This message board is unpatriotic.

[HOGHEAVEN]

This message board is simply unpatriotic. I am unable to post my opinion whether it be negative or positive without a moderator removing it. My basic freedom of speech is therefore denied while participating on this board. Back in 2007 I wanted to debate the spygate issue. Yet the second I brought it up was instantly given an infraction.

Why am I back? Well after all these years I got an email message from the mods. Why in the world would you email me after making it apparently clear that your message board is clearly run by facists.

I happen to be a part of a Skins message board. Plenty of people who have different opinions post there messages. We view them as trolls. Yet they are able to post there opinions.

I find it quite hypocritical to have message board for "Patriots" when clearly the moderator rules with an iron fist. Basically tries to stomp out any opinion that may differ from his own regardless of the facts.

Yes in my eyes the Patriots SB wins are tainted. Spygate era is what I call it. A team who is owned by the Giants. In fact the name should be the New England Eli Mannings. Manning to Burress touchdown! Yeah so! You cant talk about it like men. Go ahead I am waiting for this message to be taken down in facist Hitler style. GO ahead Mods!

[Crossfire]

Originally Posted by HOGHEAVEN

This message board is simply unpatriotic. I am unable to post my opinion whether it be negative or positive without a moderator removing it. My basic freedom of speech is therefore denied while participating on this board. Back in 2007 I wanted to debate the spygate issue. Yet the second I brought it up was instantly given an infraction.

The problem with your comment is that freedom of speech only applies to government involvement. The message board here is not run by the government. So actually your "basic freedom of speech" is not being denied. You are coming onto a privately owned web forum, and therefore you are not granted or guaranteed any "basic freedom of speech" as is the same thing with any other privately owned message board.

Try again

[TBradyOwnsYou]

If it were up to me, every idiot who uses "there" when they mean "their" would be banned immediately. So it could be worse for you!

[jmt57]

Not exactly sure what being a fan of a particular football team has to do with caring about one's country. Although as far as team names go I can think of none that are as blatantly racist as Redskins. How fans of your team defend keeping that unconscionably degrading name is unimaginable to me.

As far as what happened in 2007 goes my suggestion is to compare and contrast the difference between the causation and correlation. Why you are so fixated on an event that happened five years ago and wish to continue discussing it now as if it is a current event can only be termed as obsessive behavior; same could be said about still whining about having a comment removed from a message board five years later.

While it may not have been discussed elsewhere to your level of approval (which I find very hard to believe), trust me - the subject has been debated here. In fact, the topic has been beaten to death more than the proverbial dead horse. So that while it may have been a new conversation to you, it most likely was something that the same talking points had been brought up so many times previously that it made it so redundant that it was exiled.

As for the snow bowl game (aka tuck rule game) the referees made the correct call. The rule was - and still is on the books. In fact the one thing they did not call correctly on that play was a blow to the head by Woodson, which should have moved the ball up 15 yards for a first down. It is not up to referees to decide whether or not a rule is a good one or bad one; it is up to them to enforce the rules that are on the books. Do you really want referees to ignore the rule book and instead just call fouls as they deem fit? If that's the case then why bother with a rule book at all? That call was made three times that year and has been called at least once every year since. Something tells me that you never once complained about any of the other times the rule was enforced - which would make you a hypocrite, would it not?

Do you really think that when you came here to talk about filming or the playoff game against the Raiders that you were the first fan of another team to do so?

As for an email that may have been sent out it was system generated; no moderator sat down and typed it out specifically to you. As you can see from the number of emails that you have received from this site it is extremely rare. If one email every five years is too many for your senses to handle then perhaps you may want to go to your email tools and block correspondence from this site.

Good luck to your team despite its totally unacceptable name. Perhaps this will be the first time since Bush was president that they have a winning season.




Sorry to disappoint you but as a moderator your message - and my response - remains here, for your viewing pleasure.

[HOGHEAVEN]

Originally Posted by TBradyOwnsYou

If it were up to me, every idiot who uses "there" when they mean "their" would be banned immediately. So it could be worse for you!

What are you the grammar police? Who cares? Anyhow Eli Manning owns u.

[HOGHEAVEN]

Originally Posted by jmt57

Not exactly sure what being a fan of a particular football team has to do with caring about one's country. Although as far as team names go I can think of none that are as blatantly racist as Redskins. How fans of your team defend keeping that unconscionably degrading name is unimaginable to me.

As far as what happened in 2007 goes my suggestion is to compare and contrast the difference between the causation and correlation. Why you are so fixated on an event that happened five years ago and wish to continue discussing it now as if it is a current event can only be termed as obsessive behavior; same could be said about still whining about having a comment removed from a message board five years later.

While it may not have been discussed elsewhere to your level of approval (which I find very hard to believe), trust me - the subject has been debated here. In fact, the topic has been beaten to death more than the proverbial dead horse. So that while it may have been a new conversation to you, it most likely was something that the same talking points had been brought up so many times previously that it made it so redundant that it was exiled.

As for the snow bowl game (aka tuck rule game) the referees made the correct call. The rule was - and still is on the books. In fact the one thing they did not call correctly on that play was a blow to the head by Woodson, which should have moved the ball up 15 yards for a first down. It is not up to referees to decide whether or not a rule is a good one or bad one; it is up to them to enforce the rules that are on the books. Do you really want referees to ignore the rule book and instead just call fouls as they deem fit? If that's the case then why bother with a rule book at all? That call was made three times that year and has been called at least once every year since. Something tells me that you never once complained about any of the other times the rule was enforced - which would make you a hypocrite, would it not?

Do you really think that when you came here to talk about filming or the playoff game against the Raiders that you were the first fan of another team to do so?

As for an email that may have been sent out it was system generated; no moderator sat down and typed it out specifically to you. As you can see from the number of emails that you have received from this site it is extremely rare. If one email every five years is too many for your senses to handle then perhaps you may want to go to your email tools and block correspondence from this site.

Good luck to your team despite its totally unacceptable name. Perhaps this will be the first time since Bush was president that they have a winning season.




Sorry to disappoint you but as a moderator your message - and my response - remains here, for your viewing pleasure.

Well Ill give you guys credit for not taking down my post. Last time it was taken down quickly.

Anyways no one had ever heard of the tuck rule before that game. There have been many fumbles that looked exactly like the tuck play. Fix job if you ask me. The league just wanted the Pats to win post 9/11. No way did they want the Raiders to win.
What about spygate? Knowing what the other team is doing is certainly an unfair advantage. So therefore your SB wins should have an asterisk next to them in the record books.

[captain insano]

Originally Posted by HOGHEAVEN

Well Ill give you guys credit for not taking down my post. Last time it was taken down quickly.

Anyways no one had ever heard of the tuck rule before that game. There have been many fumbles that looked exactly like the tuck play. Fix job if you ask me. The league just wanted the Pats to win post 9/11. No way did they want the Raiders to win.
What about spygate? Knowing what the other team is doing is certainly an unfair advantage. So therefore your SB wins should have an asterisk next to them in the record books.

thats awesome. are you done now?

[jmt57]

Originally Posted by HOGHEAVEN

Well Ill give you guys credit for not taking down my post. Last time it was taken down quickly.

Anyways no one had ever heard of the tuck rule before that game. There have been many fumbles that looked exactly like the tuck play. Fix job if you ask me. The league just wanted the Pats to win post 9/11. No way did they want the Raiders to win.
What about spygate? Knowing what the other team is doing is certainly an unfair advantage. So therefore your SB wins should have an asterisk next to them in the record books.

If you believe games are fixed based on who the league wants to win then why do you bother watching the NFL? Let me guess, you believe the Redskins are bad because the league doesn't like Dan Snyder, so they conspire to have opponents beat them week in and week out?

Tuck rule: bad rule, correct call. Still on the books. Still gets called several times every year.

If the video taping had such a profound effect then how do you explain the team's record being better after than it was before? How do they ever lose a game? Why didn't they win the Super Bowl by four touchdowns every year? Since it involved taping of defensive signals why weren't they scoring 40+ points every game from 2000 to 2006? How does taping defensive signals cause that team's offense sputter and throw interceptions or make special team blunders?

As for your theories, believe what you want to believe; obviously wild speculation is of much greater importance to you than any factual evidence. You may want to acquaint yourself with the definitions of causation and correlation if you want to have an intelligent conversation on the subject though. Otherwise you may as well say that 'I just know aliens are controlling our thoughts from Area 51; prove I'm wrong'.

[bradygronk]

Go Patriots!!!

[One-Be-Lo]

filming was and still is legal why can't people get this through their heads? patriots were guilty of not having their camera in the correct place... an enclosed video booth. Jimmy Johnson, Dick Vermeil, Bill Cowher and many others have defended them numerous times. but I guess biased message boarders are somehow more knowledgeable on the game than these great coaches.. "spygate" was the most overblown sports story of all time but have fun acting like you know something.