The Swamp

If the NFL already knew about this, you'd think Roge could have given Kraft a heads up at their cocktail party the night before.

I think the best parallel is what the Orioles Grounds Crew from way back in the day used to do. They were known for doctoring the field near infield lines to help keep bunts in fair territory. The idea was the o's knew where the friendly fair roll would happen and where it would not. Opposing coaches would come and stomp on the field to try and ensure it was level.

edit
Found the reference
1890, Thomas J. Murphy
Also would harden the ground in front of the plate to hit the ball down creating high bouncers for infield hits (i.e. The Baltimore Chop)

Even that isn't quite the same since both teams knew and could take advantage of it.

wlu_lax6 wrote:I think the best parallel is what the Orioles Grounds Crew from way back in the day used to do. They were known for doctoring the field near infield lines to help keep bunts in fair territory. The idea was the o's knew where the friendly fair roll would happen and where it would not. Opposing coaches would come and stomp on the field to try and ensure it was level.

Baseball history is filled with those types of anecdotes/oddities. DIdn't the old Phillies' ballpark have "Ashburn's Alley"?

wlu_lax6 wrote:I think the best parallel is what the Orioles Grounds Crew from way back in the day used to do. They were known for doctoring the field near infield lines to help keep bunts in fair territory. The idea was the o's knew where the friendly fair roll would happen and where it would not. Opposing coaches would come and stomp on the field to try and ensure it was level.

The best parallel you can come up with is something that might come into play once a game compared to 70-90 pass/catch opportunities? That's insane.

I think corking a bat is a perfect analogy. Not sure why it isn't. You're taking something that is supposed to perform a certain way with certain limitations and changing those limitations to make it easier to use. QED.

brian wrote:I think corking a bat is a perfect analogy. Not sure why it isn't. You're taking something that is supposed to perform a certain way with certain limitations and changing those limitations to make it easier to use. QED.

Does the whole team use the bat?

How about the rumors of the Jays rampant sign stealing at home? Or is that more analogous to Spygate, the other major Patriots scandal that really isn't a big deal you guys?

mister d wrote:How about the rumors of the Jays rampant sign stealing at home? Or is that more analogous to Spygate, the other major Patriots scandal that really isn't a big deal you guys?

You show you ignorance here, as Spygate wasn't really a big deal. Any team can film an opposing teams signals. The reason that the Patriots were fined was that they filmed from a non-designated space.

Shouldn't you be blowing up pictures of that hunky AA shortstop that the Yankees have so you can cover up all the Jeter posters?

Just some wicked good Dunkin away from peak Boston there, Rush. Congrats.

Rush2112 wrote:The reason that the Patriots were fined was that they filmed from a non-designated space....

...literally, literally immediately after all NFL teams were explicitly told that was not allowed. You can quibble over whether it was a big deal or not I suppose, but the biggest fine in NFL history and the first time a first-round draft pick was taken from a team in more than 30 years would seem to indicate that it kinda was.

brian wrote:

Rush2112 wrote:The reason that the Patriots were fined was that they filmed from a non-designated space....

...literally, literally immediately after all NFL teams were explicitly told that was not allowed. You can quibble over whether it was a big deal or not I suppose, but the biggest fine in NFL history and the first time a first-round draft pick was taken from a team in more than 30 years would seem to indicate that it kinda was.

More importantly...do you know what the non-designated space is that Rush is trying to pretend is some big loophole?

"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."

brian wrote:

Rush2112 wrote:The reason that the Patriots were fined was that they filmed from a non-designated space....

...literally, literally immediately after all NFL teams were explicitly told that was not allowed. You can quibble over whether it was a big deal or not I suppose, but the biggest fine in NFL history and the first time a first-round draft pick was taken from a team in more than 30 years would seem to indicate that it kinda was.

So 750K (that's what Belichick and the team paid combined) is more than the 968K that the Broncos paid for circumnavigating the cap? Interesting math.

I'd say that the fine/pick were for subordination more than breaking some commandment of the league. Plus the penalty was handed down during the "Sheriff" phase of Godell's tenure. If it hadn't happened and some team was found guilty of the same infraction next year I'd wager it would be met with a slap on the wrist fine and nothing more.

The corked bat is a decent analogy in theory but because so many have attempted to mess with bat properties over the years, it has been universally determined to be outside of fair play. Not really the case with messing with the pressure of a football. I think its about like taking a game baseball to the dugout and filing grooves parallel to the seams.

Biggest fine in NFL history to an individual since you're intent on parsing every phrase. But I'm hoping that you continue providing your takes on this because the Boston fan victim/persecution complex is endlessly fascinating to me. I sincerely mean that.

"If the Patriots had been involved in Bountygate, they would have been kicked out of the NFL, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Patriots fan for life."

Jerloma wrote:
More importantly...do you know what the non-designated space is that Rush is trying to pretend is some big loophole?

"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."

Your quote is the rule memo. The NFL rule book stated the above as well as:

All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

Belechick interpreted that rule as filming was allowed as long as the footage wasn't used in game, which is also covered in the rule book:

"...any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited...including without limitation...any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

So it's a question of interpretation, though I'm sure you wouldn't give a shit if the Patriots weren't involved.

What do you mean "footage wasn't used in the game"?

Let's assume it was a team like, say, Seattle taking adderall or the 70s Steelers taking steroids. Since it wasn't the Patriots, would anybody actually report it? I doubt it.

mister d wrote:"If the Patriots had been involved in Bountygate, they would have been kicked out of the NFL, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Patriots fan for life."

He probably thinks that the Saints weren't even punished for it.

Again...it's just amazing to me how Belichick can go from being a genius to a complete dumb-ass like that. All of a sudden he's just some naive up and comer trying to keep up with all of these complicated rules.

Gunpowder wrote:

mister d wrote:"If the Patriots had been involved in Bountygate, they would have been kicked out of the NFL, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Patriots fan for life."

He probably thinks that the Saints weren't even punished for it.

If Aaron Hernandez weren't a Patriot, he'd be out on bail and allowed to play and people would love him and cheer for him.

brian wrote:Biggest fine in NFL history to an individual since you're intent on parsing every phrase. But I'm hoping that you continue providing your takes on this because the Boston fan victim/persecution complex is endlessly fascinating to me. I sincerely mean that.

Ah, yes. I'll just forget everything that you've written in regards to the Lions and "stepping-gate."

I just find it frustrating that a team that I have supported since they were the laughing stock of the league has any success instantly taken away because they must have cheated somehow, yet the Saints bounty fiasco is never mentioned, the Broncos circumnavigating the cap that led to two Super Bowls never getting mentioned.

Then you have casual fans, if you'd even call them that, like Mr. Delaware, ranting and raving about things that he's only because it feeds his inner troll.

This present thing I don't understand why it's gone on as long as it has. You'd think that no matter the ruling that they'd have something decided sooner than later. Review some tape, review the ref's procedures and you know if the refs actually measured or eyeballed the balls pregame. Review the sideline tape and you'd be able to get some visual clue if a ball boy or someone else was releasing air from a ball. Simple. No idea why the NFL is generating conversation that's not about their signature game in a week and half...unless they've finally realized no one gives a shit about the Pro Bowl.

Gunpowder wrote:Let's assume it was a team like, say, Seattle taking adderall or the 70s Steelers taking steroids. Since it wasn't the Patriots, would anybody actually report it? I doubt it.

I'm sure it would have the casual fan trolling message boards about it as well.

Rush2112 wrote:

Gunpowder wrote:Let's assume it was a team like, say, Seattle taking adderall or the 70s Steelers taking steroids. Since it wasn't the Patriots, would anybody actually report it? I doubt it.

I'm sure it would have the casual fan trolling message boards about it as well.

Maybe you weren't around for the Roethlisberger rape allegations.

If freerepublic got a Patriots section the persecution complexes would melt the servers.

Gunpowder wrote:

Rush2112 wrote:

Gunpowder wrote:Let's assume it was a team like, say, Seattle taking adderall or the 70s Steelers taking steroids. Since it wasn't the Patriots, would anybody actually report it? I doubt it.

I'm sure it would have the casual fan trolling message boards about it as well.

Maybe you weren't around for the Roethlisberger rape allegations.

I'm sure you're always happy when someone spells it "Rapelisberger."

Rush, I think you need to ask yourself whether you're upset with my casual fan comments or with the repeated cheating that opens the door for my comments.

Rush2112 wrote:I'm sure you're always happy when someone spells it "Rapelisberger."

Yeah, I remember SL flipping out claiming that only his most favorite QB would take universal shit for repeated sexual assaults. Boy did he get defensive over it.

The reason people get so giddy over stuff like this happening to the Patriots is mainly I think because of that bullshit "Patriot Way" narrative you guys were always spewing. It was never enough to have a winning team, you also had to somehow claim the moral high ground over everyone else. The fans bought it, the media bought it, and the people that knew it was bullshit had to hear it about it incessantly while watching Tedy Bruschi pull the dirtiest shit you'll ever see week in and week out.

So when it turns out that the Patriots really never gave a fuck about character and will bring in guys like Dillon or Moss as long as they help them win, it then turned into this idea that you were some sort of fucking reform school and bad guys magically turned into boy scouts just by wearing that uniform.

Then there was the fucking time you cut a guy for being a serial killer and everyone talked about how awesome it is that the Patriots don't put up with serial killers. You guys can't imagine how annoying this whole thing is, so when shit like this goes down, I'm shocked that any Patriot fans would be surprised that people are going to eat it up.

mister d wrote:Rush, I think you need to ask yourself whether you're upset with my casual fan comments or with the repeated cheating that opens the door for my comments.

Repeated cheating? As far as I know there has been "Spygate" (which in many people's mind wasn't cheating per se) and then something that is being investigated, which really had no bearing on the outcome of the game in question, and is something that many players and coaches have stated is something that is done one way or another through out the league.

Rush2112 wrote:

Gunpowder wrote:

Rush2112 wrote:

Gunpowder wrote:Let's assume it was a team like, say, Seattle taking adderall or the 70s Steelers taking steroids. Since it wasn't the Patriots, would anybody actually report it? I doubt it.

I'm sure it would have the casual fan trolling message boards about it as well.

Maybe you weren't around for the Roethlisberger rape allegations.

I'm sure you're always happy when someone spells it "Rapelisberger."

I'm sure I don't give too much of a fuck about it nor defend it to the death. "A lot of young guys get drunk in bars, you're showing your ignorance"

Jerloma wrote:The reason people get so giddy over stuff like this happening to the Patriots is mainly I think because of that bullshit "Patriot Way" narrative you guys were always spewing. It was never enough to have a winning team, you also had to somehow claim the moral high ground over everyone else. The fans bought it, the media bought it, and the people that knew it was bullshit had to hear it about it incessantly while watching Tedy Bruschi pull the dirtiest shit you'll ever see week in and week out.

So when it turns out that the Patriots really never gave a fuck about character and will bring in guys like Dillon or Moss as long as they help them win, it then turned into this idea that you were some sort of fucking reform school and bad guys magically turned into boy scouts just by wearing that uniform.

Then there was the fucking time you cut a guy for being a serial killer and everyone talked about how awesome it is that the Patriots don't put up with serial killers. You guys can't imagine how annoying this whole thing is, so when shit like this goes down, I'm shocked that any Patriot fans would be surprised that people are going to eat it up.

DO YOUR JOB!

Jerloma wrote:The reason people get so giddy over stuff like this happening to the Patriots is mainly I think because of that bullshit "Patriot Way" narrative you guys were always spewing. It was never enough to have a winning team, you also had to somehow claim the moral high ground over everyone else. The fans bought it, the media bought it, and the people that knew it was bullshit had to hear it about it incessantly while watching Tedy Bruschi pull the dirtiest shit you'll ever see week in and week out.

So when it turns out that the Patriots really never gave a fuck about character and will bring in guys like Dillon or Moss as long as they help them win, it then turned into this idea that you were some sort of fucking reform school and bad guys magically turned into boy scouts just by wearing that uniform.

Then there was the fucking time you cut a guy for being a serial killer and everyone talked about how awesome it is that the Patriots don't put up with serial killers. You guys can't imagine how annoying this whole thing is, so when shit like this goes down, I'm shocked that any Patriot fans would be surprised that people are going to eat it up.

This is just so good.

And as for the Lions and for whatever it's worth, I'll defend them if I think they deserve defending. We have no way of telling for sure of course, but I don't think I was arguing that Suh shouldn't have been suspended for two games back three years ago when he stomped on Dietrich-Smith and I'm definitely certain I didn't say anything about how Raiola shouldn't get suspended for Week 17. My beef with Suh's suspension ended up being the very reason the independent arbitrator overturned it -- it wasn't egregious enough to deserve a one-game penalty since he wasn't considered a repeat offender any more (according to NFL rules). I said even before that hearing either he should have been suspended for multiple games or no games. Turned out I was right.

NFL Investigating Whether Patriots Played Game With Properly Inflated Vince Wilfork

brian wrote:And as for the Lions and for whatever it's worth, I'll defend them if I think they deserve defending. We have no way of telling for sure of course, but I don't think I was arguing that Suh shouldn't have been suspended for two games back three years ago when he stomped on Dietrich-Smith and I'm definitely certain I didn't say anything about how Raiola shouldn't get suspended for Week 17. My beef with Suh's suspension ended up being the very reason the independent arbitrator overturned it -- it wasn't egregious enough to deserve a one-game penalty since he wasn't considered a repeat offender any more (according to NFL rules). I said even before that hearing either he should have been suspended for multiple games or no games. Turned out I was right.

That fine suggested that maybe he shouldn't have been suspended for a playoff game but they weren't sure. Regular season game he's suspended, I'll hypothetically bet the damn house.

Gunpowder wrote:

brian wrote:And as for the Lions and for whatever it's worth, I'll defend them if I think they deserve defending. We have no way of telling for sure of course, but I don't think I was arguing that Suh shouldn't have been suspended for two games back three years ago when he stomped on Dietrich-Smith and I'm definitely certain I didn't say anything about how Raiola shouldn't get suspended for Week 17. My beef with Suh's suspension ended up being the very reason the independent arbitrator overturned it -- it wasn't egregious enough to deserve a one-game penalty since he wasn't considered a repeat offender any more (according to NFL rules). I said even before that hearing either he should have been suspended for multiple games or no games. Turned out I was right.

That fine suggested that maybe he shouldn't have been suspended for a playoff game but they weren't sure. Regular season game he's suspended, I'll hypothetically bet the damn house.

And I probably would have agreed with that as well. But considering no player had ever been suspended for a playoff game for on-field conduct in NFL history, it didn't really seem like that was the one that should have broke that cherry.

brian wrote:I think corking a bat is a perfect analogy. Not sure why it isn't. You're taking something that is supposed to perform a certain way with certain limitations and changing those limitations to make it easier to use. QED.

As I believe I stated in a brilliant post upthread, doctored hockey and lacrosse sticks are comparable to the corked bat. But they fall short in direct comparison unless one team exclusively uses illegal equipment and the other doesn't.

rush came kind of close with the scuffed ball, but as was pointed out, that's really not a direct comparison. Closer would be when the sandpaper and Vaseline come into play.

A hypothetical closer to what happened on Sunday would be if the team in the field was able to supply their own balls, and one team decided to use balls with higher seams, or slightly heavier or both.

Was just going to make the seams analogy.

Listening to Francesa (in car, not intentionally), he seems to think a suspension is a real possibility.