[NFL] vBook: Colts vs Patriots (Deflategate)

[IrishLax]

It is pretty transparent plant by the NFL to have two of these stories come out on the same day following a long weekend after the NFL got its ass handed to them in court (again). People can eat this up if they want, but there is nothing new in the reports that came out this morning other than some background information and the extent to which Bill Belichick and Ernie Adams have crawled inside some people's heads and established permanent residency there.

Everyone already knew the Patriots videotaped opponents' sidelines prior to being fined in 2007. Up until that point, they didn't even make an effort at hiding what they were doing because they did not believe they were doing anything wrong. Everyone (that has been paying attention) also knows that filming the opposing sideline was common practice in the NFL up until 2006, when the League decided they wanted to crack down on it.

Everything else is innuendo and conjecture. The stories are mostly full of people saying what they suspect the Patriots of doing - all things that there is no actual evidence to support, which to me just makes them look like paranoid whiners. And most of the "sources" who have chosen to throw stones at the Patriots by airing their suspicious for this story won't even go on the record.

To me, Spygate continues to be the worst understood and most overblown "scandal" in the history of sports. You still have idiots (in the media, never mind fans of other teams) who think that Spygate was about taping practices and walk-throughs, when it was 100% not about that at all.

Nobody will ever make me or the rest of Patriots fans happy about this stuff. We get a bad wrap, and it is all politics. But arguing that is like spitting in the wind, so I'm not sure why we even bother. Bottom line is that we are the dominant franchise in all of sports, and no amount of whining or hilarious accusations or paranoia can change that. Once you realize that, you can embrace the hate and learn to wear it as a badge of honor.

I'm curious, did you actually read the article? Because it's as damning (if not more so) towards them as the Patriots. This isn't some NFL-generated hit piece.

The dismissive stance taken by Patriots fans is hilarious, because it's all grounded in the same Bill Simmons-esque "EVERYONE JUST JELLY" bullshit.

No one can actually make any sort of fact based argument against the allegations presented in the article. Are you arguing that the headset cutting out on a key 3rd down didn't happen? That teams didn't have their play sheets stolen? And on and on and on... there has not been one discreet rebuttal of any point presented in that article, just categorical blanket denials and ad hominem attacks against ESPN.

 

[wizards8507]

No one can actually make any sort of fact based argument against the allegations presented in the article.

Sure I can.

They're allegations. Allegations without a shred of evidence.

I can't make a fact-based argument that you didn't murder an Australian BMX enthusiast last night. But lacking any evidence that you did, I'll assume you didn't.

 

[IrishLax]

Sure I can.

They're allegations. Allegations without a shred of evidence.

I can't make a fact-based argument that you didn't murder an Australian BMX enthusiast last night. But lacking any evidence that you did, I'll assume you didn't.

You mean besides the dozens of people and first-hand accounts that say they happened? That's evidence. Unless you want to make some philosophical argument that first-hand accounts/testimony shouldn't be allowed in the court of law or as sources for peer reviewed papers or ....

 

[gkIrish]

Sure I can.

They're allegations. Allegations without a shred of evidence.

I can't make a fact-based argument that you didn't murder an Australian BMX enthusiast last night. But lacking any evidence that you did, I'll assume you didn't.

So first-hand testimony is not evidence? When Tom Brady testifies that he did not do something, that isn't evidence?

 

[Rhode Irish]

I'm curious, did you actually read the article? Because it's as damning (if not more so) towards them as the Patriots. This isn't some NFL-generated hit piece.

The dismissive stance taken by Patriots fans is hilarious, because it's all grounded in the same Bill Simmons-esque "EVERYONE JUST JELLY" bullshit.

No one can actually make any sort of fact based argument against the allegations presented in the article. Are you arguing that the headset cutting out on a key 3rd down didn't happen? That teams didn't have their play sheets stolen? And on and on and on... there has not been one discreet rebuttal of any point presented in that article, just categorical blanket denials and ad hominem attacks against ESPN.

Yes, I read it. The sourcing provides plenty of context for where this piece came from, and
I think you are over simplifying the "dismissive stance" taken by the Patriots fans (and by Bill Simmons).

But as far as "nobody can actually make a fact-based argument against the allegations in the article," yes, I am arguing that the allegations about headphones and play sheets are unsubstantiated nonsense that nobody is willing to put their name to. I am arguing that whoever is saying that for the piece is as credible of a source as Mike Kensil talking about air pressure. There is absolutely zero supporting or corroborating evidence about that stuff. It is all he-said, she-said, and the biggest problem I have with any of this stuff is that the public continues to lap it up without any sort of critical assessment of whether any of this stuff even seems plausible.

The NFL keeps lying, they keep getting caught, and they continue to lie and somehow people continue to believe them. It makes no sense to me that you would just buy those stories at face value at this point.

 

[IrishLion]

So first-hand testimony is not evidence? When Tom Brady testifies that he did not do something, that isn't evidence?

First-hand testimony doesn't count if it's a disgruntled former employee duh.

 

[wizards8507]

First-hand testimony doesn't count if it's a disgruntled former employee duh.

Correct. Also excluded: disgruntled former lovers, disgruntled ex-wives, disgruntled sportswriters, disgruntled journalists, disgruntled commissioners, and disgruntled independent investigators.

Remember the "first hand testimony" that 11 of 12 Patriots' footballs were 2 PSI underinflated?

 

[Rhode Irish]

You mean besides the dozens of people and first-hand accounts that say they happened? That's evidence. Unless you want to make some philosophical argument that first-hand accounts/testimony shouldn't be allowed in the court of law or as sources for peer reviewed papers or ....

Which "dozens" of people provided first hand accounts of headsets going out or playbooks being stolen? I must have missed the part of the article where they were named.

 

[gkIrish]

Correct. Also excluded: disgruntled former lovers, disgruntled ex-wives, disgruntled sportswriters, disgruntled journalists, disgruntled commissioners, and disgruntled independent investigators.

Remember the "first hand testimony" that 11 of 12 Patriots' footballs were 2 PSI underinflated?

Just because Chris Mortensen or whoever misreported something doesn't mean the Patriots didn't cheat in that instance or do not cheat in other instances. If this was USC in the Mid-2000s you would be absolutely hammering them and praising ESPNs reporting.

But no, just dismiss a completely damning article because it would undermine the Patriot fan agenda.

 

[IrishLax]

Yes, I read it. The sourcing provides plenty of context for where this piece came from, and
I think you are over simplifying the "dismissive stance" taken by the Patriots fans (and by Bill Simmons).

But as far as "nobody can actually make a fact-based argument against the allegations in the article," yes, I am arguing that the allegations about headphones and play sheets are unsubstantiated nonsense that nobody is willing to put their name to. I am arguing that whoever is saying that for the piece is as credible of a source as Mike Kensil talking about air pressure. There is absolutely zero supporting or corroborating evidence about that stuff. It is all he-said, she-said, and the biggest problem I have with any of this stuff is that the public continues to lap it up without any sort of critical assessment of whether any of this stuff even seems plausible.

The NFL keeps lying, they keep getting caught, and they continue to lie and somehow people continue to believe them. It makes no sense to me that you would just buy those stories at face value at this point.

Right, so you're making an ad hominem argument against the credibility of the sources and the authors, which is exactly what I said.

 

[yankeeND]

Yes, I read it. The sourcing provides plenty of context for where this piece came from, and
I think you are over simplifying the "dismissive stance" taken by the Patriots fans (and by Bill Simmons).

But as far as "nobody can actually make a fact-based argument against the allegations in the article," yes, I am arguing that the allegations about headphones and play sheets are unsubstantiated nonsense that nobody is willing to put their name to. I am arguing that whoever is saying that for the piece is as credible of a source as Mike Kensil talking about air pressure. There is absolutely zero supporting or corroborating evidence about that stuff. It is all he-said, she-said, and the biggest problem I have with any of this stuff is that the public continues to lap it up without any sort of critical assessment of whether any of this stuff even seems plausible.

The NFL keeps lying, they keep getting caught, and they continue to lie and somehow people continue to believe them. It makes no sense to me that you would just buy those stories at face value at this point.

This is the part that I do not understand. Pats say they didn't do it, no proof, but they are cheaters. NFL says this happened, get caught in lie, still Pats cheated. 20 million people see the initial false report, 20,000 see the retraction.

 

[wizards8507]

But no, just dismiss a completely damning article because it would undermine the Patriot fan agenda.

There's only one item on the Patriot fan agenda.

We're on to the Steelers.

 

[Rhode Irish]

Right, so you're making an ad hominem argument against the credibility of the sources and the authors, which is exactly what I said.

No, I'm not making an ad hominem attack at all. I'm not calling the sources for those claims fat or communists or satanists. I'm saying that the claims themselves are unsubstantiated, unsupported, and uncorroborated and there is no individual out there that is willing to put his name to them. If the claims were corroborated or substantiated in any way and I was here saying "I don't care, the guy saying that is just jealous," that would be ad hominem. What I said was not.

 

[irishfan]

Just because Chris Mortensen or whoever misreported something doesn't mean the Patriots didn't cheat in that instance or do not cheat in other instances. If this was USC in the Mid-2000s you would be absolutely hammering them and praising ESPNs reporting.

But no, just dismiss a completely damning article because it would undermine the Patriot fan agenda.

No praise for me anytime in the future since this story still is up on their site:

NFL says New England Patriots had under-inflated footballs in AFC championship Game

I don't trust any of their NFL guys. Their last OTL piece on the Patriots was a farce and was debunked by Schefter on live air minutes after it aired. I'm not believing stories that they throw out there with no names attached. They talked to dozens of people and no one put their name out attached to any actual cheating evidence.

 

[gkIrish]

There's only one item on the Patriot fan agenda.

We're on to the Steelers.

If you are on to the Steelers you wouldn't spend so much time "defending/dismissing" allegations. If you were over it you wouldn't respond to anything we say.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I admit to having an agenda. I think most people are wrong in how they interpret these stories, so I want to at least get what I feel is the correct interpretation out there. I don't know that I expect to change anyone's mind, but at least I tried.

 

[IrishLax]

No, I'm not making an ad hominem attack at all. I'm not calling the sources for those claims fat or communists or satanists. I'm saying that the claims themselves are unsubstantiated, unsupported, and uncorroborated and there is no individual out there that is willing to put his name to them. If the claims were corroborated or substantiated in any way and I was here saying "I don't care, the guy saying that is just jealous," that would be ad hominem. What I said was not.

You called it a "transparent plant by the NFL"... and called the people involved "paranoid whiners" ... but sure man, you're not making an ad hominem argument at all.

The entire basis for everyone's categorical dismissal of the article is one or a combination of:
1) The writers and/or sources are all liars. You can't trust a word they say.
2) Everyone hates the Patriots and this is all a giant, coordinated conspiracy.
3) There is no hard proof/evidence to corroborate anything these people are saying, so fuck your story and GO PATS!

The counter to #1 is that since the dawn of journalism people have used anonymous sources to get information while protecting the source from retribution, and there is no merit to this attack on standard operating procedure assuming the article was properly researched and vetted. Despite previous error-filled articles by ESPN, there is no evidence that anything was handled improperly by these authors in this article.

The counter to #2 is that it is entirely implausible that this is all a giant conspiracy with all of the accounts intentionally fabricated to go after the Patriots.

The counter to #3 is that in an article that points out evidence destruction and coverup by the NFL, the entire premise that there needs to be a "smoking gun" beyond the accounts of dozens of people is nonsensical.

This whole thing isn't even an argument... you have 95% of people who aren't biased/crazy, and then you have Pats fans that are going to believe what they want.

 

[ACamp1900]

After reading the report I tend to agree with LAX's last post... it honestly makes me want to give up on the NFL completely if any of this is true...

 

[Rhode Irish]

You called it a "transparent plant by the NFL"... and called the people involved "paranoid whiners" ... but sure man, you're not making an ad hominem argument at all.

The entire basis for everyone's categorical dismissal of the article is one or a combination of:
1) The writers and/or sources are all liars. You can't trust a word they say.
2) Everyone hates the Patriots and this is all a giant, coordinated conspiracy.
3) There is no hard proof/evidence to corroborate anything these people are saying, so fuck your story and GO PATS!

The counter to #1 is that since the dawn of journalism people have used anonymous sources to get information while protecting the source from retribution, and there is no merit to this attack on standard operating procedure assuming the article was properly researched and vetted. Despite previous error-filled articles by ESPN, there is no evidence that anything was handled improperly by these authors in this article.

The counter to #2 is that it is entirely implausible that this is all a giant conspiracy with all of the accounts intentionally fabricated to go after the Patriots.

The counter to #3 is that in an article that points out evidence destruction and coverup by the NFL, the entire premise that there needs to be a "smoking gun" beyond the accounts of dozens of people is nonsensical.

This whole thing isn't even an argument... you have 95% of people who aren't biased/crazy, and then you have Pats fans that are going to believe what they want.

1. Anonymous sources are totally legitimate provided that you can independently confirm their account. If you can't, you expose yourself to being used as a mouthpiece. That is what happened to Mortensen. In this case, if the authors were able to get specifics from their source (one source, btw, not "dozens") about the headset going out, maybe they could have gone back and watched the game to see if there was an apparent communication issue that could be seen on the broadcast, or if they had to take a timeout. Instead, the authors either appear to have taken an anonymous source on their word (which is very bad journalism) or failed in their attempt to corroborate and ran the account anyways (which is likewise very bad journalism).

2. I don't think the "conspiracy" (if that is what you want to call it, I wouldn't call it that) is all that coordinated. The Patriots have been caught breaking one rule, ever. All of the other stuff is just paranoid hysteria; people coming up with all sorts of crazy excuses about why they lost this time. It isn't coordinated; it is buckshot-style accusations about anything and everything. They bugged the locker room, they stole notes from the locker room, they filmed the practice, they cut out the QB radio, they broke into hotels and rummaged through the trash (!?), etc., etc. There is not one shred of evidence anywhere to support any of those accusations. All that exists is a general sense of suspicion and paranoia, which to me is the genius of Belichick not evidence of wrongdoing.

3. Yes, forgive us for wanting to see something beyond innuendo and conjecture before our team is convicted of heinous crimes such as going through hotel dumpsters. The article points to evidence destruction (at the direction of the league, not the team) eight years ago, and the whole point of the article is that Goodell has been trying to find an opportunity to make up for that to the other owners ever since. So your theory is in the interim, Goodell has been orchestrating and overseeing a massive evidence destruction operation to ensure that the Patriots could not be punished for any of the above mentioned infractions over the last eight years, all so that he could blow his load over .02 PSI of air pressure eight years later? He was playing some sort of bizarro long con? Sorry, that is insane.

 

[NDRock]

haha, it's like listening to Obama supporters...

Politics and sports have a lot in common. In both cases fans/party members will argue/defend their teams/party no matter what the facts say. When you're not involved (I'm registered Independent and don't hate or like the Pats) everyone sounds slightly nuts.

I'm sure the Pats have done some questionable (cheating) things through the years but I'm sure most of the other teams in the league have as well. Of course nobody really cares if you're the Falcons and you're cheating by piping in crowd music, mostly because they suck. They care when you are consistently beating the rest of the league like the Pats have.

 

[gkIrish]

If you are on to the Steelers you wouldn't spend so much time "defending/dismissing" allegations. If you were over it you wouldn't respond to anything we say.

At least I got wizards to leave...

 

[ACamp1900]

Straight Keyser Soze move...

 

[Rhode Irish]

Tedy Bruschi's message to New England Patriots fans: Refuse to be brai - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN

"I have this theory, I refuse to be brainwashed by the NFL, based on so many reports, so many league sources, so many unnamed sources, that just aren’t true," Bruschi said on the "Dale and Holley Show." "I refuse to be brainwashed by what they release or what they say through unnamed sources. "So what do I say to Patriots fans? I say refuse to be brainwashed. Believe what you see on the screen. When you see them win, when you see them make plays, when you see them win the Super Bowl last year, that’s what you need to believe."

 

[IrishSteelhead]

The cult of Pats fans is becoming crazier than the cult of Penn State fans....

 

[Cackalacky]

If I needed another reason to not like the NFL....

 

[ACamp1900]

Yep and yep...

 

[Rhode Irish]

The cult of Pats fans is becoming crazier than the cult of Penn State fans....

I'm sure nobody has ever made that observation about the "cult" of ND fans.

 

[wizards8507]

I'm sure nobody has ever made that observation about the "cult" of ND fans.

Sigh, I wish they'd bring back the Pat the Patriot helmets and red uniforms. Add that to the Pats fans cult agenda.

 

[Cackalacky]

Sucking yearly. Makes me sad that if we don't spy we suck. Makes me sadder when I think, what if the Bucs were spying and we still sucked that hard. Then not only did we suck at spying bu.sucked at executing the intelligence gathered.

The one year we definitely cheated we won A Super Bowl.

The Bucs are an ends to a mean for the Glazers.....too much money in Man U.

End result....

 

[irishfan]

I still don't get the conclusions in the OTL report if you really think about it. There was supposed rampant and blatant cheating, but no teams ever caught them in the act? It's not like there's some sort of unwritten rule about not snitching on other teams. The Jets had no issue calling the NFL about Spygate...even though they were caught doing it the year before. The Colts had no problem whining about air in a football.

Between the OTL and the SI report, are we supposed to believe that teams search for bugs in the locker room, leave fake play sheets, run fake plays in practice...yet the only thing the Pats have been caught for is Spygate and maybe Deflategate? No one thought to leave a camera in the locker room to see if a Pats staffer steals a play sheet? But there was a sting operation for deflated footballs? The Patriots are breaking into visiting team hotels, but the league just spent $5 million botching an investigation into PSI? It doesn't really add up, but oh well. Every story in the SI piece is about teams trying to catch the Pats and failing to do so.