Q: What’s the Patriots’ favorite operetta?
A: - YouTube
Dirty relative to other teams? Yes, that is what we have to do.
This is a fair point – though any number of pointless things NFL coaches do can be chalked up to superstition – but unrelated to this particular topic, I do think that Bill Belichick is oppositional, yes. Truth be told, I think he’s a total asshole, though of course I’d welcome him back to the Giants with open arms after Coughlin retires.
Wow. What a sports thread. If anything, it seems the PSI of this thread is increasing! 
Seriously, and putting aside all of the PSI scientific experiments, I have ONE major problem with this: Tom Brady.
When interviewed and asked about if the ball felt lighter, he specifically said, "I didn’t feel any difference. … I don’t know. I get the snap, I drop back, I throw the ball. That’s the extent of me touching the football. I don’t sit there and squeeze it and try to determine that. If that’s what the Colts want to do, then that’s what they want to do. … "
POPPYCOCK, I say! He’s a seasoned QB with plenty o’ playoff experience. He’s played in every condition available to the football season. He’s also said that when he picks the game balls, “When I pick those footballs out, at that point they’re perfect.”
Now should I really believe that a pro of HIS level doesn’t notice a softer ball from a stiffer one? On a really rainy and not so cold day on the field, he wouldn’t want a softer ball?
Bottom Line: Deflated, underinflated, stored in a fictional Sauna, whatever… I don’t think the ball pressure had any effect on the outcome of this particular football game. But I can’t believe Brady “didn’t notice”.
I thought this wasn’t the case. I searched for some contemporary news stories from the incident and they all mention the location of the filming and the commentary doesn’t clarify. Can you link to something definitive? I’m certainly willing to admit that I was wrong, but I didn’t think I was. Perhaps living in Boston the news I’ve read is somewhat slanted. 
As I recall, it was always illegal to videotape signals. I think the letter that was sent at the start of the 07 season was a reminder to not do it.
My memory is that the Patriots violated two procedural rules: They stole signals outside the designated signal stealing area, and they used videotape.
I can’t find the final ruling online, so the wikipedia entry may have to suffice: “On September 13, for the “use of equipment to videotape an opposing team’s offensive or defensive signals,” Belichick was officially fined $500,000 — the largest fine ever imposed on a coach in the league’s then-87-year history, and the maximum permitted under league rules.”
Here’s an article that goes into more details, and seems to support the idea that stealing signals is fine, but videotaping them is not. Although the article also says the rules are somewhat vague.
(post shortened)
I agree 100%. Considering Brady has almost two decades of college and professional football handling experience, it’s inconceivable that Brady would not have known that the game balls were under-inflated.
And I’ll add that there is still no evidence that Belichick was involved with deflategate.
There were two parts to Spygate. The key was that the Patriots had a guy on their sideline videotaping the other sideline. The rule they violated reads:
“All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead.”
So, it is fine to video from certain parts of the stadium, but you can’t be out on the open on your team’s sideline. What Belichick tried to pull off, and was rightly smacked down for, was trying to use another part of the rule to create a gray area. That part says:
“any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited…including without limitation…any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game.”
Belichick claimed that they were taping only for use in game prep for the next time they played the Jets, a divisional opponent they play twice a year, not for use during the game they were playing that day. Which was ridiculous, because the year before the league had sent out a memo clarifying just what they meant -
“videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent’s offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches’ booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.”
What has added to the confusion is that just before the Superbowl in 2008 where the Patriots played the Giants, a story came out that they had videotaped a walk-through practice of the Rams the day before they played them in the Superbowl in 2002. The NFL investigated that specific incident, found it to be untrue, and the Boston Globe printed a retraction of their story. However, this episode often still gets cited as another example of the Patriots cheating.
One addendum to what I wrote above - there has been one recent technology advancement allowed to the above. It mentions Polariod type cameras. They used to have people taking polariod pics of the formations from the coaches box, and then sending them down to the field on a little zip line for review on the sidelines. In this past season at least (maybe earlier) game broadcasts have been noting that they now are looking at those pics on tablets, but I don’t know when or how they rewrote the rule to allow digital still images.
Merely amused.
Jets fan, I take it?
So that was a spittle-flecked fit of …amusement?
I’m a fan of one of the teams that has six Lombardi trophies.
And nary a question about any one of those trophies. All perfectly legal mind you. A team brave of heart, true of spirit, and emitting a pleasant musk with intriguing citrus overtones.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=fleming/110127
I thought insults weren’t allowed in this forum?
:: taps mic ::
Is this on?
Appropriately, your link leads to nothing whatsoever. (404 error).
It’s not unfunny, but it’s the third or fourth time someone has said it.
Worked for me when I just clicked it on your post. But in case it fails again it is about the rampant, but legal mind you, steroid use in the 1970s. I’ll let someone else bring up your coach’s habit of tripping opposing players.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=fleming/110127
Worked for me…