Thinking about what Goodell may do??

[Tony Cahncuhd]

Who WAS the guy in the photo we saw yesterday?

I've been wondering about that all day. If the guy in the photo was on the Jets staff, then, that too would be a violation of the NFL memo on videotaping.

Because no stink was raised, I have to assume that that guy was not at all associated with the Jets or Patriots staff.

But who was he? And who did he work for?

 

[He Ban Me]

I've been wondering about that all day. If the guy in the photo was on the Jets staff, then, that too would be a violation of the NFL memo on videotaping.

Because no stink was raised, I have to assume that that guy was not at all associated with the Jets or Patriots staff.

But who was he? And who did he work for?

And why was he on the grassy knoll??

You make a good point.

I thought this had all been confirmed. Ease of movement from side to side, and descriptions of the attire, and hell, the photo, while not the best evidence, looked like it could have been estrella.

 

[upstater1]

And why was he on the grassy knoll??

You make a good point.

I thought this had all been confirmed. Ease of movement from side to side, and descriptions of the attire, and hell, the photo, while not the best evidence, looked like it could have been estrella.

Read the sticky note at the very top of this message board. You will find your answers.

 

[dtbrks]

I think he will come odwn hard on the Pats if there is enough evidence.

 

[He Ban Me]

Read the sticky note at the very top of this message board. You will find your answers.

thx, found it. so, let me ask, it is now "cold hard fb facts" that is discrediting? The site that says not to "click here" if you are not over 18??

Sounds like this guy was seen several times, even after the Pats guy was questioned, but man, it's tough to know who is the authority. Who is credible and who isn't. So, I guess the difference would be that the camera man was further away than first assumed. Less egregious than being 15-20 yards away? Yes. Still against the rules? Yes.

 

[upstater1]

thx, found it. so, let me ask, it is now "cold hard fb facts" that is discrediting? The site that says not to "click here" if you are not over 18??

Sounds like this guy was seen several times, even after the Pats guy was questioned, but man, it's tough to know who is the authority. Who is credible and who isn't. So, I guess the difference would be that the camera man was further away than first assumed. Less egregious than being 15-20 yards away? Yes. Still against the rules? Yes.

No one here said it isn't against the rules. Many are arguing that it's not cheating because the NFL rules don't prohibit using tape to steal signals. They only prohibit making the tape.

Me, I admit it's cheating. But then, based on the NFL's own statement after the Dolphins game last year, cheating (i.e. stealin signals off a tape and usin in the game) is legal.

The only thing the Patriots did wrong here was make a videotape. But making a videotape isn't cheating. Using the videotape to steal signals is cheating. the former is prohibited. The latter isn't.

Personally, I think that's a ludicrous stance that only a politician, a lawyer or a bureaucrat would be proud of, but then again, I don't work for the NFL.

 

[PatsSteve1]

I'd just like the Comish to make his dam decision and get it over with.

 

[Pats726]

I think he will come odwn hard on the Pats if there is enough evidence.

There will also be league wide reaction...and everyone watching their back...and opening a Pandorra's Box..I do NOT think Goodell wants that..

 

[groundgame]

A fine of $200,000 and loss of a 4th rounder.

This violation is less egregious than what the Broncos did with cap manipulation 10 years ago, so anything higher than a 3rd is complete bullsh*t.

I think a 2008 3rd round pick and $250,000.

 

[BelichickFan]

I'd just like the Comish to make his dam decision and get it over with.

No kidding - stop jerking us around and get this thing over with. There's a game in 3 days.

 

[richpats]

I think we get called for having the camera on the sidelines. No mention of cheating or any of the other crap being thrown around. They will say they looked at the tape and found nothing inapppropriate. So we get a fine, possibly less than $200,000. I don't see a loss of draft picks. Remember that most of these accusations have no bearing on anything. Its all just piling on.

I think that's EXACTLY what should happen. It's a win-win-win-win.

Win #1: The NFL will show it has dealt with the situation fairly yet protect the integrity of the product on the field. The rest of the league gains awareness and won't mess around with this (look at the PR situation for the Pats right now).

Win #2: The Jets are thrown a bone with the $200,000 fine on NE. Of course this is less than they were expecting, but I think Goodell is pissed at them for bringing the issue to light in the first place.

Win #3: The Pats have a parachute from this public freefall they have been suffering all week.

Win #4: The public/media get an explanation and a penalty that reflects the nature of the infraction. They can suspect cheating all they want but if the Pats are exonerated in that respect, life moves on and no asterisks on anything.