|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jan 21, 2015 15:08:02 GMT -5
New England - Seattle
What do you guys make of Deflate-gate?
Bill Belicheat back at work?
I always thought game footballs were kept in a separate area--completely controlled by the officials.
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jan 21, 2015 15:41:46 GMT -5
Tuck rule, Spygate, Deflating balls... They come by the moniker Cheatriots honestly, in my opinion. As a Rams fan who was robbed of a Super-bowl because of Spygate I hate the Patriots. And since the Rams are in the NFC West I hate the Seahawks. Basically I throw up in my mouth a little bit every time I think of this game. Thanks for bringing it up!  |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jan 21, 2015 16:43:44 GMT -5
Basically I throw up in my mouth a little bit every time I think of this game. Thanks for bringing it up! So….no Super Bowl party at BC's? |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 21, 2015 17:14:50 GMT -5
I guess this will be dubbed the Karma Bowl
The Lions got robbed by the Cowboys on a PI-gate
The Cowboys got robbed by the Packers on "what's a football move" - gate
The Packers got robbed by the Seahawks on "Bostick"-gate
And In the AFC
The Patriots cheated their way past the Ravens on Ineligible-gate
The Patriots cheated their way past the Colts on deflate-gate
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jan 21, 2015 17:47:05 GMT -5
Tuck rule, Spygate, Deflating balls... They come by the moniker Cheatriots honestly, in my opinion. I thought the very same thing earlier ... it's always the Patriots ... Spygate was a farce ... the only thing they did was get caught ... the Lions got jobbed, the Cowboys feel they were jobbed (bad karma) ... however, the Packers were not jobbed and they deserve to be home ... one bad decision after another on the premise the game was over ... don't like Seattle either ... I really dislike New England ... was hoping to see the Ravens return to the final ... probably hate the Cowboys more than any other team ... winner in SB XLIX? ... not the Packers ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 22, 2015 0:00:18 GMT -5
Belichek will stretch explode the rules any way he can to win. One of the good tweets I read today was that if Belichek is ever suspended from football, he'll be fine with it because of all the friends he has (not). He's a dislikeable guy, for good reason. And he's in Boston! Naturally. Heck, Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe isn't surprised in the least. The part that's really sad is Tom Brady denying all knowledge and scoffing at the 'rumour', which has now been proved a fact. Yeah, like you didn't know Tom. All footballs feel exactly alike to you. Duh. It may not have made any difference at all, since the Patriots ran the ball a lot, but maybe a slightly more inflated ball slips out of your hands more easily and the Patriots fumble once or twice at key points. Who knows? I'm a Seahawks fan (Sorry BC) because they're the closest city to us in BC, but I wasn't crazy about their arrogance at times and how close they came to losing to GB had to humble them a lot. They know they were damn lucky to win and it might make the difference in 10 days time.
To me it all depends on how Seattle handles NE's offensive line. If they can break it down, Brady won't have time and the running game will suffer. Wilson will not have the second worst day of his career. They'll put up some points, and if the offensive line breaks down, the Patriots will look like the early season version. It is the key part of any football team, even more than the QB, IMO, the offensive line. I could probably run an offense if I had all the time in the world. Ok, that's an exaggeration, but any average QB would look really, really good with a good line.
That's your wisdom from the fount for today, folks. I'm not just a hokey, I mean hockey expert.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jan 22, 2015 7:05:51 GMT -5
Belichek will stretch explode the rules any way he can to win. One of the good tweets I read today was that if Belichek is ever suspended from football, he'll be fine with it because of all the friends he has (not). He's a dislikeable guy, for good reason. And he's in Boston! Naturally. Heck, Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe isn't surprised in the least. The part that's really sad is Tom Brady denying all knowledge and scoffing at the 'rumour', which has now been proved a fact. Yeah, like you didn't know Tom. All footballs feel exactly alike to you. Duh. It may not have made any difference at all, since the Patriots ran the ball a lot, but maybe a slightly more inflated ball slips out of your hands more easily and the Patriots fumble once or twice at key points. Who knows? I'm a Seahawks fan (Sorry BC) because they're the closest city to us in BC, but I wasn't crazy about their arrogance at times and how close they came to losing to GB had to humble them a lot. They know they were damn lucky to win and it might make the difference in 10 days time. To me it all depends on how Seattle handles NE's offensive line. If they can break it down, Brady won't have time and the running game will suffer. Wilson will not have the second worst day of his career. They'll put up some points, and if the offensive line breaks down, the Patriots will look like the early season version. It is the key part of any football team, even more than the QB, IMO, the offensive line. I could probably run an offense if I had all the time in the world. Ok, that's an exaggeration, but any average QB would look really, really good with a good line. That's your wisdom from the fount for today, folks. I'm not just a hokey, I mean hockey expert. As a Packers fan the hardest part of that game was watching the comeback. People will focus on the bobbled onside kick, but the Packers had other chances to put the game away before that ... however, the worse part for me is yet to come ... I suspect I'll probably have to watch the highlights of that comeback for the next 25 years ... still, I didn't lose any sleep Sunday ... it's not like it was the Habs ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 22, 2015 7:17:20 GMT -5
I wonder if this might be the least paid attention to SB in some time ... It won't be the least watched because 'everyone' will have the game on at a party somewhere. But, how many will be focused on the game instead of the spread of food? Maybe I'll tune it at half time to watch Katy Perry. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 22, 2015 8:38:41 GMT -5
As a Packers fan the hardest part of that game was watching the comeback. People will focus on the bobbled onside kick, but the Packers had other chances to put the game away before that ... however, the worse part for me is yet to come ... I suspect I'll probably have to watch the highlights of that comeback for the next 25 years ... still, I didn't lose any sleep Sunday ... it's not like it was the Habs ... Cheers.[/quote] I thought the game was lost when the Packers couldn't punch it in from the 1 in the first quarter and had to settle for 3. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jan 22, 2015 8:51:19 GMT -5
It's pretty clear they cheated. Whether it had any impact on the game or not is irrelevant. They cheated. Just like Olympic athletes losing their medals for accidentally taking cold medicine, the Patriots should lose the game. They deliberately broke the rules, not because they thought they were going to blow out the Colts and that it wouldn't matter, but because they thought it would give them an edge that might be the difference between winning and losing. Just like video-taping the Rams walkthrough the day before the Super Bowl, where the Rams actually walked through all the plays they intended to call in the Super Bowl, could have, and most likely was, the difference in a football game that came down to a last second field goal. They knew the plays the Rams were going to run, and just like a batter knowing what pitch a pitcher is going to throw, this gave them an unfair advantage and WON them the game. They cheated with the footballs. Again, not because they expected that the tampered with balls would result in a blowout, but because by tampering with the balls they hoped to get that slight edge that would win them a close game. AND it should be noted that the Colts were tipped off to the Patriots deflating the balls by the Ravens who suspected that the Patriots did it in their game too. A game that the Patriots won on a touchdown pass with five minutes left in the game. A close game in other words. It will never happen of course - $$$ - but they deserve to forfeit that game. Goodell doesn't have the clout or the stones to pull that off. They'll just ignore it. Bah, I'm bitter. Keith Olbermann: www.youtube.com/watch?v=N50xBZQBZGY&feature=youtu.be |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jan 22, 2015 9:15:33 GMT -5
As a Packers fan the hardest part of that game was watching the comeback. People will focus on the bobbled onside kick, but the Packers had other chances to put the game away before that ... however, the worse part for me is yet to come ... I suspect I'll probably have to watch the highlights of that comeback for the next 25 years ... still, I didn't lose any sleep Sunday ... it's not like it was the Habs ... Cheers. I thought the game was lost when the Packers couldn't punch it in from the 1 in the first quarter and had to settle for 3. [/quote] That's one way of looking at it ... I felt that was only one factor in a longer list of factors that decided the Packers fate ... ref running the ball; if you have the chance to watch the last two Packer drives you'll see that Aaron Rodgers actually looks like he's had the life sucked out him ... he was told to keep the ball on the ground when he could have passed for a possible first down ... another play that could have decided the game was the dropped interception by Clinton-Dix (he had two INTS prior to that miss) ... had he hung onto the ball (a bullet) that would have been it ... then there's the botched onside kick by Brandon Bostick ... sure it allowed Seattle to get into OT but when we take into consideration what transpired before that, I think there's a lot of unfair criticism being heaped on this young man ... honestly, I'd buy into the theory that those 1st-quarter lost points were the deciding factor in the game but in the end they were only two factors in a list of factors that cost the Packers the game ... unbelievable ... the hardest part for me is that I now have to watch replays of this for the rest of my life next 25 years ... sigh ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jan 22, 2015 9:22:04 GMT -5
They cheated ... Bah, I'm bitter. I'm not sure if I'll be watching the Super Bowl this year ... my coin only has two sides to it ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 22, 2015 9:34:21 GMT -5
I actually thought they lost the game when they intercepted the ball with about 4 mins to play and there was a wide-open field ahead of him and instead of trying to gain 10-15 yards more, he immediately went to the ground. Green Bay proceeded to go three and out and were too far to attempt a field goal ... those 15 yrds could have been the difference in trying a field goal.
And don't get me started on that 2 pt conversion ... What was Clinton-Dix thinking??? I am willing to bet, every single member of HabRUs would have played that hail mary better. He looked like he just didnt know what to do ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jan 22, 2015 9:58:31 GMT -5
I actually thought they lost the game when they intercepted the ball with about 4 mins to play and there was a wide-open field ahead of him and instead of trying to gain 10-15 yards more, he immediately went to the ground. Green Bay proceeded to go three and out and were too far to attempt a field goal ... those 15 yrds could have been the difference in trying a field goal. And don't get me started on that 2 pt conversion ... What was Clinton-Dix thinking??? I am willing to bet, every single member of HabRUs would have played that hail mary better. He looked like he just didnt know what to do ... I originally wanted to include that INT in my post but forgot about it at the end ... that two-point convert reminded me of a high school pass and when Seattle got it I thought the Packers might lose the game ... I thought these plays were only two more factors in a whole list of factors to the Packer meltdown ... anyone watching the Super Bowl ... my neighbour (huge Packer Backer too) is having a SB party ... I may show up for some eats but this SB is a bit different ... sigh ... |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jan 22, 2015 10:30:04 GMT -5
If you are not cheating, you're not trying to win!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dschens on Jan 22, 2015 11:15:54 GMT -5
If you are not cheating, you're not trying to win!! I prefer losing with grace. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 23, 2015 19:53:42 GMT -5
Joe Theismann believes this makes no difference. He tried it & could not tell the difference. www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2015-01-22/nfl-deflated-football-joe-theismann-redskins-test-no-difference-patriots-belichick-afc-championshipI'm having trouble mustering outrage about this. I can't see how it makes that big of a difference. I want some of these guys calling Brady a liar ( like Mark Brunell)to tell him to his face, not from the safety of a TV studio. To me it's akin to a hockey player using an illegal stick - something that usually goes unnoticed and doesn't have a big impact on the game. And I think there's a lot of Patriot hate going around. As Habs fans we know what that's like. How many times have the Canadiens been accused of having an unfair advantage - the draft being the biggest myth out there. If it wasn't Belichick & Brady would anybody even be talking about it? Question for you: The Habs are in OT of game 7 of the Conference Final. Pacioretty scores the series winner with what is determined later to be a clearly illegal stick. The cheating accusations fly. How do you respond? |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 23, 2015 20:20:36 GMT -5
Joe Theismann believes this makes no difference. He tried it & could not tell the difference. www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2015-01-22/nfl-deflated-football-joe-theismann-redskins-test-no-difference-patriots-belichick-afc-championshipI'm having trouble mustering outrage about this. I can't see how it makes that big of a difference. I want some of these guys calling Brady a liar ( like Mark Brunell)to tell him to his face, not from the safety of a TV studio. To me it's akin to a hockey player using an illegal stick - something that usually goes unnoticed and doesn't have a big impact on the game. And I think there's a lot of Patriot hate going around. As Habs fans we know what that's like. How many times have the Canadiens been accused of having an unfair advantage - the draft being the biggest myth out there. If it wasn't Belichick & Brady would anybody even be talking about it? Question for you: The Habs are in OT of game 7 of the Conference Final. Pacioretty scores the series winner with what is determined later to be a clearly illegal stick. The cheating accusations fly. How do you respond? I really dont think it's the same. For one, the opposition has a chance to call a penalty on Pacioretty if he is caught. What's the recourse if New England got caught? No penalty, they move on. They might lose a draft pick, but that's worth a Super Bowl . Also, the Colts don't get to handle the illegal ball, before each play. When they finally got their hands on one after an INT they immediately felt the difference. But it isn't a penalty in the game. The Colts could tell but Brady couldn't ...hmmmm If the weather was sunny and nice, I'd agree with Theisman. But Brady was quoted saying a few years ago that he loves when Gronkowski spikes the ball cause he deflates it a little and he loves playing with a deflated ball. So he can tell the difference after a ball is spiked, but not when 2 pounds of pressure is released between halfs??? Also, he said he loves playing with a deflated ball. Why? Because it's easier for him to grip obviously. So does Theisman really think that a deflated ball is not easier to grip in the pouring rain and cold??? As they say on Game Day .... C'Mon Man!!! |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 24, 2015 6:50:42 GMT -5
Joe Theismann believes this makes no difference. He tried it & could not tell the difference. www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2015-01-22/nfl-deflated-football-joe-theismann-redskins-test-no-difference-patriots-belichick-afc-championshipI'm having trouble mustering outrage about this. I can't see how it makes that big of a difference. I want some of these guys calling Brady a liar ( like Mark Brunell)to tell him to his face, not from the safety of a TV studio. To me it's akin to a hockey player using an illegal stick - something that usually goes unnoticed and doesn't have a big impact on the game. And I think there's a lot of Patriot hate going around. As Habs fans we know what that's like. How many times have the Canadiens been accused of having an unfair advantage - the draft being the biggest myth out there. If it wasn't Belichick & Brady would anybody even be talking about it? Question for you: The Habs are in OT of game 7 of the Conference Final. Pacioretty scores the series winner with what is determined later to be a clearly illegal stick. The cheating accusations fly. How do you respond? I really dont think it's the same. For one, the opposition has a chance to call a penalty on Pacioretty if he is caught. What's the recourse if New England got caught? No penalty, they move on. They might lose a draft pick, but that's worth a Super Bowl . Also, the Colts don't get to handle the illegal ball, before each play. When they finally got their hands on one after an INT they immediately felt the difference. But it isn't a penalty in the game. The Colts could tell but Brady couldn't ...hmmmm If the weather was sunny and nice, I'd agree with Theisman. But Brady was quoted saying a few years ago that he loves when Gronkowski spikes the ball cause he deflates it a little and he loves playing with a deflated ball. So he can tell the difference after a ball is spiked, but not when 2 pounds of pressure is released between halfs??? Also, he said he loves playing with a deflated ball. Why? Because it's easier for him to grip obviously. So does Theisman really think that a deflated ball is not easier to grip in the pouring rain and cold??? As they say on Game Day .... C'Mon Man!!! My question about Pacioretty was "after the fact". He doesn't get caught & wins an important game with illegal equipment. What do we say then? How do we respond to the cheating accusations? Now the league is saying that deflated balls were only used in the 1st half when the score was 17-7 NE. In the 2nd half the Patriots score 28 points with regular footballs. How did it really make a difference in this game? |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jan 24, 2015 8:49:07 GMT -5
True it didn't have any effect on the Colts game... But what about the Ravens game? That was a close one. Pats won it with five minutes left, on a winning TD pass. Couldn't an argument be made that it helped determine the outcome of the that game? It was the Ravens who alerted the Colts to the whole thing because the Pats had done it in that game too.
If Pacioretty scores with what is later determined to be an illegal stick then that Cup victory would be tainted in the same way Brett Hull's foot-in-the-crease Cup winning goal is forever tainted, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 24, 2015 9:43:52 GMT -5
I really dont think it's the same. For one, the opposition has a chance to call a penalty on Pacioretty if he is caught. What's the recourse if New England got caught? No penalty, they move on. They might lose a draft pick, but that's worth a Super Bowl . Also, the Colts don't get to handle the illegal ball, before each play. When they finally got their hands on one after an INT they immediately felt the difference. But it isn't a penalty in the game. The Colts could tell but Brady couldn't ...hmmmm If the weather was sunny and nice, I'd agree with Theisman. But Brady was quoted saying a few years ago that he loves when Gronkowski spikes the ball cause he deflates it a little and he loves playing with a deflated ball. So he can tell the difference after a ball is spiked, but not when 2 pounds of pressure is released between halfs??? Also, he said he loves playing with a deflated ball. Why? Because it's easier for him to grip obviously. So does Theisman really think that a deflated ball is not easier to grip in the pouring rain and cold??? As they say on Game Day .... C'Mon Man!!! My question about Pacioretty was "after the fact". He doesn't get caught & wins an important game with illegal equipment. What do we say then? How do we respond to the cheating accusations? Now the league is saying that deflated balls were only used in the 1st half when the score was 17-7 NE. In the 2nd half the Patriots score 28 points with regular footballs. How did it really make a difference in this game? My point is this jkr: In baseball, there is recourse for playing with a doctored ball. The pitcher gets ejected. In hockey there is recourse for playing with doctored equipment. It can range from a 2min to 5 min penalty, as well, it could result in the loss of a goal. Even if the Colts pointed out during the game that the balls were doctored, what would have happened? Nothing, Brady would not have been ejected, there would not have been a 15 yrd penalty. In the NFL, the only recourse is to moan about it after the fact and hope sanctions are applied. In the other sports, you have at least a chance to catch them. Every team knows who is playing with an illegal stick, they got that info in their back pocket. Most good centers can tell right at the face-off sometimes if a stick is illegal. If an NHL game is decided by a goal with an illegal stick, I'd say you had your chance to catch me during play. if I latter find out that in the NFL, the refs would have removed those 11 balls from play if pointed out, I'd change my mind. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 24, 2015 10:06:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jan 24, 2015 10:48:06 GMT -5
Great read, Skilly! A very compelling argument, especially from Aikman. The Lance Armstrong-excuse comparison is apt, IMO. What? Who? Me? No! I would imagine riots in Boston if suspensions were handed out to include the Super Bowl. But their anger should be 100% directed at Belichick and Brady. Cheating is cheating….even if it has no effect on the outcome. As Aikman states…even though there were no players targeted or injured in the Saints' "Bounty-gate", the punishment was still severe. Something about the defiance/arrogance of the Patriots and Bruins, eh? I'm surprised no one from the Patriots called it "an unfortunate equipment malfunction…."  Goodell's painted himself into quite a corner with the precedent brush he used with New Orleans. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 24, 2015 11:16:13 GMT -5
no. they are going to do "a full investigation". you know, though, that "full investigations" take time. probably . . . two full weeks from the Monday following the initial "incident". |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 25, 2015 9:15:13 GMT -5
True it didn't have any effect on the Colts game... But what about the Ravens game? That was a close one. Pats won it with five minutes left, on a winning TD pass. Couldn't an argument be made that it helped determine the outcome of the that game? It was the Ravens who alerted the Colts to the whole thing because the Pats had done it in that game too. The only thing I heard after the Ravens/Patriots game was complaints about the formations NE was using. There was no talk of under inflated footballs in that game. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 25, 2015 9:24:44 GMT -5
Great read, Skilly! A very compelling argument, especially from Aikman. The Lance Armstrong-excuse comparison is apt, IMO. What? Who? Me? No! I would imagine riots in Boston if suspensions were handed out to include the Super Bowl. But their anger should be 100% directed at Belichick and Brady. Cheating is cheating….even if it has no effect on the outcome. As Aikman states…even though there were no players targeted or injured in the Saints' "Bounty-gate", the punishment was still severe. Something about the defiance/arrogance of the Patriots and Bruins, eh? I'm surprised no one from the Patriots called it "an unfortunate equipment malfunction…." Goodell's painted himself into quite a corner with the precedent brush he used with New Orleans. The big problem I have with this article is the complete lack of objectivity: The Patriots reek of cutting corners. Reek of being shady and doing whatever it takes. Reek of not caring about the rules or respecting that the NFL is bigger than them. The fictional football teams in Playmakers, which the NFL hated and said didn't resemble its league, are like monasteries compared to the Patriots.I'd be more inclined to consider someone's viewpoint if they weren't so obviously biased. The article (this part of it anyway) sounds like it was written by an angry Jets fan. I'm surprised no one here has a touch of empathy. We all support a team that's been accused of taking unfair advantage forever ; a team that's attacked in a similar fashion - why because they are successful. I heard Jesse Palmer talking about it this morning. I agree with his statement that this is getting all sorts of play because it's the Patriots. No one wants to believe they are better, they want to accuse them of cheating. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jan 25, 2015 9:58:43 GMT -5
We all support a team that's been accused of taking unfair advantage forever ; a team that's attacked in a similar fashion - why because they are successful. I heard Jesse Palmer talking about it this morning. I agree with his statement that this is getting all sorts of play because it's the Patriots. No one wants to believe they are better, they want to accuse them of cheating. I presume you're talking about, "The Habs had control of all Quebec-born players for decades." That argument, made by ignorant fans, is easily refuted. "It's the Patriots" because they've cheated before…and they've been punished (Spy-gate). Aikman's comment did it for me. And not because I'm a Cowboys' fan or a Patriots' hater. I have no allegiance to any NFL team. I don't see what kind of motive Aikman could have, other than being jealous of Brady, which would be really small for a QB who went 3-0 in Super Bowls. In my thinking, here's a guy who's done it all, seen it all….knows what goes on….and he's tired of it. He's pointing out the double-standard as it applies to the New Orleans situation. In other words, are the Saints easier to punish, because they're NOT the Patriots? Just asking….just conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 25, 2015 10:42:57 GMT -5
We all support a team that's been accused of taking unfair advantage forever ; a team that's attacked in a similar fashion - why because they are successful. I heard Jesse Palmer talking about it this morning. I agree with his statement that this is getting all sorts of play because it's the Patriots. No one wants to believe they are better, they want to accuse them of cheating. I presume you're talking about, "The Habs had control of all Quebec-born players for decades." That argument, made by ignorant fans, is easily refuted. "It's the Patriots" because they've cheated before…and they've been punished (Spy-gate). Aikman's comment did it for me. And not because I'm a Cowboys' fan. I have no allegiance to any NFL team. I don't see what kind of motive Aikman could have, other than being jealous of Brady, which would be really small for a QB who went 3-0 in Super Bowls. In my thinking, here's a guy who's done it all, seen it all….knows what goes on….and he's tired of it. He's pointing out the double-standard as it applies to the New Orleans situation. If Aikman convinces some people than why is no one talking about Theisman. This guy played high level football in the NCAA, the CFL and the NFL. He has won Super Bowls and he played in areas where the climate could be unforgiving & he says it makes no difference. Just because the Patriots have been guilty before doesn't mean they are guilty every time. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jan 25, 2015 12:13:30 GMT -5
Good point, jkr. Yes, logically speaking, guilty of one thing does not mean guilty of another.
But prior misconduct is always referenced when new misconduct rears its head….in this case, for at least the third time with the same person.
Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck…
Enjoying the conversation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 25, 2015 13:21:29 GMT -5
I presume you're talking about, "The Habs had control of all Quebec-born players for decades." That argument, made by ignorant fans, is easily refuted. "It's the Patriots" because they've cheated before…and they've been punished (Spy-gate). Aikman's comment did it for me. And not because I'm a Cowboys' fan. I have no allegiance to any NFL team. I don't see what kind of motive Aikman could have, other than being jealous of Brady, which would be really small for a QB who went 3-0 in Super Bowls. In my thinking, here's a guy who's done it all, seen it all….knows what goes on….and he's tired of it. He's pointing out the double-standard as it applies to the New Orleans situation. If Aikman convinces some people than why is no one talking about Theisman. This guy played high level football in the NCAA, the CFL and the NFL. He has won Super Bowls and he played in areas where the climate could be unforgiving & he says it makes no difference. Just because the Patriots have been guilty before doesn't mean they are guilty every time. I think Theismann is not being honest ... Take a deflated football and squeeze it. Compare that to a football at 12.5 psi. Now take a deflated football vs a regular one and go out in the pouring rain .... Simple physics tells you a deflated ball is easier to grip. If not, then why does Brady prefer a deflated ball? Even if it's just "feel" then that's an advantage. But he prefers it so much that he can tell the difference after his tight end spikes the ball. So while Joe Theismann can not tell the difference, and it might not make a difference for him ... The evidence is there that Tom Brady CAN tell the difference. Also, Theisman's arguement is that it gives you no competitive advantage. Aikman's arguement is that it doesn't matter if a competitive advantage was gained or not, they attempted to skirt the rules. And the precedent is set where someone tried to do something to put into question the integrity of the game, and even though they gain no competitive, it does not matter ... The punishment should be similar. It's not because it was the Patriots ... It's because the Patriots are not above the league, it's integrity, or the New Orleans Saints. |
|
