One rule the NFL takes action on.....

[dynasty13]

I just threw that one in there , as you got a nice Jeffrey Maier call in that one that gave you a win, you shouldn't have had.

 

Except the Tuck Rule isn't something that the Patriots 'did'....so 'throwing it in there' during a discussion where you're trying to show how the Patriots consistently get away with breaking rules makes zero sense and undermines the larger point you are trying to make. 

[The Old Crow]

And Hernandez may walk but doesn't matter as he has not been a Patriot for three years now ...

But he was then ..... Kraft and Belichick picked him when many teams stayed away from him with a ten foot pole. As usual, they thought they were smarter than everyone. They got burned.

If the Ravens are guilty of anything, it's giving second chances. Unfortunately , the way society is today, it's getting harder to do that.

[JerodMayo51]

It's funny, you don't see the other teams involved in videotaping,

 

Actually this was league wide.. and the violation was not the video taping itself, it was the location of where it was being done from.. they were doing it in a location that was not permitted, because they had access to the footage during the live game.. The act of actually recording signals was not what the violation was and it was admitted by several NFL coaches that this was going on around the league.. 

 

 

equipment malfunctions

 

I have no idea what you're even talking about here? 

 

 

or tuck rules

 

Completely flabbergasted..  See this is just proof of what I've been saying.. there is this narrative that people love to run wild with that the Patriots are no good dirty cheaters because they're sick of them winning all the time... and this just further proves that point.. because you're trying to imply that the tuck rule, which existed long before the 2001 season and was called 8 times in 2001 alone, including AGAINST the Patriots in favor of the Jets in a game that they ended up losing.. was some shady tactic by the Patriots..  The Tuck Rule was a call that is made by officials on the field because of the outcome of a play.. a team can't execute a Tuck Rule.. lol..

 

It was a rule in the rule book and the referees were the ones that enforced it, not the Patriots.  They went into the replay booth, reviewed the play for 2 minutes and REVERSED the ruling on the field of a fumble because by definition in the rule it was the correct call..

 

Nevermind that there was a blow to the head on the play by Woodson which should have been a 15 yard penalty and automatic first down.. the fact that you try to spin the Tuck Rule game as some shady act by the Patriots just goes to further show that there is an agenda in play to try and paint the Patriots as some big bad bullies... they had ZERO to do with the Tuck Rule, other than being just another team that benefited from it being called in a game that year.

 

 

 

 

Thats your list of shadiness?  Seriously?  You'll have to explain the equipment malfunction to me, i can't even keep up with all of the conspiracy theories.

[amfootball]

But he was then ..... Kraft and Belichick picked him when many teams stayed away from him with a ten foot pole. As usual, they thought they were smarter than everyone. They got burned.

If the Ravens are guilty of anything, it's giving second chances. Unfortunately , the way society is today, it's getting harder to do that.

 

Yep. Easy to get burned by players.

 

How are you feeling about FA so far for the Ravens? How do you feel about losing Nagata?

[The Old Crow]

Except the Tuck Rule isn't something that the Patriots 'did'....so 'throwing it in there' during a discussion where you're trying to show how the Patriots consistently get away with breaking rules makes zero sense and undermines the larger point you are trying to make.

That's fine, you can take that off the table and put it into a horrific ref's call column, but there is still plenty more meat on the bone.

[Gramz]

This thread is hilarious.

[The Old Crow]

Actually this was league wide.. and the violation was not the video taping itself, it was the location of where it was being done from.. they were doing it in a location that was not permitted, because they had access to the footage during the live game.. The act of actually recording signals was not what the violation was and it was admitted by several NFL coaches that this was going on around the league..

I have no idea what you're even talking about here?

Completely flabbergasted.. See this is just proof of what I've been saying.. there is this narrative that people love to run wild with that the Patriots are no good dirty cheaters because they're sick of them winning all the time... and this just further proves that point.. because you're trying to imply that the tuck rule, which existed long before the 2001 season and was called 8 times in 2001 alone, including AGAINST the Patriots in favor of the Jets in a game that they ended up losing.. was some shady tactic by the Patriots.. The Tuck Rule was a call that is made by officials on the field because of the outcome of a play.. a team can't execute a Tuck Rule.. lol..

It was a rule in the rule book and the referees were the ones that enforced it, not the Patriots. They went into the replay booth, reviewed the play for 2 minutes and REVERSED the ruling on the field of a fumble because by definition in the rule it was the correct call..

Nevermind that there was a blow to the head on the play by Woodson which should have been a 15 yard penalty and automatic first down.. the fact that you try to spin the Tuck Rule game as some shady act by the Patriots just goes to further show that there is an agenda in play to try and paint the Patriots as some big bad bullies... they had ZERO to do with the Tuck Rule, other than being just another team that benefited from it being called in a game that year.

Thats your list of shadiness? Seriously? You'll have to explain the equipment malfunction to me, i can't even keep up with all of the conspiracy theories.

FOOTBALLS lacking air pressure

[JerodMayo51]

SW, what game were you watching? The refs were told about the Pats plays before the game prior which is why they did their job 100 percent correct announcing the ineligible players and also telling the Ravens not to cover #34 which was Vereen. The refs were never confused in that game. My gosh, these plays have been run before in the NFL, college and high school ...

 

Yea and this is another fact being completely ignored by the "they were confusing officials and jeopardizing the integrity of the game" crowd.  The Patriots literally, before the game, went to the officials and explained to them those plays that they planned on using at some point in the game.  They discussed these with the officials, they were LEGAL plays and the refs were fine with it. 

 

think about that for a second... they showed the plays to the NFL OFFICIALS... before the game.. and they were fine with it.. and they called the game accordingly when it came up a whopping THREE times (OMG!) in the game

[JerodMayo51]

We don't see other teams involved in Tuck Rule? See...this is where some people start to lose credibility in their points. 

 

Seriously though, part of your argument for how the Patriots constantly skirt the rules and flirt with the line of what is allowed is the Tuck Rule???

 

Those sneaky Patriots, always pulling out those shady Tuck Rule tactics!

[The Old Crow]

Yep. Easy to get burned by players.

How are you feeling about FA so far for the Ravens? How do you feel about losing Nagata?

Probably the same as you guys feel about losing Wilfork. We both know it's right player , right price. Neither fit the bill.

[JerodMayo51]

Except the Tuck Rule isn't something that the Patriots 'did'....so 'throwing it in there' during a discussion where you're trying to show how the Patriots consistently get away with breaking rules makes zero sense and undermines the larger point you are trying to make. 

 

They have to "throw it in" because without those straw man, random issues tossed onto the pile.. its not a pile at all and more like a little pebble

[southwest1]

SW, what game were you watching? The refs were told about the Pats plays before the game prior which is why they did their job 100 percent correct announcing the ineligible players and also telling the Ravens not to cover #34 which was Vereen. The refs were never confused in that game. My gosh, these plays have been run before in the NFL, college and high school ...

You stick your interpretation & I will stick to mine. You & I will never see eye to eye on this issue. That's perfectly fine. If the loophole was above board, then why was it systematically closed so swiftly then? 

 

Not every rule change is rooted in NE animosity either. I am not implying you fit that criteria AMF, but why is NE continuously accused of rule violations? Jealousy cannot be used as a crutch for every rule infraction that a team is accused of violating. Bill Belichick is a smart HOF coach who doesn't need to resort to such tactics IMHO. 

[Superman]

Yea and this is another fact being completely ignored by the "they were confusing officials and jeopardizing the integrity of the game" crowd.  The Patriots literally, before the game, went to the officials and explained to them those plays that they planned on using at some point in the game.  They discussed these with the officials, they were LEGAL plays and the refs were fine with it. 

 

think about that for a second... they showed the plays to the NFL OFFICIALS... before the game.. and they were fine with it.. and they called the game accordingly when it came up a whopping THREE times (OMG!) in the game

 

Link

[The Old Crow]

Those sneaky Patriots, always pulling out those shady Tuck Rule tactics!

I will point out though, Boston and New York teams seem to get an inordinate amount of friendly calls that other teams don't seem to get. Ratings, maybe ?

[JerodMayo51]

That's fine, you can take that off the table and put it into a horrific ref's call column, but there is still plenty more meat on the bone.

 

But it wasn't a horrific ref call..  it was said and is still said today that it was correctly made.  Argue and bash the rule all you want, but it existed and was called a multitude of times before it was ever called in that playoff game. 

 

What other meat on the bone?  That must be some real lean meat..

[amfootball]

You stick your interpretation & I will stick to mine. You & I will never see eye to eye on this issue. That's perfectly fine. If the loophole was above board, then why was it systematically closed so swiftly then? 

 

Not every rule change is rooted in NE animosity either. I am not implying you fit that criteria AMF, but why is NE continuously accused of rule violations? Jealousy cannot be used as a crutch for every rule infraction that a team is accused of violating. Bill Belichick is a smart HOF coach who doesn't need to resort to such tactics IMHO. 

Interpretation of what? The refs were never confused. They were told before the game and were fine with it and did their job 100 percent correct.

 

Since the game the competition committee felt it was necessary to alter the rule to have the players close to the tackle box for ID purpose. There was no cheating or anything. If there was, the Pats would have been penalized by the league ... having a rule changed or altered does not imply cheating. I don't understand why you keep saying it does.

[The Old Crow]

They have to "throw it in" because without those straw man, random issues tossed onto the pile.. its not a pile at all and more like a little pebble

It was thrown in because the Patriots were involved, and there was a rule change.

[The Old Crow]

But it wasn't a horrific ref call.. it was said and is still said today that it was correctly made. Argue and bash the rule all you want, but it existed and was called a multitude of times before it was ever called in that playoff game.

What other meat on the bone? That must be some real lean meat..

It's Prime Rib !

[JerodMayo51]

FOOTBALLS lacking air pressure

 

Thats a couple weeks away from being debunked, then what will you have?

 

if you've been paying attention to the investigation, after Belichick's presser basically laughing at the entire accusation after spending a little time doing his own experiments to confirm what science has already proven as a law of physics, Wells reached out to Columbia University to conduct their own experiments to prove/disprove this... i guess they didn't want to take MIT and several other Boston area schools word for it after they already conducted their own experiments and confirmed it..  Along with ESPN's own SportsScience show that proved there could be no competitive advantage gained in the first place with the air pressure missing, which ESPN actually took down and blocked on their website while the media sharks were circling the Pats.

 

What else do you have, because the deflated footballs aren't going to hold up once the results of the investigation are released soon

[southwest1]

Those sneaky Patriots, always pulling out those shady Tuck Rule tactics!

Ah yes, NE's automatic reflex position. If NE just once took responsibility for something they misinterpreted or something they played loose with, I would respect their franchise more for owning it. Just once. 

[amfootball]

Ah yes, NE's automatic reflex position. If NE just once took responsibility for something they misinterpreted or something they played loose with, I would respect their franchise more for owning it. Just once. 

lol. You are on a roll today SW. When did Bill ever deny the formations? He talked about them freely, where he came up with them and why a change to the rule would effect punt formations.

[JerodMayo51]

I will point out though, Boston and New York teams seem to get an inordinate amount of friendly calls that other teams don't seem to get. Ratings, maybe ?

 

Possibly..  im sketched by the league not wanting to put cameras down on the goal line.. claiming it wouldn't be "cost effective" for the multi billion dollar industry to have every team place 4 extra cameras.. when they have about 2000 cameras already in every stadium.

 

As Belichick said... you could have a bake sale or a car wash to pay for 4 cameras at your stadium.. its a bogus excuse not to institute something, so i don't know what the league is thinking half the time.

 

Boston and New York are huge sports markets, so anything is possible.

[NFLfan]

I would prefer to go through Baltimore football history including both the Colts and Ravens. It is a much more respected history.

That question by AM was not relevant to the discussion. Do the Ravens or the Colts have a history of bending the rules and cheating?

[The Old Crow]

Thats a couple weeks away from being debunked, then what will you have?

if you've been paying attention to the investigation, after Belichick's presser basically laughing at the entire accusation after spending a little time doing his own experiments to confirm what science has already proven as a law of physics, Wells reached out to Columbia University to conduct their own experiments to prove/disprove this... i guess they didn't want to take MIT and several other Boston area schools word for it after they already conducted their own experiments and confirmed it.. Along with ESPN's own SportsScience show that proved there could be no competitive advantage gained in the first place with the air pressure missing, which ESPN actually took down and blocked on their website while the media sharks were circling the Pats.

What else do you have, because the deflated footballs aren't going to hold up once the results of the investigation are released soon

None of us are going to believe it when the research is being done by Boston area, or elite Northeast leaning schools. I suggest we go to the University of Indiana for a non biased look at the effect a pressure gauge in a toilet, can affect a football's overall weight.

[dynasty13]

Ah yes, NE's automatic reflex position. If NE just once took responsibility for something they misinterpreted or something they played loose with, I would respect their franchise more for owning it. Just once. 

 

SW...you and I are usually in the same corner about a lot of things...but I dont understand this comment. New England has never shied away from anything and have taken responsibility for everything that they were accused of and proven to have done. Spygate? Belichick admitted that he did it, took the punishment, and moved on. The Tuck Rule? Since it somehow entered this conversation of things the Patriots have done...no, there is nothing to take responsibility for. What else is there....illegal contact? They played physical and never once avoided that fact and deflected discussion on it. That became a point of emphasis the following year but in no way is that an example of cheating and refusing to take responsibility for it. 

 

I dont really know what else you are referring to...but I'm happy to have a discussion about it because it's clear that a lot of opposing fans have some master list of tall the times that the Patriots have cheated the system...

[The Old Crow]

That question by AM was not relevant to the discussion. Do the Ravens or the Colts have a history of bending the rules and cheating?

Not that I know of, but we've been victimized by it.

[The Old Crow]

Possibly.. im sketched by the league not wanting to put cameras down on the goal line.. claiming it wouldn't be "cost effective" for the multi billion dollar industry to have every team place 4 extra cameras.. when they have about 2000 cameras already in every stadium.

As Belichick said... you could have a bake sale or a car wash to pay for 4 cameras at your stadium.. its a bogus excuse not to institute something, so i don't know what the league is thinking half the time.

Boston and New York are huge sports markets, so anything is possible.

I'm still waiting for the fan interference call on Jeffry Maier !!

[southwest1]

Interpretation of what? The refs were never confused. They were told before the game and were fine with it and did their job 100 percent correct.

 

Since the game the competition committee felt it was necessary to alter the rule to have the players close to the tackle box for ID purpose. There was no cheating or anything. If there was, the Pats would have been penalized by the league ... having a rule changed or altered does not imply cheating. I don't understand why you keep saying it does.

Show me an article confirming that refs had prior knowledge of this ineligibility tactic prior to the division round being played & I will personally apologize to you AMF. The article must also confirm that the zebras on duty for that game informed John Harbaugh of this tactic prior to kickoff too. 

 

Did you even read what I said? "Okay, I will admit that nothing in the NFL rules at the time said failing to declare a WR's eligibility was illegal.... Declaring eligibility is a bedrock principle in sports & when you circumvent that principle I have a HUGE problem with that deliberate act of deception. It's wrong & can never be condoned or endorsed ever. " 

 

You'll forgive me if I desire a neutral, non Patriots voice to enlighten me about what refs were told prior to the game itself. It's about the honest spirit of competition itself for me plain & simple. 

[The Old Crow]

Show me an article confirming that refs had prior knowledge of this ineligibility tactic prior to the division round being played & I will personally apologize to you AMF. The article must also confirm that the zebras on duty for that game informed John Harbaugh of this tactic prior to kickoff too.

Did you even read what I said? "Okay, I will admit that nothing in the NFL rules at the time said failing to declare a WR's eligibility was illegal.... Declaring eligibility is a bedrock principle in sports & when you circumvent that principle I have a HUGE problem with that deliberate act of deception. It's wrong & can never be condoned or endorsed ever. "

You'll forgive me if I desire a neutral, non Patriots voice to enlighten me about what refs were told prior to the game itself. It's about the honest spirit of competition itself for me plain & simple.

I never heard that one either, about the refs being informed beforehand.

[JerodMayo51]

None of us are going to believe it when the research is being done by Boston area, or elite Northeast leaning schools. I suggest we go to the University of Indiana for a non biased look at the effect a pressure gauge in a toilet, can affect a football's overall weight.

 

MIT is world renown... people come from all over the world to go there, its not like just people from Boston attend those schools..   I'm sure those schools that have a long history, older than the sport of football itself, would jeopardize their credibility over something so silly.  They would want to get the facts right and do it from a scientific stand point..

[JerodMayo51]

Should have tried looking that up before the competition committee news came out, because now the search results are just saturated with this new ruling

 

This was straight from Blandino though, the head of officiating, who saw nothing wrong at all with the plays;

 

 

 

It doesn’t sound like they’ll change any. Pro Football Talk reported on Sunday the NFL would investigate whether Baltimore was properly notified that Vereen (playing the Robinson role) had reported as eligible, making Hoomanawanui eligible. Blandino doesn’t give the impression that the league will uphold Baltimore’s complaints.

 

“The whole issue with Baltimore is they felt they weren’t given enough time [to match up],” Blandino told MMQB.com. “We will review the three plays, but it appears from a mechanical standpoint that the announcement was made properly, the defense was notified, and the proper mechanics were executed.’’

 

[southwest1]

lol. You are on a roll today SW. When did Bill ever deny the formations? He talked about them freely, where he came up with them and why a change to the rule would effect punt formations.

It depends if we are viewing this single incident on it's own merits or if we collectively look at Spy Gate, Deflate Gate, or Inactive Gate together as a pattern of disturbing trends that speaks to the same franchise in question. 

 

As far as I can tell, Bill has claimed the League fined him or his organization for a misinterpretation of the rules [spy Gate I mean] that's not the same thing as owning responsibility for one's role in a controversy. 

 

For the record, Tuck Gate was simply a bad interpretation of the rules done by the refs on the field vs Oakland. NE got lucky there; They are not at fault for benefiting from a blown zebra call IMHO. 

[JerodMayo51]

This is where they got the idea..

 

Look at that.. an NFL team.. in 2014.. Week 6..

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4776177/another-nfl-team-used-four-offensive-linemen-set

[The Old Crow]

MIT is world renown... people come from all over the world to go there, its not like just people from Boston attend those schools.. I'm sure those schools that have a long history, older than the sport of football itself, would jeopardize their credibility over something so silly. They would want to get the facts right and do it from a scientific stand point..

I know about MIT. Just having some fun.

[The Old Crow]

It depends if we are viewing this single incident on it's own merits or if we collectively look at Spy Gate, Deflate Gate, or Inactive Gate together as a pattern of disturbing trends that speaks to the same franchise in question.

As far as I can tell, Bill has claimed the League fined him or his organization for a misinterpretation of the rules [spy Gate I mean] that's not the same thing as owning responsibility for one's role in a controversy.

For the record, Tuck Gate was simply a bad interpretation of the rules done by the refs on the field vs Oakland. NE got lucky there; They are not at fault for benefiting from a blown zebra call IMHO.

My point was a more collective retrospective. When you look back in time at other successful teams, the 50''s through 71 Colts, the 60's Packers, the 70's Steelers, or the 49ers, you just don't see the same perception as the Patriots. No one was jealous of those teams, so I totally reject that argument. The difference is a collection of questionable issues with this team, versus other successful teams of the past.

[Gramz]

My point was a more collective retrospective. When you look back in time at other successful teams, the 50''s through 71 Colts, the 60's Packers, the 70's Steelers, or the 49ers, you just don't see the same perception as the Patriots. No one was jealous of those teams, so I totally reject that argument. The difference is a collection of questionable issues with this team, versus other successful teams of the past.

I agree.

[amfootball]

Show me an article confirming that refs had prior knowledge of this ineligibility tactic prior to the division round being played & I will personally apologize to you AMF. The article must also confirm that the zebras on duty for that game informed John Harbaugh of this tactic prior to kickoff too. 

 

Did you even read what I said? "Okay, I will admit that nothing in the NFL rules at the time said failing to declare a WR's eligibility was illegal.... Declaring eligibility is a bedrock principle in sports & when you circumvent that principle I have a HUGE problem with that deliberate act of deception. It's wrong & can never be condoned or endorsed ever. " 

 

You'll forgive me if I desire a neutral, non Patriots voice to enlighten me about what refs were told prior to the game itself. It's about the honest spirit of competition itself for me plain & simple. 

What? The refs did not have to inform the Ravens of anything. It was a legal formation! Should they have also told Harbaugh about the Edelman WR pass that tied the game?

 

In terms of your link, here it is. Vinovich was told by the Pats about the players and did his job 100 percent on each of the three plays going so far as to say "don't cover #34" on one of the plays ...

 

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/13/patriots-coach-bill-belichick-has-response-john-harbaugh-charge-deception/8GyQYOd2zXXaYbQr2k2ugK/story.html

An NFL spokesman told the Globe that both in formation and in reporting ineligible players, everything was done by the book.

On three plays during the Patriots’ second possession of the third quarter, guard Josh Kline left the field, a skill player told lead official Bill Vinovich that he was ineligible on the play, and Vinovich announced to the Baltimore defense and the entire stadium that the player was ineligible, going so far as to say “do not cover No. 34 [Shane Vereen]” in at least one instance.

[amfootball]

It depends if we are viewing this single incident on it's own merits or if we collectively look at Spy Gate, Deflate Gate, or Inactive Gate together as a pattern of disturbing trends that speaks to the same franchise in question. 

 

As far as I can tell, Bill has claimed the League fined him or his organization for a misinterpretation of the rules [spy Gate I mean] that's not the same thing as owning responsibility for one's role in a controversy. 

 

For the record, Tuck Gate was simply a bad interpretation of the rules done by the refs on the field vs Oakland. NE got lucky there; They are not at fault for benefiting from a blown zebra call IMHO. 

In terms of spygate - Bill took full responsibility for spygate. He accepted the penalty and never appealed it either. His reason for doing the taping was a mis-interpretation of Roger's memo as he thought he could do it as long as the footage was not used in game. That is why he did it, he never said he should not have been punished for it.

 

Deflate gate has yet to be proven and he and Kraft have vehemently denied it. So we will see if the league is able to prove anything.

 

What else is there? Like you said, Tuck rule was a rule. The formations were legal ...

[The Old Crow]

What? The refs did not have to inform the Ravens of anything. It was a legal formation! Should they have also told Harbaugh about the Edelman WR pass that tied the game?

In terms of your link, here it is. Vinovich was told by the Pats about the players and did his job 100 percent on each of the three plays going so far as to say "don't cover #34" on one of the plays ...

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/13/patriots-coach-bill-belichick-has-response-john-harbaugh-charge-deception/8GyQYOd2zXXaYbQr2k2ugK/story.html

An NFL spokesman told the Globe that both in formation and in reporting ineligible players, everything was done by the book.

On three plays during the Patriots’ second possession of the third quarter, guard Josh Kline left the field, a skill player told lead official Bill Vinovich that he was ineligible on the play, and Vinovich announced to the Baltimore defense and the entire stadium that the player was ineligible, going so far as to say “do not cover No. 34 [Shane Vereen]” in at least one instance.

Believing an NFL spokesman who may be a hack of Pats friendly Goodell, hardly fills us all with confidence .

[The Old Crow]

In terms of spygate - Bill took full responsibility for spygate. He accepted the penalty and never appealed it either. His reason for doing the taping was a mis-interpretation of Roger's memo as he thought he could do it as long as the footage was not used in game. That is why he did it, he never said he should not have been punished for it.

Deflate gate has yet to be proven and he and Kraft have vehemently denied it. So we will see if the league is able to prove anything.

What else is there? Like you said, Tuck rule was a rule. The formations were legal ...

The thing other fans see is why is this organization always involved in shenanigans ? Is it pure coincidence, or are you guys victims of circumstance ?