for the league's rules in spite of the fact that they are clearly printed and that they were reminded of them after accusations had been made that they had cheated in the past. The fans' reaction to this has zero impact on whether it was wrong or right. Just the facts.

I understand that, and I'm ok with that. I think it's a stupid rule, but it is a rule, and the Pats deserved to be penalized for it. As much as I've defended them in any Spygate thread that's come up, I've never griped about the penalty levied upon them. (BTW, it's interesting how you mention it being the worst penalty levied for any offense, but most of the time, the usual response is they got a "slap on the wrist". Perhaps we should get some common ground there.)

I don't remember any non-Patriots players coming out and minimizing this (former players like Willie McGinest don't count). I have heard Eagles players make comments about it (Sheldon Brown and I believe Brian Dawkins). The people who should not be listened to are owners, GM's and coaches because it is in their best interest to move on for the good of the league (and they were informed of that in a closed-door meeting before the Pro-Bowl if you remember Adam Schefter talking about that on NFLN's coverage of the week before the game). I'll be waiting for another hall of fame QB like Steve Young to come out and defend Tom Brady and Spygate. I know other former players like the 72 Miami Dolphins are more than willing to comment on the Pats cheating ways. They may have been the first to publicly insult their accomplishments with the * comments.

I've heard Rod Woodson on NFLN talk about the minimal impact. I've heard guys like Tim Hasselbeck (who I personally don't care for, but he is an active/former player), Ross Tucker, and Soloman Wilcots say they don't believe it in any way diminshes what they've accomplished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most think it did serve an ingame purpose. The fact that Walsh and now you confirm that they weren't used in the same game blows a major hole in the idea that most people have that we were cheated out of our ring. This of course is assuming they were even taping our signals in that SB.

Unless the Pats recorded the Eagles signals on one of the multiple times since Belicheat took over that they played before the Super Bowl...

I don't disagree, but I still don't see how that's relavent to my original point that one's opinion on an issue makes them a good or bad person.

Don't our opinions and beliefs define who we are and what we do?

I understand that, and I'm ok with that. I think it's a stupid rule, but it is a rule, and the Pats deserved to be penalized for it. As much as I've defended them in any Spygate thread that's come up, I've never griped about the penalty levied upon them. (BTW, it's interesting how you mention it being the worst penalty levied for any offense, but most of the time, the usual response is they got a "slap on the wrist". Perhaps we should get some common ground there.)

Good point. It is the worst, but in my opinion it was not enough as this is in my opinion the worst team infraction that has been proven that I am aware of.

I've heard Rod Woodson on NFLN talk about the minimal impact. I've heard guys like Tim Hasselbeck (who I personally don't care for, but he is an active/former player), Ross Tucker, and Soloman Wilcots say they don't believe it in any way diminshes what they've accomplished.

I've heard most of those guys on NFLN and I don't remember them being so light on the situation. I think they have said that their accomplishments shouldn't be taken away but I don't think they made light of the situation. If you've seen any of that in print I would be interested to see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites