Belichick the Cheater

[zblock]

He cheated, he was caught, he was not adequately punished, and what has happened to him should encourage more coaches to cheat.

[brady_branch]

Not adequately punished? Half a million dollars (the largest fine ever imposed on a coach) not enough? How about throwing on a likely first-round pick (the first time that one would ever be taken away as a penalty)?

[zblock]

Not adequately punished? Half a million dollars (the largest fine ever imposed on a coach) not enough? How about throwing on a likely first-round pick (the first time that one would ever be taken away as a penalty)?
Half a million dollars is nothing to Belichick, whose contract is enormous. If that is the largest fine ever imposed on a coach, so what? It's still not enough, and it will not discourage other coaches from cheating. Call that a business expense.

The Patriots have two first round picks for next year, and they should have lost both unconditionally. So what if the actual penalty was a first? That is irrelevant. It was not enough.

Furthermore, Belichick should have been suspended for several games, and the victory over the Jets should have been declared null and void.

[brady_branch]

The NFL has declared that the taping had no impact on the outcome of the game. So why should the victory be taken away? You also can't take away the pick they got from the 49ers, since it's not "their" pick. Also, I remember reading that $500,000 is the maximum amount a coach can be fined, so how do you want to go above that? I'm not saying he shouldn't be suspended, but you absolutely cannot take away the win or the 49ers pick.

[ATLFalcons]

I think $500,000 was enough of a fine. But, what about the fine Mclaren got for spying on Ferrari? $100 million dollars! Put that in your pipe and smoke it. LOL

[zblock]

The NFL has declared that the taping had no impact on the outcome of the game. So why should the victory be taken away? You also can't take away the pick they got from the 49ers, since it's not "their" pick. Also, I remember reading that $500,000 is the maximum amount a coach can be fined, so how do you want to go above that? I'm not saying he shouldn't be suspended, but you absolutely cannot take away the win or the 49ers pick.
Just because $500,000 is the maximum does not mean that $500,000 is fair. In this case, it is a slap on the wrist.

As for the 49ers' pick, of course it can be taken away from New England. If New England has an option on that pick, then the penalty should be that New England loses that option. If that means restoring full rights to that pick to SF, then do it.

The NFL is hardly a neutral party in this matter. It would love to see this matter swept under a rug, or (to use the wretched words of Belichick) "put behind us," so that everyone can "move forward" (I'm quoting the cheater again). And how the hell can the NFL declare with certainty that the cheating had no effect on the outome of the game. And what about the other games where Belichick cheated? Are we to assume that this game was the only time this cheater cheated? Didn't Belichick cheat in his three Super Bowls? Is he entitled to the presumption of innocence? When a student gets caught plagiarizing, he can lose credit for every course he has taken, even the ones he passed honestly.

The Commissioner has come up very small in this matter, and he has demonstrated that he will apply a double standard when he is disciplining. The players and assistant coaches will be dealt with severely. Head coaches and owners will be treated with kid gloves. Belichick has disgraced himself and his franchise; the Commissioner has disgraced the entire NFL. The league must have integrity, and it must be willing to punish severely anybody who cheats.

[brady_branch]

The NFL absolutely cannot restore the pick to SF. New England traded their pick last year for that pick, so in essence, it is their pick from last year.

Fair or not, $500,000 is the maximum that Belichick could be fined. You can't criticize the NFL for not going over it.

The camera was confiscated prior to the end of the first quarter, at which point the score was no more than 7-0 in favor of the Pats. The Jets would tie it up after the camera was removed, and even if you remove the one TD they got prior to the camera's removal, they still win.

The rest of your post is your opinion (and also sounds very much like anti-Patriot bias), and I will not argue with that.

[efin98]

Suspending him or any other coaches does no good when they already have the game plan in place mid week and Belicheck doesn't do anything during the game that actually affects the play of the game- his coordinators do all the coaching. You can take him away for a game and act like it is doing good, but it doesn't do anything to negatively impact the Patriots since he would have done his work already

Taking away a first round draft pick in a sport where draft picks are better than gold hits the team where it hurts- more than suspensions, more than fines, more than loss of major television nights.

Draft picks affect the immediate future, draft picks affect years to come. Look back at the late 90s draft chaos with the Patriots for a clear example of how you can royally F-up a team not just for one game but for several years by screwing around with their draft picks.

[zblock]

The NFL absolutely cannot restore the pick to SF. New England traded their pick last year for that pick, so in essence, it is their pick from last year.

Fair or not, $500,000 is the maximum that Belichick could be fined. You can't criticize the NFL for not going over it.

I can and will criticize the NFL for not having in place a punishment that will fit the crime. The maximum in this case does not fit the crime for cheating.

The camera was confiscated prior to the end of the first quarter, at which point the score was no more than 7-0 in favor of the Pats. The Jets would tie it up after the camera was removed, and even if you remove the one TD they got prior to the camera's removal, they still win.
I agree, but Belichick still cheated, and the rule should be that if you cheat, you lose--big time. The Patriots should have forfeited the game.

Did the Patriots need to cheat? I think not. They are much too talented a team to have to resort to cheating, and it is a measure of Belichick's insecurity and stupidity and lack of integrity that he still resorted to cheating when he did not have to. (Right now, Belichick reminds me of another cheater who did not have to cheat--Barry Bonds.)

The rest of your post is your opinion (and also sounds very much like anti-Patriot bias), and I will not argue with that.
In calling the rest of my post an opinion, you seem to be suggesting that it is weak because it is an opinion. However, since my opinion is backed by facts, that Belichick cheated, it is a strong opinion. You also seem to be implying that an opinion cannot be argued with. Of course, it can. An opinion can be wrong. If you think my opinion is wrong, please explain why.

In saying my opinion "sounds very much like anti-Patriot bias," you are using "bias" carelessly. A bias is an opinion that is not based on facts. It is one that ignores the facts. Until a few days ago, I admired Belichick and the Patriots. Now that the facts about his cheating have emerged, I despise Belichick and am skeptical about the great success the Patriots have enjoyed. That is not a bias. It is not a prejudgment at all. You weaken your own response by using such a loaded word so carelessly.

[brady_branch]

In calling the rest of my post an opinion, you seem to be suggesting that it is weak because it is an opinion. However, since my opinion is backed by facts, that Belichick cheated, it is a strong opinion. You also seem to be implying that an opinion cannot be argued with. Of course, it can. An opinion can be wrong. If you think my opinion is wrong, please explain why.

In saying my opinion "sounds very much like anti-Patriot bias," you are using "bias" carelessly. A bias is an opinion that is not based on facts. It is one that ignores the facts. Until a few days ago, I admired Belichick and the Patriots. Now that the facts about his cheating have emerged, I despise Belichick and am skeptical about the great success the Patriots have enjoyed. That is not a bias. It is not a prejudgment at all. You weaken your own response by using such a loaded word so carelessly.

Bias is not an opinion that is not backed up by facts. Bias is "a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question". By referring to Belichick as "the cheater", you are showing an inclination to believe that he cheats in every game he coaches, and that is not a fair consideration of the question.

I never said, or tried to imply, that your opinion was weak, or that I could not argue with it. I rarely enjoy arguing with somebody else's opinion, because opinions are so hard to change. At the end of the day, you're still going to believe that Belichick needed to be fined more, and I'm still going to believe that $500,000 was enough. That's why I won't argue.

[zblock]

Bias is not an opinion that is not backed up by facts. Bias is "a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question". By referring to Belichick as "the cheater", you are showing an inclination to believe that he cheats in every game he coaches, and that is not a fair consideration of the question.

I never said, or tried to imply, that your opinion was weak, or that I could not argue with it. I rarely enjoy arguing with somebody else's opinion, because opinions are so hard to change. At the end of the day, you're still going to believe that Belichick needed to be fined more, and I'm still going to believe that $500,000 was enough. That's why I won't argue.
Belichick is a cheater. He has apologized (to his team) for cheating. When a person is guilty of cheating in one instance, he is no longer entitled to the presumption of innocence in others. Belichick was asked if he had cheated in other games. He evaded the questions in a cowardly manner, suggesting strongly that he does have something to hide. That cameraman was present in other games. I believe this is not the first time that cameraman was caught. The facts suggest strongly that Belichick did cheat in other games. Therefore, the NFL should have pursued its investigation of Belichick to determine the extent of his cheating. I am responding to facts, not to "a particular tendency or inclination that prevents an unprejudiced consideration of a question." So once again, your use of "bias" is careless and uncalled for. In throwing the accusation back at me for daring to question Belichick, you are resorting to the old political ploy of questioning the character of the questioner when the character of the questioner is not the issue here. In other words, you are arguing ad hominem. That is what a person will usually do when he finds that he cannot defend the indefensible. What Belichick did was and is indefensible.

And how can you in your prescient wisdom declare with such certainty that at the end of the day, I am still going to believe that Belichick deserved a greater penalty? Prove to me that Belichick did not cheat and I will change my opinion. What will make you change your opinion that Belichick has been punished adequately?

[CCN]

They seem to be using this case as a precedent. Chances are, the punishment will be more severe, they just set out what they could at the time.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-nfl-spying&prov=ap&type=lgns