Welcome to PatsFans.com

Wow, a national article that isn't biased against the Pats

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Master Yates, Nov 6, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Master Yates

    Master Yates Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Last edited: Nov 6, 2007
  2. Bella*chick

    Bella*chick Addicted to the light

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    8,115
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    What's all that about the real time in-game advantage we were trying to get? Whatever. NO ONE has come up with a plausible way in which that would have worked.
  3. Master Yates

    Master Yates Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yeah, some of it isn't worth reading, but at least it puts Shula in his place if we go undefeated this year.

  4. Bella*chick

    Bella*chick Addicted to the light

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    8,115
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Well, yes, but this guy is one in a sea of people who think Shula is being foolish. I actually haven't seen anyone agreeing with his point of view except maybe the New York Post....and we all know what type of trash tabloid they are.
  5. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    I wrote this to Dan Wetzel:

    I'm very confused by your article on Shula and the Patriots.

    You wrote: "NFL teams constantly update their movements,
    even week to week, since it isn't against NFL rules to film
    the coaches' signals from other areas of the stadium."

    It's not? Then why does it matter that the Patriots were
    doing it? I heard Bob Costas interview Goodell, and Costas
    asked him: "With high-tech gadgets these days, like
    binoculars with digital recording, you could steal signals
    from the stands. How are you going to legislate against
    this?" Goodell responded: "This wasn't a high-tech device.
    And it was out in the open in an illegal area."

    Seems to me the NFL is concerned about keeping up
    appearances more than they are about cheating. You'll have
    to explain to me the difference between videotaping in row 1
    and videotaping on the sideline.

    You also wrote: "New England was trying to get a real-time,
    in-game advantage."

    How do you know this?

    Lastly, you stated that it's ok to question New England's
    Super Bowl victories. Except the rule against videotaping
    was passed in 2005, and the memo reinforcing the rule was
    sent in September of 2006. The Patriots haven't won a Super
    Bowl since those dates. Their wins occurred prior to the rule.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>