PatriotsReign

Why? He's not going to be big news. there is nothing to this non-story that ESPN is trying to salvage. This is pretty much already known it's nothing.

so I don't think pretty soon anything is gonna change

PatsFanSince74

his is one of those names that i guess many of us fans feel "yeah, i've heard of him," but couldn't quite tell you what he did.

as for the implied "accusation" here, even Banks at SI acknowledged this morning that any team's personnel who are allowed to be openly on or near the field in team attire when their opponent was practicing can't be blamed for noticing and reporting anything they saw.

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

MoLewisrocks

Some people actually prefer to know all there is to know about a subject of interest. Others like you prefer to try to browbeat them into not talking about anything related to this issue...here, in your self designated comfort zone, because talking about it here upsets your apple cart. Which, apparently, includes harassing people over on a Colts board playing avenging angel under the guise of straightening them out. The rest of us aren't here to fluff your trolling resume. You should stick to posting over there.

And btw don't keep doing us any favors like inviting them over here to talk...Ian's not running an opposition re-education gulag, he's running a Patriots fan site and message board. Seriously...grow up. The more you beat on them over there the less likely they are to see the light. And the more mis statements you make that they catch you on the dumber you make us all appear.

bakes781

Oh gee I don't know

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/jets/

PatriotsReign

Thanks for the lecture....MO

Let me give you some advice that will save you from embaressment. Let others stand up for themselves. You're not big brother here.

You don't like my posts? too bad Mo!

If you think I don't want to know anything about information regarding spygate, why was I one of the member who spurned the idea for FRAMe in it's earliest stages? You need to do more thorough investigative work my friend.

What I do NOT care for is member of our own board who like to keep this going with irrelevant bits of information. Basically anything & everything that "might" be a story.

What I do on other boards is none of you business, period. So DO NOT play the role of Patsfans police with me. You're wasting your time.

I don't follow you around on other boards and make note of what you say. Talk about acting childish! And, btw, what I say on other boards is always based upon the pride I feel for my Patriots.

Do not speak for Ian as if you know how Ian feels. What got up your butt this morning little man?

P.S. I just invited some more visitors!

PatriotsReign

Look at your source. I know for a fact this can't lead to anything. If you read more on this topic, you'll understand why.

bakes781

I never gave my opinion on the matter. I simply felt it was relevant to the discussion. Seeing as how he's a subject that has just been recently identified as a player in all of this I felt it warranted it's own thread.

PatriotsReign

Again, if you read beyond the NY papers, you'd know it doesn't even come close to warrenting it's own thread. It is clear that Walsh was there on official & legitimate business, wearing patriots clothing and standing right in fronto of Rams personnel. If they didn't want him there, they could have asked him to leave. It was in no way a form of espionage, period.

You should read both sides before you get concerned. And if you did read both sides, you should have posted 2 links rather than just the one from the NY Daily News

MoLewisrocks

That was a pretty honest (and somewhat comical) wrap up of the days events by Cimini...LOL

Only point I would quibble with is why assume your teams QB coach wasn't completely honest with the Commish - because we're all so convinced Matt Walsh - the guy who bamboozled an entire national sports media for years - certainly was?

To me this is just one more public mis step by dunderhead and his minions. Should it have been mentioned, sure - because you don't want to leave a tidbit on the table for Arlen to hang his agenda on. But leaving it out of the original briefing only called attention to it in a post PC vacuum where disheartened mediots were grasping for straws. And failing to mention that Daboll had been interviewed and apparently did not recall the events quite the way Walsh did (he says he's sticking to his testimony as he's been recalled to the principal's office) just gives those mediots an excuse to run with something they think might in some small way partially cover their collective asses for unsubstantiated rumor mongering for the last 100+ days.

bakes781

And again I have yet to give my opinion on the matter, so it is unfair of you to assume my position based on the links I provide. As a matter of fact I'm NOT concerned. I simply felt it was important info for those who are interested in gathering all of the facts.