EagleTribune.com : Blogs : Burt Talks Sports

And I wish it would.
Personally, I intend to enjoy the level of play on the field without worrying about the soap opera-esque background drama.

Mangini lied? You mean a guy who would stab his mentor, a guy who saved him from a life of flipping burgers, in the back would actually lie too? I'm shocked! Shocked I tell ya!

Yeah, this Mangini stuff just extends the story even more. The NFL already said the Jets LEGALLY taped the end zones, what else is there to say?

Destroy the J-E-T-S!

Nice rings*

Get over yourselves.

Here's to seeing shady brady's knee turned into spaghetti on sun.

Mike: I hope you get shot in the head.

Shooter:
I hope you realize people who call themselves "Shooter McGavin" are fags.

Mike from VA...there is no question the NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS are the real deal this year. Too bad the rule wasn't in place when the rings were won.
Wassamatta Mikey, don't you love our Patriots? Which team are you a fan of? Or are you too ashamed to tell us you coward?

To Pats haters, i.e., Mike/ VA.

Bill Burt is not a homer as most writers in Boston simply are. His story is most likely true.
All season we have read football insiders repeat the fact that "all" teams were involved in videotaping other teams to get another edge.
Folks like you just cannot square these simple and understandble claims by those in the know with the delicious irony of the one team which has finally been outed - the Jets - well, go ahead and continue to be ignorant. The real loss for you is that you will be missing football history because your eyes are closed. When you finally decide to open your eyes, and ears for that matter, you might realize this simple fact that all the teams were involved in the same practice.
The Pats are merely a hard working group of focused players who are committed not only to each other but their coach.

I do believe the "anti-camera" memo was sent out to NFL teams in September 2006? Somebody help me here, am I right? Am I also right in saying the Pats won three Super Bowls PRIOR to that date? In...2002, 2004, and 2005, correct? Those aren't season years, those are Super Bowl years...so there was a 19-month gap between the Patriots' third ring and the banning of sideline cameramen. So even if we were doing it then, it wasn't illegal to do so. So don't you dare put an asterisk next to those Super Bowl wins, or do, your choice. Just know that all this talk only fuels the Patriots fire and conquest of the entire NFL. And as for this year, we did it in a HALF of a SINGLE GAME, we will admit that much. We also paid, collectively between the team and Belichick, $750k for doing so, and lost a #1 pick in the process. Isn't that punishment enough? Do the Patriots and their fans need to continue to be bombarded with accusations that if the first half of a blowout of the Jets is controversial, then it calls everything that has happened in the previous 6 years into question? The answer is no. We hear you, we do, and hearing each comment only makes us want even more to see the Pats put up 70+ on their opponent. This team is destined to go down in history, and everyone has blinders on for it.

I heard a bigger rumor that, not only did the Pats never give the Jets permission butactually have a videotape of the Jets' camerman they stopped from filming, and that the Pats neither complained to the League office at the time or when Mangini turned them in in Setpember. Pats were not right to violate rules, and the fact others did it is not a good defense- but there also is more to this than Mangini acting out of some sense of duty for enforcement of the rules.

This morning I'm praying that a stupid person like Mike in VA gets cancer. And Mike, you should have shut-up because you know what happens. Nothing Mangini does could possibly surprise me - thank goodness he'll be out of coaching next year.

Mike in VA, the fact that the Patriots drive degenerates like you crazy brings a smile to my face. Get used to losing because you have a lot more of it in your future.

John, if that rumor is true it explains why Tan-A-Bum denied it in October to Jay Glazier and now admits it. He must have found out the Pats have the evidence so he could no longer deny it.

If it is true I hope the Pats leak it to the Media before the game.

PS - there's no need to stoop to Mike in VA's level. Simply knowing how much the Patriots drive degenerates like that crazy should be reward enough for us.

Where art thou....ye ignorant Mikey from dog killin' VA?

Making sure you didn't leave any cancelled checks with your trainer?

Eric Man-Dummy is 3-10, cannot sleep at night, and has applied to break down special teams film at Notre Dame next year...hey, what's their record?

Just like the naive believe the Mitchell Report provides "closure", those same believe the Pats were the only team to use video to get an edge. BTW, and I get a kick out of this, a friend who works at Shea says they routinely videotape opposing catchers' signals during the early innings to 'get an edge".

Eric Mangini and the Jets took great pains yesterday to quell a potential videotaping controversy of their own, and the NFL backed them up by giving the league's stamp of approval to the Jets' version of events.
****
Fellas, congrats on all of your success*, but Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens have to question whether the Pats accomplishments are tainted.
****
I am sorry I called Shooter a fag.

you should be sorry. it was puerile and offensive, and has no business being used in what should be a polite forum for discussion

I said I was Pat, and what about what Shooter and Nooner said?
I guess they get a pass because they're Pats fan?

"Oh, sure, Brady-to-Moss is frightful,
But tattling on Bill was soooo delightful,
We can stop the Pats from 16 and oh,
So, let it snow, let it snow, let it snow."

First of all, my name is Patrick, not Pat. Secondly, I am not saying what they said is okay, but I AM saying that it wasn't derogatory. i thought what they said was over the line and foolish, but the word fag takes hate and descrimination to another level and targets a group entirely separate from the audience you were addressing it to. there are other ways to get your point across and you should really consider using them from now on, unless you enjoy being perceived as ignorant or a bigot.

and just so you are aware I'm a cowboys fan, so, no, they didn't get a free pass for being pat's fans.

Relax Pat

At this point its clear that you are on the internet to be an asshole and to get a rise out of people, Mike. No one with any sense would continue to provoke after what I said to you. You are entitled to your opinion but I, and others, take offense in the way you present them, and that is why I made my comment.

I will not be writing to you further, as you clearly are unwilling to change the way you act, thanks to the comfort of your security blanket: internet anonymity. Good luck in the future with being a dick for no reason, I am sure it wins people over on a regular basis.

No Pat, it's your holier than though attitude that makes you the a-hole. You've never said or done anything in life that you regretted? Of course you have, but yet here you are lecturing, piling on, and acting like a douche.

"No one with any sense would continue to provoke after what I said to you" -- only a little full of ourselves, aren't we? I hate to be the one to let you know your posts areren't insightful, and filled with the wisdom you believe they are.

Let me help you understand why I find you so offensive: I apologized for what I said and yet afterwards you still found it necessary to blather on, talking loud and saying nothing.

Accept my apology, or don't, (I stopped caring) but STFU.

And funny to hear you refer to internet anonymity while you benefit from the same, no?

Glass houses Pat, glass houses.

The Pats got caught doing something wrong, that is a fact. I am a Pats fan but can’t justify their behavior and they have been punished.

.The Jets have been accused of a similar act, they said they had permission, the Pats say no. The NFL has said they are Ok with the Jets “as long as they had permission”. The obvious question is who is telling the truth?

The Colts have been accused of turning up the heat and the volume in their domed stadium on more than one occasion. One of their employees has stated they do it. The lack of concrete evidence doesn’t prove them innocent, only that they may have gotten away with it.

The Steelers of the 70’s had players on steroids and their team doctor has been indicted I believe. Does that mean they are cheaters and their 5 SB wins should be “asterisked”?

The Dolphins had all of the Pats snap counts last year, made a big deal of it for a day or two and then conspicuously backed away form the statements. Why? Did they gain them by manners that shall we say may be questionable?

And what team broke a rule and was docked a draft pick during a particularly successful. None other than the Dolphins and Don Shula.

What team was over the cap a few years ago and was fined? The Broncos.

The Jets were accused by Baltimore this year of simulating the snap count, a distinct violation of the rules.

If you have resources you can probably find some sort of dirt on every team. It doesn’t appear any are above this gamesmanship. To look at the scope of this issue and center in on only the Pats is narrow minded at best.

Oh and one other thing, to those that wish a player would get hurt. That is about as low as you can get. I am appalled by those individuals.

To the writer that wrote he would take the penalty on a late hit. What kind of hypocritical idiot are you? Videotaping is wrong and the perpetrators should be fined but this type of action that is also against the rules is ok?

Mike in MA
All good points, but the key difference is most of the acts you cited are only allegations, or worthy of a penalty flag (Jets calling out signals). The Patriots cheating was so systematic the penalties were unprecedented - $750K in total fines plus loss of their first rd draft pick. That makes a big difference.

Mike in VA,

So basically the only difference is as I said they got caught, red handed I might add.

My point is this pretty much all of the teams have done something illegal. Listen to some of the coaches comments, Jimmy Johnson, Billick, etc... Some get caught, and some don't. If you want to believe that even though the Colts who have been accused on more than one occaision of these imprpprieties are innocent that is your right. Just because an O lineman doesn't get flagged for holding during a game doesn't mean for a second that he didin't hold someone. From a purely technical standpoint he did nothing wrong but as an observer watching it live or on replay it may be quite obvious it occurred.

My belief is that they (the Pats) were guilty and they paid a price. They have however proven that even without the benefit of tapes they can win, quite well I might add.

The allegations against other teams are there to read and believe if you choose. I personally believe rule breaking occurs.

By the way they are not just allegations against the Steelers, and Bronco's.

One question for you. Who is your team?

I have friends who are not Pats fans. Giants, Steelers, Rams, Raiders, Dolphins, Jets, and Colts. It makes for interesting games once in awhile to say the least. We are all in agreement that Belichick does not have the best people skills but they don't pay him for that anyways. I asked this question to all of them. Who would you rather have, your current coach or Belichick.

All of them would want Belichick at the helm.

Mike in MA
I am a Jets fan. Belicheat was my coach - for one day!

There is a huge difference in perception when you caught vs just suspicions, no matter how strong they are. Just see the reaction to Clemens since Thursday. Getting caught does make all the difference - think of baseball with its "if you're not cheating, you're not trying" and compare that to the reaction Sosa got when he was caught with the corked bat. He got more flak than he ever has for his "alleged" steroid use. The difference? We "know" he did one act, but he was caught with the other.
I agree completely that the Pats did not need to cheat to win this year. It's what makes Belicheat's actions even more despicable. He gave folks a reason to wonder* about all he and the Pats have accomplished the last 6 years, whereas prior to SpyGate, they earned nothing but respect, grudging as it may have been.

Reading your post again did trigger a couple more thoughts:
Like I said with the Jets on the field transgression, holding is a poor example - it's impossible to compare something that gets only a penalty flag vs what Belicheat did. You only need to look at the penalties for each - refs missing calls all the time is part of the game. Just last week while you guys were dismantling the Steelers and A Smith, I watched the refs get a call wrong against the Browns - our QB broke the plane on a 4th and 1 sneak, but he was ruled down. Just like we're still waiting for Vinny to score on the same play against the Seahawks in '98 - one the field and off the field are not remotely a fair comparison.

Back to the Steelers and roids, what do you mean? I only heard about Haslett saying they did - are you referring to something else? If no, sure we believe it (why would he say something like that if it wasn't true?) but notice no outcry, no desire for * to their dynasty of the 70s.

Also belonging on any list of cheatings is the amazing happenstance of visiting QBs headsets always going out in NE. Like Indy's crowd noise alleagations, I'm sure there's nothing to it.

Right. Where there's smoke there's fire.