If you insist that I go back through that post, line by line, showing where it is based on opinion and not fact then I will... but tomorrow, not tonight.
I'm not asking for where it's fact or opinion, I'm asking you to find me where it isn't logical. And yes, I will gladly give you to tomorrow to do so.
I give up. I'm too bored with this subject to do this.
You are right and I am wrong. Groovy?
Wait, does this mean no beer of beef jerky?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Voltaire
Just got caught up with this thread and this post by knapp stood out to me:
In the grand scheme of things I don't feel that what the Pats did here was as bad as when Albert Haynesworth stomped on Gurode's face last season. They aren't intentionally trying to harm anyone. There is no evidence to show that any player was hurt, intentionally or unintentionally, by what the Patsies did.
It is really impossible to compare the 2 because:
1. 1 was physical. The other was not. 2. 1 was premeditated and the other probably was not.
Depending on your definition of harm, you could say that the Pats were trying to harm the Jets in this instance. Not physically but in the standings.
Weren't they warned about this in the past?? Seems like they felt that they were bulletproof.
"There is no bad beer. Some are better than others."
Lofunzo wrote:Just got caught up with this thread and this post by knapp stood out to me:
In the grand scheme of things I don't feel that what the Pats did here was as bad as when Albert Haynesworth stomped on Gurode's face last season. They aren't intentionally trying to harm anyone. There is no evidence to show that any player was hurt, intentionally or unintentionally, by what the Patsies did.
It is really impossible to compare the 2 because:
1. 1 was physical. The other was not. 2. 1 was premeditated and the other probably was not.
Depending on your definition of harm, you could say that the Pats were trying to harm the Jets in this instance. Not physically but in the standings.
Weren't they warned about this in the past?? Seems like they felt that they were bulletproof.
True. And I think in that example not only was there a premeditated factor, but one was systemic, and one was individual. Now, if a team has a policy of constantly stomping on players, taking penalties in exchange for injuring opponents, then we might have something.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
I have mostly stayed out of the discussion here, but have read most of what has been posted. I don't see what the big deal on the arguments is. It's cut and dry in my mind.
The league said not to have cameras on the sidelines in the owners meetings this season. The Patriots did. They were caught. They get punished. We move on with the season.
For me, this whole situation just shows that most people are using this as an excuse to justify their dislike(hatred) for the Pats. The only thing that the Pats did wrong was use a camera. If they used a telescope and a guy with photographic memory, no rules would have been broken. Stealing signals is not breaking the rules. What suprises me most is that no has brought this up.
I don't remember to much outrage about this(throw me a link if I am wrong). The only difference I see it that the Pats used video and the Dolphins used audio.
I really think losing a first round pick is too much, would have rather have seen a punishment that focused more on BB than the team. If BB leaves at the end of this year, the team will still suffer from something that he did.
What bothers me more is the thought that the Pats were screwing with the communications of the other teams during home games. That, to me, is a lot worse that this 'tapegate' situtaion....
yeah those are two VERY VERY different things... hoodie was cheating the NFL, the game, and the teams he played... the face stomp was a poor decision made in the heat of a game and anger...
i just don't think they can even be compared...
treat24
Hall of Fame Hero
Posts: 18188
Joined: 6 Oct 2003
Yards this season: 0
Home Cafe: Football
Location: I'm drinking 'til I forget the 1999 NFC Championship game.
The Pats were told it was illegal last year when the Lions were in town (from SI):
Last year the Lions played the Patriots in Foxboro. At one point Detroit's coach, Rod Marinelli, phoned up to the press box, 'There's a camera pointed right at our defensive coach making his calls. Is that allowed?' A Lions employee called the NFL booth. No, it certainly was not. So the videotaper was stopped. Then after a while he began again. The same process was repeated and he was asked to stop again. Now that's dedication."
si.com/email/siextra/2007/09/14/ By Mark Beech, Richard Deitsch and David Sabino
Fantasy Football: "Luck is where preparation meets opportunity"
stomperrob wrote:The Pats were told it was illegal last year when the Lions were in town (from SI):
Last year the Lions played the Patriots in Foxboro. At one point Detroit's coach, Rod Marinelli, phoned up to the press box, 'There's a camera pointed right at our defensive coach making his calls. Is that allowed?' A Lions employee called the NFL booth. No, it certainly was not. So the videotaper was stopped. Then after a while he began again. The same process was repeated and he was asked to stop again. Now that's dedication."
si.com/email/siextra/2007/09/14/ By Mark Beech, Richard Deitsch and David Sabino
against the lions... man, imagine how much bellicheat did against better teams and in the playoffs
treat24
Hall of Fame Hero
Posts: 18188
Joined: 6 Oct 2003
Yards this season: 0
Home Cafe: Football
Location: I'm drinking 'til I forget the 1999 NFC Championship game.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Kilroy » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:58 am 
