Soulive
Well-Known Member
Evan! said:I suppose that makes it okay then...![]()
Absolutely not, I'm just saying he's the scapegoat/whipping boy lately. Notice how not too many other coaches are bashing him...
Evan! said:I suppose that makes it okay then...![]()
Soulive21 said:Absolutely not, I'm just saying he's the scapegoat/whipping boy lately. Notice how not too many other coaches are bashing him...
the_bird said:I thought it was VERY telling how, in the heart of "spygate," Brian Billick made it a point to talk about how he thought Mangini was "cheating" in the Ravens/Jets game... very pointed.
Soulive21 said:Absolutely not, I'm just saying he's the scapegoat/whipping boy lately. Notice how not too many other coaches are bashing him...
Evan! said:Anecdotal evidence and assumptive guesses are worthless, to be honest. He got caught cheating, and in other instances, he is riding the line between ethical and unethical. These are documented cases. Other coaches MAY be doing the same thing, but I have yet to see much evidence to that point. And believe me, if another coach got caught cheating, they'd catch hell too. Yes, Cheatichek is in the spotlight because his team is superhuman, but that doesn't mean that everyone else gets a free pass. As for why not too many other coaches are "bashing" him, perhaps that's because some NFL organizations have class...and their coaches have better things to do (like, um, coaching football) than attack other coaches.
kinison_fan said:OK, off topic but two observations of last week's game:
-How come the (almost) full audio of Brady on the line? How many times did we hear him call 69, 69 (Runyan) before the snap?
-Loved the angry WTF look on Brady's face as he got up after the sacks...
the_bird said:I'm pretty sure that when he calls "Omaha," that means that they snap the ball on the next sound. I suppose they need to pass a rule so that defenses can't pay attention and act on that information...![]()
olllllo said:From what I understand, Patriot D-Linemen were wired up so they could record audibles for later study.
the_bird said:There was speculation about that, but no evidence that I heard. Hell, why not just have an assistant coach stand at the line of scrimmage with a notebook?
olllllo said:Evidence was destroyed by the NFL...
Convenient.
the_bird said:I've never understood why, in football or baseball, "stealing signals" is such an ethical problem. You don't want them stolen? DISGUISE THEM BETTER!
the_bird said:I just don't get it... if a team's not smart enough to disguise its signals well, or its players aren't smart enough to handle having a couple sets of signals or some false audibles or whathaveyou... why should the opposing team not be able to take advantage of that? I've never understood why, in football or baseball, "stealing signals" is such an ethical problem. You don't want them stolen? DISGUISE THEM BETTER!
Evan! said:I've got no problem with teams reading or "stealing" signals. What I've got a problem with is when they use technology like digital recording devices to do so. In kind, I have no problem with someone hitting 80 home runs, but I do have a problem with them hitting 80 home runs because their bat was corked or their veins were juiced up.
Reverend JC said:I recently hit my eff. of 80% and i was juiced up on homebrew. You gotta problem with that too?!!![]()
the_bird said:Where's the line?
the_bird said:It's at the core of Belichick's philisophy to not show your cards unless you absolutely have to. That's why he talks to the media as little as he can get away with. That's why he coaches all of his players to be extremely gaurded in the things that THEY say to the media (you never hear any of the Pats speaking out of turn). That's how it's always been, and frankly, I don't see the problem. The information is available (you can look and see if a player was favoring his foot or his arm when he came off the field), why should Belichick just GIVE IT to the other guy so he doesn't have to work for it?
the_bird said:If you want to talk about CHEATING, let's talk about the Denver Broncos. How many years have they been teaching their offensive linemen to legwhip and chop block? How many players have gotten seriously injured as a result? One of the Pats linemen was seriously injured a few years back, and he was neither the first nor the last one. That's an instance of a good team with a very well-documented history of performing blocks that's not only illegal, but extremely dangerous. There have also been a lot of defensive players who have admitted to being hesitant when they play the Broncos because they know their linemen cheat and they don't want to get injured; you think that might be a reason they can put basically anyone off the street in the backfield and they'll gain 1,000 yards?
Now, that's just one example of a team where there's a whole lotta evidence that they don't PLAY above-board. But, it's something that only gets attention when someone gets hurt, and certainly it doesn't get as much attention as it would if the Pats did that.
EDIT: It was Bryan Cox, in 2001. I'm firmly convinced that Cox is one of the key reasons that Patriots came out of nowhere in '01, he was arguably our most valuable player for much of that season (until he was taken out).
Dude said:Do you think if it was illegal, the league would have sent out a memo? Know why they didn't? Because it isn't illegal. It is the basis of the zone blocking scheme developed by Alex Gibbs. Quite a few other teams use it now too, Atlanta and Green Bay for starters.
There is a gray area between the legal cut block and the illegal chop block. The cut block occurs when a player (usually an offensive lineman) blocks another (usually a defensive lineman) below the knees with his helmet in front of the player. The chop block occurs when the same block comes from the side or the back, or when the defensive player is engaged with another offensive player and therefore defenseless.
TheJadedDog said:Don't players get fined if they are caught chop-blocking? Wouldn't that mean it is illegal?
the_bird said:Yup. I'd argue that they ought to be suspended.
I was just using the Broncos as another example of a team that is VERY widely known to consistently engage in illegal practices (in this cases, practices that can end a player's career; I don't think Bryan Cox ever really came back). Yet, no one seems to care, at least until one of their guys gets taken out.
It seems that half the posters here are advocating for some third-string defender to hit Brady with a cheap shot and knock him out. Where's the consistency there?
the_bird said:Chop blocking isn't illegal?
You might want to Google that... cut blocking is OK, chop blocking ain't. A quick summary:
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/10/31/Sports/Stop_the_chop_Broncos.shtml