Does your team cheat? Find out!

[cdumler7]

Have the Broncos ever cheated?

Oh the Broncos have cheated and I have no problem admitting that. I'm saying to say that this site is full of facts and is accurate though is what is laughable. A great example is the Broncos got caught video taping just like the Patriots did. Yet somehow the Broncos got the worst rating of the two by the author. How is it when the Patriots lose a 1st round pick because they were warned and then continued to do it where the Broncos got caught once then is it fair to give the Broncos the worst rating? Especially when the team fired the people responsible right after they did it yet the Patriots didn't allowing those very people to be leaders on the team? Yeah seems very accurate.

 

[Rock Strongo]

I'm just curious...over 13k posts and you have never cast a stone???

no, i throw hot facts.

 

[cdumler7]

no, i throw hot facts.

There you go again using that word Facts and just really don't think you know what it means.

 

[Rock Strongo]

There you go again using that word Facts and just really don't think you know what it means.

data supports my facts.

 

[cdumler7]

data supports my facts.

I haven't seen you post one "fact" as you put it today. You just say well this is facts. Show me then how the measuring this guy used on this website makes any sense. Two teams do the exact same thing yet one gets penalized more than the other? How is that fair?

How is it fair to say for the Patriots that deflategate because it hasn't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt shouldn't count too much against the team yet then penalize the Colts in the Suck for Luck when they did nothing against the rules and without their HOF quarterback they stunk which was expected yet they are given almost maximize points?

Again talking about the Colts he penalizes them for Noisegate when the league never found anything and he even uses the words "more probable than not" but on his criteria on the front page says that if that is the level the league has reached that he won't penalize a team yet here we are seeing him penalize the Colts for something that was not proven.

He again penalized the Colts in the deflate gate just as much as that of the Patriots. He also penalized them again for noisegate when again it was not proven.

That is just one team right there where the criteria that he used for the Patriots is different compared to other teams. What he says is the reason the Patriots won't get points is then used to give points to another. Yeah seems totally fair.

 

[BoBlake]

I haven't seen you post one "fact" as you put it today. You just say well this is facts. Show me then how the measuring this guy used on this website makes any sense. Two teams do the exact same thing yet one gets penalized more than the other? How is that fair?

How is it fair to say for the Patriots that deflategate because it hasn't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt shouldn't count too much against the team yet then penalize the Colts in the Suck for Luck when they did nothing against the rules and without their HOF quarterback they stunk which was expected yet they are given almost maximize points?

Again talking about the Colts he penalizes them for Noisegate when the league never found anything and he even uses the words "more probable than not" but on his criteria on the front page says that if that is the level the league has reached that he won't penalize a team yet here we are seeing him penalize the Colts for something that was not proven.

He again penalized the Colts in the deflate gate just as much as that of the Patriots. He also penalized them again for noisegate when again it was not proven.

That is just one team right there where the criteria that he used for the Patriots is different compared to other teams. What he says is the reason the Patriots won't get points is then used to give points to another. Yeah seems totally fair.

You're getting sucked into the black hole man; I can't rescue you, I can only point out the disaster you're heading into.

 

[cdumler7]

You're getting sucked into the black hole man; I can't rescue you, I can only point out the disaster you're heading into.

Haha good point. Maybe good point to go grab some lunch and give Rock his time to figure out his next troll post.

 

[tedman2012]

they are facts.

hot facts.

yes straight from a horses ass

 

[BobGnarly]

Not gonna read through the whole thread, but if there's any question as to who this site was set up by(and thus who they are biased), just take a look at the owner's twitter.

https://twitter.com/YourTeamCheats

 

[Rock Strongo]

Not gonna read through the whole thread, but if there's any question as to who this site was set up by(and thus who they are biased), just take a look at the owner's twitter.

https://twitter.com/YourTeamCheats

doesnt change his factual findings and data collection.

 

[SteelersPride]

actually it does, because well we have all questioned things, theres no citations for his "facts"......and when something is questioned, you dont actually reply, you ignore, or say "fact".....

 

[Rock Strongo]

actually it does, because well we have all questioned things, theres no citations for his "facts"......and when something is questioned, you dont actually reply, you ignore, or say "fact".....

they are facts

i.e jeff blakes...i dunno....interview?

 

[SteelersPride]

why i continue to respond to trolls is beyond me, ........we have asked questions, you continue to defer, ignorance is bliss

 

[chappee11]

There's a new web site, YourTeamCheats.com, which shows exactly how often your favorite NFL team has "cheated," and what their specific violations were. Each instance of "cheating" is catalogued, labeled as team-specific or league-wide, and given a rating on a scale of zero through five video cameras (presumably a reference to Spygate) that helps determine where they rank on the cheating scale. Some of these instances of "cheating" are specified on the site itself as not being against the rules, but are still listed there anyway.

There's a list like this for every single team in the league. The accusations are given a severity rating, specify who the "victim" was, whether the team was punished, and then if it wasn't, usually states "but it's more probable than not" that this was cheating.

 

[chappee11]

A PLEDGE TO YOU FROM THE COMMISH
1. AUTHENTICITY: Every cheat listed on this site was published by a third party somewhere in the media, no cheats have been created solely for this site. You can challenge the rating and commentary, but you can't challenge the cheat.

2. VERIFIABILITY: A cheat will never be posted on this site without a link to at least one of these sources.

3. FACTUALITY: A cheat is only included if it exceeds the "more probable than not" doctrine established by the NFL. Severity rankings are Your Team Cheats* editorial decisions and are based upon the facts of the cheat.

4. PEER STANDARDS: We will strive to exhibit as much attention to detail, fact and fairness as fans and professional media exhibited in their coverage of signature NFL cheats like Spygate, Bountygate, and Deflategate.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

This has been posted over 9000 times and every time the flaws in the methodology have been pointed out.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

 

[BoBlake]

why i continue to respond to trolls is beyond me, ........we have asked questions, you continue to defer, ignorance is bliss

I'm just becomming very liberal with the 'bullshit' icon.

 

[chappee11]

This has been posted over 9000 times and every time the flaws in the methodology have been pointed out.

I guess I missed that. Can you please elaborate on these flaws?

 

[Cave_Johnson]

I guess I missed that. Can you please elaborate on these flaws?

Most ratings are completely arbitrary with the severity coming down to the opinion of the authors ( who have been proven to be Patriots fans). For instance why is a Jets assistant coach tripping somebody on a special teams return in one game a 9/10 while the Falcons pumping in noise presumably all season is a 10/10? No explanation is given. What makes that one infraction one rating point worse than the other?

On the other hand, the ratings that have set systems are flawed. For instance:

According to the criteria used on YourTeamCheats.com if your team has had 4 players test positive for a banned substances over the course of the last 20 years that is just as bad as Spygate. Additionally, 3 players testing positive is just as bad as deflating footballs. The players in question don't even have to be players who made the 53 man roster. If your team signed somebody to the preseason roster for 7 days and they tested positive they're counting it, and that positive test for a player who never saw the field in the regular season counts just as much as if a pro bowl player were caught.

Honestly it's quite sad how much time and effort probably went into such a flawed, poorly put together system like this.