Patriots being investigated after Colts game (2 Viewers)

[Bayhawks]

One team in the league has faced singularly severe loss of draft picks and monetary fines for their behavior. Twice. Even tho the powers that be are strongly incentivized not to impose said punishments.

Yet some of their fans still want to believe they simply do what everyone else is doing?

You assume there are no strong incentives to impose these punishments, and you assume the NFL's first and foremost concern is the competitive integrity of the league.

If one accepts those assumptions, the conclusion is obvious. However, many of us don't accept either assumption, hence the 262 pages and counting of this thread.

For centuries, many people wouldn't accept that the earth wasn't flat. They were wrong, as are those of you who won't accept the truth.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Goodell is a Jet and will always be a Jet.

From his first cigarette to his last dieing day.

 

[Run It Up]

If we're going to moderate the dismissal of some posters, can we get some moderation on the entry level trolling that has been ongoing for the past 6 months.

The amount of posts that go on at great length on the subjects covered in this thread by people who have no knowledge of or even an attempt to become knowledgeable about the information that is available is staggering.

Id wager 99 out of 100 posters in this thread have read less than 5 pages of the Well's report. Id also wager a select few of those people also account for a large portion of the posts in this thread where ad nauseam they bring up cyclical arguments based in ignorance of the subject. Regardless of the proceeding pages of replies, its the same thing every week.

Spend even a fraction of the time you do in this thread consuming available information, please, ffs.

 

[satch]

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

In what way did they cheat to beat the Seahawks? They had to have cheated somehow, right? I can't imagine how many heads would explode around here if they were forced to admit that the Patriots won the SB fair and square, so what are you all using as an excuse for that one?

 

[Arodin]

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

In what way did they cheat to beat the Seahawks?

If they cheated to get there, then it's fair to say they might not have won that SB without cheating, even if they didn't cheat in that particular game.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

In what way did they cheat to beat the Seahawks?

If they cheated to get there, then it's fair to say they might not have won that SB without cheating, even if they didn't cheat in that particular game.

* Tarnished. Forever.

 

[satch]

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

In what way did they cheat to beat the Seahawks?

If they cheated to get there, then it's fair to say they might not have won that SB without cheating, even if they didn't cheat in that particular game.

* Tarnished. Forever.

Only in the eyes of a loser.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Or the general public.

 

[Uncle Grandpa]

Wtf are any of you saying that wasn't said 5 or 10 pages ago?

 

[satch]

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

In what way did they cheat to beat the Seahawks?

If they cheated to get there, then it's fair to say they might not have won that SB without cheating, even if they didn't cheat in that particular game.

It's honestly surprising that a grown man would use such a desperate and pathetic excuse. If you want to pretend that they got there only because some ball boy let a little air out of the ball so be it, but the truth is that the Patriots beat the best team in the NFC fair and square because the Patriots are the best team in the league. The Seahawks would've beat any other team. It's too bad for you all that this psi thing came out before the Super Bowl. If it came out after you could've blamed the Pats Super Bowl win on psi too. Unfortunately for you, the Pats beat the second best team in the league fair and square and there's nothing you can say to take away from that. To be the best you have to beat the best. The Pats beat the best.

 

[squistion]

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

In what way did they cheat to beat the Seahawks?

If they cheated to get there, then it's fair to say they might not have won that SB without cheating, even if they didn't cheat in that particular game.

It's honestly surprising that a grown man would use such a desperate and pathetic excuse. If you want to pretend that they got there only because some ball boy let a little air out of the ball so be it, but the truth is that the Patriots beat the best team in the NFC fair and square because the Patriots are the best team in the league. The Seahawks would've beat any other team. It's too bad for you all that this psi thing came out before the Super Bowl. If it came out after you could've blamed the Pats Super Bowl win on psi too. Unfortunately for you, the Pats beat the second best team in the league fair and square and there's nothing you can say to take away from that. To be the best you have to beat the best. The Pats beat the best.

So the year that the Giants beat them in the SB, the Giants were the best team, no?

And a lot of otherwise reasonable people have used that "desperate and pathetic excuse." Unless we can rerun history and play the entire season over with balls that weren't deflated, there is no way of knowing how many games had the outcome changed. Maybe none, but also, maybe enough to keep them from making the SB. And that is why this championship will be always be tarnished in the minds of many.

 

[Arodin]

It's honestly surprising that a grown man would use such a desperate and pathetic excuse. If you want to pretend that they got there only because some ball boy let a little air out of the ball so be it, but the truth is that the Patriots beat the best team in the NFC fair and square because the Patriots are the best team in the league. The Seahawks would've beat any other team. It's too bad for you all that this psi thing came out before the Super Bowl. If it came out after you could've blamed the Pats Super Bowl win on psi too. Unfortunately for you, the Pats beat the second best team in the league fair and square and there's nothing you can say to take away from that. To be the best you have to beat the best. The Pats beat the best.

Are we really at the point of questioning people's manhood because they don't find cheating to be something lightly excused?

If someone cheats at a poker tournament and wins, does it matter whether they cheated during the final hand, or whether they cheated along the way? And does "they would have won even if they hadn't used the ace up their sleeve" somehow make it perfectly fine to have had it there in the first place? If so, you and I have very different concepts of fair play and appropriate competition.

 

[Jercules]

Context matters, and in a league where every single team is cheating in one way or another, a guy in the wrong place with a camera here or a few fractions of a psi out of a football there is just no big deal.

Even if this were true (it's not-it's already been established that the website you are basing this on is a NE-created BS website), the one team that has been repeatedly punished, severely, for their cheating is NE. That is the only context that matters.

The only thing that's been established is you're not so good at math.

yourteamcheats.com... a few issues here and there, a few pieces of subjectivity, but overall a well-done, comprehensive compilation of NFL cheating throughout the years.

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

So having a cameraman in the wrong place explains three SB wins? Letting tiny amounts of air out of footballs explains years of dominance? I see we're back to being intentionally vague so as to avoid sounding preposterous.

One team in the league has faced singularly severe loss of draft picks and monetary fines for their behavior. Twice. Even tho the powers that be are strongly incentivized not to impose said punishments.

Yet some of their fans still want to believe they simply do what everyone else is doing?

You assume there are no strong incentives to impose these punishments, and you assume the NFL's first and foremost concern is the competitive integrity of the league.

If one accepts those assumptions, the conclusion is obvious. However, many of us don't accept either assumption, hence the 262 pages and counting of this thread.

For centuries, many people wouldn't accept that the earth wasn't flat. They were wrong, as are those of you who won't accept the truth.

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

 

[Jercules]

It's honestly surprising that a grown man would use such a desperate and pathetic excuse. If you want to pretend that they got there only because some ball boy let a little air out of the ball so be it, but the truth is that the Patriots beat the best team in the NFC fair and square because the Patriots are the best team in the league. The Seahawks would've beat any other team. It's too bad for you all that this psi thing came out before the Super Bowl. If it came out after you could've blamed the Pats Super Bowl win on psi too. Unfortunately for you, the Pats beat the second best team in the league fair and square and there's nothing you can say to take away from that. To be the best you have to beat the best. The Pats beat the best.

Are we really at the point of questioning people's manhood because they don't find cheating to be something lightly excused?

If someone cheats at a poker tournament and wins, does it matter whether they cheated during the final hand, or whether they cheated along the way? And does "they would have won even if they hadn't used the ace up their sleeve" somehow make it perfectly fine to have had it there in the first place? If so, you and I have very different concepts of fair play and appropriate competition.

Here's the problem with the whole thing: the very label "cheater".

Anarchy99 (apologies if I got the name wrong) had a brilliant post some time ago about all the "cheating" that happens in his peewee football league. I myself played high school football, and can remember several instances of stolen playbooks, filmed practices, etc.

Things like deflating footballs because the QB likes 'em like that are a lot more commonplace in football than people seem to realize, especially the average person who has no experience with "football culture", let's say.

You don't call it cheating for the same reason you don't call a jaywalker a criminal (even though it is technically true).

However, in an environment in which the Patriots are hated both by many fans nationwide and by powerful political forces within the NFL, the situation is ripe to take something small like this and trump it up to the point that $5,000,000 investigations are being conducted, high draft picks are stolen and suspensions are doled out, and the team's name is dragged through the mud. For those of us who are fans of this team, it's a problem.

yourteamcheats.com is probably the best effort anyone could possibly make to add some context to all this, and show people what deflated footballs really mean as far as "cheating" is concerned, and the desperation some people have shown in trying to tar the site and pretend there is nothing worthy of consideration there is nothing short of staggering.

Paying off the refs is the ultimate cheating. Aside from that, rampant PED use would be cheating. Cooking your salary cap numbers so you can include one or two extra All-Pros is cheating. Stealing radio signals, so you can know almost exactly what play an opposing offense or defense is about to run, is absolutely cheating.

But a cameraman in the wrong place? Slightly deflated footballs? Sorry, but none of that rises to the same level. The trouble is, this casual use of the word "cheat" or "cheaters" implies that such things do rise to that level, hence the defensive vitriol of some of the fans.

That's an honest take on it, if there's still anybody left with an open mind. Peace.

 

[Jercules]

Because there's no evidence that they're the best in cheating, whereas when it comes to wins/SBs/AFC titles/AFC East titles/etc., there's plenty of evidence that they're the best?

The counter-argument to that would be that without the cheating, perhaps they don't win those SBs, conference titles, division titles, etc.

In what way did they cheat to beat the Seahawks?

If they cheated to get there, then it's fair to say they might not have won that SB without cheating, even if they didn't cheat in that particular game.

* Tarnished. Forever.

If you ever wondered what BigSteelThrill looks like in person, check out 1:49 of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSYXmFeeTPs&list=FL2EFKzqfzZ9F9Rtg85G0D0Q&index=10

 

[renesauz]

whether he destroyed the phone or not is not really an issue......he could be hypnotizing big Rog with it right now singing nana nana na na......and still not give it up....it doesn't make him a cheater

it has been made very clear that there is no evidence he cheated .......being "uncooperative" is not evidence he cheated.....

"not cooperating fully" may make it appear more probable than not that he had knowledge of what was going on......but nobody knows for sure.....bad for Brady that this is enough to get suspended under the current system and be labeled a cheater and have your legacy tarnished......

he was not aware that not giving up his cell phone was akin to not agreeing to a sobriety test.....

Again....they never asked for the phone. They asked for pertinent information off of it which miraculously can no longer be retrieved.

Still haven't fully caught up to today's posts but . . .

AGAIN . . . the NFL has no legal right to demand an employee's personal communications devices (phones, tablets, laptops, etc.), nor can they demand access to its contents or stored communications. That is federal labor law. Similarly, since that is the law, there is nothing in the CBA or in a player's contract that mandates he has to give that information to the league.

Brady may be guilty as sin, but the NFL cannot punish him for not providing the information they asked for off his phone. This will be argued in federal court.

Also, it is the league's job to prove he was guilty of something . . . not Brady's job to prove his innocence. There's a reason things are set up like that. It's to prevent investigators to have the abilty to overreach and keep after people until they find something. For example, let's say Brady produced his phone and there was nothing incriminating on it. Then they could have demanded his laptop. And if there was nothing there, they could have demanded access to his instant/personal messages on social media. And if they didn't find anything there, then they could have asked for Gisele's phone in case he used that to text people. There could be no end into what they could demand access to.

The league has taken the position that Brady's punishment was administered and upheld because he did not provide the items from his phone that they asked for (when he was under no obligation to furnish them). So the NFL took the stance that he did not cooperate and conspired to break the integrity of the game in the investigation and on appeal (destroying the phone) based on information the league was not legally entitled to.

Since people keep saying "but this is not a criminal investigation," that cuts both ways. No court had demanded or subpoenaed Brady to supply evidence, so he can't be knocked for destroying something that a court ordered him to produce. If at some point the court asks for the items on his phone, his attorneys will argue that no such documents or texts exist.

And just a reminder, we have no idea what other information (favoring or hurting either side) is still out there. We don't know what information Brady provided, in what now has been like 20+ hours of testimony. We don't know what many others said in their interviews with Wells. We don't know what other records there are.

We predominently have whatever the NFL has floated out there, and who knows what is fact and what is fiction. We certainly know that there have been numerous leaks where things were fiction. Bottom line, we don't have access to all the information, and short of that we have no idea how that would play out in federal court.

But not to a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. The NFL does not need, and SHOULD NOT NEED to meet that kind of standard.

 

[satch]

It's honestly surprising that a grown man would use such a desperate and pathetic excuse. If you want to pretend that they got there only because some ball boy let a little air out of the ball so be it, but the truth is that the Patriots beat the best team in the NFC fair and square because the Patriots are the best team in the league. The Seahawks would've beat any other team. It's too bad for you all that this psi thing came out before the Super Bowl. If it came out after you could've blamed the Pats Super Bowl win on psi too. Unfortunately for you, the Pats beat the second best team in the league fair and square and there's nothing you can say to take away from that. To be the best you have to beat the best. The Pats beat the best.

Are we really at the point of questioning people's manhood because they don't find cheating to be something lightly excused?

If someone cheats at a poker tournament and wins, does it matter whether they cheated during the final hand, or whether they cheated along the way? And does "they would have won even if they hadn't used the ace up their sleeve" somehow make it perfectly fine to have had it there in the first place? If so, you and I have very different concepts of fair play and appropriate competition.

We are at a place where grown men are taking something that had no impact on the game and labeling it "cheating" just so they have an excuse for losing. It's pathetic. Your poker example with an ace up the sleeve is a horrible comparison, but that's a great example of how far people want to take this to have an excuse for losing to a better team.

 

[Arodin]

Here's the problem with the whole thing: the very label "cheater".

*trimmed for space*

Paying off the refs is the ultimate cheating. Aside from that, rampant PED use would be cheating. Cooking your salary cap numbers so you can include one or two extra All-Pros is cheating. Stealing radio signals, so you can know almost exactly what play an opposing offense or defense is about to run, is absolutely cheating.

But a cameraman in the wrong place? Slightly deflated footballs? Sorry, but none of that rises to the same level. The trouble is, this casual use of the word "cheat" or "cheaters" implies that such things do rise to that level, hence the defensive vitriol of some of the fans.

That's an honest take on it, if there's still anybody left with an open mind. Peace.

I agree that your first paragraph (bribing officials, PEDa, etc.) are serious cheating and should be punished harshly.

I'd also argue that improper filming of opponent practice is cheating. If that can be spun into "cameraman in the wrong place" then yes, that's cheating too. If you mean "wrong place" in the same sense as coaches ignoring the sideline box...well that's more jaywalking.

Similarly, a few balls being underinflated...jaywalking. I deliberate ongoing effort to tamper with the equipment? Sounds more serious...at least as bad as tampering with opponent communications. Was the issue a few years back of one team's staff being able to listen into the visiting team locker room minor? I don't think so...equipment tampering comes in a range of severity. One problem with the Pats issue at hand is we have no real sense of whether this was going on for years and only just discovered, or if it was a one-time thing. The former, on principle, strikes me as more serious and worthy of greater discipline.

That's my "honest take." Thank you for your cogent remarks without needing to throw about invective. It does seem like some people are more interested in picking internet fights than discussing the matter. (that probably should have been predictable from the thread size alone....)

 

[T J]

Colts fan here. Patriots are a great team but Tom Brady is GUILTY as hell on this one. He should have just owned it.

 

[Godsbrother]

Aren't you guys sick of arguing about this by now? The only thing that matters now is how this thing plays out.

 

[Bayhawks]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.

Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

 

[satch]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

 

[CoolHandLukeB]

So yesterday, on a lazy summer Sunday, there was a report that Mike Kensil, the rat with an agenda, had been removed from his position as VP of game-day ops, presumably because of his false leaks to Chris Mortensen. Within 1 hour, the NFL had corrected the incorrect report. But they couldn't be bothered in 4 months to correct the 11-of-12 balls are 2 PSI under narrative? What a joke

 

[Pots]

It's honestly surprising that a grown man would use such a desperate and pathetic excuse. If you want to pretend that they got there only because some ball boy let a little air out of the ball so be it, but the truth is that the Patriots beat the best team in the NFC fair and square because the Patriots are the best team in the league. The Seahawks would've beat any other team. It's too bad for you all that this psi thing came out before the Super Bowl. If it came out after you could've blamed the Pats Super Bowl win on psi too. Unfortunately for you, the Pats beat the second best team in the league fair and square and there's nothing you can say to take away from that. To be the best you have to beat the best. The Pats beat the best.

Are we really at the point of questioning people's manhood because they don't find cheating to be something lightly excused?

If someone cheats at a poker tournament and wins, does it matter whether they cheated during the final hand, or whether they cheated along the way? And does "they would have won even if they hadn't used the ace up their sleeve" somehow make it perfectly fine to have had it there in the first place? If so, you and I have very different concepts of fair play and appropriate competition.

We are at a place where grown men are taking something that had no impact on the game and labeling it "cheating" just so they have an excuse for losing. It's pathetic.Your poker example with an ace up the sleeve is a horrible comparison, but that's a great example of how far people want to take this to have an excuse for losing to a better team.

If the Pats were such a better team, they wouldn't have to resort to cheating to beat their opponents. Frankly it shows they were too insecure in their own abilities to win by playing the game within the confines of the rules.

 

[Burl]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"

For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

 

[satch]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

 

[moleculo]

pre-emptive arguement to slow-leak theory

if there was a slow leak in the footballs, they would have leaked in the second half as well. When measured post-game, their air pressure was where one would expect it to be.

 

[moleculo]

It's honestly surprising that a grown man would use such a desperate and pathetic excuse. If you want to pretend that they got there only because some ball boy let a little air out of the ball so be it, but the truth is that the Patriots beat the best team in the NFC fair and square because the Patriots are the best team in the league. The Seahawks would've beat any other team. It's too bad for you all that this psi thing came out before the Super Bowl. If it came out after you could've blamed the Pats Super Bowl win on psi too. Unfortunately for you, the Pats beat the second best team in the league fair and square and there's nothing you can say to take away from that. To be the best you have to beat the best. The Pats beat the best.

Are we really at the point of questioning people's manhood because they don't find cheating to be something lightly excused?

If someone cheats at a poker tournament and wins, does it matter whether they cheated during the final hand, or whether they cheated along the way? And does "they would have won even if they hadn't used the ace up their sleeve" somehow make it perfectly fine to have had it there in the first place? If so, you and I have very different concepts of fair play and appropriate competition.

Here's the problem with the whole thing: the very label "cheater".

Anarchy99 (apologies if I got the name wrong) had a brilliant post some time ago about all the "cheating" that happens in his peewee football league. I myself played high school football, and can remember several instances of stolen playbooks, filmed practices, etc.

Things like deflating footballs because the QB likes 'em like that are a lot more commonplace in football than people seem to realize, especially the average person who has no experience with "football culture", let's say.

You don't call it cheating for the same reason you don't call a jaywalker a criminal (even though it is technically true).

However, in an environment in which the Patriots are hated both by many fans nationwide and by powerful political forces within the NFL, the situation is ripe to take something small like this and trump it up to the point that $5,000,000 investigations are being conducted, high draft picks are stolen and suspensions are doled out, and the team's name is dragged through the mud. For those of us who are fans of this team, it's a problem.

yourteamcheats.com is probably the best effort anyone could possibly make to add some context to all this, and show people what deflated footballs really mean as far as "cheating" is concerned, and the desperation some people have shown in trying to tar the site and pretend there is nothing worthy of consideration there is nothing short of staggering.

Paying off the refs is the ultimate cheating. Aside from that, rampant PED use would be cheating. Cooking your salary cap numbers so you can include one or two extra All-Pros is cheating. Stealing radio signals, so you can know almost exactly what play an opposing offense or defense is about to run, is absolutely cheating.

But a cameraman in the wrong place? Slightly deflated footballs? Sorry, but none of that rises to the same level. The trouble is, this casual use of the word "cheat" or "cheaters" implies that such things do rise to that level, hence the defensive vitriol of some of the fans.

That's an honest take on it, if there's still anybody left with an open mind. Peace.

 

[Bayhawks]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

How about you relax with the name calling and personal attacks, and discuss the issues & facts?

Brady has been found "guilty" by the NFL of cheating. You don't think it's cheating, even though the entity whose purpose it is to determine that does. You're wrong. Therefore, by definition, he is a cheater. Stating that doesn't make me a loser, just as refusing to accept that fact makes you a winner.

 

[Bayhawks]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

What isn't coherent or well thought out is that I'm not saying the Patriots aren't a great team/franchise. In fact, I said the exact opposite, several times in this very thread. Yet, you called me a loser, because I'm also able to acknowledge that they cheated.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

You don't call it cheating for the same reason you don't call a jaywalker a criminal (even though it is technically true).

Actually I don't call jaywalking "criminal" because it's not a crime (and therefore technically NOT true) - it's an infraction penalized by fine.

ETA: Oh and this is an awesome bit: http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=metzger+jaywalking&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=382863CBFE8FBD154C47382863CBFE8FBD154C47

 

[satch]

pre-emptive arguement to slow-leak theory

if there was a slow leak in the footballs, they would have leaked in the second half as well. When measured post-game, their air pressure was where one would expect it to be.

The larger point is that no one has ever cared about the air pressure in the footballs until it became a potential weapon to bring down a dynasty. All of a sudden, the air pressure in the footballs is the difference between winning and losing.The NFL knows that temperatures affect air pressure. They set a legal range of 12.5-13.5 psi. If a team submits footballs before a game at or near the high or low limit, wouldn't it be incumbent on the officials to re-check them at halftime to make sure they are still within limits after being exposed to hot or cold temperatures? You know why they never did? Because no one really believes a barely perceptible change in the air pressure of a football has any impact whatsoever on the outcome of a game so they never gave it a second thought. The feel of a football is a personal preference whether firmer, softer, or somewhere in between. There is no competitive advantage to be gained one way or the other so it's not even worth checking at halftime. Until now. Until it became a beacon of hope for those desperate to bring down the most successful dynasty n NFL history. Suddenly the air pressure in a football is a critical factor that cannot be overlooked.

 

[Tango]

pre-emptive arguement to slow-leak theory

if there was a slow leak in the footballs, they would have leaked in the second half as well. When measured post-game, their air pressure was where one would expect it to be.

The larger point is that no one has ever cared about the air pressure in the footballs until it became a potential weapon to bring down a dynasty. All of a sudden, the air pressure in the footballs is the difference between winning and losing.The NFL knows that temperatures affect air pressure. They set a legal range of 12.5-13.5 psi. If a team submits footballs before a game at or near the high or low limit, wouldn't it be incumbent on the officials to re-check them at halftime to make sure they are still within limits after being exposed to hot or cold temperatures? You know why they never did? Because no one really believes a barely perceptible change in the air pressure of a football has any impact whatsoever on the outcome of a game so they never gave it a second thought. The feel of a football is a personal preference whether firmer, softer, or somewhere in between. There is no competitive advantage to be gained one way or the other so it's not even worth checking at halftime. Until now. Until it became a beacon of hope for those desperate to bring down the most successful dynasty n NFL history. Suddenly the air pressure in a football is a critical factor that cannot be overlooked.

So you're saying Brady is technically guilty, but it's not a big deal.

OK, got it. What should be his penalty?

 

[satch]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

How about you relax with the name calling and personal attacks, and discuss the issues & facts?Brady has been found "guilty" by the NFL of cheating. You don't think it's cheating, even though the entity whose purpose it is to determine that does. You're wrong. Therefore, by definition, he is a cheater. Stating that doesn't make me a loser, just as refusing to accept that fact makes you a winner.

My use of the term loser is with reference to the teams in general who have lost, not directed at you or any other individuals. For example only, the Seahawks lost the Super Bowl, so by definition they were the losers. A Seahawk fan claiming the Pats cheated could be said to be using a loser's excuse, because their team lost and they're using an excuse.

 

[satch]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

What isn't coherent or well thought out is that I'm not saying the Patriots aren't a great team/franchise. In fact, I said the exact opposite, several times in this very thread. Yet, you called me a loser, because I'm also able to acknowledge that they cheated.

I didn't call you personally a loser. I apologize if it came across that way. My use of the term loser is in reference to a losing team.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The larger point is that no one has ever cared about the air pressure in the footballs until it became a potential weapon to bring down a dynasty. All of a sudden, the air pressure in the footballs is the difference between winning and losing.

I doubt it had any real impact on any games. But why do it then? It's that arrogance and smugness that make the Pats targets.

Tom Brady and Billy Belichick are arguably the best of all time and that's why the Pats win. However it's the arrogance of thinking they can bend whatever rules they want and be deceptive and evasive about it that rubs people the wrong way. Obviously if they were just an "average" franchise no one would care. Winning of course breeds contempt.

You reap what you sow. Most people can't stand arrogant jerk-offs in their real lives and Brady and Billy come off that way, so people want to see them fail.

Bottom line, as I've said all along, I'm not sure why Pats fans sit here and argue. Just enjoy your Super Bowls and don't pay attention to those that think they're tainted.

 

[satch]

pre-emptive arguement to slow-leak theory

if there was a slow leak in the footballs, they would have leaked in the second half as well. When measured post-game, their air pressure was where one would expect it to be.

The larger point is that no one has ever cared about the air pressure in the footballs until it became a potential weapon to bring down a dynasty. All of a sudden, the air pressure in the footballs is the difference between winning and losing.The NFL knows that temperatures affect air pressure. They set a legal range of 12.5-13.5 psi. If a team submits footballs before a game at or near the high or low limit, wouldn't it be incumbent on the officials to re-check them at halftime to make sure they are still within limits after being exposed to hot or cold temperatures? You know why they never did? Because no one really believes a barely perceptible change in the air pressure of a football has any impact whatsoever on the outcome of a game so they never gave it a second thought. The feel of a football is a personal preference whether firmer, softer, or somewhere in between. There is no competitive advantage to be gained one way or the other so it's not even worth checking at halftime. Until now. Until it became a beacon of hope for those desperate to bring down the most successful dynasty n NFL history. Suddenly the air pressure in a football is a critical factor that cannot be overlooked.

So you're saying Brady is technically guilty, but it's not a big deal.

OK, got it. What should be his penalty?

Yes, that's what I, along with many other Pats fans are saying. Whatever the usual equipment violation fine is, plus some kind if punishment for trying to hide it when questioned. Whether the league has enough actual evidence or proof to hand out punishments is another story. I think he broke a rule and tried to cover it up. I also think claiming he had a competitive advantage by breaking this rule is ridiculous, since the air pressure in footballs has been an afterthought at best, and never checked at halftime for all these years, even in games below freezing. Obviously a ball submitted at 12.5 in a warm locker room before the game will drop below this supposedly critical number after being outside in 7 degree temps for 2 hours. Why wouldn't they check and re-inflate them when necessary at halftime? Because it's not a big deal.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

You are obviously welcome to this line of thought, as are those who cannot relate to trying to justify multiple instances of being caught breaking rules by saying "everyone else does it" and "it didnt impact the outcome of the game". To some, that line of thinking is equally pathetic.

 

[Bayhawks]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

What isn't coherent or well thought out is that I'm not saying the Patriots aren't a great team/franchise. In fact, I said the exact opposite, several times in this very thread. Yet, you called me a loser, because I'm also able to acknowledge that they cheated.

I didn't call you personally a loser. I apologize if it came across that way. My use of the term loser is in reference to a losing team.

You quoted my post, in which I said Brady was a cheater. I didn't reference any team. If you truly weren't calling me a loser, apology accepted; but the fact remains that the NFL has the obligation to determine if he cheated, & they've done so. Since he's not challenging their decision, only the process, he is accepting their decision that he cheated.So even if he wins a court case, he will still be labeled a cheater by the NFL, and its their view, not mine or yours that matter.

 

[satch]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

You are obviously welcome to this line of thought, as are those who cannot relate to trying to justify multiple instances of being caught breaking rules by saying "everyone else does it" and "it didnt impact the outcome of the game". To some, that line of thinking is equally pathetic.

I guess we're all just a bunch of pathetic football fans.

 

[Tango]

pre-emptive arguement to slow-leak theory

if there was a slow leak in the footballs, they would have leaked in the second half as well. When measured post-game, their air pressure was where one would expect it to be.

The larger point is that no one has ever cared about the air pressure in the footballs until it became a potential weapon to bring down a dynasty. All of a sudden, the air pressure in the footballs is the difference between winning and losing.The NFL knows that temperatures affect air pressure. They set a legal range of 12.5-13.5 psi. If a team submits footballs before a game at or near the high or low limit, wouldn't it be incumbent on the officials to re-check them at halftime to make sure they are still within limits after being exposed to hot or cold temperatures? You know why they never did? Because no one really believes a barely perceptible change in the air pressure of a football has any impact whatsoever on the outcome of a game so they never gave it a second thought. The feel of a football is a personal preference whether firmer, softer, or somewhere in between. There is no competitive advantage to be gained one way or the other so it's not even worth checking at halftime. Until now. Until it became a beacon of hope for those desperate to bring down the most successful dynasty n NFL history. Suddenly the air pressure in a football is a critical factor that cannot be overlooked.

So you're saying Brady is technically guilty, but it's not a big deal.

OK, got it. What should be his penalty?

Yes, that's what I, along with many other Pats fans are saying. Whatever the usual equipment violation fine is, plus some kind if punishment for trying to hide it when questioned. Whether the league has enough actual evidence or proof to hand out punishments is another story. I think he broke a rule and tried to cover it up. I also think claiming he had a competitive advantage by breaking this rule is ridiculous, since the air pressure in footballs has been an afterthought and never at best, and never checked at halftime for all these years, even in games below freezing. Obviously a ball submitted at 12.5 in a warm locker room before the game will drop below this suppisedly critical number after being outside in 7 degree temps for 2 hours. Why wouldn't they check and re-inflate them when necessary at halftime? Because it's not a big deal.

OK, good to know you think he's guilty.

Now...

1) I agree a slap on the wrist is in-order for the deflation w/the amount of info we have about it now. So let's assume that story never grows beyond what we know...then slap-on-the-wrist makes sense.

2) Given that we all agree Brady is guilty, what do you think the penalty should be for?

-lying to the press

-lying to the poor Patriot fans

-inducing his owner to lie or at least leading him astray

-inducing his head coach to have pointless press conferences

-ridiculing the NFL on a worldwide stage

-letting two guys who make next-to-nothing take the fall for what would have been a slap on the wrist

-more stuff that I cant remember now...

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

You are obviously welcome to this line of thought, as are those who cannot relate to trying to justify multiple instances of being caught breaking rules by saying "everyone else does it" and "it didnt impact the outcome of the game". To some, that line of thinking is equally pathetic.

I guess we're all just a bunch of pathetic football fans.

Amen to that, brutha!

 

[satch]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

You are obviously welcome to this line of thought, as are those who cannot relate to trying to justify multiple instances of being caught breaking rules by saying "everyone else does it" and "it didnt impact the outcome of the game". To some, that line of thinking is equally pathetic.

I guess we're all just a bunch of pathetic football fans.

Amen to that, brutha!

Regardless of which side of this discussion we're on, the end result will be an even more exciting football season for all of us. Can't kickoff soon enough!

 

[sho nuff]

Aren't you guys sick of arguing about this by now? The only thing that matters now is how this thing plays out.

Its still sort of fun seeing the excuses Pats fans will make to minimize it all.

 

[Run It Up]

Its still sort of fun seeing the excuses Pats fans will make to minimize it all.

In case moderators were wondering what I meant, I meant this for example.

 

[sho nuff]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

Packers fan...not even sure when the Patriots have beaten the Packers.

And the NFL called them cheaters...and the NFL is winning at the bank all day long.

 

[sho nuff]

Its still sort of fun seeing the excuses Pats fans will make to minimize it all.

In case moderators were wondering what I meant, I meant this for example.

CLaiming trolling?

No, I believe what I am saying and my argument has sound factual basis.

But why keep arguing when we know what will happen...is because it is interesting to see.

Why do you keep coming back with the same arguments over and over again (510 times...and that is if you aren't using any alias accounts)?

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Us who "won't accept the truth"? What are you, some kind of Brady-hating missionary now? Care to supplement your preachings with another horse#### statistical analysis?

Yes, you who won't accept the truth. The truth is Brady was caught cheating. It's been proven, to the NFL's standards, and the circumstantial evidence is enough for any rational person to acknowledge this. While he may yet get his suspension overturned, he is challenging the NFL's process, not it's findings. This is essentially tacit admission that he was in the wrong. Like Ryan Braun, he may get his punishment reversed; that doesn't change the fact that he cheated.Picking nits "it's not cheating, it's bending the rules," everyone does it, blah, blah, blah is denial of the truth.

Making up ridiculously biased, 98% inaccurate websites to "prove" your point is denial of the truth.

Ignoring the fact that the person charged with determining if Brady cheated or not has said "Brady cheated!" is denial of the truth.

Calling Brady and the Patriots cheaters is a loser's excuse and nothing more.

You actually started posting in this thread with coherent well thought out posts debating the points. Now your posts have fallen to the point of, "I know you are but what am I?"For the record...my team beat NE last year so nah nah na boo boo.

Is there something incoherent or not well thought out about that post? I'd argue it's very coherent and very well thought out. The more I think about all of this, the more I believe that post to be spot on.The Patriots sucked for a long time, and during that time there were a few teams that won a lot. Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Fran, etc. Back then Pats fans didn't look for excuses. We sucked because we sucked, and those teams were great because they were great. It nothing to do with air, stick 'um, steroids, pumped in noise, texting on sidelines, broken headsets, etc. I just can't relate to using excuses like that and I do think it's kind of pathetic.

You are obviously welcome to this line of thought, as are those who cannot relate to trying to justify multiple instances of being caught breaking rules by saying "everyone else does it" and "it didnt impact the outcome of the game". To some, that line of thinking is equally pathetic.

I guess we're all just a bunch of pathetic football fans.

Amen to that, brutha!

Regardless of which side of this discussion we're on, the end result will be an even more exciting football season for all of us. Can't kickoff soon enough!

Agreed!

We are on the other side of the table on this discussion, but I must admit that as a Fins fan I am biased, and a few years ago when Bullygate was going down, I was just as adamant in the defense of my team as you are in defense of yours. I get it.

 

[moleculo]

until the legal battle plays out, there is really no more that needs to be said. This thread has continued to devolve as both sides dig in, and the same tired rationalizations and generalizations have been repeated.

No one's opinion will be swayed from here on out. If one continues to believe Brady is a saint beyond all evidence to the contrary, that opinion will not change because some guy from the internet made a good arguement. Likewise, if one believes Brady is guilty, his opinion will not change because yourteamcheats or whatever. There is no more good that can come from this thread. We are all meme'd out, not even the unintentional humor is funny any more (all though, I do still chuckle a little bit every time we get to talk about how Tom likes his balls to be prepared).

Anyways, I'm done here until more news breaks.

balls.

 

[FBG Moderator]

Aren't you guys sick of arguing about this by now? The only thing that matters now is how this thing plays out.

Its still sort of fun seeing the excuses Pats fans will make to minimize it all.

These posts definitely don't help there be any useful discussion. This contributed nothing other than insulting a group of people. This needs to stop. It was bad enough in the off season. Now preseason is picking up we're not going to have new users seeing this thread and thinking it's the tone to use in the Shark Pool.