Brady & Patriots are cheaters

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Jack Brickman

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
33,630
Reaction score
46,749
Points
148
COmNHhiWUAAsr6S.jpg


Apparently Michael Signora doesn't know his job??

Or he's taking the Patriots' word that their headsets went out too. I have my doubts. What have the Patriots done in the past decade and a half to deserve the benefit of the doubt on anything?
 

godfather

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
35,998
Reaction score
30,861
Points
148
There's no advantage for the Patriots here to sabotage their headsets. Why would they? Think about it. By rules, when this happens, the other team also has to remove their headsets too.

The Patriots had to remove theirs during the game last night.

The Steelers are whiny as hell. I mean, we have Big Ben calling the Patriots foul, for a LEGAL shift, that caused them a false start.

Let the crying begin.

The Patriots might be cheaters but we got a lot of babies in the NFL too. Last night, it was much to do about nothing. But for those that hate the Patriots a lot this is just more fuel to the fire I suppose.
 

MRMsix6

All-Star
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
3,184
Reaction score
7,118
Points
113
Either the Patriots have the biggest fucking balls I've ever seen, or I actually tend to believe their explanation.

There's no way they would so brazenly cheat again after what they just went through, absolutely knowing that the Pittsburgh coaches would raise hell about it, right?
 

godfather

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
35,998
Reaction score
30,861
Points
148
Either the Patriots have the biggest fucking balls I've ever seen, or I actually tend to believe their explanation.

There's no way they would so brazenly cheat again after what they just went through, absolutely knowing that the Pittsburgh coaches would raise hell about it, right?

Agree. They'd have to be absolutely stupid to do this on purpose. Like mention, it gives them zero advantage given the rules when this happens. The other team also has to remove their headsets until the problem is solved.

The Patriots had to remove theirs last night in the game when this happen.

It would make zero sense, given if they fuck up one more time, we could be looking at lifetime bans for someone like Belichick.

Just sounds like a salty Pukesburgh team bitching about everything they could think of on why they got their asses kicked.

They even complained about a legal shift! I think I've heard it all now.
 

Tlyons

NBA Starter
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
6,784
Reaction score
4,715
Points
113
That's some awesome weather.

It deflates their footballs and shorts their radios.
 

Phills14

Cleveland Sports Fan
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
11,699
Reaction score
16,765
Points
123
It's all too coincidental for me to shrug it off.
 

MoGottiFor3

#ALLin216
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
2,733
Reaction score
2,810
Points
113
Why is it surprising the Patriots might be cheating again? It's only been happening since 2001 and they have received zero punishments for it.
 
Last edited:

spydy13

Gold Star Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
4,165
Reaction score
3,307
Points
113
The Patriots had to remove theirs last night in the game when this happen.

Did they? I wasn't watching the game, but everything I've read said that the NFL didn't force them to stop using their headsets during the game.
 

spydy13

Gold Star Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
4,165
Reaction score
3,307
Points
113
Innocent or Guilty is never what an appeal is about.,

And to be specific, the judge ruled that Brady was not given due process. That is the specific language.

Meaning, they basically found Brady innocent without any evidence.

Not a Brady fan, but i dont know if he is a cheat. Bellicheck sure is and seems to constantly cheat enough for the both of them though.

They didn't basically find him innocent. They ruled that the NFL bungled the investigation and overstepped their bounds with the punishment. Actual criminals can get off on technicalities like that if a judge rules that the cops/prosecution did their jobs wrong.

But again, in no way did the judge decide that Brady was innocent because that's not what he was asked to do.

And for a difference between Brady and Belichick, I don't know how anyone can think that in an atmosphere where your coach is telling you to do anything you can to win, even if it sometimes skirts the lines of the rules, that Brady might not decide that it was okay to fuck with the balls. Sure, the coach is at fault for establishing that culture, but that doesn't, in my mind, absolve Brady of guilt if he decides to cheat.
 

godfather

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
35,998
Reaction score
30,861
Points
148
Did they? I wasn't watching the game, but everything I've read said that the NFL didn't force them to stop using their headsets during the game.

I thought I heard Al Michaels say the Patriots also took theirs off. But I had a massive head last night, so maybe I'm mistaken.
 

Lee

Gold Star Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
28,761
Reaction score
37,967
Points
148
They didn't basically find him innocent. They ruled that the NFL bungled the investigation and overstepped their bounds with the punishment. Actual criminals can get off on technicalities like that if a judge rules that the cops/prosecution did their jobs wrong.

But again, in no way did the judge decide that Brady was innocent because that's not what he was asked to do.

And for a difference between Brady and Belichick, I don't know how anyone can think that in an atmosphere where your coach is telling you to do anything you can to win, even if it sometimes skirts the lines of the rules, that Brady might not decide that it was okay to fuck with the balls. Sure, the coach is at fault for establishing that culture, but that doesn't, in my mind, absolve Brady of guilt if he decides to cheat.

You are right worded it wrong, he found there was no evidence against Brady. The league over stepped there bounds based a decision and punishment with no direct evidence. You are never found innocent, just not guilty, which is technically different.
 
Last edited:

spydy13

Gold Star Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
4,165
Reaction score
3,307
Points
113
You are right worded it right, he found there was no evidence against Brady. The league over stepped there bounds with no evidence. You are never found innocent, just not guilty, which is technically different.

But the judge wasn't ruling on whether or not the NFL had enough evidence or whether he was innocent or guilty. It was all about whether the NFL had enforced a penalty greater than what the CBA allows. He ruled with Tom Brady that they had gone too far, so his suspension was vacated.

None of the cases between the NFL and their players have been about whether they had sufficient evidence in the cases. It's all been about whether the white knight has the legal authority under the CBA to punish his employees in the manner that he has done recently. So far the various judges that have reviewed these cases have decided that he has acted improperly, and have overturned the suspensions he enforced.

Edit: The court's problem with the suspension was that it was based on him destroying his phone. The NFL never told Tom Brady that if he didn't cooperate with the NFL then he would get suspended, in particular with a four game ban. Because they didn't do those things (in addition to not letting him know that "general awareness" of wrong doing by the two locker room attendants could result in suspension) the court ruled that Brady's suspension was not in keeping with the CBA. If they had done those things then Brady most likely would be suspended right now.
 
Last edited:

Lee

Gold Star Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
28,761
Reaction score
37,967
Points
148
But the judge wasn't ruling on whether or not the NFL had enough evidence or whether he was innocent or guilty. It was all about whether the NFL had enforced a penalty greater than what the CBA allows. He ruled with Tom Brady that they had gone too far, so his suspension was vacated.

None of the cases between the NFL and their players have been about whether they had sufficient evidence in the cases. It's all been about whether the white knight has the legal authority under the CBA to punish his employees in the manner that he has done recently. So far the various judges that have reviewed these cases have decided that he has acted improperly, and have overturned the suspensions he enforced.

All of the cases up to Brady were purely about unfair punishment, which is a ground for an appeal and court intervention on a legally binding mediation, which is what Goddell is per the CBA.

What is different about the Brady case was he not only found the punishment was not fair, but the investigation had "significant legal deficiencies"

It is a 40 page document that the judge issues, it is allot more than just saying he over punished Brady. There is a whole section that the wells report was supposed to be "independent" but was found not to be independent. The report (on page 5 if you want to look) talks about "there is less direct evidence linking Brady to tampering than either McNally or Jestremski" Meaning while they most likely did deflate the balls, there is no direct evidence Brady had any knowledge.

He also mention that the evidence they had, of the two Personnel being in a bathroom for less than 2 minutes with the balls and the lower pressure than the Colts balls "did not provide a basis for them to determine with absolute certainty whether there was tampering or not." Meaning there really isnt any direct evidence against the Personnel much less brady.

It also talks that Goddell should have agreed with being recused from oversight of the hearing, and as you point out, the appropriateness of the decision.

But make no mistake, it does find there is no direct evidence linking Brady, and the "general knowledge more probable than not" finding of the Wells Report. to be a complete over step of the boundaries.

So yes, in the 40 pages (if you read, because i have) of the judges ruling, it absolutely states there is no direct evidence against Brady, that is why it set aside the punishment completely.

PS, below is a link if you want to read the findings yourself.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2329817-national-football-league-management-council-v.html
 

Jack Brickman

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
33,630
Reaction score
46,749
Points
148
Agree. They'd have to be absolutely stupid to do this on purpose. Like mention, it gives them zero advantage given the rules when this happens. The other team also has to remove their headsets until the problem is solved.

Haven't you read the reports? Every time the NFL officials went to make the Patriots remove their headsets, the problem conveniently resolved itself for the Steelers. Then, as soon as the officials moved away, the problems resumed.

The fact that anyone here gives the Patriots, a team that has been caught cheating numerous times over the past fifteen years, the benefit of the doubt is amazing.
 

New Ownership

Total amount
$2,395.00
Donation ends:
Top