FWST LBOH: Media gives cheating Patriots a break

[Route 66]

In 10 years, nobody will even remember the controversy, or even care.

I wouldn't bet on it.

 

[Route 66]

They got punished. They lost a 1st round pick. Bellicek got fined.

Move on.

We are about to witness history. Though I wish it was us and not the Patriots having this success.....it is still kind of cool to watch it unfold.

Someday, I will be able to tell my kids I watched the greatest team of all time play.

You keep talking about "history" like it doesn't matter what happened on the road to get to 19-0. IMO, I saw the Pats beat every team they played against. The only beef I have with them is their sportsmanship. Heck, with that in mind, if they ran up the score on a team then give 'em heck next time. But if they did cheat and it did help them at least one game this year, there goes that perfect season and "history" is rewritten.

You can't just act like others are ridiculous for questioning a team that was caught cheating and wanting an * next to their title. Sadly, this season has that asterisk because the team that went undefeated is the same team that was not only accused, but caught and fined for cheating in games. I just don't see the history in seeing this team achieve that. I can't say that the Pats had to cheat to win all their games but raising the question does make sense.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

And daddy will probably say, "Yes, but they were punished. And it's not like other teams don't cheat either."

In 10 years, nobody will even remember the controversy, or even care.

Nice value system.
"You can go and kill someone.... other people do it"

I doubt that. In 10 years it will be remembered.

 

[burmafrd]

cheating should be punished in such a way as to make sure no one else wants to do it. Cannot say that happened in this case, can you?
Integrity of the game= sweep it under the rug.
AS MUCH as I despise the NCAA, they will take away victories and championships if they are tainted. The NFL should do the same. declare the 3 other SB victories null and void and asterisk this one if they win.

 

[Vintage]

You keep talking about "history" like it doesn't matter what happened on the road to get to 19-0. IMO, I saw the Pats beat every team they played against. The only beef I have with them is their sportsmanship. Heck, with that in mind, if they ran up the score on a team then give 'em heck next time. But if they did cheat and it did help them at least one game this year, there goes that perfect season and "history" is rewritten.

You can't just act like others are ridiculous for questioning a team that was caught cheating and wanting an * next to their title. Sadly, this season has that asterisk because the team that went undefeated is the same team that was not only accused, but caught and fined for cheating in games. I just don't see the history in seeing this team achieve that. I can't say that the Pats had to cheat to win all their games but raising the question does make sense.

Let me explain: If the Patriots win the Super Bowl, there will be no *. None. Nada. Zilch. The record book will say 19-0. The end.

You can put a mental one in there if you wish....but the reality of it is, no * will appear on nfl.com or any other official NFL document, catalog, history book, etc.

And that's really all that will matter. I doubt the Patriots will care too much about what others think while they celebrate a Super Bowl victory (should they win).

 

[Vintage]

cheating should be punished in such a way as to make sure no one else wants to do it. Cannot say that happened in this case, can you?
Integrity of the game= sweep it under the rug.
AS MUCH as I despise the NCAA, they will take away victories and championships if they are tainted. The NFL should do the same. declare the 3 other SB victories null and void and asterisk this one if they win.

Is there proof that the Patriots cheated during their other Super Bowl victories to make such a claim?

 

[burmafrd]

Did it not come out that they had been doing it since 2001?

 

[Sarge]

The biggest joke is winning Coach of the Year the year you're caught and fined for cheating.

Yep------------nice job NFL...........

Cheat and you shall succeed.

 

[zrinkill]

Someday, I will be able to tell my kids I watched the greatest team of all time play.

I already can ..... the 92-93 Cowboys would beat this Patriot team like a redheaded step child who just broke a vase.

 

[Hostile]

The media loves to build something up only to tear it down. Media day and all of both weeks leading to the Super Bowl they should hammer the cheating accusations. The Patriots should have to answer it in every media session.

This may be the only way they can tear them down, because I don't think the Giants have a prayer.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Again, what would the evidence have done?

Are you really asking this question?

It shows guilt, innocence, or inconclusiveness. If it shows guilt, it also shows the extent of the wrongdoing.

We destroy bank records, tax returns, etc., after a certain time.

You seriously think this is relevant to destroying evidence? Unless those documents are part of a court case, they're not even remotely comparable. But, then that would be contrary to your point, if you even had one for mentioning such a vacuous analogy.

What would have been the point of keeping this information other than the possibility that someone else would make copies?

What makes you think there aren't any copies?

What does that have to do with any?

You're arguing simply to argue and have no point. Of course, he was filming to gain an advantage.

He was filming to gain an "unfair" advantage. Otherwise, it wouldn't be considered "cheating".

I'm saying to you, it's incumbent upon you to prove that he won games because of that advantage.

That's harder to do.

It's not incumbent on me to prove anything. Because that's an argument you invented, and I never agreed to participate in. That's why it was deemed irrelevant.

Your argument is nonsensical anyways. How do you prove someone won games because of something except if that something led them to scoring more points than the other team?

People can't do that even for a football game that's played fairly. LOL.

LOL!

My argument is irrelevant?
But it's your argument - or at least the argument of others here - that the NFL ordered the tapes destroyed to hide some conspiracy.

It's not an argument. It's evidence for the notion that they did. And it's strong evidence, because you don't destroy evidence otherwise. If it shows innocence, then what's the point of destroying it because it vindicates you. If it shows inconclusiveness, then it's irrelevant. However, if it shows guilt, and more importantly, the extent of that guilt, and you don't want others to know it, you destroy it.

If you're going to make the argument that the NFL thought it created an advantage, then you have to also buy the NFL's position that the tapes should have been destroyed. Obviously, the NFL didn't think they should remain in existence.

You appeal to the same authority you criticize.

I don't have to buy anything, because those two arguments aren't even related.

So what? Evening the playing field doesn't mean that the Pats still wouldn't have won. And that's the issue that everyone is crowing about.

How convenient. I guess we'll never know.

If the Pats had gone on to lose the rest of their games, no one would be whining. But it's because the Pats won, that you hear the crying about "Spygate."

Because if the Pats went on to lose the rest of their games, then it would be evidence that their cheating helped them win, and it would prove the point!

How silly.

Who said this was open to third-party arbitration?

In order to have a third-party arbitration, you have to have one party (the Pats) and the other party (the NFL) to enter into that arrangement.

Second, the NFL has the authority to act in these cases. This issue wasn't against particular teams as it was against the league and violated the league's policy.

You don't even know what you're talking about. You create scenarios not even relevant (such as a third-party arbitrator), you ignore any attempts to show how "Spygate" led to a Patriots win, and yet you call my arguments silly?

I didn't use third party arbitration in the legal sense. I used it in the sense that destroying the evidence won't allow anyone outside of the NFL and the Pats, i.e. a third party to see the evidence so that they can make their own determination on whether the tapes made it easier for them to win games, if someone wanted to pursue that issue down the road in the future for whatever reason.

You're talking about something I didn't even try to imply.

 

[Hostile]

I already can ..... the 92-93 Cowboys would beat this Patriot team like a redheaded step child who just broke a vase.

I still say the best football team I ever saw was the 1985 Bears.

 

[superpunk]

Is there proof that the Patriots cheated during their other Super Bowl victories to make such a claim?

We don't know.

They destroyed the evidence.....:

 

[juck]

We havent heard the end,this will come out years later but nobody will care by then.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think the Pats clearly have a good argument to claim them as the best ever and that is the NFL is now in the days of parity, FA and salary caps many said things like the Pats are currently doing could not be done. In my opinion are they the best I have ever seen? maybe not, but what they have done thus far is very impressive under today’s NFL makeup

 

[tyke1doe]

Nice value system.
"You can go and kill someone.... other people do it"

Yeah, comparing killing to cheating.

I doubt that. In 10 years it will be remembered.

Yes, it will be remembered in the since that people who are around will remember the controversy.

But it won't matter much 10 years from now. Few, when talking about the great teams, are going to cite the Pats and then say, but for Spygate, they wouldn't have been great.

 

[khiladi]

Again, what would the evidence have done?
We destroy bank records, tax returns, etc., after a certain time.
What would have been the point of keeping this information other than the possibility that someone else would make copies?

This is by far, one of the most ******** analogies I have ever read in my life. Are bank records, tax returns, and phone bills destroyed when somebody is under suspicion for committing a crime?

I guess that makes Arthur Anderson not guilty for destroying the evidence related to the Enron case....

 

[khiladi]

We don't know.

They destroyed the evidence.....:

That point, and it is really astonishing how it does, flies right over their heads...

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Yeah, comparing killing to cheating.

Yes. I exaggerated the point.
The punishment did not fit the crime and the simple fact that they cheated in game 1 they should lose the W.

Yes, it will be remembered in the since that people who are around will remember the controversy.

But it won't matter much 10 years from now. Few, when talking about the great teams, are going to cite the Pats and then say, but for Spygate, they wouldn't have been great.

Dont be so sure. We are living in the "cheatin" era in sports.

 

[cajuncocoa]

I think the Pats clearly have a good argument to claim them as the best ever and that is the NFL is now in the days of parity, FA and salary caps many said things like the Pats are currently doing could not be done. In my opinion are they the best I have ever seen? maybe not, but what they have done thus far is very impressive under today’s NFL makeup

It would be, except the fact that they got caught cheating and are helped with ridiculous calls in crucial situations in each and every damn game makes it hard for me to chalk this up to "greatness".

To those who wish to overlook this, I wonder if you have children, and what values are you teaching them?????