Chad to leap in the Dawg Pound, O'Neal's dog bites and Patriots in the doghouse

by Kirkendall on Sep 14, 2007 1:16 PM EDT in I Wonder..

Question. If Chad Johnson jumps into the Dawg Pound, will we see him again? Will he fall into an alternate dimension like Alessa Gillespe unable to break free back into our own realm? Will he return a changed man? Or will he pass along the total Bengals goodness to the Browns fans? Who knows.

Note to Browns fans: Please don't hurt him.

Is there a correlation between Bengals 2003 and Browns 2007?
Bengals | Browns history

Speaking of Dawg Pound...

BATAVIA, Ohio - A dog bit a woman and her 3-year-old son at the home of Bengals cornerback Deltha O'Neal, who drove them to a Cincinnati-area hospital with injuries to their legs and buttocks, the Clermont County sheriff said Thursday.

"A frantic caller indicating they needed help" called 911 about 8:45 a.m., then hung up, Sheriff A.J. "Tim" Rodenberg Jr. said. Deputies traced the call to O'Neal's condo near Amelia, east of Cincinnati.

O'Neal was not at the condo when the biting occurred, but witnesses told investigators that he returned home to take the woman and her child to the hospital before deputies arrived, Rodenberg said. A message seeking information on the conditions of the woman and boy was left with a hospital spokesman.

Video gate

I don't have much input with New England's video gate. My first reaction when the story came out was, "what's the big deal?" How is this any different than any Patriots employee with binoculars charting signals that's lined up with the plays during films? Is that a lesser deal than video taping? Is the extreme reaction simply based on the use of technology or the ethics of the game? Wasn't it accepted that the other team would try to steal signals? Don't most coaches cover their mouths? Hasn't this been going on for years? My point is that the video part of it is only using technology. If the crime is stealing other coaches signals, then I'm sure it isn't just in the hands of the Patriots.

But like I said, it didn't affect us as much so I really don't have that much input. And I'm not going to waste my time wondering if the Bengals losses against the Patriots were a result of this.

Head Coach Marvin Lewis said they've "taken it to a different level" which implies the practice of stealing signs was common -- it was using video tape that was over the line.

Even Browns head coach Romeo Crennel said, "Everybody looks across the field to see if they can determine what the signals are. But that doesn't necessarily help you. Your guys still have to make the plays."

What do you think? Do you think the use of video tape was the straw that broke the camel's back? Or is this perfectly acceptable?

0 recs | Comment 3 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

The Punishment

I'll have to disagree. The rules are the rules. No one says you can't use your eyes to watch the signals, but using videotape to go back and compare signals for the second half crosses that line. That's the rules. And what kind of gumption does this man have where he knows that people suspect him of this cheating and he does it anyway while playing a vastly inferior opponent? What I was disappointed in is the lack of suspension. A guy likes to drink too much legal alcohol and is going on a two year ban. Testing positive for illegal substances (cheating) gets you four games for the first offense. So, why does a coach not get suspended when he cheats? Money is nothing to these people who work so much that they probably can't even spend it all. Anyway, I think the punishment was good, but a 2-4 game suspension should have been added with the fine being adjusted accordingly.

by DUVols on Sep 14, 2007 1:47 PM EDT 0 recs

RE:

Well, suspensions would be based on how well the NFL could monitor the participation. How much does he influence his team's actions? Could they prevent total communication between team on the sidelines and coach at home? This head coach could circumvent that.

I also don't think we can compare a player's life style (drinking, recreational drugs) to this. They are completely different. And I'm in the circle that this issue is in no relation to steroids or grow enhancements just because it's "gaining an advantage".

That's like saying apples and cottage cheese are the same because they're both foods bought at Kroger.

And I still don't get how this is way worse that deserves this type of penalty when a coach on the sidelines can just simply stare at the other coach and jot them down. Or someone in the press box starring down. Now suddenly you get a camera it makes it worse? The act is still there.

by Kirkendall on Sep 14, 2007 4:32 PM EDT up 0 recs