|
|
Forums:
Community:
Campground:
Re: [snoopy138] This just in....:
Edit Log
|
|
wideguy
Sep 14, 2007, 2:39 AM
Views: 1905
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 15046
|
snoopy138 wrote: caughtinside wrote: Hmm, I don't think I'd place the pats in the same category as the yankess. I hate the yankees. It's easy to hate them because their payroll is 3x anyone elses and they buy the best players year after year. I've always enjoyed watching the pats play and win (except when the beat the 9ers or broncos!) But, if they are cheating at levels way way beyond, which I'll concede we don't know yet, that is a real problem that needs to be addressed. Who knows yet. It could just be a silly 'hey, everybody does this' slap on the wrist, or it could be endemic. The problem with hating the Yankees for spending all that money is that I'd have to hate the Mets, too. And Boston fans can't use that reason either. Instead, I hate the Yankees because I was brought up to do so. And because they deserve it.
Well, As for hating the baseball/Yankee payroll issue, Red Sox fans have largely given up on the money thing the last few years. Our "new" owners spend plenty to compete. (Although the difference between the Yanks and the Bosox is STILL $85 million. That the ENTIRE payroll of The Cubs, the Braves, The Mariners or the Dodgers. Still a pretty big gap.) The thing people hate most about the Yanks spending now is why they spend it. Many times they do it solely to take a player away from another team, not because they actually needed that player in any position.
I've said it before, what the Pats did was dead wrong. They got busted and punished. They should have been.
However,
In reply to: According to multiple league sources, the practice of surreptitiously recording a foe is commonplace. A former Patriots cameraman told the Herald as much on Tuesday. “I can tell you this happens all the time,” he said. “I guarantee you the Jets and everybody else are doing it, too.” Similarly, a Packers official admitted part of the reason the team didn’t file a complaint against the Pats even after catching them with a camera last November was because “everyone does it.” The difference, multiple sources said, is that the Patriots’ breach was overwhelmingly egregious. “When we call in our defenses, we work really hard to keep other teams from getting (the signals),” Chargers coach Norv Turner said.
That's it in a nutshell. Mangini knew his ex-boss would be doing it, because he used to be a party to it. He wanted Belichick knocked down a peg. The Competition Committee wanted ammunition to get two more votes to approve defensive helmet speakers. They were only too happy to run with Mangini's inside info.
What I do find comical is the NY Post columnist who opened with "Although the Patriots probably would have beat the Jets Sunday even without videotape assistance..." and all the Jets fans saying that the league should forfeit the win for the Pats because "Who knows what would have happened..."
We Know what would have happened. The Patriots would have won 38-14. The guy didn't have a live video link to the sidelines. And he wasn't relaying audio calls because he had no audio recording devices. The Patriots may fully have intended to cheat at halftime, but they never got the chance because the tape never made the locker room. What happened that Sunday was the sole result of whatever skills and game planning those two coaches went in with. Whatever "Halftime adjustments" were made were done without benefit of video.
Really, the Pats got off easy, probably because they're only guilty of ATTEMPTED cheating, like a lesser sentence for attempted murder.
That last line was tongue -in-cheek, btw.
(This post was edited by wideguy on Sep 14, 2007, 2:42 AM)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by wideguy
() on Sep 14, 2007, 2:42 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
