Spygate....

Okay, I know this is over and I am not one to harp on this, but I do find some things interesting.

Today I have heard 2 different players bring this up. The first was Hollis Thomas with the Eagles. Brady always seemed to check to the correct play, especially in the 2nd half. The second was Muhsin Muhammed who talked about that same thing. He basically said he was pretty sure they cheated, but wouldn't want the SB just given to him now he would just have rather beaten them even with their cheating.

I also have heard this stat...can someone confirm?

Pre-Spygate 10-0 3 SB wins.

Post Spygae 8-8 0 SB wins.

 

Are those last two lines playoff records or what?

 

Yes. With Spygate they were 10 wins/0 losses. Since having gotten caught....8 wins/8 losses. Or at least that is what I have been told.

 

they cheated. I know that much. only question has been if it gave them a major advantage. I say it did or they wouldn't have done it. I am fortunate enough to have some insight into this is how I know they did cheat. I can tell you that defensively they knew a lot more than they should have.

 

I do find the "why didn't they win every game?" argument to be annoying. The advantage from cheating doesn't have to be overwhelming; even a small edge is all that is needed.
Any Vegas casino would drool if they could legally tip the game odds even 1% in their favor.

 

They should have been stripped of all three titles. If you know Townsend is going to blitz then you throw where he came from. Guck Fodell would never strip them so give them an astrisk

 

Quite. Obviously it still comes down to execution on each play (for example, often teams would know we were going to run the Bus down the middle, but they still couldn't stop him).

But the tilt in the Pats favour with this is still highly significant.

 

I'm with you I will never let them live it down. They cheated us out of another chance at a SB. We manhandled them and destroyed them in the regular season that year ,only to turn around and get crushed ourselves. We all remember the comments Hines made shortly after.

my simplest take on the significance of the advantage they gained is this. We all know Rog's excuse was there was nothing on the tapes that was incriminating. All the more reason you wouldn't have destroyed them. Wouldn't you want to be able to show everyone how innocent they were and remove all the speculation and doubt as to whether they're titles were indeed tainted? The tapes would of served a much greater purpose proving their innocence if revealed ,rather then proving their guilt by being destroyed.

 

I had it put to me this way. if you cheat then you don't care about the consequences. I ask a former patriot player one time about spygate. that's how he put it to me. winked at me as well. had a buddy play for pats before spygate but stayed in touched with all those guys. nobody ever come out and said yes it gave us a tremendous advantage but certain little things you can pick up on. I have no dog in the fight being just a fan but I know a lot of players feel cheated by it and don't associate with a lot of pats players. for example I know brett keisel will not hunt or talk to russ hochstien a former pats lineman because of somethings that were said about spygate when it come out. brett is bitter.lol

 

If he's bitter then you know somethings amiss!

 

Maybe having a good defense helped also with guys like Bruschi, Vrabel, Harrison, Law, Seymour, McGinest not just spygate.

 

or maybe spygate made them a good defense.lol

 

No one is saying they were not good already, but it can't be denied how many of those plays they had where they were in perfect position to make the play. That just isn't happening with the frequency it did in their recent playoff runs.

 

There was a key fumble in the game against the Rams that wasn't a forced fumble. If not for that the Rams probably win. In the Eagles game the camera footage had nothing to do with the fact that McNabb was out there almost puking his guts out and couldn't play at the level he needed to when it counted. In the Panthers game there was offensive explosion on both sides of the ball and if the Pats d knew everything they were going to do then why would the Panthers be able to move it up and down the field and then allow it to come down to the wire again? I'm just saying that I think all this was completely overblown. I'm sure in all those playoff games there were costly drops and unforced fumbles and other factors that led to the Pats winning. I'm not saying it was right. It was wrong. I'm just saying I don't think it was the be all end all for their success.

 

Lol. But "cheating" doesn't always equal "winning" is what I'm saying. Just ask Coach T. He learned that lesson in the Rats game this year. LOL!!!! JUUUUUUST KIDDDDDDING!!! I couldn't help myself!

 

I brought this topic up for multiple reasons, but mostly just to show how multiple teams and multiple players stated that even before they knew the Pats were spying that something wasn't right. Ward and Mohammed and Thomas all said the same thing....they seemed to know what we wanted to do BEFORE we did it.

When it comes to why they weren't more successful than they were like in the Rams and Panther games, let me tell a personal story. I used to work for a former NFL coach. I worked closely with him. In addition, despite going to a really small school, I also worked with 2 future NFL players during that same time. Coach used to say all the time....Guys, even if they know what we are doing, if we execute it won't matter. At this point I would argue that it was the times they DIDN'T execute where the Pats would benefit the most. The opportunities for turnovers and forcing punts improves when you can put someone in JUST the right position.

 

LOL. Well Bill doesn't everything else better than everybody else so why not cheat the best too?

 

Most of the Pats' success from that era came from the talent they had. Belichick's drafting the last 5-6 years has been about as good as Colbert's.

 

Bellychuck is just over.500 in the only game that counts and 0-2 since getting caught cheating and he's the best??? The father of the west coast offense is 1.000 in the SB!

 

IMHO, the taping was just the tip of the iceberg. The Pats have a very sophisticated system of spying/cheating on their opponents. The taping is just one, small component. Consider...

1. When the scandal broke in 2007. SI writer Paul Zimmerman pointed out that the bigger issue was the headsets. Zimmerman (one of the great all-time football writers) reported that headsets went out all the time at Gillette, and some coaches suggested they were being listened to.

2. Not long after, on Peter King's Monday Morning QB, a player reported that the Pats bypass the audio cutoff on their own headsets, allowing Belichick (or maybe Adams) to continue giving play instruction right up the snap. The Encryption system on those headsets can be broken into with ease.

3. Ernie Adams, a code-breaker, lip reader, and military strategist, is an assistant to Belichick, and none of the players know exactly what he does.

4. Former LB Ted Johnson reported that before games they'd get sheets with their opponent's audibles on them.

5. Belichick's favorite book is Sun-Tzu's THE ART OF WAR. Anyone who wants to psychoanalyze Belichick just needs to read this book. There are several chapters written on the use of spying and how no military commander will ignore its usefulness in defeating the enemy.

Now, it is true that the Pats' record in the post-season is less than stellar since the Spygate scandal broke. Pats fans point out that the team went 16-0 the season of the scandal, which proves they didn't cheat. HOWEVER...

Prior to the 2007 AFCCG, between the Pats and Chargers, the NFL decided that it would start monitoring the setups of the communications systems during the post-season--mostly due to complaints by Pats opponents. If you remember correctly, the Pats struggled to beat a hobbled Chargers team in that game. They then lost the Super Bowl--that high-powered offense looking quite mediocre. In 2009 and 2010, they lost divisional round games at home--ever wonder how the Jets managed to beat a team that destroyed them just six weeks earlier?. And since 2007, Brady has never looked in the post-season like he has in the regular season. Now, is this all just a coincidence?

Cowher has admitted that every team tries to gain an advantage. This is probably true. But I don't think any team has made an art of it like the Pats have. To use a school analogy, there's a big difference between writing notes on your palm prior to a test and stealing the actual test.

 

I've never seen a team win a Super Bowl with a WR moved to CB, a position he has never played. It's easier to do that when you're game planning at a level 10x above the rest of the league.