]
13.09.2007, 18:11
Auf der inzwischen von vielen geachteten profootballtalk.com wird auch die Rolle von Tom Brady im Spionagefall der Patriots kommentiert. Wie ich finde sehr interessant:
IS BRADY TARNISHED, TOO?
At the risk of inviting another 500 or so e-mails, we need to address a twist to this whole Patriots Act ordeal that we have yet to tackle, but that we have been pondering for the past 36 hours or so.
Do the revelations of stolen defensive signals diminish the reputation and perceived abilities of quarterback Tom Brady?
If the goal of the brazenly overt operations was to help the team know the tactics that an opposing defense would employ on a given play (either on game day or the next time the two teams met), the player squarely in the eye of the storm of information was Brady. And, surely, he knew (or at least suspected) that the intelligence that the offensive coaches had about what a given defense might be doing didn't come from legitimate methods.
So, as an industry source posed the question to us this morning, what did Brady know, and when did he know it?
Unless and until Brady comes clean with a full and frank -- and credible -- explanation about his first-hand experiences, it fairly can be presumed that his legend has been fueled by the advantage derived from the actions for which the Patriots undoubtedly will be punished, as soon as Friday.
How many times has Brady come up with a key play late in a close game? In those occasions, how many times did he know exactly what the defense would be doing?
Part of the effectiveness of a blitz is the element of surprise. And a quarterback's challenge in that situation is to spot the corresponding gap in the coverage, and to get the ball to the receiver who'll likely be wide open in the sliver of time that the quarterback has to unload the ball before landing on his butt.
If the quarterback knows that the blitz is coming before the play is snapped, and if he knows who'll be blitzing, the task of finding that open receiver suddenly becomes a lot easier.
How many times have we seen Brady fire the ball to a wide open receiver an instant after Brady got the snap? How, in those cases, did he know so quickly that the guy would be open?
Though we realize that there are many factors that influence the ability of the team to achieve success on the field, most of which are unrelated to cheating, the added advantage that can come from knowing what the defense is going to do can make a huge difference. Otherwise, the Patriots (and other teams) wouldn't be devoting time and effort and money in order to find out, through legitimate and/or illegitimate means.
As we see it, the fact that the Patriots did what they allegedly/apparently/actually did creates a presumption that a benefit came from it. The fact that Brady has been the quarterback since 2001 creates a presumption that he knew or should have known what was going on. The fact that he took less money to stay in New England suggests that he knew (or feared) that he might not be able to replicate his success in a system that doesn't involve videotaping defensive signals. So unless he comes clean, we think it's fair to believe that, but for the added benefits that came from knowing what the defense was doing via techniques that crossed the line, he might have performed more like a sixth-round draft pick and less like a future Hall of Famer.
Regardless of whether he opts not to disclose what he knew and when he knew it, we think that Brady will be required to achieve a high level of success under another coach, and possibly with another team, before he is regarded as being truly worthy of Canton.
IS BRADY TARNISHED, TOO?
At the risk of inviting another 500 or so e-mails, we need to address a twist to this whole Patriots Act ordeal that we have yet to tackle, but that we have been pondering for the past 36 hours or so.
Do the revelations of stolen defensive signals diminish the reputation and perceived abilities of quarterback Tom Brady?
If the goal of the brazenly overt operations was to help the team know the tactics that an opposing defense would employ on a given play (either on game day or the next time the two teams met), the player squarely in the eye of the storm of information was Brady. And, surely, he knew (or at least suspected) that the intelligence that the offensive coaches had about what a given defense might be doing didn't come from legitimate methods.
So, as an industry source posed the question to us this morning, what did Brady know, and when did he know it?
Unless and until Brady comes clean with a full and frank -- and credible -- explanation about his first-hand experiences, it fairly can be presumed that his legend has been fueled by the advantage derived from the actions for which the Patriots undoubtedly will be punished, as soon as Friday.
How many times has Brady come up with a key play late in a close game? In those occasions, how many times did he know exactly what the defense would be doing?
Part of the effectiveness of a blitz is the element of surprise. And a quarterback's challenge in that situation is to spot the corresponding gap in the coverage, and to get the ball to the receiver who'll likely be wide open in the sliver of time that the quarterback has to unload the ball before landing on his butt.
If the quarterback knows that the blitz is coming before the play is snapped, and if he knows who'll be blitzing, the task of finding that open receiver suddenly becomes a lot easier.
How many times have we seen Brady fire the ball to a wide open receiver an instant after Brady got the snap? How, in those cases, did he know so quickly that the guy would be open?
Though we realize that there are many factors that influence the ability of the team to achieve success on the field, most of which are unrelated to cheating, the added advantage that can come from knowing what the defense is going to do can make a huge difference. Otherwise, the Patriots (and other teams) wouldn't be devoting time and effort and money in order to find out, through legitimate and/or illegitimate means.
As we see it, the fact that the Patriots did what they allegedly/apparently/actually did creates a presumption that a benefit came from it. The fact that Brady has been the quarterback since 2001 creates a presumption that he knew or should have known what was going on. The fact that he took less money to stay in New England suggests that he knew (or feared) that he might not be able to replicate his success in a system that doesn't involve videotaping defensive signals. So unless he comes clean, we think it's fair to believe that, but for the added benefits that came from knowing what the defense was doing via techniques that crossed the line, he might have performed more like a sixth-round draft pick and less like a future Hall of Famer.
Regardless of whether he opts not to disclose what he knew and when he knew it, we think that Brady will be required to achieve a high level of success under another coach, and possibly with another team, before he is regarded as being truly worthy of Canton.
