So, Remember those tapes that the Pats were allowed to destroy?

[revefsreleets]

It does have to be tough being forced to defend the indefensible.

[T&B fan]

alright alright already stop with all the oh the Pats are cheaters boo hoo they destroyed the tapes we need to know what was on them ....

if you just forget all about it it will go away and that is what the NFL is hopeing for ,everyone to just move on ...

but I here yea it dos p___ me off too .

[Preacher]

Originally Posted by SMR

"astrick" what...oh do you mean "asterisk"? Not being mean or anything just wanting to make sure.

Originally Posted by VASTEELER

Grammer police...........LAME

Originally Posted by stlrtruck

Isn't that preacher's job anyway?

Um, that would be spelling police, not grammar police. However, when changing thought within a sentence, it is best to separate with punctuation. In the above sentence, a semicolon would be best.



Wait for it










Wait for it.

[The Patriot]

Originally Posted by revefsreleets

It does have to be tough being forced to defend the indefensible.

What qualifies as "indefensible" is relative. On the Seahawks boards, I'm sure, the legitimacy of the Steelers recent super bowls qualifies as "the indefensible" (as absurd as it may seem). In fact, some of the most factual, logical, well put together arguments cannot stand up to the incessant "Nah-ah!". And when it comes to something as inconclusive and interpretable as the extent of the advantageousness of a rule violation, then everyone's opinion is equally legitimate and equally indefensible.

[fansince'76]

Funny, I don't remember any record fines being levied against the Steelers for the wins in SB XL and SB XLIII that are only "disputed" by a bunch of crybabies who don't understand the rules of the game.

[SteelCurtain7]

Cheatriots* fan owned, yet again!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MACH1]

I don't recall the Steelers with a camera man on the opponents sideline stealing signals.Why is it that the Steelers home communications seem to work during the whole game and not "cutting out" at inopportune times for the opponent.

[revefsreleets]

Yeah, in fact, the officials themselves came out and said their calls, after careful review, were legit. The league issued no apologies. There is not even any smoke, let alone fire,other than sour grapes from some fans who know little about football. Seattle whining <<< Patriots caught, covered for, and still heavily penalized...

You're gonna have to do a little better than that, Patfan...

[The Patriot]

I wasn't comparing Spygate to Crygate. I was just giving an example of opposing viewpoints. The Pats broke the rule, but I believe that when you see the other team, the other team sees you. And anything you put up in the air, the other team interprets. And so it's fitting, in a time where near everybody has a camera-phone in their pocket, that a rule that allows you to view something but also prohibits you from filming it, was so poorly enforced for the past seven years.

I respect the rule, but I'm tired of hearing the incident construed to sound like the Pats were filming something they weren't allowed to see.

[MACH1]

Originally Posted by The Patriot

I wasn't comparing Spygate to Crygate. I was just giving an example of opposing viewpoints. The Pats broke the rule, but I believe that when you see the other team, the other team sees you. And anything you put up in the air, the other team interprets. And so it's fitting, in a time where near everybody has a camera-phone in their pocket, that a rule that allows you to view something but also prohibits you from filming it, was so poorly enforced for the past seven years.

I respect the rule, but I'm tired of hearing the incident construed to sound like the Pats were filming something they weren't allowed to see.

Like the other teams final walk throughs before the SB.