Tom Brady
Poll
 | 6 votes (24%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4%) | ||
| | 11 votes (44%) | ||
| | 5 votes (20%) | ||
| | 2 votes (8%) |
25 members have voted
Anybody caught cheating should have the book thrown at them...........
Sure, he's dirty, but he's been the NFL's poster boy for years.
Booting him in the ass and throwing him out, which is what he deserves, will never happen; he's the golden child,
This fiasco proves once again that no matter how much you have, you'll always want more.
How about the city of Pittsburgh suing the Patriots for spy gate. The city lost millions in tax revenue for the cheating in the playoffs.
If you bet on a game, I think part of what you are betting on is the shadier element. You're betting on stuff that happens in the real world. In the real world, players use PEDs, baseball teams manicure the field to their advantage, football teams try to amplify crowd noise, boxing judges favor the guys who bring in the most money, etc. etc. You should factor these things into your bet and, even if you don't, they will help you just as often as hurt you.
Complaining about that is like betting on an election and then complaining that the opposing candidate won by lying and running dirty campaign commercials.
I don't get it. Like you, the NBA seems to me to be the most corrupt sport. You can see when the refs are calling the game to one team's advantage at times. They are the World Wrestling League of professional sports. I would much rather see games decided on a teams' talent and effort. Otherwise, what's the point?
Quote: GWAESteel, I have been saying for years that I can't wait until someone sues a player or team. Imagine betting 50k on a game in Vegas based on the rules that are enforced just to find out that you lost, possibly because of cheating.
How about the city of Pittsburgh suing the Patriots for spy gate. The city lost millions in tax revenue for the cheating in the playoffs.
Actually, cheating in sports is so rampant that a bettor needs to accept the fact that it could possibly benefit him or possibly hurt him. In horse racing it is well know that certain trainers routinely juice horses with banned drugs and the bettors factor that into their decisions. You will see some trainers with a winning % around 30% which is kind of like a MLB player batting .475 for an entire season. It's a sad situation and is reflective of our entire society where cheating on Wall Street and on standardized tests is very common. Having said this I would add that cheating is not the same thing as fixing; and fixing in a sporting event is much less common.
Quote: lilredroosterActually, cheating in sports is so rampant that a bettor needs to accept the fact that it could possibly benefit him or possibly hurt him. In horse racing it is well know that certain trainers routinely juice horses with banned drugs and the bettors factor that into their decisions. You will see some trainers with a winning % around 30% which is kind of like a MLB player batting .475 for an entire season. It's a sad situation and is reflective of our entire society where cheating on Wall Street and on standardized tests is very common. Having said this I would add that cheating is not the same thing as fixing; and fixing in a sporting event is much less common.
Isn't cheating and fixing basically the same? The only differentiation being that fixing involves doing it for financial gain?
Quote: steeldcoIsn't cheating and fixing basically the same? The only differentiation being that fixing involves doing it for financial gain?
No, cheating and fixing are definitely not the same. In cheating, the cheating side gains an advantage but it does not necessarily mean that they will win. The Colts still could have beaten the Patriots. In fixing, there is an attempt to predetermine the outcome of the game so that (usually a criminal) will win a bet. Gaylord Perry throwing a spitball is cheating but not fixing. His opponents would still win the game quite often.
Quote: steeldcoIsn't cheating and fixing basically the same? The only differentiation being that fixing involves doing it for financial gain?
There is a huge difference unless you consider every penalty, which is cheating hence the penalty, fixing the game. Does it mean that every game in the steroid era was fixed.
For me a more difficult question: is resting your starters for an up coming playoff games fixing the current game because you as a team have made a conscience effort not to play your best for that game.
Quote: lilredroosterNo, cheating and fixing are definitely not the same. In cheating, the cheating side gains an advantage but it does not necessarily mean that they will win. The Colts still could have beaten the Patriots. In fixing, there is an attempt to predetermine the outcome of the game so that (usually a criminal) will win a bet. Gaylord Perry throwing a spitball is cheating but not fixing. His opponents would still win the game quite often.
By that logic, a referee making a few bad calls, and making only a few because he doesn't want to be too obvious, would only be "cheating" instead of trying to "fix" a game? After all, a few bad calls don't guarantee a win.
In my opinion, any of these offenses should be punished, but 1/4 of the season or more seems excessive.
Quote: MidwestAPI'm not a Brady fan, nor a Patriot fan, not even close. But, I don't carry the hate some seem to have toward the Patriots, Brady, and Belichick. This was definitely not a sports fix, the outcome was not pre-determined, nor was it done (to my knowledge), to win a bet. Was it cheating? I guess it was because the balls were outside the PSI tolerance, and there wouldn't be any other reason to do that other than to gain an advantage. No different than a pitcher scuffing a ball, a hockey player with a stick that was too curved, or a NASCAR driver/team with a spoiler top long.
In my opinion, any of these offenses should be punished, but 1/4 of the season or more seems excessive.
MidwestAP, I would agree with you if I were absolutely certain that were no other motivations for him doing what he had done. However, I do not know what his motivation was. You do not know what his motivation was. Do we want there to be doubt as to the outcome of the game being fair? I say that there should never be a doubt as to the integrity of a game. Even though it exists now, we need to move toward cleaning it up.
Nest: off to court.
Amazing.
Quote: MrVBrady did himself no favors in destroying his cell phone once he learned the NFL investigators wanted to look at it, thereby presumably destroying evidence.
Nest: off to court.
Amazing.
Unfortunately that action created even more doubt as to what his motivation was. It just shouldn't be condoned and it certainly shouldn't just be written off as a bit of cheating, or gamesmanship.
Quote: steeldcoMidwestAP, I would agree with you if I were absolutely certain that were no other motivations for him doing what he had done. However, I do not know what his motivation was. You do not know what his motivation was. Do we want there to be doubt as to the outcome of the game being fair? I say that there should never be a doubt as to the integrity of a game. Even though it exists now, we need to move toward cleaning it up.
You are correct, I can't speak to his motivation, but winning the playoff game seems like it would be motivation enough. Frankly, I'm amazed that the NFL allowed the teams to maintain control of the balls after they are each permitted to set the balls up within the allowable tolerance. This was a gross oversight in their former procedures and imo, not enough blame has been pointed at them.
Players and teams will always try to gain an advantage (stick-em, lineman taping their jerseys tight to their pads, etc.). I read one instance (can't remember the coach, but think it was Parcells) who sent an intern into the opposing team's locker room after they had departed after the game to look for any game plans, scouting reports, etc., that may help him the next time he faced the opponent. Therefore, I don't have any perception that the game is always 'fair'. If someone tries to gain an illegal advantage and is caught, punish him to a reasonable degree, and escalate punishment for future transgression. I just think four games is excessive for this particular infraction.
Quote: steeldcoBy that logic, a referee making a few bad calls, and making only a few because he doesn't want to be too obvious, would only be "cheating" instead of trying to "fix" a game? After all, a few bad calls don't guarantee a win.
I think you are referring to the NBA's crooked referee and I would say that was fixing because he was tied to gamblers although it's true that he could not guarantee a win. I think your point is that there is a gray area which is certainly true but in general the difference is fairly clear. A heavily favored boxer who takes a dive so a mob guy can win a big bet at 20 to one is clearly fixing, no doubt about it. Another key is whether or not the fix is done due to a payment from criminals trying to win a big bet. Arod juicing to me is not fixing he was trying to deify himself and cared much less about the outcome of any one game.
But, unless the NFL has more evidence than they are revealing, Brady will win his lawsuit.
What proof do they actually have that he was responsible for having the balls deflated?
If anything, the deflated balls worked against him.
The balls were re-inflated for the second half where he was he was 12 for 14 with 131 yards, and two TD's.
They scored four TD's on their first four possessions in the second half.
As for the phone, any text messages are stored on a server somewhere, and can be retrieved.
