Brady Wins, again.

Hmm. After re-reading your post Barry I had to go back and check to see if it was completely illegal to film signals because over the years I have seen conflicting information in that regard:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...pygate-punishing-success-and-promoting-parity

Reading this I can see where Belichick's reasoning came in regards to filming signals now. I suggest reading the entire article even though it's written by a Pats fan. I'll quote the most relevant text here:

The above seems to be legit. Here's a the link to relevant portions of the manual: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/sports/20080511_NFL_DOCUMENTS.pdf

I've read it and nowhere does it prohibit to video taping of signals, which adds validity with Jimmy Johnson's claim that if they filmed from an approved location then nothing would have happened. But the memo sent out does square with the rules as written in the manual, so that's where Belichick's may or may not have a legit excuse. But since the NFL wanted to ban this practice from the sidelines, the Pats should have gotten clarification before continuing their practice and pointed out that the league's memo inconsistencies with the written rules. But to say the Pats are completely guilty here is a bit of the stretch given the memo's inaccuracies with the rules.

See worst memo in history as well:
https://sites.google.com/site/hardboiled33/andersonmemo

If anybody can find the portion in the game operations manual (and not the memo paraphrased in news stories) where it strictly prohibits filming signals, please post a link because I haven't found it after many several google searches.

 

Thanks guys. I wasn't that worked up about it until I came across that fan article. It just got me going again because it just raised even more questions for me in regards to the front office. And, well, here I go again:

Barry, the reference you made is the same one that the article and I are pointing out and that the Sept. 6 memo misquotes the relevant rule section. To me that raises the issue of why were the Pats punished that harshly if all they did was film from the wrong location and the Jets did the same exact thing the season before, admitted it in the media and no fine or punishment happened. Why? I think the article I posted answers most of that question. The league wants parity because it keeps fans interested in the game and generates a lot of revenue.

Even in regards to ball tampering, other teams have been caught doing it and there wasn't anything even close to being to same punishment the league slapped Brady and the Pats with. Look I can take fair and consistent punishment and enforcement of actual stated rules, but when the league fails to consistently punish equally across the board for the same infractions I take issue with it (or just simply invents something out of thin air). To me that raises some serious questions about what's going on in the front office. And I don't understand why there isn't any real investigative journalism looking into the league's actions, to me it reeks of corruption.

 

Yes, it was from a fan site (I mentioned that in the post before) and that's why I quoted the relevant text from the article and linked to the sections of the Game Operations manual (here's the link for Manual section) to try to verify the author's claims. I, also, tried to find the letter Goodell sent to the Patriots to see if the author was, also, accurate in the language used in the punishment (but couldn't find it). Again, nowhere have I said the Patriots were innocent in this affair. What I said is that I could see some validity to Belichick's claims given what the manual and rulebook actually states (whereas before I thought it was just a very lame excuse), and it's his mistake was that he didn't seek clarification of the memo's claims when it didn't square with his interpretation of said rules. He said as much in his apology issued after meeting with Goodell.

(Edit: Here's a link from the Boston Globe that might better explain the differences between the 2006 memo and 2007 Operation Manual and why it may have mattered:
http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2008/05/13/meeting_day/?page=full)

To me especially in light of what the relevant rule sections actually say and the memo's interpretation of the relevant rules, they need to punish all offending parties. Before I thought the league was lenient in its non-punishment of the Jets was because it had at least something to do with what was being videotaped, but you were right it didn't--you couldn't film anything from the sidelines or endzones, not the cheerleaders or even pretty butterflies landing on the grass. So if it's very important to league NOT TO VIDEOTAPE AT ALL from the "field" as defined in the memo, then all offending parties should be punished to some degree. And what is, also, amusing or irritating is the fact Goodell based the 1st draft pick punishment on how well the Patriots finished the season without videotaping like the author mentions. The better they did without videotaping the punishment became more severe and the worse they did without it it became less severe...seriously? There should be a set punishment for an infraction at the time, not basing it on how well a team performs in the future. Because it, again, questions what the legitimacy of what the league office is doing in enforcing the rules for all 32 teams fairly.