Yeah, hate to say it, but I'm all about the bunker too.
Look, it's not paranoia if everybody really is out to get you. Let them spin their wheels, don't spin yours. It looks like we're about to have our guys dragged in front of a kangaroo court.
What you can do as a Pats fan is understand that you're witnessing a theatrical event. Don't take it as you would take something coming out of a fair trial; one avowed Pats-hater will be asking all the questions, unless of course people like Leahy and Kennedy decide to descend to the same level, and badger about other teams.
Sure, write them if you want. I am sure they're as eager to please their constituents as Specter is... but the key to the whole episode is this:
You mind is free. You control what constitutes a fair standard. And whatever you have to hear from other fans, and from the media, and for however long, you establish what you believe to be the conclusion, for a Pats fan.
For me, the standard of guilt here is twofold:
1) It must be demonstrated, on any given point, that the Pats engaged in an activity against the NFL rules, as those rules stood at the time of the occasion;
2) It must be demonstrated, on any such occasion, that the Pats were unique in violating these rules.
2a) If we do not have this conversation, it qualifies as a cover-up of other teams' activities. If they do not question whether the Pats' activities were unique -- regardless of the answer to that question -- any committee investigating the league is fulfilling its avowed motivation; i.e., Specter's concern as an Eagles' fan.
3) As far as Specter vs. the NFL: Specter must prove that the NFL, in moderating its own business partners and meting out punishment for the breaking of league rules, impeded justice and broke U.S. law.
4) The argument that the NFL's antitrust exemption has any bearing on its right to dole out punishments and handle internal affairs must be shown to have bearing on the matter, if Specter invokes it to obviate the need to prove point (3).
4a) In other words, Specter will argue that, because the NFL enjoys this exemption, the Senate has an interest in the internal matters of the league. In baseball, the steroids scandal skirts this issue, because substances that break US law are involved. I know of no law preventing a company from meting out punishments as it sees fit, and disposing of records as it sees fit, provided that disposal of the records does not itself break any law.
In terms of the league, Specter is gunning to use his political power to weaken the NFL vis a vis the cable companies. In terms of the Patriots, Specter is gunning to use his political power to take away Lombardi trophies, suspend or ban Belichick, or impose some other draconian solution, like confiscation of remaining draft picks (including but not limited to our #7 overall pick, of course.)
So don't look at this as arising from the Pats' wrongdoing, or arising from a neutral observer. We are the subject of one powerful individual's agenda. Judge what you see knowing the agenda.
That's what you can do: be fair, including being fair to your own team and your own coach.
What you can not do, most likely, is influence the course of events going forward. You can not influence the scads of fans and talking heads who think it's funny to talk about the whole dynasty as "tainted." You can not undo the past, however minor you think the Pats' actions are.
But you can hold the Pats to a level of conduct equal to that of the remainder of the league. When the team is accused, it is appropriate to demand equal treatment and equal standards.
Just my .02,
PFnV
