The Specter of intelligence

Phantom.

Ghost.

Illusion.

Call it what you will, but Arlen Specter appears to be rattling a blunt saber and armed with minimal wits. According to the Associated Press, Specter...well, read it for yourself -

Specter, from Pennsylvania, cited the fact a Patriots attorney sat in on Walsh’s meeting with Goodell as proof the investigation has not been impartial.

I can't wait to hear how he'll be changing the judicial system because it's lack of impartiality due to the fact that attorneys for the accused parties are in the room when the accusers are testifying.

Dave over at the Coffin Corner has a great take on this.

Specter seems to think that a Mitchell-type investigation of the NFL over a rules violation is in order. Mind you, not something illegal like buying and taking banned substances, but over something that merely broke the NFL's rules.

He appears to imply that the investigation should be of the Patriots and how deep Spygate really went.

What I want is transparency on his part. We know what Goodell learned from Walsh. I want to know if Specter actually asked Walsh about his part in Spygate, or just how the NFL questioned Walsh. If it's the latter, then I have to conclude that Specter doesn't actually care about Spygate, but does care about doing everything in his power to make the NFL look bad and his biggest financial backer, Comcast, happy.

Here's the funny thing about Specter's request - he wants transparency? He wants fairness? Then a Mitchell-like investigation is going to blow the lid open.

No sweeping the accusations of "sound issues" in the RCA Dome under the rug with a cursory investigation.

No dismissal by the Steelers of a sideline doctor implicated in the Albany HGH investigation being the end of that issue.

No absolving and forgetting about the Jets and Broncos filming opponents - no matter how many years (Shanahan) the filming violation might be - or the Dolphins use of film, for which they were patted on their back.

Teams would need to get ready for every dirty little secret to be dragged screaming in the daylight - to see what rumors are correct, and which are just rumors. To see every little accusation of doping, sound enhancement, electronic espionage, and god only know what else, exposed to the public.

Specter's beloved Eagles wouldn't be spared. Nor would the league's "infallible" team, the Colts.

It will need to be all encompassing, and it will be brutal to the sanctimonious fans out there that believe they're rooting for teams full of saints.

No team, no team's fans are going to want this.

And from what I can tell, no senators have Specter's back regarding this issue.

Ultimately, all Specter is engaging in here is a distraction technique in an election year - a placebo to pull the minds of voters off an unpopular war entered into under false premises sold to the American people by his party, gas prices spiraling out of control, a housing market that's gone to hell in a hand-basket, and increasing unemployment numbers. It's what Bush did during the last election with the Swift Boats, it's what Specter is doing now.

It's despicable and he needs to be held accountable the way that he is saying the NFL needs to.

The Pundits' Double Standards

After the Goodell-Walsh meeting on Tuesday regarding Spy-Gate, ESPN went on the offensive...full bunker mentality.

Their NFL Today program went off full-bore talking to Chris Carter and Mark Schlereth about whether or not the punishment of the Patriots was severe enough. Both went on a tirade about how the punishment wasn't enough given what the film showed.

What the film showed was nothing more than standard coach footage inter-spliced with the coaches signals and time on the clock.

I could put that together based on television broadcasts.

Not quite the same angles, but I could still get formations, personnel packages, clock time, and coaching signals from the various networks. If I wanted end-zone angles, I could easily create a computer generated model for that would show me the same play from other angles.

Carter and Schlereth both condescended to the fans, saying that the untrained eye wouldn't understand the advantage a team could gain from this.

I watched.

What I saw, like I said, was film that would give me pretty much what i would get from a standard coach's film combined with the notes that are typically garnered from the non-electronic spying that the teams engage in all the time.

As for Schlereth's rhetoric - Noted at profootballtalk.com:

Indeed, let’s consider this quote from Schlereth, which he offered up on ESPN Radio on Tuesday afternoon: “This besmirches to the organization to the point where regardless of how you look at these three championships that they’ve won over the last seven, eight years you will still always look at them and say ‘Yeah, but . . . they had this Spygate thing, how much of it was inappropriate, how much cheating went on, and how much did it help them during the course of some of those games?”

I thought him talking about how the Patriots' dynasty would always be tainted was a bit disingenuous considering he earned two of his Super Bowl rings for a Broncos squad that was not only caught filming opponents, but was in violation of the salary cap by close to $30 million in both of the Super Bowl seasons. If he thinks the Pats' punishment wasn't severe enough for filming, I'd love to hear what he thinks the penalty should be for his Broncos that were guilty of the same violation and an additional one that was meant to give the team a competitive edge.

Considering the cap in 1998 was $52.4 million in 1998, that means that the Broncos were over the cap by almost 60 percent. SIXTY PERCENT! What buys you a bigger advantage? A coaching tape with hand signals, or the fact that you don't have to cut players that know the system inside and out and replace them with younger players unfamiliar with the system because your team is paying 157 percent of what every other team is paying their players? The Broncos claimed that there was no competitive advantage in the $29 million "accounting gaffe" that largely involved John Elway and Terrell Davis' contracts. But the league fined them $950 thousand and a third round draft pick back in 2004 for the violations in the late 1990's.

As I rant here, I think it's important to note that ESPN has worked hard to destroy its own journalistic credibility with things like the Barry Bonds love-in last season. Right now the ESPN pundits are putting forth the "if it didn't give the team that much of an advantage then why did they do it" line in their attacks on the Patriots. Why then did the Broncos put forth contracts with hidden deferred monies to their stars in the years in question if it didn't help them?

On ESPN's second face, last year the likes of Buster Olney and Jayson Stark repeatedly fawned over Bonds, argued that they would vote for him first ballot because, "it was just the era, and everyone else was doing it." Supporters like to point out that he hasn't failed a test, the cheating is alleged. They don't like to be countered with the fact that Bonds hasn't disputed a single fact in Game of Shadows. The man's a cheater, admitted to a grand jury. Get over it now.

Today, the station that was ramming Barry Bonds down our throats all last year, calling Roger Clemens the best pitcher ever, and pretty much exonerated Andy Pettitte because he came clean after getting caught, is expressing moral outrage at the actions of the Patriots. Actions that, anyone that can do a little Internet research can find, were perpetrated by Eric Mangini's Jets, the aforementioned Broncos, and even the Miami Dolphins (does it not count if they purchased the tape? It ends up as the same result).

Are the reporters being told by the producers not to dig?

It would make sense, given the moral outrage at the Patriots 52-7 pasting of the Redskins last season. Everybody was talking about winning games like that demanded payback, and that losing teams, losing coaches don't forget about losses like that. It was funny how none of the network or newspaper research departments turned up the one previous meeting between teams coached by Bill Belichick and Joe Gibbs. The Redskins put a 42-17 thrashing on Belichick's Browns in 1991. Yeah, the loser of a blowout remembered. And yeah, payback was a bitch.

I could be wrong, but it certainly seems like the the national outlets are going out of their way to demonize the Patriots. They did something wrong. They got caught. They were punished. Get over it people.

Was it worse than the salary cap violations of the Broncos? No, but there was nowhere near this much outrage. Maybe because by the time it hit for the Broncos, they were six years removed from being any good.

Was it worse than Zach Thomas admitting the 'Phins got the Pats' O-line calls and audibles from a tape the team "bought"? No. But the Dolphins were patted on their back for their ingenuity...maybe because it was one of only six wins Miami had all season.

Was it worse than the Jets taping from the Gillette end zone? No, but the Jets were off to one of the worst starts in football, which developed into a grim season, when they copped to their actions.

Only the Patriots were winning when it happened.

Only the Patriots continue to get vitriol.

But they're not alone in their actions.

For a good read on the subject, check out the commentary at PFT.

Everybody Loves a Winner

Is a crock.

The fans of a winner? Yeah. Bandwagon jumpers? Yeah. Fans of other teams? Not so much.

The more a team wins, the more others hate the team. Dominant teams get singled out for their faults, often in spite of the fact that there are things they do, or did, that are little different than the actions of the other teams.

Red Sox fans don't have a monopoly on loathing the Yankees. When the Mitchell Report hit there were a number of fans that were quick to point out that the Yankees Dynasty of the late Nineties was peppered from top to bottom with individuals named in the report. In the mid-1990's people reveled in the legal troubles of the various Dallas Cowboys.

That is precisely the reason why the Patriots are being singled out - and make no mistake about it - they are being singled out. Try to find out from Arlen Specter why he's making a big deal out of Spygate? Why he's continuing to do so, when everyone else seems to feel that it's a dead issue? Why the Patriots (who beat his Eagles in a Super Bowl) when no one has heard word one from him over -

• Allegations in recent years that both the Colts and the Redskins artificially enhance the crowd noise at their stadiums - a violation of NFL rules, if they are indeed doing so?
• An admission by the Dolphins' then middle linebacker Zack Thomas, after a 2006 21-0 victory over the Patriots, that the 'Phins stole the Patriots' offensive signals from tape?
• Why a team (the Broncos) that won the Super Bowl twice while in violation of the salary cap by almost $30 million over the two seasons, wasn't more severely sanctioned?
• Why that same team, caught taping an opponent's practice mid-week, once again, wasn't more severely sanctioned?
• Why the Jets admitted to taping the Patriots, but received no punishment for doing so?
• The 49ers weren't sanctioned more severely for their salary cap violations of the late 1990's?
• Why more teams aren't sanctioned for tampering when signing players from other teams mere minutes after free-agency begins? Who manages to negotiate and agree to terms in mere minutes with contracts that often exceed 100 pages?

And all of this is just the recent history stuff. An article in the San Diego newspaper from when Spygate hit, outlines some of the things that went on in the 1960's and 70's with the Raiders and somethings even more recently with the Bucs in regards to stealing plays and signals.

All told, the Patriots, Jets, Dolphins, and Broncos have been caught or copped to taping, or having tape of opponent's signals. The Raiders, and Buccaneers have either stolen signals, been suspected of it. And all teams must suspect other teams of doing so, or coaches wouldn't cover their mouths when relaying in signals. That's almost 20 percent of the league. Yet the Patriots are singled out by Specter..why? Because he wants to clean up the game? No.

Because of two things and two things only. It makes him feel better about the fact his team lost to be able to call the other team cheaters, and his biggest campaign contributor is Comcast, currently locked in a legal battle with the NFL in regards to the NFL network.

The Patriots cheated. But they did no more than any one of a number of teams.

And anyone that believes otherwise is being willfully ignorant of what goes on in the NFL.

Quick thoughts

Meant to mention this the other day. A big shout-out to Joe Andruzzi who recently got the news that he is now cancer-free. Less than a year ago the former Patriots offensive lineman was diagnosed with a particularly aggressive form of lymphoma.

With everything else that has happened in New England sports this last year - World Series Championship, undefeated regular season, best record in the NBA, an Ivy League football championship, a college bowl bid after flirting with being the number one team in the nation - this might be the best news. It's not going to cause the euphoria with the fans that, say a Celtics Championship will. But Andruzzi healthy again...that's great news.

Starting rotation

Sixteen of the Red Sox 23 wins have come from the starting rotation (well, the regular starting five of Matsuzaka, Beckett, Wakefield, Lester, and Buchholz).

The Dice-man is leading the way with five wins and a 2.43 ERA.

Wake is second in ERA with a 3.33, and third in wins with three.

Beckett is at four wins and 3.70, Lester two and 3.94, and Clay at two and the only ERA over four at 4.50.

By comparison, Baltimore has had seven pitchers with at least two starts. Of the five with a minimum of four starts, there are eight wins between them and only two with ERA's below four, with another two with ERA's over seven. The Rays have 13 wins from their starting five, but only one starter with a sub-four ERA. Like the Sox, the Blue Jays have 16 wins from their starting five, but have two pitchers with ERA's over four, including AJ Burnett's 5.19 ERA. The Yankees have been slightly better than the Rays with their starting five, getting 14 wins from them, but they've had three guys with ERA's over four, and none below three. Two of their starters (one now back in the minors, and the other on the disabled list) have ERA's over eight.

If these ERA numbers stay fairly consistent, it's only a matter of time before the Sox starters separate from the pack.

"I know the writer and I think very highly of him"

-Bob Ryan on John Tomase, Friday morning appearing on Mike & Mike in the Morning

Ryan wasn't excusing the whole Spygate thing. He was explaining how writers roll the dice whenever relying on unnamed sources.

The Herald is already feeling enough negative feedback that they have deactivated the comments sections following Tomase's articles due to the shots being taken by Herald readers in those forums. Without the direct route to Tomase, readers displeased with the Herald and Tomase have begun voicing their displeasure in the comments attached to other writers.

Regardless of how good Tomase may or may not have been in the past, if he cannot produce something tangible to back his story, his career as a Patriots beat writer might as well be over. I would be shocked if his access to Patriots events weren't extremely limited.

Backs to the wall...

Down two games to none with one of the worst two-game shooting stretches in playoff history coming from their star, the Cleveland Cavaliers have their backs to the wall. The question out there is - what did the Celtics learn from their struggles in Atlanta in the first round?

I would be surprised if LeBron James had a third stinker in a row.

That said, it's interesting to note that the C's strategy in this playoff series has been - we're gonna stop LeBron. If the rest of the Cavs can beat us, then so be it, but we don't think they can.

Anti-climax

The Sox spit the bit against the Tigers...well, Julio Lugo did, and to some extent, so too did Papelbon. While the lion's share of the blame rests with Lugo's error, Pap's cannot be held blameless. Lugo's error was not responsible for the men on base who crossed the plate. Pap's was.

By the same token, maybe the Sox get out of Detroit with a 9-8 win instead of a 10-9 loss if Lugo doesn't screw up at a crucial moment.

White-Walshed...

Former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh is turning over eight tapes. None, reportedly, are a taping of the Rams practice before the 2001 Super Bowl.

The most interesting item that came up was the denial issued by Walsh's lawyer -

"Mr. Walsh has never claimed to have a tape of the walkthrough," Levy told The New York Times. "Mr. Walsh has never been the source of any of the media speculation about such a tape. Mr. Walsh was not the source for the Feb. 2 Boston Herald article."

From the Herald -

“Mr. Walsh has never been the source of any of the media speculation about such a tape,” Levy added. “Mr. Walsh was not the source for the Feb. 2 Boston Herald article.”

He might not have been the original source, but he didn't, until now, deny having a tape of the walk through. And he certainly fueled the story with intimations that he knew more than what was previously disclosed and that he had evidence in his possession that was damning to the Patriots.

This raises any one of a number of potential questions -

• Does said tape really exist?
• If so, who has it?
• Why did Walsh wait until now to issue the denial?
• Did Walsh really tape a Rams practice (the lawyer didn't actually deny that)?
• If he did and claims in his meeting with Roger Goodell, without the evidence of said taping, what is Goodell's recourse? What's Walsh's credibility?
• Where do the Patriots go from here (in regards to the Herald story)?
• What is the Herald's recourse in regards to their "unnamed source"?

Let's face it, here are some of the scenarios that could still play themselves out -

• The Patriots, fearing the report was indeed accurate, rattles their sabers and then let's the story die out.
• The Kraft Family sues the pants off the Boston Herald. The Herald saves face, and redirects the Pats' ire by doing the only thing available to them - naming the source.
• The Herald issues an apology to the Patriots, and performs its own investigation into John Tomase's story and the source.

Now, the really interesting thing to note, Chris Mortensen of ESPN mentioned that a number of media outlets, including ESPN, pursued these allegations for months before the Boston Herald reported on it,"and it just didn't meet the standard in terms of" reporting the story.

For many this was expected to resolve the whole Spygate thing. For some, they will lock onto the lawyer-speak and believe, no matter what evidence to the contrary comes out, that the Pats taped the Rams' walkthrough. For others, this won't be done until the situation with the Boston Herald resolves itself.

Still a long way from a climax.

The righteous and the wicked

As fans we are typically raised in our own particular denomination - Sox, Yankees, Colts, Penguins. Sometimes it's because of family, sometimes it's regional.

We've been raised to believe that there is something pure and good about sports.

The character of Terrence Mann in Field of Dreams concludes his keynote speech with, "And they'll watch the game and it'll be as if they dipped themselves in magic waters. The memories will be so thick they'll have to brush them away from their faces. People will come Ray. The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It has been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game: it's a part of our past, Ray. It reminds of us of all that once was good and it could be again. Oh... people will come Ray. People will most definitely come."

The fact is, people that play sports - and I'm not talking about those of us that play pick-up games of basketball on Saturdays, or in softball leagues after work - no, those that were competitive enough to be in that handful of players to ever make it to the majors, the coaches, the trainers, these people are some of the most competitive people in the world.

They look for edges, often going out of the bounds allowed by their sport, sometimes venturing into the outright illegal. And this is not limited to American athletes or coaches.

Look at Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, Barry Bonds, Bjarne Riss, Roger Clemens, and Lyle Alzado to name a few. By all reports, these people are the ones who looked for shortcuts, looked for the edge that going outside the bounds of the rules of their sport, and sometimes the laws of their country.

If you doubt how competitive these people are, consider that Pete Rose ended the career of a catcher in an All-Star game. A game that didn't even count.

The history of professional sports is a history of cheating and controversy, as much as we would like to convince ourselves otherwise, as often as we try to convince ourselves otherwise, the fact remains that there is nothing clean about pro sports.

The Patriots have Spygate, the Chicago White Sox will always have the Black Sox Scandal, the Packers and Lions will always each have a highly regarded player (historically speaking) in the 1960's who were both suspended for a season for gambling on the game. The Reds will always have Pete Rose, and Rose will always carry the stigma of betting on baseball.

Questions will always dog Floyd Landis and Lance Armstrong. There will always be questions regarding the timing of Martina Hingis and the timing of her retirement in regards to an alleged positive test for cocaine, violating the WTA's drug policy.

In spite of mounds of incontrivertible evidence that pro sports is rife with cheating, we, as fans, get indignant over the fact that an opposing team cheated to win. We yell cheater(!) and point fingers, and try to claim the team that is the subject of our affections in a given sport is on some sort of moral high ground.

As a Red Sox fan, I always felt, from a public standpoint, that the Sox and the fan base lost the moral high ground on the steroid issue back in the mid 1990's when they added Jose Canseco to the roster. I felt it then, I feel it now.

Owners hold cities hostage, favorite players bail in favor of better money elsewhere, officials get nailed in gambling scandals. But we keep coming back, and we defend our teams with the rabid, one-mindedness of a pitbull. We are Crusaders for the Patriots, Giants, or Eagles.

Sometimes we are misguided in our attacks, sometimes because of misrepresentation by the press, sometimes because we are going to impress our preconceived notions upon a team we don't like, and have no desire for the making a judgment based on the facts. It is a religion, like all religions, based on faith and emotion.

And like religion, the government has no place in the games, unless the governing bodies of the games turn their heads and look the other way when federal and state laws are violated. For those of you who do, think about it this way - hypothetically, you own a contracting firm and are a member of your local chamber of commerce. You cut corners by setting studs two inches farther apart in your building than you are supposed to. Arlen Specter calls for an investigation into your business practices by Congress and compares your violation of building standards to illegal practices by the CIA. Anyone else sense the incongruity?

As for the Anti-trust Exemption that people claim give him the right. Let them remove it. See how football suffers. If football looses the exemption, then the draft goes away. The exemption is what allows the NFL to tell a player coming out of college that the Bills, or the Raiders, or the Panthers own a player's rights for a year. That goes away and the teams with the best profit margins - the Patriots, the Redskins, the Cowboys, and large market teams like the Giants are the only ones that can get the best talent coming out of college. Football becomes baseball.

Teams like Buffalo, Green Bay, Tampa Bay, Tennessee...they might as well kiss their collective futures goodbye.

As for Specter...this is a joke. His impartiality is questionable, at best, considering he's an Eagles fan and is pretty much tailoring his inquiry to the Eagle's Super Bowl loss to the Patriots, and his second largest contributor during the last election was Comcast, one of the companies locked in the legal dispute with the NFL over the NFL Network. He comes off more as a fan pissed about his team losing a championship than as an official trying to protect the integrity of the game.

And as a fan, he's wielding the cudgel that he he has - the Anti-trust Exemption - in a matter that was already handled in-house, as it should have been.

As for his claim that the NFL might need the evidence it destroyed at a different time, this isn't a court of law, nothing illegal was done. What need is there to hang on to evidence that had already leaked to the press to the embarrassment of the NFL? Specter is mistaking an in-house issue for something of the severity of baseball's steroid scandal, which did indeed violate federal law.

And people wonder why the Republican Party took a beating in the last election.

As fans, sometimes we need to temper our emotions. Sometimes we need to do a little footwork on our own, and not completely trust the media - they are, after all, in the business of selling papers and advertising. It behooves them to present stories in a way that will allow them the largest possible circulation. It's why the headlines were, "Pat's caught stealing signals," rather than, "Pat's caught putting together game film from forbidden location."

Presenting the story as taping from a location not allowed, but that stealing signals is...just not a sexy story.

It's why we'll never know what really happened with Terrell Owens just before the beginning of the season, but "attempted suicide" sells papers.

Sure, in our judicial system everyone is accorded the benefit of the doubt - innocent until proven guilty. But that's not the way the court of public opinion works.

For the detractors of the Patriots, this season will always be tainted - in spite of the fact that they were probably the most scrutinized team in the league this year, that the film was confiscated before the end of the first quarter of the first game and the NFL said that there was no way that the film could have been used, that nothing else untoward happened during the season. Those same people will always doubt the validity the 2001 win over the Rams due to unsubstantiated rumors that the Patriots taped the Rams' walk-through the day before. It's the nature of being a fan who doesn't like a team, or who resents a team.

But it remains the same for other teams that this happened to - the Yankees of the late 1990's will, in many people's heads, always have the taint of a large number of steroid users on that club. For some, it will always be remembered that the 1972 Dolphins were without a first round draft pick due to a penalty levied for tampering with a coach (Shula) who was still under contract with another team.

The instances of cheating and impropriety in sports are legion. And anyone who thinks they root for a team that's innocent, well they're just kidding themselves.

Mythology

It's amazing, the difference between fact and fiction in professional sports. That which is accepted as fact, often by the apologists or those looking to bolster their own arguments in an effort to make a player, coach, or organization look either better or worse. Sometimes the myth is true...or more accurately, the truth is so wild or great that it becomes mythic - the Immaculate Reception, Carlton Fisk's home run in game six of the 1975 World Series, Kirk Gibson, the 1980 Olympic American ice hockey team, and so on. Sometimes it becomes difficult to separate myth from fact.

Let's take a shot at a couple of the big myths floating around professional sports today...

Myth - Bill Belichick was fined $500,0000.00 for filming the Jets' signals. The knock, among fans of other teams, is that Belichick cheated by stealing signals.

Fact - Belichick was fined for filming from the sideline, the fact that he was shooting the defensive signals was incidental. According to the following report from when the story broke -

From reports when the story broke -

As part of the league's investigation, Goodell determined the filming of Jets coaches had no impact on the outcome of the game. Goodell also ruled that Robert Kraft and Patriots ownership were unaware of the filming...The NFL's rules state that "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game" and that all video shooting locations for coaching purposes "must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

In a memo to NFL head coaches and general managers on Sept. 6, 2006, NFL executive vice president of football operations Ray Anderson wrote: "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."

So...according to the NFL, the issue had nothing to do with them taping signals, and everything to do with where they taped from. According to this, any team can film its opponent's signals as long as the filming location is not accessible during the game - like, say, one of the skyboxes, which is enclosed on all sides with a picture window facing the field.

Myth - "Steroids don't help you hit the ball." This is the favorite defense of Bonds apologists who first will argue that he never used (he did, he admitted it, get it through your thick skulls) and even if he did...(see statement above)...

Fact - No, the performance enhancers largely don't help a person with their natural ability to hit the ball, but they do, in the end, help a batter hit...

To wit, steroids and other performance enhancers in baseball are used in order to recover faster from games, double headers, and other workouts. They also make the player stronger.

Increased strength and faster recovery time results in the following -

• Balls hit harder, thus, the ball travels both farther and faster. Balls dying on the warning track get deposited three rows behind the outfield wall. Balls barely reached by the middle infielder in the hole get by for hits.
• The player using these drugs is fresher at the end of a ten game stretch than the one not using, thus allowing the user to turn on a ball, with the greater likelihood of putting it into play than the tired opponent whose timing might be off enough to make his swing result in a foul ball or strike, instead of a hit. Hmmm...help hitting the ball. Who would've thought. Oh, right, the ball players injecting themselves with steroids.
• Balls get thrown harder by power pitchers losing their power

Myth - Baseball didn't even have a rule banning steroids in 1998.

Fact - MLB had a rule passed in 1971. According to the Mitchell Report a drug policy was written in MLB that prohibits using any prescription medicine without a prescription. From all reports, virtually none of the players named for use of either steroids or HGH had a prescription from a doctor. And those that did had their prescription from less than reputable doctors (see Paul Bird).

So, based on this 1971 rule, steroid and HGH users were in violation of MLB's rules and regulations, and use of those substances, in essence, has been against baseball's rules for the last 26 years.

Then in 1991, just to be safe, then commissioner Fay Vincent added steroids to the prohibited substance list.

Myth - The offensive coordinator of a record setting offense will make for a great head coach.

Fact - Right now 31-year old Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniel is generating interest from both the Falcons and the Ravens for their head coaching vacancies. Recent jumps from record setting coordinator to head coach have included Mike Martz and Brian Billick.

While it can be debated as to how successful Billick was, winning a Super Bowl and making multiple playoffs, one thing is certain - Billick was brought to a Ravens team that already had a solid defense, with the purpose of putting together a championship caliber offense. His offenses, over his nine years with the Ravens, have averaged 23rd. Only twice in the Ravens last six seasons have the Ravens achieved at least ten wins and the playoffs.

He inherited a team that had an improving defense, a slowly improving record, and an opportunity to build the offense he wanted. The offensive guru has been so good at identifying the talent he needed at key positions that he had 12 different quarterbacks start for him during his nine seasons at the helm.

Mike Martz won a Super Bowl ring running the Greatest Show on Turf for Dick Vermeil. Without Vermeil's tempering hand, Martz eventually went pass-happy, let the defense deteriorate, and the team's record eventually suffered in subsequent years.

Under Vermeil, during his last season at the helm, the Rams ranked 4th in points allowed on defense. Under Martz in the first year, 31st. Over the five full seasons at the helm, his defenses finished an average of 17th in points allowed and was fired in a year that the team was again 31st.

Gaudy numbers get you noticed, and there is success to be had with these coaches, but the numbers in a record setting season sets the bar impossibly high. Billick's offense in Minnesota was fueled by a young Randy Moss, just as McDaniels' offense in New England is fueled by Moss.

What is the likelihood that McDaniels will be the solution in Baltimore when they have a scouting office that can't identify a pro-ready quarterback on the collegiate level, or a veteran that still has some gas left in the tank?

Double Standards

The Jets were absolved by any wrong doing by the commissioner's office this past week in regards to their taping at Gillette Stadium last year during the playoffs based on the claim by the Jets that they had permission to film from the mezzanine in the Patriots' home field. I'm puzzled by a number of questions this brings up.

If the Jets employee had permission, what is the proof that was provided to NFL offices? I think, based on the penalties meted out to the Patriots for Belichick's transgressions, the NFL owes that to the Patriot fan base.

If said employee had permission, was he wearing the proper vest and credentials that are issued to...well..credentialled personnel?

Even if the Jets were given permission, is the NFL then saying that team permission supersedes league rules? Consider the following reported by New York Newsday -

NFL rules state "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." They also say all video for coaching .purposes must be shot from locations "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

Last time I checked, the location the Jets noted that they were filming from was not "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead." At least it wasn't unless the Jets set up in one of the stadium's snack stands on the mezzanine (assuming there's one with a view of the field).

Herein lies my problem with this - the Jets admitted filming. They publicly admitted filming from a location from which they are not allowed to film. The NFL essentially said, "that's okay because (you said) you got permission." To me, this is like a team going into a game, and then repeatedly committing personal fouls with the referees letting the team get away with it, because the team committing the fouls told the refs they had been given permission by the other team to commit said fouls.

The NFL either has to mete out discipline evenly for this, or the league needs to revisit the rule.

But this uneven application brings me to a baseball point.

As I have noted before, there are a number of baseball writers, including ESPN's Buster Olney, who say that they will continue to vote for the likes of Mark MacGwire, Barry Bonds, and Roger Clemens for entry into the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. The excuse put forth by these writers is, "well, it's just the era they played in, and these were the best in that era."

These are the same people that want to keep Pete Rose as a pariah "in the best interests in baseball." The same people that keep Jim Rice out of the Hall because, in some eyes, his numbers aren't good enough - in spite of the fact that, without steroids, he has considerably better numbers than MacGwire in every offensive category except for homeruns. And, possibly most importantly, these are the same people who won't vote Jose Canseco in due to his steroid use.

The hypocrisy of the BBWA is palpable in the Hall of Fame voting.

There are even those writers, and many fans that like to point out that baseball in many of those years had no rule against steroid use. This is, I think, the most laughable justification. Possession and use of steroids without a prescription is a federal crime. The argument that baseball had no rule governing it is akin to employees of an Edward Jones Financial franchise flouting the federal laws enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), because Edward Jones corporate had no written policies dictating the same as the SEC.

In the case of the Edward Jones employee, that person would first lose his or her job, and then that person would go to jail for violation of federal law. Baseball players appeal to an arbitrator and keep their jobs in spite of violating federal statute. Nice double standard.

And this from a New York paper...

This

is

delicious...

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/jets/ny-spjets1212,0,3978329.story

It has been confirmed that the Jets were taping in Gillette last season. The Jets claimed they were doing so with the permission of the league and the Patriots.

The league has no knowledge of the incident, or at least it has been reported that the league was unaware of it.

The Patriots removed the Jets employee from the stadium. Interesting definition of "permission" the Jets must have.

The line from Newsday - "Tuesday night the Jets admitted that they did videotape the game and their employee was confronted, but said they had permission from the Patriots to film from that location."

Once again, I ask, if they had permission to film from there, then why was the Jets employee removed?

I think this reaction from New York Newsday's response page sums it up best -

"So, the JETS catch the PATS videotaping and inform the league. The PATS catch the JETS and don't tell anyone, just remove the guy? If that's the case, it really makes Mangini seem low. Was it the game we won? Maybe that's the reason we won 10 last year and stink this year. After ratting on the PATS, the JETS stopped also.
"Great.
"It just gets better. "

-Frank, East Brunswick, NJ.
East Brunswick, NJ

Cheating and fan hypocrisy

With the Patriots due to play the 3-10 New York Jets on Sunday, a lot is going to resurface in regards to Camera-gate, Tape-gate, Spy-gate, or whatever you want to call it. In the wake of every game, some fan of some team puts their foot in their mouth and wants to yell about the Patriots as cheaters.

I have not denied that the Pats were caught doing something they weren't supposed to be doing, nor would I. The irony of it is that the problem was that they were filming from the sideline. If they had done it from the coaches' booth, it wouldn't have been considered cheating (a stupid loophole, but a loophole none the less).

I would, however, point out to the Eagles fans, Steelers fans, Rams fans, and other groups that complain that the Patriots championships deserve an asterisk that, while the league frowned on the practice, the sideline camera wasn't officially outlawed by the NFL until this season. The Pats kept doing it. They got caught in the first half of the first quarter of the first game of the season.

They were nailed with an unprecedented punishment.

So it goes.

For those fans who want to continue this holier than thou farce, I give you the following -

2006-2007 Pittsburgh Steelers - in the spring, one of the team's game-day sideline doctors was fingered by a federal investigation into illegal distribution of HGh by one of Florida's anti-aging clinics. Despite claims by the doctor that the hormone was used for elderly patients, the Steelers dismissed the doctor. Considering he purchased through illegal channels, his claims come off as somewhat disingenuous.

2007 New York Jets - Accused of emulating the snap count on defense in a game against the Baltimore Ravens, a personal foul that should have resulted in at least one, if not multiple personal fouls for unsportsmanlike conduct, had the officiating crew noticed.

1998-2007 Indianapolis Colts - Repeatedly accused by opponents, including the Steelers, Jaguars, and Patriots (among others), of piping in crowd noise. In spite of the fact that the NFL absolved the team of wrong-doing in the most recent incident, rumors abound that a stadium employee has acknowledged the team's cheating.

2007 Washington Redskins - Multiple Redskins fans have blogged this season that the Skins are piping crowd noise into FedEx field. The claims are being made by people who claim to be attending the games and sitting under the speakers.

2007 Green Bay Packers - Still currently under investigation by the NFL for reports of defensive players offering "bounties." League rules prohibit teams and players "from offering or accepting bonuses to a player for his or his team's performance against a particular team, a particular opposing player or players, or a particular group of an opposing team."

2007 Dallas Cowboys - In mid-November a trainer from Plano, TX plead guilty to possession of illegal steroids. The man provided federal investigators names of FORMER and CURRENT Cowboys whom he claims to have supplied with performance enhancing drugs.

2007 New York Giants - Have faced recent allegations that certain coaching decisions have been dictated by the Las Vegas point spread. Granted, this is speculation based on Big Blue's recent game against the Bears, however, if the Vegas point spread is indeed dictating coaching decisions and proof can be found to back this allegation, this could be a bigger scandal than the NBA ref incident.

Those are just the ones that hit the fan in the last twelve months - but are the fans of the following clubs ready to give up NFC Championships, AFC Championships, and even Super Bowl wins for the following?

1997 San Francisco 49ers - According to ESPN, "Carmen Policy made secret side deals with Young and three other players to clear out some cap room for the team. This, too, crossed the boundaries, and it came to the attention of the NFL Management Council, an ownership committee.
"After hearing Policy's protestations of innocence, Jerry Jones reportedly asked fellow committee members, 'How many of us believe what he said?'
"The 49ers eventually reached a settlement with the league, which docked the club two draft picks and assessed fines against Policy and general manager Dwight Clark."

1996-1998 Denver Broncos - Found to be in violation of multiple salary cap issues, were fined $950,000.00 and a third round draft pick in the third round of the 2005 draft by the less strict Paul Tagliabue. During that same time period, Broncos coach Mike Shanahan was caught filming (gasp! Not filming!) a Chargers practice...during the week...from a hill overlooking San Diego's practice facility.

1999 DenverBroncos/1998 Miami Dolphins - According to an article at ESPN..."In an interview published in the September 1999 issue of Muscular Development magazine, Conte said BALCO had 'provided testing and consultation for over 250 NFL players, including the entire Denver Broncos Super Bowl championship team, as well the entire Miami Dolphins team.'
"A Broncos spokesman told the Chronicle that the team was never a client of BALCO's and that any players who used the company did so on their own. Dolphins strength and conditioning coach John Gamble said that in 1998 Conte tested all of the Dolphins players for mineral deficiencies and that he subsequently sent supplements to counteract those deficiencies. Gamble said, though, that he did not believe Conte was paid for his services."

That's eleven teams (including the Pats) over the course of the last decade against which serious allegations were made, or were outright caught. Eight within the last year alone. And that was just based on a cursory search on a handful of teams.

I didn't include recent allegations by Shawn Merriman that Jeff Fischer "ordered a hit," this past weekend for three reasons - one; the blocks he's complaining about were clean and legal. Two; he's a whiner. Three; he was nailed for steroid use and hasn't exactly been the force he was since getting nailed.

I am by no means condoning what the Patriots coaching staff did earlier this season. To the contrary, I think it was mind-bogglingly stupid and unnecessary. They got caught, they got punished - and they should have been punished.

My point here is different.

My point is that the sanctimonious fans of other teams need to get off their high horse. I have no problem with those fans screaming about the Pats cheating, as long as those fans are acknowledging that their own team isn't a group of saints either...well, except of course for the Saints fans...but you get what I mean.

There is no such thing as an innocent team, there are only the ones that haven't been caught yet - and if you don't believe that with millions of dollars on the line in coaching contracts, player contract, endorsement deals, and various bonuses are going to prompt the most competitive people in our society to cheat, then you are truly among the most naive in society. Remember, part of the idea behind cheating is to not get caught.

For those who scream, "what does this teach the children," it teaches them that professional sports is a cold, hard business in which winning is the bottom line. If these people are using professional athletes as roll models for their children, well they're just morons.

Cheating in professional sports is a long standing tradition - from Ty Cobb sharpening his spikes and sliding with his feet high in order to cleat an opponent's shins, to Todd Bertuzzi's ordered hit on ice, to NASCAR pit crews making alterations to cars that violate NASCAR's rules, every sport, every team has a dark side to it's history that it doesn't want to see dredged into the light.

The White Sox have, arguably, the darkest story in all professional sports being the centerpiece of the 1919 Black Sox Scandal. Rumors abound that the 1970's Steelers, one of the most dominant teams in the NFL during the Super Bowl Era, were practically pioneers in the use of steroids (note, I did say rumors, although at least one Steelers lineman from the 1979 team came forward in 2000 to talk about his steroid use). Baseball Hall-of-Famer Gaylord Perry admitted to throwing the spitball. In 1963 the NFL suspended Packer Paul Hornung and Lion Alex Karras for gambling.

If you have a big problem with cheating, then give up on professional sports. If you want to believe that what each of these teams is doing creates an uneven playing field (which all of this is intended to do), then maybe it's time for you to walk away from the games. If you're looking for a villain because you need a bad guy - that's fine too, but admit, at least to yourself that's what you're doing. But don't pretend that there's a team out there that isn't doing everything it can in order to get an edge.

On another note -

The weighing in - 185, down 3.5 from my start weight last week.