The Idea Is Spreading...

[SteelerEmpire]

LINK: http://www.xtrapointfootball.com/201...ing-again.html

[vasteeler]

are they cheating or are we just preparing an excuse in case they beat us again?

[Chidi29]

Call me when anyone has any proof of anything and it isn't out of spite because the Pats are beating his favorite team.

[T&B fan]

I said this weeks ago in another thread

Re: Brady's Legacy (by LLT - December 14, 2010)

very well said I would add that a cheater is a cheater and will look to cheat again , it might be time to look in to them

[BuddhaBus]

I said this weeks ago in another thread

Re: Brady's Legacy (by LLT - December 14, 2010)

very well said I would add that a cheater is a cheater and will look to cheat again , it might be time to look in to them

Who's going to look into them... Roger Goodell? That's like asking Don King to look into fight fixing in boxing.

[T&B fan]

Who's going to look into them... Roger Goodell? That's like asking Don King to look into fight fixing in boxing.

hahahaha thats funny

I have no answer as to who should look in to them . just hope someone would .

[stlrtruck]

Why does everyone sweep this travesty under the rug?

Only the main media outlets have swept this under the rug, and many fans don't let it go. Matter of fact I make every attempt to remind my patriots* friends about this in any conversation about the greatness of the pats*

The Patriots cheated for 3 Super Bowls

Yes and it looks like they are on their way to cheating for 4

Is cheating wrong for everyone but the Patriots?

Obviously, according to the NFL and Roger Goodell it doesn't affect the integrity of the game as much as attending strip clubs, making hard tackles, or hitting QBs not named Marsha (brady).

The Patriots have gotten better at not getting caught

Eventually you do something long enough you do get better at it.

But I have the common sense to realize if it was good enough for Kraft, Belichick, and Brady in the last decade, it should be good enough for them in this one.

You and a few hundred thousand fans. Must be those 6 states that make up the patriots* fan base and the dumbbells in NY that can see the forest for the tree

[Chidi29]

For the group of fans, myself included, who defend Ben with the "no proof, just accusations" train of thought, you guys sure seem to be hypocritical.

[stlrtruck]

Call me when anyone has any proof of anything and it isn't out of spite because the Pats are beating his favorite team.

Sometimes I don't need full proof to show that my kids did something wrong. It's obvious by the way they handle themselves. So let's see the patriots* continue their arrogant pompous attitude when beating teams, there's no excuse or reason for their recent incineration of top defenses, but a team like cleveland burns them up? Hmmm, how ironic that the person in charge of the browns team is a former employee and knows the tactics.

While I'll remain open to the fact that maybe the patriots* are good enough as a team to do this, there will still be that reasonable doubt that they aren't doing it all honestly!

[stlrtruck]

For the group of fans, myself included, who defend Ben with the "no proof, just accusations" train of thought, you guys sure seem to be hypocritical.

Except the patriots* were found guilty of it before. Had Ben been found guilty in any of his previous incidents, then I'd have doubts of his behavior if he took on similar patterns.

[Chidi29]

Sometimes I don't need full proof to show that my kids did something wrong. It's obvious by the way they handle themselves. So let's see the patriots* continue their arrogant pompous attitude when beating teams, there's no excuse or reason for their recent incineration of top defenses, but a team like cleveland burns them up? Hmmm, how ironic that the person in charge of the browns team is a former employee and knows the tactics.

While I'll remain open to the fact that maybe the patriots* are good enough as a team to do this, there will still be that reasonable doubt that they aren't doing it all honestly!

Maybe not "full proof" but you have "some proof", no? We don't have ANY proof as of now.

Or maybe the Pats did just get a little full of themselves and that's why they lost to the Browns. Maybe it's because Rob Ryan is a really good DC that can throw a lot of different looks at you that the Pats don't get to see too often because they're playing the Browns once every four years.

Hey, we lost to KC, Oakland, and Cleveland last year. I guess they figured out our "tactics" too.

This is the equivalent to Steve Courson coming out today and saying, "Hey look, the Steelers have been playing really well this decade. A little too well. Must be steroids!"

You'd think that was a dumb argument. And you'd be right.

The fact that this is being talking about in association with the Pats causes you to leave the thought of needing proof and following the way the justice system works at the door.

[Chidi29]

Except the patriots* were found guilty of it before. Had Ben been found guilty in any of his previous incidents, then I'd have doubts of his behavior if he took on similar patterns.

And if someone brought up the idea that because Ben was accused before there was a greater chance of him being guilty on the second accusation, you'd run them out of town. Again, rightfully so.

Each accusation is separate from the next. Even if a robber is accused of robbery at a later point, the legal system doesn't say "We don't have any proof of you robbing this time around but since you did in the past, we'll just assume you're incapable of changing and find you guilty".

Each case needs proof.

This case has no proof.

This claim is baseless until there is proof.

[Wallace108]

And if someone brought up the idea that because Ben was accused before there was a greater chance of him being guilty on the second accusation, you'd run them out of town. Again, rightfully so.

Each accusation is separate from the next. Even if a robber is accused of robbery at a later point, the legal system doesn't say "We don't have any proof of you robbing this time around but since you did in the past, we'll just assume you're incapable of changing and find you guilty".

Each case needs proof.

This case has no proof.

This claim is baseless until there is proof.

Gotta disagree with you here Chidi. Past behavior is most definitely taken into account in the legal system. If a child disappears, the first thing police do is knock on the doors of known sex offenders in the area. That's just one example.

The Patriots were caught cheating, so I think that opens them up to more scrutiny. And with the McDaniels situation, we know this kind of thing is still going on. I'm not saying the Pats are cheating NOW, but it's worthy of discussion. Just like the cop says to the sex offender: We're not saying you abducted THIS child, but because of your past behavior, we're certainly going to take a look at you.

[fansince'76]

For the group of fans, myself included, who defend Ben with the "no proof, just accusations" train of thought, you guys sure seem to be hypocritical.

Seems to me there was about 7 years' worth of proof until the Commish conveniently destroyed it....

[T&B fan]

And if someone brought up the idea that because Ben was accused before there was a greater chance of him being guilty on the second accusation, you'd run them out of town. Again, rightfully so.

Each accusation is separate from the next. Even if a robber is accused of robbery at a later point, the legal system doesn't say "We don't have any proof of you robbing this time around but since you did in the past, we'll just assume you're incapable of changing and find you guilty".

Each case needs proof.

This case has no proof.

This claim is baseless until there is proof.

yea they never bring up your past guilty charge's in court . it only shows you track record .

[stlrtruck]

Maybe not "full proof" but you have "some proof", no? We don't have ANY proof as of now.

Or maybe the Pats did just get a little full of themselves and that's why they lost to the Browns. Maybe it's because Rob Ryan is a really good DC that can throw a lot of different looks at you that the Pats don't get to see too often because they're playing the Browns once every four years.

Hey, we lost to KC, Oakland, and Cleveland last year. I guess they figured out our "tactics" too.

This is the equivalent to Steve Courson coming out today and saying, "Hey look, the Steelers have been playing really well this decade. A little too well. Must be steroids!"

You'd think that was a dumb argument. And you'd be right.

The fact that this is being talking about in association with the Pats causes you to leave the thought of needing proof and following the way the justice system works at the door.

I don't need any proof with my children. As I mentioned, I can see it in their actions, physical proof comes later or through their own admissions down the road. And come to find out, I've been right more times, a lot more times, then I've been wrong.

When a team wins a game every couple of years, or even a few in a season (see browns this year),that they probably shouldn't I can see where the team rises above themselves and doesn't need a system to win, they just found a way. But when a team over the course of years used a different 'system' to become victorious, it just leaves a bad smell, and if it smells like a rat, looks like a rat, then it must be a rat.

As for justice, when it comes to the NFL there is no justice. And if Roger Goodell is going to make certain judgments based on accusations, then why doesn't he look at this one? Is it because it's the patriots*, or maybe he's afraid what he'll find? Or maybe he's just a coward and he doesn't want to have to deal with the negativity such an action would bring on the integrity of the league?

I understand your point of view and discussion, but personally, I feel that Der Kommish has shown a certain favoritism in his rulings and fails to handle discipline across the board in a manner that goes hand in hand with his 'integrity of the league' statements.

And if someone brought up the idea that because Ben was accused before there was a greater chance of him being guilty on the second accusation, you'd run them out of town. Again, rightfully so.

Each accusation is separate from the next. Even if a robber is accused of robbery at a later point, the legal system doesn't say "We don't have any proof of you robbing this time around but since you did in the past, we'll just assume you're incapable of changing and find you guilty".

Each case needs proof.

This case has no proof.

This claim is baseless until there is proof.

I've got to say I do appreciate your evil keel view of situations within the Steelers organization and across the NFL. It does make one stop and re-examine their views and arguments.

But are you a lawyer by trade?

[T&B fan]

Seems to me there was about 7 years' worth of proof until the Commish conveniently destroyed it....

no no, I was lead to believe that he told the pats to destroy the tapes ?? read it a few times ,think one was here on SU .

[Chidi29]

Gotta disagree with you here Chidi. Past behavior is most definitely taken into account in the legal system. If a child disappears, the first thing police do is knock on the doors of known sex offenders in the area. That's just one example.

The Patriots were caught cheating, so I think that opens them up to more scrutiny. And with the McDaniels situation, we know this kind of thing is still going on. I'm not saying the Pats are cheating NOW, but it's worthy of discussion. Just like the cop says to the sex offender: We're not saying you abducted THIS child, but because of your past behavior, we're certainly going to take a look at you.

But that basis alone does not make someone guilty. It's that basis plus a crap ton of other evidence. More direct evidence. There's no way that person would be found guilty soley on the premise of his past history.

That's my point. You guys are already calling the Pats guilty without a shred of proof.

You can tack on the "past behavior" part if you can find any other evidence. But you can't have it stand alone.

[Chidi29]

yea they never bring up your past guilty charge's in court . it only shows you track record .

But it's never the only thing held against you.

[steelreserve]

Except the patriots* were found guilty of it before.

^^^^ This.

[Chidi29]

I don't need any proof with my children. As I mentioned, I can see it in their actions, physical proof comes later or through their own admissions down the road. And come to find out, I've been right more times, a lot more times, then I've been wrong.

When a team wins a game every couple of years, or even a few in a season (see browns this year),that they probably shouldn't I can see where the team rises above themselves and doesn't need a system to win, they just found a way. But when a team over the course of years used a different 'system' to become victorious, it just leaves a bad smell, and if it smells like a rat, looks like a rat, then it must be a rat.

As for justice, when it comes to the NFL there is no justice. And if Roger Goodell is going to make certain judgments based on accusations, then why doesn't he look at this one? Is it because it's the patriots*, or maybe he's afraid what he'll find? Or maybe he's just a coward and he doesn't want to have to deal with the negativity such an action would bring on the integrity of the league?

I understand your point of view and discussion, but personally, I feel that Der Kommish has shown a certain favoritism in his rulings and fails to handle discipline across the board in a manner that goes hand in hand with his 'integrity of the league' statements.




I've got to say I do appreciate your evil keel view of situations within the Steelers organization and across the NFL. It does make one stop and re-examine their views and arguments.

But are you a lawyer by trade?

We can't see the Pats' actions. And for a legal process, it doesn't hope it gets it right and the physical proof will show itself down the road. Nor does it use the "I'm usually right" defense. Won't see that in a courtroom.

We really have no clue if Goodell has kept up with the Pats after the fact. That could be done behind closed doors. I don't see any reason for Goodell to publicly speak about it and drum up more talk like this nationwide.

[pepsyman1]

I don't know if they are cheating or not, but I do find it amazing that with the addition of a few first and 2nd year plays and the removal of Randy Moss (a troublemaker, but very productive since he got to New England) that this team suddenly is an unstoppable offensive juggernaut. If I were the Steelers, just to play it safe, I'd put together a new set of signals and keep them under lock and key until needed.

[JayC]

call me when something real comes out.

they indeed got a slap on the wrist for it the first time so i could see them try to bend the rules and integrity of the game again but just because they had a great season and destroyed some good defenses doesn't mean anything

[X-Terminator]

Yeah, it might just be time to admit that the Pats* are a pretty good team. But as I've said before, they are not invincible. They had problems with the Aaron Rodgers-less Packers 2 weeks ago and could have easily lost had Rodgers played. You just can't play scared against them - if you do, then Marsha will carve you up like a Christmas ham.

[tube517]

Agreed.

The Steelers seem to like being the "us against the world" team. I don't think the Patriots* will have the same results as the previous game.

I won't say the Pats* are cheaters now, but they cheated before. You can't deny that.

Yeah, it might just be time to admit that the Pats* are a pretty good team. But as I've said before, they are not invincible. They had problems with the Aaron Rodgers-less Packers 2 weeks ago and could have easily lost had Rodgers played. You just can't play scared against them - if you do, then Marsha will carve you up like a Christmas ham.

[stillers4me]

Until Belichick is gone, they will never get the benefit of the doubt.

[Devilsdancefloor]

Just go look at the jets game again. That was the night i shook my head and thought WOW brady knows where the DB's especially the safeties are going to be. It was like that all night. That is my first hmmm like truck said about kids you get a feel for when they are up too something. I feel like the *'s are up too something, but until someone speaks up or they get caught "we the fans" will never know for sure.

[Chidi29]

Yeah, it might just be time to admit that the Pats* are a pretty good team. But as I've said before, they are not invincible. They had problems with the Aaron Rodgers-less Packers 2 weeks ago and could have easily lost had Rodgers played. You just can't play scared against them - if you do, then Marsha will carve you up like a Christmas ham.

No one is saying they can't lose. They've had their struggles this year. Just less than most teams.

[stillers4me]

Just go look at the jets game again. That was the night i shook my head and thought WOW brady knows where the DB's especially the safeties are going to be. It was like that all night. That is my first hmmm like truck said about kids you get a feel for when they are up too something. I feel like the *'s are up too something, but until someone speaks up or they get caught "we the fans" will never know for sure.

My husband said the same thing that night about the DB's.

[Chidi29]

Just go look at the jets game again. That was the night i shook my head and thought WOW brady knows where the DB's especially the safeties are going to be. It was like that all night. That is my first hmmm like truck said about kids you get a feel for when they are up too something. I feel like the *'s are up too something, but until someone speaks up or they get caught "we the fans" will never know for sure.

You don't think that has anything to do with the fact they lost to them the first time around and went back and figured out what they did wrong? Then made the needed adjustments to their gameplan?