Lloyd_Christmas

Your holier-than-thou non-homer shtick is tiresome.

Stick your legitimate points:

1) We got caught red-handed and these other instances cited cannot be proven

2) The penalty given, while unprecedented, is within the legitimate range

All the rest of that was arrogant finger pointing and fluff.

***

I think the other side has some legit points too:

1) Public outcry (fueled by envy) and media sensationalism (fueled by money) was a driving factor in the level of punishment

2) Our level of success over the years on the field, in FA, and in accumulating extra draft picks influenced Goodall to take a 1st round pick away rather than a lower round pick. Had we been the Dolphins, we probably would have lost a much lower pick.

***

Regardless, I'm in agreement with anyone who would just like to move on.

__________________
A Truly Vindictive Fanboy-type Poster

"My name is William Stephen Belichick, Coach of the New England Patriots, Three Time Super Bowl Champion, Defensive Guru, Pride of Karlovac, The Greatest Coach in the History of the NFL Since Vince Lombardi. Target of the spygate lynching, Defender of our Dynasty's legacy. And I will have my vengeance, in this game and the rest."

BradyManny

Right, but who says his discretion is right? That's what I'm asking PatsinVA to answer. I think Goodell's discretion, his judgement, was way off base. I'm not going to blindly accept the Commish's rule simply because he has the authority to rule as he wishes.

Pujo

Right, you're questioning the commissioner's motives, and I'm questioning yours. Do I feel that the person who was elected by the entire ownership to be the steward of the game is capable of more objectivity than fans, ones who support one team to the point of being regulars of that team's fan site? Yes. Do I feel that you'd be defending the Colts if they were in our shoes? Not a snowball's chance in hell. Credibility is the issue here; not Goodell's - yours.

BradyManny

Right, because all elected officials are incapable of making wrong decisions and we should never question them...

Pujo

Sure, question them, but expect that others are going to question you, since you have even more apparant bias than the person you're questioning.

It's like Democrats going after Republicans and Republicans going after Democrats, you know they're both going to jump at each other any chance they get, so it's tough to take them seriously when they speak about their "outrage at what the other party has done".

reflexblue

Yes "The Penquin" is a rat mother f@#king snitch. I don't know what he OR BB were trying to accomplish. I don't think BB was dumb enough not to think he was not going to get caught.
That he never thought the penalty would be this steep if he did (get caught)
The info garnered was worth the price,I doubt it.
I'm pretty sure BB had a reason for being so blatantly obvious.

I'm sure that The snitch isn't held in high regard by the rest of the coach's who also cheat,and don't want the commish pokeing his nose into things.From what I've read most teams "bend the rules" to get an edge,and have done so for as long as the game has been played. The leauge office new about this for along time and said nothing.

And finally the next jests pats game/score Pats 76 Jests 10

No handshake just BB zapping the snitch with a tasser at mid-field.

__________________
S.H.E.S.
I Likes Spikes.

JoeSixPat

I'm waiting to see if the media picks up on the interesting connection between Wade Wilson and Rex Grossman...

Maybe they might want to connect the dots between these facts:

Wade Wilson served as the QB coach for Chicago last season when Rex Grossman took them to the Super Bowl.

This year, Wade Wilson leaves and it is learned that he was the recipient of human growth hormone. The Commissioner doesn't buy his excuse and suspends him for 4 games (a punishment that those who are gullible enough to beleive Wilson's explanation use to suggest Goodell wasn't tough enough on Belichick)

In 2007 With his relationship with Wilson severed in his move to the Cowboys, and a league wide crackdown on HGH use, Grossman finds himself having a very poor season, and was benched this week in favor of Brian Griese.

I don't suppose our crack media hacks see any reason to question the circumstances in which a QB can go from the Super Bowl to the Bench in 3 games, do they?

Pujo

In Grossman's defense, and I can hardly call it that, he was really bad last year, too, I thought they should have benched him for the Super Bowl.

PatsFanInVa

It's just how I feel. So get tired, what can I say. I find the homer shtick tiresome, and I find the "now can we get our rings" shtick tiresome. Both reek of justifications/excuses/whining to me, just as my own point of view looks sanctimonious to you.

I would add,
3) Regardless of justification, BB -- yes, OUR GUY! -- knew the league was on the lookout for this behavior and did it anyway.

Take note of the difference between what you consider my legitimate points and this one: none of the 3 points I made depend on subjective judgment. They are objective facts (unless you want to stretch the point and say "maybe BB didn't read the memo.")

Your first point is entirely speculative, albeit widely accepted within our own fan base. It is the diametric opposite of the point of view of many outside this fan base. I have seen no objective evidence that either is the case.

I will acknowledge that much other team/other fan reaction is envy-driven. I do not recognize your assertion that this envy, and the media's reaction to the story, dominated Goodell's thinking, any more than I can take on face value an assertion that a Pacman Jones was "railroaded by the press", or a Mike Vick was prosecuted "because he's black", on face value.

This statement can not be substantiated objectively. I have read opinion to the effect that "it's almost like Goodell knew they had two number one picks [so it didn't really hurt the Pats/he's doing us favors.]" How do I tell which of you is objectively correct? It strikes me that both assertions are mere statements of opinion, akin to conspiracy theory: this assertion ties together all these facts (we are successful) with this outcome (we were penalized). There is just no reason to believe in a causal relationship.

The level of the penalty is in the eye of the beholder.

Finally -- and this may be in response to an earlier poster -- I mention the fact that the violation was an in-game infraction not to establish a perception of in-game use of the tape, which indeed this fact does not establish. I only mention it to establish the evidentiary difference between the Pats' case, and a writer reporting a rumor.

Time and place are tied to the physical evidence by the fact that they were apprehended in the act. Nobody has to "place them at the scene."

Thanks,

PFnV

BoTown

It cost us a first round pick to get Belichick in the first place. What's another first rounder?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.