Cheating Patriots coach faces more scrutiny

Can we all start ripping him on the Warren Commission again?

 

Am I a pervert because I thought that was something other than a bullet for a second?

 

It bears repeating: Goodell showed little savvy in his first test as commissioner.

 

That's actually low on the list of reasons you're a pervert.

 

I would say his first test was the Pacman Jones fiasco, his second test was Michael Vick and maybe you can argue that his third was this.

On all three counts, I think he did a great job.

And I'm offically leaving this thread now because no matter what the fuck happens in this, douche-faced anti-Patriots fans will come here and argue that "Oh, no, the punishment isn't enough".

Why not just NCAA it and wipe out everything related to the Pats first three superbowls? This way, you assholes who are only crying about this because your beloved teams lost to New England can finally move on with your life.

-SchiezaInc out-

 

Arlen Specter is a grandstanding tool.

 

Rack him.

 

Translation: Anybody who disagrees with you on this issue is a "douche-faced anti-Patriots fan"

Damn disappointing from a fellow BSG fan.

 

FanBoy Loser rant.....nothing more, nothing less.

 

It was a joke, fanboi.

 

Certainly I understand that point. It was a terrible PR move for the Commissioner to destroy those tapes. Maybe Goodell chose to do so because the tapes contained extremely damaging information. If he did, shame on him. Yet we don't know. We will never know now. As the cliche goes, however, it is innocent until proven guilty and we can only trust what Goodell is telling us (for better or for worse). By saying that the destruction of the tapes signifies a larger pattern of cheating, we are further punishing the Patriots for the Commissioner's stupid decision. I would like the tapes to still exist, because I hate that this story will continue on and on.
[/quote]

The destruction of evidence is not proof of guilt, but it is absolutely fair reason to call for a deeper investigation.


[/quote]

O.K., I don't know if I agree with that, but let's operate on that premise, that the destruction of the tapes and additional evidence serves as an indication that Goodell swept this underneath the rug and that there were larger examples of cheating.

It's a perfectly reasonable deduction, but most people are taking this and running to a perfectly unreasonable and unfair conclusion. Most people who take this view, from those on this board and in the overall media, argue that the destruction of the videotapes is proof that the Patriots and Belichick are guilty of additional infractions.

But that's not fair. Goodell destroyed the tapes. We can't convict Belichick and the Patriots simply because of Goodell's fuckup---and I think that's what many people are doing.

And say Goodell shredded the evidence because he wanted to protect the league from further controversy and the other owners fell in line with the Commish and toted the company line. If so, we cannot only assume that the Patriots were involved in these other examples. If you believe this conspiracy theory is true---and to take that viewpoint you have to make a lot of assumptions---then the next reasonable assumption is that there were many other teams guilty of similar infractions.

To that I am sure you will say, "Only the Pats were caught."

That is a fact, indeed, but to believe in this conspiracy theory, you have to reject many other facts that verify the Patriots innocence in further examples of rule infractions. Walsh informed Goodell yesterday that in 2001 he learned that Jets head coach Herm Edwards filmed the Patriots' coaches in the same way as Belichick. But I don't have any faith in Walsh's credibility, whether that is on the Patriots' infractions or those of Herm's.

You know what I think is going on? I think we keep searching for one particular something, and when that something is not unturned, then we change the object of our search.

I may want the Patriots to win and you may even label me a fanboi in order to try and refute my arguments. Yet objectivity is not a one-way street. People like Mark Fish are just as compromised as I. John Tomase is just as compromised as I. He had a motivation---to be first with a story that was poorly sourced but incredibly juicy. If you are motivated in any way, then you are not objective. And everyone involved in this story, from Specter, Goodell and Belichick to the fans and media, have a motivating interest.