Letters to the Editor
-
Lynx
I don't know why either, but I'm smart enough to know that if they thought there was value, there probably was.
You have a point. After all, the NFL has always shown such wisdom in the rules they make and how they enforcemen them.
Ahem.
Snarkiness aside, I think the severity of the punishment has more to do with "How dare you defy me so openly!" than it does with the level advantage provided.
-
As long as it can be done safely
Under a (Spin) Doctor's supervision.
-
Revelations 22:22
And I saw, and behold, a white cloud; and on the cloud I saw a Patriot from Judah, one sitting like unto a son of man, having on his head a golden crown with 18 pearls, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
-
Cheating Schmeating
First off, great article, King! Really funny stuff - you managed to capture and parody just about every media obsession about these two teams in just a few short paragraphs.
As for cheating, players cheat in every single game of every football weekend everywhere at all levels. Holding is cheating. Pass interference is cheating. Facemasking is cheating. Despite the best efforts of refs everywhere, those darned players just keep trying to get away with things they know are illegal. Why is there an instance of blocking in the back on virtually every punt and kick-off return despite the players knowing it's wrong and that they will probably get caught for it? What's even worse is that players just keep cheating in ways that could seriously injure other players. Even after the NFL outlawed horse-collar tackles, players keep trying to get away with it even though it could result in career-ending injuries. That's not just cheating, that's evil!
So the Patriots' coaches decided to get into the act. Is this what makes it so egregious - that it's the "organization" and not just the players? Stealing signals has been a part of organized sports for as long as there have been signals. Yes it is cheating, but do you really think a team could go 18-0 because they were stealing signals? Maybe it's because they used video cameras. That's so insidious! Using advanced technology to gain an unfair advantage over an opponent - it's like trying to play football against a team full of James Bond villains! Supposing the Patriots had hired a guy whose sole talent was the ability to memorize and perfectly mimic hand gestures. He just stands on the sidelines and watches the opposing sideline and then goes back to the lockerroom after the game and mimics back the signals to the coaching squad. You think that would be worth half-a-million and a top draft pick? They cheated, they got caught, they were penalized. Get over it. Or else start carrying around every other incident of cheating by every other team that may or may not have led to victory.
-
I pick the Giants
Here are my ten reasons (I) Cheaters never prosper. (II) the Giants are my hometown team. (If you thought the Colts, don't let the name fool you.)(III) Eli Manning has finally figured out how to play pro football. (IV) Always root for the underdogs. (V) The Giants haven't lost on the road since way back when. (The Pats have't lost on the road OR at home either over the same period, but so what?) (VI) The Giants almost beat the Pats in Week 17, when the Pats were supposed to win in a rout because the game was meningless to the playoff-bound Giants who would want to avoid injuries, but very meaningful to the also playoff-bound, but even wanting even more to be history-bound, Patriots. (VII) I pointed out (VI) to my boss, who had quoted the foregoing suppositions before Week 17. He told me "The Superbowl is a different game." Well, gee, what do you mean exactly, boss? Do they play Rugby instead? Of course, it's a different game, but of the same sport, with the same teams, so what else is different? You must mean that the Giants WILL win this time. (VIII) Screw the boss, anyway. Screw all bosses. (IX) Screw the grammar police too. (Hey, Dick! howya doin? Can you guess who this is?) Lots of ellipses here, I know. (So, sue me!) (X) There is no honor in predicting that the stronger team will prevail. If the Giants win , I will be the prescient genius and be doubly blessed. If the Patriots win as expected, you can call me a chump and a stupid chump at that, but I'll be unhappy already.
-
Hoosier Daddy
You stupid chump.
-
Patsies' days are numbered
The Giants have shown they can beat the heavyweights on their own turf: Tampa, Dallas, Green Bay. They have taken 10 in a row. The Pats are next. This is a no-brainer.
Brady's high ankle sprain will make him unable to make the narrow escapes from linebackers he's become accustomed to. Umenyora and Strahan will have a huge day - 3 sacks each, one for twenty yars. There will be one fumble by the Pats run back for a score.
I am seeing Plaxico's predictions come true:
G-Men 23, Patsies 17
Good by perfecto, finally!
-
Why do it?
Lynx said: "I don't know why either, but I'm smart enough to know that if they thought there was value, there probably was."
In response, Farnsworth said: "You have a point. After all, the NFL has always shown such wisdom in the rules they make and how they enforcemen them....Ahem."
I think Farnsworth is missing Lynx's point. I don't think he's extolling the rule itself. Most of the arguments in defense of the Patriots have pretty much consisted of the same core point: what they did probably didn't help their team that much. But many people seem to ignore the question, "Why?". Why would Belichick risk so much if this kind of cheating added so little value? Those of us who take this transgression seriously feel like a guy as smart as Belichick wouldn't have done such a thing if he thought it wasn't valuable.
I sincerely would like to hear the reason.
-
John N.
Those of us who take this transgression seriously feel like a guy as smart as Belichick wouldn't have done such a thing if he thought it wasn't valuable.
Exactly. One of the main jobs of an NFL coach is risk management. Should I let this player risk injury or risk aggrevating a previous injury? Should I risk a turnover on a risky play? Should I punt or go for it on 4th down, etc...
In this case, either Bellicheck is terrible at risk management and risked a lot over nothing or he's really good at risk management and the rest of us, having had no access to any of the evidence, can't see what he would have gained.