JDSal45

Let me get this straight, the NFL issued the so-called "clarifying memo" on this rule in September of 2006?

So how exactly are the Patriots championships in the least bit tainted? How do you violate a rule that is, as the NFL conceded, unclear? If they issued a memo, and they did, then the NFL must have felt there was some understandable, divergent and differing interpretations of the rule. They clarified it in 2006, so the Patriots still doing it apparently did violate the rule. But doing it prior, while it was still unclear when they were actually winning championships? Not a violation. You can't intentionally violate that which is not understandable. The NFL conceded that point.

There is no taint. They made a mistake in continuing the practice, it should have been a minor fine and a further warning next time its draft picks and then move on. Instead it became the story du jour in a media climate where they are incapable of discussing anything but alleged scandal.

J D Sal

StevePatsFan

Wow this is a great point very overlooked!

tombonneau

I posted the exact thing on another board.

Put an * on the AFC East 2006 Champions banner all you like. But stay the **** away from the 2001, 2003, 2004 NFL Champion ones.

JDSal45

Maybe this year, though they never got to use the actual film

But it wasn't cheating in 2001, 2003 or 2004. The rule was, as the NFL conceded, unclear.

J D Sal

PatsFanSince74

the championships are tainted only to the extent that people think they are tainted. there is no official or objective metric of what is or is not "tainted." One man's tainted is another person's shiny trophy. I don't think the lombardi's are tainted. to me they still shine bright. but that don't mean squat.

Today, a lot of people, including some level-headed and reasonable folks, think they are tainted, so we have to accept that they are pretty tainted.

By the end of this season, especially if we win the SB, a lot fewer people will think they are tainted, so they will be a lot less tainted.

By sometime next season, only die hard patriot haters will still think they are tainted, so they'll be tainted only in small, biased circles.

By the end of next season, this will all be a footnote. We will have to be patient.

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

StevePatsFan

Idiots like you have been saying since the tuck rule, so what does it matter what you think?

PonyExpress

What kind of a thread title is that? Of course they're not tainted. Only a troll would think so. Ridiculous. Please edit the thread title, it's drawing trolls like flies to honey.

Grizzafted

If you keep defending this so breathlessly, it's always going to stick. When people say that, tell them to ***** off. Mention LT's nervous breakdown, Merriman's "special edge," Peyton Manning showing his ass to a female trainer, a drunk Joe Namath trying to date rape Suzy Kolber, etc etc etc.

This is sports. Up your game and relax. This isn't the history of Sparta.

Fahrenhype

People have been saying the Pats dynasty was bogus for five years now because it was all based on the "tuck rule" against the Raiders.

How is any of this mudslinging new to people? I'll take this nonsense over how last year started: "Brady has no weapons. Look at his body language!"

Belichick got nailed doing what everybody does, and they'll suffer the penalty for it. It doesn't change how talented this year's squad is. Hell, the "sorriest corner in the league" is already making history.

dngerhiboltage

sorry bro but you missed Rodney's HGH (on the "special edge" thing). thnx.