Does Patriots Hiring of McDaniels Right Before Broncos Game "violate spirit of fair play?" [Archive]

View Full Version : Does Patriots Hiring of McDaniels Right Before Broncos Game "violate spirit of fair play?"

Cugel

01-10-2012, 12:46 PM

The Post had this article this morning. I haven't seen it posted anywhere else so I thought I'd comment on it.

Does Patriots' hiring of McDaniels violate spirit of fair play? (http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_19709279)

"The Broncos could fret about the team secrets Josh McDaniels can now share with the enemy. Or they can be pleased their former coach is now working for the New England Patriots, Saturday's second-round playoff opponent."

Personally, as a McDaniels HATER (and proud of it) I think this can only HURT the Patriots. But, the point was "does this hiring constitute another Belicheat end-run around the league rules?

Once again, Belichick has found a loophole in the rulebook by hiring McDaniels as an offensive assistant coach the week before the Patriots play McDaniels' former team. And the NFL has plugged its ears and covered its eyes to a move that would seem to at least violate the spirit of fair competition.

Once again, I'm not personally convinced by this argument. I doubt McDaniels will be able to tell Belichek anything he doesn't already know. But, it does at least raise an issue of fair-play. Not that Belichek ever believed in fair-play of course, as the Spy-Gate incident proved beyond doubt.

Still, if McMoron can contribute his help to bringing down the Patriots that would please me no end.

I just thought that those who believe McDaniels was just a Belichek mole going out to undermine and destroy as many competing teams before returning to the Patriots where Belichek will welcome him back with a "job well done Josh" -- they just got some apparent vindication. :ranger:

PatriotsGuy

01-10-2012, 12:58 PM

I just thought that those who believe McDaniels was just a Belichek mole going out to undermine and destroy as many competing teams before returning to the Patriots where Belichek will welcome him back with a "job well done Josh" -- they just got some apparent vindication. :ranger:

I think that anyone that believes this is insane. Also it's Belichick.

WTE

01-10-2012, 01:01 PM

I think holding a D-Lineman is a worse violation of fair play.

HammeredOut

01-10-2012, 01:13 PM

The Patriots are not only getting McDaniels, he is getting MadDog Romeo Crennel who shut us out last game.

I believe the Tim Tebow train can still pound the Patriots. The Broncos will need every second of time in on the clock. They need to put up and repeat the 250+ yards on the ground but be more efficient with the clock this time. If Tim Tebow can draw 9 in the box all like the Steelers did, we can have a ton of success on the Patriots. Overall, I think the power run game has been the Patriot weakness, and this plays into the Broncos strength.

yuhateme80

01-10-2012, 01:19 PM

Mcdaniels doesn't know anything we have different coordinators different style of offense n defense

TXBRONC

01-10-2012, 01:21 PM

Mcdaniels doesn't know anything we have different coordinators different style of offense n defense

We have the same offensive coordinator in fact most of the offensive staff was retained after Fox was hired.

Cugel

01-10-2012, 01:25 PM

We have the same offensive coordinator in fact most of the offensive staff was retained after Fox was hired.

That was the point. The argument was that McDaniels HIRED most of the current offensive staff and knows them well.

And there's a policy in the NFL about NOT allowing teams to hire coaches from another team during the playoffs.

However, because McDaniels was previously helping destroy the Rams it's ok.

Well, once again, I'm not buying this argument, but it was the focus of an article in the Denver Post.

I think McMoron can only hurt whatever team he's hired by. The notion that he's some kind of offensive genius is absurd by this point. Obviously Brady didn't need him during this season, and I don't know what he can contribute to them.

Traveler

01-10-2012, 01:30 PM

I have no fear of what McDaniels does or doesn't know. Everything he's been associated with the last 2-3 years has turned to shit. Here's hoping this applies to the PATS as well.

What information can he provide in this short week that the PATS don't already know?

If Denver's defense can handle their business better than last time, it doesn't matter what information McDaniels can provide.

WTE

01-10-2012, 01:30 PM

And there's a policy in the NFL about NOT allowing teams to hire coaches from another team during the playoffs.

Prove it.

Ravage!!!

01-10-2012, 01:33 PM

Watchthemiddle

01-10-2012, 01:35 PM

We have the same offensive coordinator in fact most of the offensive staff was retained after Fox was hired.

But.....we are running a totally different style of offense then McD ran. He NEVER used Tebow unless it was a goaline situation..he NEVER let him pass, DT was hurt most of the time (thanks to McD letting him return kicks and punts) and we are running a different Defense.

There is nothing that we NOW do that we did the last 2 seasons. NE is grasping at straws thinking it will give them an edge. On Dec 18th, they were on their heels until we started beating ourselves.

Now they must still honor the run game, still concern themselves with the spread option, and watch out for the pass. This Bronco offense is no longer one dementional..I look at it as tri-dementional.

McD gives them no edge IMO. Just because he drafted some of these players means nothing. Coaches and teams go up against players they originally drafted all of the time. NE showed their hand with Hernandez and their game the first time we played them. We were just getting started....

Cugel

01-10-2012, 01:40 PM

Prove it.

Once again, Belichick has found a loophole in the rulebook by hiring McDaniels as an offensive assistant coach the week before the Patriots play McDaniels' former team. And the NFL has plugged its ears and covered its eyes to a move that would seem to at least violate the spirit of fair competition.

"Teams in the playoffs can sign players," said Greg Aiello, spokesman for the NFL commissioner's office by way of explanation.

Yes, but playoff teams can't sign players from other teams. And a case can be made that in regard to the 2011 season, McDaniels' job should be finished.

Did you suppose I made that up? I'm not the one arguing for this. I saw this article in the Post and thought it deserved comment.

SM19

01-10-2012, 01:41 PM

I'm not sure it's a huge deal, but I do think the answer is "yes," and that has to do with more than just us. McDaniels knows a lot about our personnel in particular, true, but he's also coached against five of the remaining playoff teams this year. Assuming the Pats beat us Sunday, they could have the benefit of work McDaniels did for the Rams against the Ravens next week, and against the Packers, Saints, 49ers or Giants in the Super Bowl. That doesn't really sit right with me.

Cugel

01-10-2012, 01:43 PM

I don't know if its unethical or not, but the McDaniels hire COULD have happened after the playoffs, and should have. I'm betting there is going to be some rule changes to this effect after this season.... ONCE AGAIN.... changing the rules because of Belicheck.

McDaniels is his puppet, and copies everything he does. I'm soooo glad he's gone.

I think you're right about that Rav. I imagine that at some point, maybe this off-season the league is going to have to prevent Belicheat from doing this.

Apparently the only league rule is that you can't hire a coach in a lateral move (to the same job he had with his old team) while he's still under contract. But, you CAN hire him if it's a promotion. The rule seems ripe for abuse by a rule-breaker like Belicheck to hire some assistant coach from another team just before facing that team in the playoffs.

Fullback32

01-10-2012, 01:43 PM

I think this is more of a mind game by the Patriots than anything. Besides, Belicheat has more than enough access to tape to see what the Broncos are doing.

Ravage!!!

01-10-2012, 01:43 PM

Once again, Beli-cheat is doing eveything he can to prove what a dirty coach he really is. Its who he is.

Ravage!!!

01-10-2012, 01:45 PM

jlarsiii

01-10-2012, 01:46 PM

TXBRONC

01-10-2012, 01:49 PM

That was the point. The argument was that McDaniels HIRED most of the current offensive staff and knows them well.

And there's a policy in the NFL about NOT allowing teams to hire coaches from another team during the playoffs.

However, because McDaniels was previously helping destroy the Rams it's ok.

Well, once again, I'm not buying this argument, but it was the focus of an article in the Denver Post.

I think McMoron can only hurt whatever team he's hired by. The notion that he's some kind of offensive genius is absurd by this point. Obviously Brady didn't need him during this season, and I don't know what he can contribute to them.

The person I responded to said McDaniels knows both the offensive and defensive staff and this is inaccurate. Anyway I agree I don't think McDaniels can be that much help to Belichick. That still doesn't make it right that Belichick was allowed to higher the little squirt when it otherwise against the rules but obviously the NFL isn't going to step in and put the kibosh on it so we have to live with it.

Ravage!!!

01-10-2012, 01:50 PM

The NFL has allowed this to occur before. Some analyst pointed out that one reason Denver won't make a big deal about this is because we did the same thing back in 1989 or 1990.

After Shanny was fired by Oakland we picked him up 2 weeks later and he was on the staff when we played Oakland again later that season.

Granted that was during the regular season and not the playoffs, but still we have already done the same thing so there is no point in pursuing the validity of making such a move.

If the NFL doesn't like the move they can always change the rule. Personally, IMO I don't think this will have any real affect on the outcome of the game. We played each other just a month ago so it's not like we are totally unfamiliar with each other.

Then it should have been addressed then. I think its silly that "Denver" won't make a big deal out of it because of something that happened 20+ years ago.

Uhmm.. No.

The reason you won't hear anything about it from the Broncos publicly is the same reason most coaches didn't say anything about Belicheat filming during games......they just don't go public with this stuff.

They will keep their grievances in private, and address it after the season is over. But it doesn't have anything to do with something that happened 20 years ago during the regular season. Teams hire players all the time to try and "get info" about the opposing team in regular season play. Thats different. Playoffs are only a couple weeks long, and its not asking a coach to go jobless (or a player that is picked up to try and get info) for the season to end.

Ravage!!!

01-10-2012, 01:52 PM

The person I responded to said McDaniels knows both the offensive and defensive staff and this is inaccurate. Anyway I agree I don't think McDaniels can be that much help to Belichick. That still doesn't make it right that Belichick was allowed to higher the little squirt when it otherwise against the rules but obviously the NFL isn't going to step in and put the kibosh on it so we have to live with it.

Going to make it that much funnier when NE loses :lol: :lol:

Nomad

01-10-2012, 01:54 PM

Patriots beat the BRONCOS convincingly a few weeks ago without McDaniels. I don't see what adding McDaniels is going to change that Patriots offense.

rjent

01-10-2012, 01:55 PM

I read through all of this, and all I can say is wow you guys are giving McD a LOT of credit. If he was such an idiot here and with the Rams, what should we be worried about.

Personally, I think we will OWN the patsies this WE. If we play like we played this Sunday ... well I can honestly say it could be a very one sided game in our favor.

Brady acts like Orton when pressured, they have no run defense, and if we can score like Sunday! .... OH BABY! :dancing:

Anyway, **** McDaniels and the cheater ... that is what I think! :coffee:

Ravage!!!

01-10-2012, 01:56 PM

Patriots beat the BRONCOS convincingly a few weeks ago without McDaniels. I don't see what adding McDaniels is going to change that Patriots offense.

Not a thing. But I think that it COULD make a difference against other teams.

PatriotsGuy

01-10-2012, 01:57 PM

Nomad

01-10-2012, 01:57 PM

I'd be more concerned with the BRONCOS underestimating the Patriots defense again.

Nomad

01-10-2012, 02:01 PM

Not a thing. But I think that it COULD make a difference against other teams.

Let's hold a glimmer of hope that the BRONCOS will take care of that on Sat night and Patriots won't have that chance.:)

WTE

01-10-2012, 02:06 PM

Going to make it that much funnier when NE loses :lol: :lol:

What a shock that Ravage is all worked up over this. Mention Controversy and Patriots in the same sentence and he's there in a heartbeat!

Oh, and Ravage. There won't be a rule change about this after the season as you already assured. Mark my words, No Change.

Fullback32

01-10-2012, 02:06 PM

I'd be more concerned with the BRONCOS underestimating the Patriots defense again.

Agreed. They did give up a lot of yards this year, but they didn't give up a lot of points and that's where it really counts. Additionally they were like +17 on turnovers. Still, I can see the scenario where the Broncos can win this game. If Von Doom can get to Brady early and often, that will be the difference maker. Like always, Wes Welker needs to be made into a non-factor. Two guys they have who can really kill the Broncos are Gronkowski and Hernandez, again stressing the importance of getting to Brady.

red98

01-10-2012, 02:07 PM

Much ado about nothing.

weazel

01-10-2012, 02:11 PM

Is it bush league? yes. Is it something you would see in the CFL? yes. Am I surprised Belichick would do it? no.

But... Do what you can to win, if you're not doing all you can, you're not trying hard enough.

Ravage!!!

01-10-2012, 02:11 PM

What a shock that Ravage is all worked up over this. Mention Controversy and Patriots in the same sentence and he's there in a heartbeat!

Oh, and Ravage. There won't be a rule change about this after the season as you already assured. Mark my words, No Change.

Gee.... your word means so much to me.

Its weird how its nearly always Belicheck and his tree that have all the "controversy" talk. Coincidence? I mean, why is that?

Nomad

01-10-2012, 02:23 PM

Agreed. They did give up a lot of yards this year, but they didn't give up a lot of points and that's where it really counts. Additionally they were like +17 on turnovers. Still, I can see the scenario where the Broncos can win this game. If Von Doom can get to Brady early and often, that will be a difference make. Like always, Wes Welker needs to be made into a non-factor. Two guys they have who can really kiil the Broncos are Gronkowski and Hernandez, again stressing the importance of getting to Brady.

Yeah, I know people can't stand Belichick but NE's offense is fun to watch especially those TEs. The only way BRONCOS win is to keep pressure on Brady when on the field and off the field when BRONCOS have the ball.

PatriotsGuy

01-10-2012, 02:26 PM

Gee.... your word means so much to me.

Its weird how its nearly always Belicheck and his tree that have all the "controversy" talk. Coincidence? I mean, why is that?

The only controversy I've read about is from Denver media, and the Patriots hired him before they knew who would win the Denver/Pitt game.

WTE

01-10-2012, 02:30 PM

The only controversy I've read about is from Denver media, and the Patriots hired him before they knew who would win the Denver/Pitt game.

and the Denver media admitted they tried to get everyone worked up over this but their attempts failed.

Funny too, every article I read talks out of both sides of their ass. Stating it shouldn't be allowed, McDaniels has inside info, coached against 6 playoff teams, blah, blah, blah.

Then say he was a horrible coach so this should actually hurt New England.

I always suspected Denver had crappy sportswriters, now I know.

dogfish

01-10-2012, 02:32 PM

Much ado about nothing.

story of josh mcdaniels' life. . . . :coffee:

Northman

01-10-2012, 02:34 PM

I do think its a bit retarded and that he should of had to wait until the postseason was over to go back to them. But, if it doesnt break the rules than its really a non-issue and you just roll with it.

HORSEPOWER 56

01-10-2012, 03:30 PM

As far as I'm concerned, there is something rotten in Denmark. McDaniels spent the entire season coaching for another team. That season ended before he was "terminated". The way I see it, it's no different than the 20 teams who didn't make the playoff's upcoming FAs. We can't go and sign Kyle Orton (not that we'd want to) or Brandon Lloyd because technically, their contracts don't expire until the end of the league year and FA officially starts. It should be the exact same with coaches.

I don't believe that coaches who coached during that year, fired or not, should be allowed to join another team who is actively still playing that season. If your season is over and you want to interview/hire a guy, fine. I don't even have a problem with the Patriots signing him to a "future" deal to be the OC when their current one moves on, but he shouldn't be able to actively participate with the team while they're still playing the current season.

This smells a little bit like a more gray-area videotaping scandal and it's definitely NOT in the "spirit of fair play". Is it technically illegal? No, but it does make the Pats look like they don't care much about sportsmanship. This is something I would expect out of the Raiders. Or Eddie Quittison... :tsk:

With the parity already afforded to the league, this stinks of a high school coach switching teams to the cross town rival just before the playoffs.

More than just the Broncos, the Giants, Ravens, Packers, and Saints - all still potential opponents for the Pats - should take exception. McDaniels coached against every one of those teams this season.

Even John Gruden had a to wait a year to humiliate the team he'd just left on the public stage.

jhildebrand

01-10-2012, 03:37 PM

I said this in another one of these threads. St Louis is St Louis for a reason! They fired everybody but McDoof. Then New England came calling.

If St Louis had any brains they would have realized they had a commodity on their hands. Allow New England to interview mr immaturity. Then when they want to hire him-especially seeing how technicially it is a lateral move if not a demotion up front-ask for a draft pick. Bend Belicheat over like he does to the league.

If he want McD bad enough he'd pay the price. If not, then wait until the season or Pats season is over and then release McD.

That is what St. Louis shoulda and coulda easily done!

Even John Gruden had a to wait a year to humiliate the team he'd just left on the public stage.

Gruden was traded. Precisely what St. Louis should have done with mcD.

Nomad

01-10-2012, 03:38 PM

If this really bothers some folks....all I can recommend is people need to try and contact the league owners and try to persuade them to change this rule. I don't know what good it'll do, but it may let one know they've voiced their opinion.

BroncoJoe

01-10-2012, 04:15 PM

Nomad

01-10-2012, 04:22 PM

And, if anyone does this, they need to consider getting a life.

Just sayin'.

Perhaps.....depends on how passionate a person is. Just like watching game film...I don't do it but if someone does, more power to them.

The move doesn't bother me, but it may bother some to the point of voicing their opinion and what better way than to go to the NFL, but I have a funny suspicion they won't give a crap.

Either way....BRONCOS better bring their A++ game Sat night because Tom Brady will be the one on the field and he doesn't need Josh McDaniels.

Superchop 7

01-10-2012, 04:48 PM

The NFL will have to fix this as it is a move that can open pandoras box.

On the bright side, pulling a cheap ass stunt like this against his former players............................

Paybacks a bitch.

rcsodak

01-10-2012, 05:01 PM

That was the point. The argument was that McDaniels HIRED most of the current offensive staff and knows them well.

And there's a policy in the NFL about NOT allowing teams to hire coaches from another team during the playoffs.

However, because McDaniels was previously helping destroy the Rams it's ok.

Well, once again, I'm not buying this argument, but it was the focus of an article in the Denver Post.

I think McMoron can only hurt whatever team he's hired by. The notion that he's some kind of offensive genius is absurd by this point. Obviously Brady didn't need him during this season, and I don't know what he can contribute to them.

And last i heard, the playbook mccoy is using was constructed WITH mcd.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak

01-10-2012, 05:08 PM

Once again, Beli-cheat is doing eveything he can to prove what a dirty coach he really is. Its who he is.
I'm not too thrilled about the signing, but if den had grabbed an asst in the same instance, woukd we be crying foul or telling people 'hey, its not against any rules'.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

NightTerror218

01-10-2012, 05:16 PM

Only thing that it might affect is if McCoy is really running a playbook McD came up with for Tebow. There was an article about it some time back posted in a thread by Tned i think. If so then he would have our playbook.

dogfish

01-10-2012, 05:19 PM

Either way....BRONCOS better bring their A++ game Sat night because Tom Brady will be the one on the field and he doesn't need Josh McDaniels.

this is the bottom line. . .

i don't give a shit about that runt josh mchoodie-- i'm a lot more concerned with who's going to cover aaron hernandez. . . .

NightTerror218

01-10-2012, 05:22 PM

this is the bottom line. . .

i don't give a shit about that runt josh mchoodie-- i'm a lot more concerned with who's going to cover aaron hernandez. . . .

that and getting some actual pressure on Brady. No turnovers and stupid penalties. If NE is one thing, that one thing is a very disciplined team. They dont make very many stupid mistakes.

MNPatsFan

01-10-2012, 06:56 PM

And there's a policy in the NFL about NOT allowing teams to hire coaches from another team during the playoffs.Cugel, as usual you might want to get your facts straight and correct before posting. There is not a policy in the NFL prohibiting teams from hiring coaches from another team during the playoffs. A similar situation unfolded two years ago with the Dallas Cowboys. When Cowboys assistant Todd Grantham was named defensive coordinator at the University of Georgia, the Cowboys hired Paul Pasqualoni -- who had just been fired as Dolphins defensive coordinator after the 2009 season -- for the playoffs that year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/news/story?id=4828825

So all those fools that claim BB and the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper .... GET A CLUE!!!;)

:laugh:

Joel

01-10-2012, 11:22 PM

Yes, this is technically legal, but yes, it does violate the spirit of the game. You know Belichick: Cheating isn't everything--it's the ONLY thing.

Patriots beat the BRONCOS convincingly a few weeks ago without McDaniels. I don't see what adding McDaniels is going to change that Patriots offense.
Yeah, because we fumbled the ball 3 times on our end of the field before half time. Prior to that we were up 16-14 and had scored on three straight drives. In fact, WE made the first stop on D. We only STOPPED running over their crap defence because the turnovers put us down 11 and, after we stopped them AGAIN to start the second half but our run, run, run petered out at midfield, they got another TD. At that point we were down 18 and all the time we spent running had brought us to the 4th quarter, so it was garbage time; we managed another TD, they matched it, and that was it.

You think Belicheat is content to hope he forces three fumbles again, or wants a little extra edge?

"He obviously has some inside information on that team and those players, as he coached them," Patriots quarterback Tom Brady said, according to the Associated Press. "I think Coach (Bill) Belichick has a pretty good idea of what he's going to want Josh to do."
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d825de8c5/article/timing-of-mcdaniels-patriots-return-calls-into-question-fairness

How much plainer does it need to be, folks? If God has EVER felt like helping Tebow out in a game, I sure hope He lays down the law on such dishonesty this time, 'cos the League sure won't.

I'm not too thrilled about the signing, but if den had grabbed an asst in the same instance, woukd we be crying foul or telling people 'hey, its not against any rules'.
I would. I know we hired Shanny after the Raiders dumped him, despite having another regular season game left against them, but that was a single fairly inconsequential regular season game. This is for a trip to the AFC Championship. On top of that, there's an established pattern of unethical dishonest behavior involving Belicheat AND McDumbass in Spygate and McDumbass AGAIN in Spygate II. Geez, how much Broncos tape do you think he has lying around his house? I mean, this is a guy with more naughty videos than most frat houses have.

Cugel, as usual you might want to get your facts straight and correct before posting. There is not a policy in the NFL prohibiting teams from hiring coaches from another team during the playoffs. A similar situation unfolded two years ago with the Dallas Cowboys. When Cowboys assistant Todd Grantham was named defensive coordinator at the University of Georgia, the Cowboys hired Paul Pasqualoni -- who had just been fired as Dolphins defensive coordinator after the 2009 season -- for the playoffs that year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/news/story?id=4828825
Yeah, and Dallas got a HUGE competitive advantage against Miami in the play--oh, right; MIAMI IS IN A DIFFERENT CONFERENCE! Dallas COULD NOT face a team Miami played earlier than a Conference Championship against New Orleans (as it happens, New Orleans won the Super Bowl, but Dallas lost in the Divisional round.) I still don't think it was kosher; Miami played ya'll and the Jets twice plus the Colts, all of whom could've faced Dallas in the Super Bowl if they got there. But they didn't go out a week before they played the Eagles and hire the guy who wrote their playbook and signed half their roster.

So all those fools that claim BB and the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper .... GET A CLUE!!!;)

:laugh:
So are you saying Brady is a fool, or that using McDumbass to get inside info on the Broncos playbook and personnel is neither cheating nor improper? 'Cos, frankly, I don't consider the Patriots or most of their fans very good authorities on what constitutes the last two; their poor grasp of each is very well documented.

You realize your guru coach just screwed off any chance of ever convincing anyone but Patriots fans they didn't cheat their way to the only Super Bowl wins in franchise history, right? That the difference between the League laughing stock the Pats were for decades and the Pats now is a solid decade of brazen cheating? That even if you go all the way now people will just say, "oh, look; New England couldn't even REACH the Super Bowl after they fired the assistant coach who got caught cheating TWICE, but now that he's back they're 'champions'"? If the Patriots win the Super Bowl now people will look at Belichick like people have looked at Gruden since he "won" a Super Bowl against a Raiders team whose playbook he wrote. Except, of course, that the Pats have already been caught cheating before, McDumbass was subsequently caught cheating the same way, and one of your ex-assistants is on record that's how you "won" your Super Bowl against the Rams.

Like I said, I don't think God really cares much about football, but He does seem to have a thing for justice, and I hope He smacks ya'll around good next week for a decade of shameless unrepentant misdeeds.

rcsodak

01-10-2012, 11:31 PM

this is the bottom line. . .

i don't give a shit about that runt josh mchoodie-- i'm a lot more concerned with who's going to cover aaron hernandez. . . .
They already used hernandez. Now itll be gronk.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

MNPatsFan

01-11-2012, 11:02 AM

Yeah, and Dallas got a HUGE competitive advantage against Miami in the play--oh, right; MIAMI IS IN A DIFFERENT CONFERENCE! Dallas COULD NOT face a team Miami played earlier than a Conference Championship against New Orleans (as it happens, New Orleans won the Super Bowl, but Dallas lost in the Divisional round.)I never said Dallas got a HUGE, or any, competitive advantage. I merely pointed out this had previously happened and there was no rule against it.

Joel, I know your realize that rules are designed to be black and white and enforced OBJECTIVELY, not subjectively, regardless of the teams involved and any alleged or perceived competitive advantages. If there is no rule against it and teams have been allowed to do it before, with or without, any alleged or perceived competitive advantages, people can't suddenly say, "Oh this is wrong and shows the Patriots are just cheating and/or engaging in improper conduct" because it involves the Patriots, who just happen to be playing the Broncos this weekend.

I still don't think it was kosher; Miami played ya'll and the Jets twice plus the Colts, all of whom could've faced Dallas in the Super Bowl if they got there. But they didn't go out a week before they played the Eagles and hire the guy who wrote their playbook and signed half their roster.You do realize that the Patriots agreed to hire McD last week before the Broncos beat the Steelers, but didn't officially announce the hire until Sunday night. Regardless of which team won between the Broncos and the Steelers, the Patriots were hiring McD to help the Patriots coaching staff the rest of this post-season as Bill O'Brien handles both his duties as OC and the new head coach of Penn State. I doubt you would be as upset about the hiring if the Steelers had beaten the Broncos.;)

Regardless of whether the Broncos beat the Steelers, I actually think it makes a lot of sense under the rules for the Patriots to bring McD on given Bill O'Brien's situation to protect against any potential issues with Bill O'Brien's focus and preparation given the multiple roles he is juggling. Not to mention that it will serve as a great transition for the Pats and McD leading into McD resuming his role as the Pats OC next season.

So are you saying Brady is a fool, or that using McDumbass to get inside info on the Broncos playbook and personnel is neither cheating nor improper? 'Cos, frankly, I don't consider the Patriots or most of their fans very good authorities on what constitutes the last two; their poor grasp of each is very well documented.I didn't see anything in the Brady quote you posted or any other Brady quotes on the various media outlets where Brady said the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper.

Let's analyze Brady's quote that you posted:

"He obviously has some inside information on that team and those players, as he coached them,"Brady is simply stating the obvious. Any one who coached on a team is going to have some inside or personal knowledge of the team and its player.

I think Coach (Bill) Belichick has a pretty good idea of what he's going to want Josh to do."Something similar to this is written or said every time BB brings in a higher profile player or a coach because BB is said to be one of the most prepared coaches in the NFL and always has a plan and purpose when he brings in a player, such as Welker or Danny Woodhead, or a coach such as McD.

Please show me where Brady said in either of the above quotes that the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper?:confused:

You realize your guru coach just screwed off any chance of ever convincing anyone but Patriots fans they didn't cheat their way to the only Super Bowl wins in franchise history, right?You can believe anything you want Joel, because this is the US of A.

That the difference between the League laughing stock the Pats were for decades and the Pats now is a solid decade of brazen cheating?.Delude yourself all you want, but the Patriots stopped being a laughing stock when Bill Parcells became the Patriots head coach and Bob Kraft purchased the team.;)

BTW, BB was hired for the 2000 season and there are no allegations of any cheating by the Pats since early Sept. 2007 when Spy Gate broke. I am not sure about the education you received, but I was taught that a decade is 10 years, not just over seven (8th season had just started).;)

So not sure how you came up with "a solid decade of brazen cheating" but you might want to either check your math or seek a refund from your educator(s).:laugh:

That even if you go all the way now people will just say, "oh, look; New England couldn't even REACH the Super Bowl after they fired the assistant coach who got caught cheating TWICE, but now that he's back they're 'champions'"?If you are talking about McD, the Patriots didn't fire him, he was hired away by the Broncos.;)

The Patriots were one of the favorites to reach the Super Bowl BEFORE they agreed to hire him back last week.

WTE

01-11-2012, 11:32 AM

Cugel, as usual you might want to get your facts straight and correct before posting. There is not a policy in the NFL prohibiting teams from hiring coaches from another team during the playoffs.
I already pointed that out to Cugel but he claimed he never said that. :laugh:

A similar situation unfolded two years ago with the Dallas Cowboys. When Cowboys assistant Todd Grantham was named defensive coordinator at the University of Georgia, the Cowboys hired Paul Pasqualoni -- who had just been fired as Dolphins defensive coordinator after the 2009 season -- for the playoffs that year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/news/story?id=4828825

So all those fools that claim BB and the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper .... GET A CLUE!!!;)

:laugh: Great find! They didn't change the rule then and they won't change it now. Funny how nobody gave a crap about Dallas doing that but when BB does it it's a national scandal.

wayninja

01-11-2012, 11:47 AM

Cugel, as usual you might want to get your facts straight and correct before posting. There is not a policy in the NFL prohibiting teams from hiring coaches from another team during the playoffs. A similar situation unfolded two years ago with the Dallas Cowboys. When Cowboys assistant Todd Grantham was named defensive coordinator at the University of Georgia, the Cowboys hired Paul Pasqualoni -- who had just been fired as Dolphins defensive coordinator after the 2009 season -- for the playoffs that year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/news/story?id=4828825

So all those fools that claim BB and the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper .... GET A CLUE!!!;)

:laugh:

Exactly. The sheer idea of the Pats doing something unethical is patently absurd. How you can you guys even think that a franchise with such an untarnished reputation for honor would deign to stoop so low as to skirt the boundaries of fair play?

It's asinine, really.

MNPatsFan

01-11-2012, 12:38 PM

Exactly. The sheer idea of the Pats doing something unethical is patently absurd. How you can you guys even think that a franchise with such an untarnished reputation for honor would deign to stoop so low as to skirt the boundaries of fair play?

It's asinine, really.We are or were talking about the Patriots hiring of Josh McD and how that was neither illegal, improper, unethical nor skirted the boundaries of fair play. Please show me your posts from several years ago saying the Cowboys hiring of Paul Pasqualoni for the playoffs that year was illegal, improper, unethical and/or skirted the boundaries of fair play. I know you can't because the Cowboys' hiring of Paul Pasqualoni for the playoffs that year wasn't illegal, improper, unethical and/or didn't skirted the boundaries of fair play and the Patriots hiring of Josh McD isn't and doesn't either.

I realize consistency and objectivity is impossible for some Broncos fans ... time and your posts will reveal whether you and/or Joel are in that group.;)

I love the irony of Broncos fans throwing stones at the Patriots and their fans for alleged unethical conduct, a tarnished reputation for honor and skirting the boundaries of fair play.:rolleyes: Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.;)

The Broncos have a tarnished reputation because they were punished twice, not once, and arguably more severely than the Patriots for unethical conduct and skirting the boundaries of fair play.:laugh:

wayninja

01-11-2012, 01:11 PM

We are or were talking about the Patriots hiring of Josh McD and how that was neither illegal, improper, unethical nor skirted the boundaries of fair play. Please show me your posts from several years ago saying the Cowboys hiring of Paul Pasqualoni for the playoffs that year was illegal, improper, unethical and/or skirted the boundaries of fair play. I know you can't because the Cowboys' hiring of Paul Pasqualoni for the playoffs that year wasn't illegal, improper, unethical and/or didn't skirted the boundaries of fair play and the Patriots hiring of Josh McD isn't and doesn't either.

There's a simpler reason. I wasn't here. Look at the join date.

I realize consistency and objectivity is impossible for some Broncos fans ... time and your posts will reveal whether you and/or Joel are in that group.;)

Not sure what you mean. I defended you and your teams spotless reputation.

I love the irony of Broncos fans throwing stones at the Patriots and their fans for alleged unethical conduct, a tarnished reputation for honor and skirting the boundaries of fair play.:rolleyes: Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.;)

You seem awfully defensive. I was agreeing with you. The patriots are above reproach.

The Broncos have a tarnished reputation because they were punished twice, not once, and arguably more severely than the Patriots for unethical conduct and skirting the boundaries of fair play.:laugh:

They were? How so?

MNPatsFan

01-11-2012, 02:25 PM

There's a simpler reason. I wasn't here. Look at the join date.Ooops, my bad because I missed that one. :lol:

Not sure what you mean. I defended you and your teams spotless reputation.

You seem awfully defensive. I was agreeing with you. The patriots are above reproach.Not sure if you actually were because your post came across as very sarcastic and mocking, but if you were then please accept my apologies for misreading your intent and post.:salute:

They were? How so?The NFL fined the Broncos over $950,000 in Sept. of 2001 and again in December of 2004 (guestimating amounts and dates off of my memory) and took away at least one draft pick from the Broncos in the 2002 and 2005 drafts for the Broncos salary cap violations during their Super Bowl winning seasons.

wayninja

01-11-2012, 02:27 PM

The NFL fined the Broncos over $950,000 in Sept. of 2001 and again in December of 2004 (guestimating amounts and dates off of my memory) and took away at least one draft pick from the Broncos in the 2002 and 2005 drafts for the Broncos salary cap violations during their Super Bowl winning seasons.

Is there anyone even indirectly involved in either of those incidents still in the Broncos organization?

Is the same true of the Patriots?

dogfish

01-11-2012, 03:08 PM

WTE

01-11-2012, 04:01 PM

PFT has a poll (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/11/league-should-close-the-mcdaniels-loophole/) up on the issue. . . 70% of 16,000 respondents think the loophole should be closed after the season-- i would imagine the competition committee will at least be looking at it. . .

How come nobody gave a shit when Dallas did the exact same thing two years ago as MNPatsFan illustrated.

If the NFL didn't change anything then why are you and your fellow Broncos fans so confident they will change it now?

VonSackemMiller

01-11-2012, 04:35 PM

this crap does not matter, teams have 16 games worth of tape on our players. if they havent figured out what we do well and dont do well then there stupid teams. mcdaniels wont matter the players have to go play the game.

wayninja

01-11-2012, 04:39 PM

How come nobody gave a shit when Dallas did the exact same thing two years ago as MNPatsFan illustrated.

Are you presuming no one at all cared, or simply that no one in Broncos forums cared? Seems like a fairly easily logic puzzle to solve.

If the NFL didn't change anything then why are you and your fellow Broncos fans so confident they will change it now?

Who said they were going to change it? Looking at anything doesn't guarantee a change. So defensive.

PAINTERDAVE

01-11-2012, 04:56 PM

Joel

01-11-2012, 06:17 PM

So my bad there; I stand by everything else.

I never said Dallas got a HUGE, or any, competitive advantage. I merely pointed out this had previously happened and there was no rule against it.

Joel, I know your realize that rules are designed to be black and white and enforced OBJECTIVELY, not subjectively, regardless of the teams involved and any alleged or perceived competitive advantages. If there is no rule against it and teams have been allowed to do it before, with or without, any alleged or perceived competitive advantages, people can't suddenly say, "Oh this is wrong and shows the Patriots are just cheating and/or engaging in improper conduct" because it involves the Patriots, who just happen to be playing the Broncos this weekend.
"There's no rule against it" is the standard tacit concession one KNOWS an action is "illegal, improper, unethical or skirted the boundaries of fair play" but won't ADMIT it. In this case, it is apparently not illegal (though I thought lateral coaching moves during the season were) but clearly improper, unethical and skirting the boundary of fair play. The only reason it didn't reek when Gruden did it to the Raiders with the Bucs is that would've had to have hatched his plot right after the both got knocked out of the playoffs, with the expectation of both of them making the next Super Bowl, and it's impossible for anyone to simultaneously be that devious AND stupid. It was bad luck for the Raiders, and makes the Bucs SB win look kinda soft, but I can't really accuse Gruden of cheating because he can't be expected to just forget everything he knew about an offense he designed; short of "recusing himself" from coaching the Super Bowl he had no good option.

It amuses me that Pats fans now insist "no harm, no foul" given how ya'll squalled when the Jets hired Belicheat away from you just to skirt the rules by making Parcells a "consultant" and avoid giving you a draft pick.

You do realize that the Patriots agreed to hire McD last week before the Broncos beat the Steelers, but didn't officially announce the hire until Sunday night. Regardless of which team won between the Broncos and the Steelers, the Patriots were hiring McD to help the Patriots coaching staff the rest of this post-season as Bill O'Brien handles both his duties as OC and the new head coach of Penn State. I doubt you would be as upset about the hiring if the Steelers had beaten the Broncos.;)
Yeah, and McDumbass didn't watch those tapes Scarnecchia made of the '49ers; he neglected to tell the NFL for a day or two for a completely different (but unknown) reason. And no one can prove otherwise. ;)

Regardless of whether the Broncos beat the Steelers, I actually think it makes a lot of sense under the rules for the Patriots to bring McD on given Bill O'Brien's situation to protect against any potential issues with Bill O'Brien's focus and preparation given the multiple roles he is juggling. Not to mention that it will serve as a great transition for the Pats and McD leading into McD resuming his role as the Pats OC next season.
Yeah, they're reunited and can bond over their tainted titles for nearly a whole year before they resume seeking more by any means necessary. It makes a lot of senses UNDER THE RULES, yes; under sportsmanship and fair play it makes none. Since McCoy's interviewing for the Jags head coaching job, maybe Denver should go find some former Cheatriot offensive coaches to "prepare" as HIS replacement. :rolleyes:

I didn't see anything in the Brady quote you posted or any other Brady quotes on the various media outlets where Brady said the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper.
He explicitly said it's "obvious" McDaniels has inside knowledge of our team (which it is, even to the Patriots starting QB.) One team exploiting such knowledge against another is improper.

Let's analyze Brady's quote that you posted:

"He obviously has some inside information on that team and those players, as he coached them,"

Brady is simply stating the obvious. Any one who coached on a team is going to have some inside or personal knowledge of the team and its player.
Right, and another team using that coaches knowledge to defeat his former team is improper.

"I think Coach (Bill) Belichick has a pretty good idea of what he's going to want Josh to do."

Something similar to this is written or said every time BB brings in a higher profile player or a coach because BB is said to be one of the most prepared coaches in the NFL and always has a plan and purpose when he brings in a player, such as Welker or Danny Woodhead, or a coach such as McD.
Something similar is said everytime ANYONE brings in a coach with an impressive resume; the differences are:

1) The statement "our coach has a pretty good idea of what he wants the new guy to do" usually isn't made right after the statement "the new guy has inside knowledge of our next opponent" and

2) McDumbass' resume consists of turning a .500 team into the second worst in the League, in just a season and a half--then doing the same thing to another one a year later.

That's "impressive," but not in a good way. The Pats offense clearly hasn't suffered from McDumbass' absence, and every team he's joined since has suffered greatly from his presence, so why does NE want him back now? Maybe because he signed and coached half our team and wrote our offensive playbook?

Please show me where Brady said in either of the above quotes that the Patriots are cheating or doing something improper?:confused:
Done: Brady said point blank that McDumbass "obviously" has inside knowledge or our team, then immediately continued by saying Belicheat "knows what he wants from McDumbass." What more do you need?

You can believe anything you want Joel, because this is the US of A.
Based on the poll numbers cited, pretty much EVERYONE but Cheatriot fans know this stinks to high heaven. Maybe if you've accepted that as "the new normal" it seems OK, but it's really not.

Delude yourself all you want, but the Patriots stopped being a laughing stock when Bill Parcells became the Patriots head coach and Bob Kraft purchased the team.;)
I dunno, the Packers were laughing pretty hard by the time that ended. It wasn't as bad as Super Bowl XX, but wasn't great. Denver, Buffalo and Minnesota fans can tell you: LOSING Super Bowls doesn't grant any legitimacy; why do you think Elway was willing to be spun like a top to BEAT the Packers?

BTW, BB was hired for the 2000 season and there are no allegations of any cheating by the Pats since early Sept. 2007 when Spy Gate broke. I am not sure about the education you received, but I was taught that a decade is 10 years, not just over seven (8th season had just started).;)

So not sure how you came up with "a solid decade of brazen cheating" but you might want to either check your math or seek a refund from your educator(s).:laugh:
Except when Spygate broke one of NEs former assistants admitted the Pats taped the Rams pre-Super Bowl practices, too. You remember the Super Bowl against the Rams? When the Patriots improbably won the teams first Championship, starting a run that produced 3 Super Bowls in 4 years? Do you realize ALL those Super Bowls (i.e. EVERY SUPER BOWL NEW ENGLAND EVER WON) are now in the same class as USCs 2004 forfeited National Championship? With McDumbass and Scarnecchia gone you actually had a chance to prove you could win one on the field instead of the editing room, but I guess Belicheat has given up on that possibility.

I'm unsure how the fact that's "only" 80% rather than 100% of a decade makes anything better, but OK: NEARLY a solid decade of cheating. Happy? For the record, I actually respected and kinda liked NE--until Spygate.

If you are talking about McD, the Patriots didn't fire him, he was hired away by the Broncos.;)

The Patriots were one of the favorites to reach the Super Bowl BEFORE they agreed to hire him back last week.
Meh, they had the top seed, but Pitt beat them in the regular season and the Ravens only blow games they know don't matter; every good team they've played (Pitt twice, SF, Houston with Schaub, Cincy) they beat handily. A lot of folks like the Pack, too, but I REALLY don't think the Super Bowl will be the WORST defence versus the SECOND worst. If it is, expect some major rules changes in the next year or two; if two teams with NO defence contest the Super Bowl, the NFL is officially arena flag football.

But, no, the Pats didn't need to cheat to win. They might not have needed to against the Rams, Panthers or Eagles. But we'll never know, will we? That's what makes it so pathetic. Between those games and the "Gruden Bowl" separating them it's a wonder the NFL has any credibilty left. The moral is Fox owes Belicheat a big payback just like the Broncos owe McDumbass, so I hope and pray they get it next week, unlikely as it seems. New England needlessly cheating its way to victory has made them the NFLs Richard Nixon.

WTE

01-11-2012, 06:46 PM

So my bad there; I stand by everything else.

"There's no rule against it" is the standard tacit concession one KNOWS an action is "illegal, improper, unethical or skirted the boundaries of fair play" but won't ADMIT it. In this case, it is apparently not illegal (though I thought lateral coaching moves during the season were) but clearly improper, unethical and skirting the boundary of fair play. The only reason it didn't reek when Gruden did it to the Raiders with the Bucs is that would've had to have hatched his plot right after the both got knocked out of the playoffs, with the expectation of both of them making the next Super Bowl, and it's impossible for anyone to simultaneously be that devious AND stupid. It was bad luck for the Raiders, and makes the Bucs SB win look kinda soft, but I can't really accuse Gruden of cheating because he can't be expected to just forget everything he knew about an offense he designed; short of "recusing himself" from coaching the Super Bowl he had no good option.

It amuses me that Pats fans now insist "no harm, no foul" given how ya'll squalled when the Jets hired Belicheat away from you just to skirt the rules by making Parcells a "consultant" and avoid giving you a draft pick.

Yeah, and McDumbass didn't watch those tapes Scarnecchia made of the '49ers; he neglected to tell the NFL for a day or two for a completely different (but unknown) reason. And no one can prove otherwise. ;)

Yeah, they're reunited and can bond over their tainted titles for nearly a whole year before they resume seeking more by any means necessary. It makes a lot of senses UNDER THE RULES, yes; under sportsmanship and fair play it makes none. Since McCoy's interviewing for the Jags head coaching job, maybe Denver should go find some former Cheatriot offensive coaches to "prepare" as HIS replacement. :rolleyes:

He explicitly said it's "obvious" McDaniels has inside knowledge of our team (which it is, even to the Patriots starting QB.) One team exploiting such knowledge against another is improper.

Right, and another team using that coaches knowledge to defeat his former team is improper.

Something similar is said everytime ANYONE brings in a coach with an impressive resume; the differences are:

1) The statement "our coach has a pretty good idea of what he wants the new guy to do" usually isn't made right after the statement "the new guy has inside knowledge of our next opponent" and

2) McDumbass' resume consists of turning a .500 team into the second worst in the League, in just a season and a half--then doing the same thing to another one a year later.

That's "impressive," but not in a good way. The Pats offense clearly hasn't suffered from McDumbass' absence, and every team he's joined since has suffered greatly from his presence, so why does NE want him back now? Maybe because he signed and coached half our team and wrote our offensive playbook?

Done: Brady said point blank that McDumbass "obviously" has inside knowledge or our team, then immediately continued by saying Belicheat "knows what he wants from McDumbass." What more do you need?

Based on the poll numbers cited, pretty much EVERYONE but Cheatriot fans know this stinks to high heaven. Maybe if you've accepted that as "the new normal" it seems OK, but it's really not.

I dunno, the Packers were laughing pretty hard by the time that ended. It wasn't as bad as Super Bowl XX, but wasn't great. Denver, Buffalo and Minnesota fans can tell you: LOSING Super Bowls doesn't grant any legitimacy; why do you think Elway was willing to be spun like a top to BEAT the Packers?

Except when Spygate broke one of NEs former assistants admitted the Pats taped the Rams pre-Super Bowl practices, too. You remember the Super Bowl against the Rams? When the Patriots improbably won the teams first Championship, starting a run that produced 3 Super Bowls in 4 years? Do you realize ALL those Super Bowls (i.e. EVERY SUPER BOWL NEW ENGLAND EVER WON) are now in the same class as USCs 2004 forfeited National Championship? With McDumbass and Scarnecchia gone you actually had a chance to prove you could win one on the field instead of the editing room, but I guess Belicheat has given up on that possibility.

I'm unsure how the fact that's "only" 80% rather than 100% of a decade makes anything better, but OK: NEARLY a solid decade of cheating. Happy? For the record, I actually respected and kinda liked NE--until Spygate.

Meh, they had the top seed, but Pitt beat them in the regular season and the Ravens only blow games they know don't matter; every good team they've played (Pitt twice, SF, Houston with Schaub, Cincy) they beat handily. A lot of folks like the Pack, too, but I REALLY don't think the Super Bowl will be the WORST defence versus the SECOND worst. If it is, expect some major rules changes in the next year or two; if two teams with NO defence contest the Super Bowl, the NFL is officially arena flag football.

But, no, the Pats didn't need to cheat to win. They might not have needed to against the Rams, Panthers or Eagles. But we'll never know, will we? That's what makes it so pathetic. Between those games and the "Gruden Bowl" separating them it's a wonder the NFL has any credibilty left. The moral is Fox owes Belicheat a big payback just like the Broncos owe McDumbass, so I hope and pray they get it next week, unlikely as it seems. New England needlessly cheating its way to victory has made them the NFLs Richard Nixon.

I just read this, before I read all that:

http://www.greenleafpress.com/catalog/images/0688062016.jpg

Medford Bronco

01-11-2012, 07:14 PM

No mcd can ruin their offense too

Seriously much adu abot nothing

Joel

01-12-2012, 05:15 AM

I just read this, before I read all that:

http://www.greenleafpress.com/catalog/images/0688062016.jpg
Are you comparing me to Chaucer? Gee, thanks. If memory serves, Canterbury Tales is also premised on act of extreme treachery. ;)

Denver Native (Carol)

01-14-2012, 01:53 PM

AdamSchefter Adam Schefter
Patriots offensive assistant Josh McDaniels will be upstairs in New England's coaching booth for tonight's game vs his former team.
1 hour ago

AdamSchefter Adam Schefter
NFL will review rule this off-season that allowed Josh McDaniels to change teams in the same season and to coach in the post-season.
2 hours ago

http://twitter.com/AdamSchefter

WTE

01-14-2012, 02:09 PM

Yesterday Heath Evans said that Eric Managini had checked out on NE after he interviewed with the Jets. Evans said that after he interviewed with NYJ Mangini spent the entire week recruiting personnel to join him in NY rather than developing a good defensive game plan to defeat Denver in the Divisional Round.

Evans said Mangini not living up to his word that he would give his best effort was the reason his relationship w/ Belichick soured, not because he joined a division rival.

I'm sure Belichick realizes that Bill O'Brien will have plenty of distractions going into this game which is one of the reasons why he wanted McDaniels to join ASAP. Why should NE be placed at such a disadvantage when they allowed O'Brien to interview for Penn St. instead of fulfilling his contractual obligations.

Did you hear about this Carol?

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/this-just-in/21169016/evans-mangini-screwed-our-team-05

Ravage!!!

01-14-2012, 02:28 PM

Why should the patriots be "penalized" is a pretty silly question, considering they chose to let a coach walk in the middle of the playoffs.

The problem is, like normal, Belicheck is setting the precident in something that has to be reviewed by the competition committee to see if they want to allow this to continue.

Will the rule change? Who knows. But the original question from the OP still holds true.... Does Belicheck hiring McDaniels now, break the SPIRIT of fair play. If it didn't raise a lot of eyebrows, then it wouldn't even be a question. Considering its Belicheck, than I think its safe to say that it definitely breaks the spirit of fair play.

WTE

01-14-2012, 02:40 PM

The problem is, like normal, Belicheck is setting the precident in something that has to be reviewed by the competition committee to see if they want to allow this to continue.

You're wrong again Ravage!!!! Belichick is not the first, he has not set the precedent. Dallas did the EXACT same thing in 2010 when the hired Paul Pasqualoni to help with their playoff drive after he finished the year as Miami's DC b/c Dallas' DC was hired to be the HC at Georgia.

You didn't hear about that Ravage!!!!??? It's been brought up multiple times in this thread.

Joel

01-14-2012, 05:01 PM

As I recall, NEs D wasn't the problem in that game, it was Tom Terrific throwing a pick at our goal line and Champ running it back to their half yard line, a 14 point play. That, and the phantom PI on the deep pass to Lelie.

Yesterday Heath Evans said that Eric Managini had checked out on NE after he interviewed with the Jets. Evans said that after he interviewed with NYJ Mangini spent the entire week recruiting personnel to join him in NY rather than developing a good defensive game plan to defeat Denver in the Divisional Round.

Evans said Mangini not living up to his word that he would give his best effort was the reason his relationship w/ Belichick soured, not because he joined a division rival.

I'm sure Belichick realizes that Bill O'Brien will have plenty of distractions going into this game which is one of the reasons why he wanted McDaniels to join ASAP. Why should NE be placed at such a disadvantage when they allowed O'Brien to interview for Penn St. instead of fulfilling his contractual obligations.

Did you hear about this Carol?

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/this-just-in/21169016/evans-mangini-screwed-our-team-05

"Listen, we were underhanded a lot in that year in a lot of ways, but we still should have beaten that Denver Broncos team and at least gotten to the AFC championship game."--Heath Evans of the '05 Patriots
Nothing like a Patriot player admitting the team is underhanded. :lol: Although a coach admitting it about a different action on a different occasion was nice, too.

Look, it's really simple: If Belicheat's worried about coaches being distracted during the playoffs, he can refuse permission to interview them. Problem solved, with no need to cheat either the spirit or letter of the rules.

Denver Native (Carol)

01-14-2012, 05:06 PM