A demonstration of what a bald-faced liar Brady is:

[RamWoodie]

I think this "inflation gate" is not as much an issue of the cheating done in filming the Rams practice before that Super Bowl. That is the reason the NFL destroyed the film evidence!!! They would have had to award the Rams as winners OR replay the game.

This situation is NOT THAT! The Colts got creamed 45 - 7! Don't tell me underinflated footballs gave them that victory.

FINE THEM or whatever...and let's move on!

 

[Greg Stone]

After a friend of mine just pointed something out to me...the footballs being used in this video are composite footballs that were probably bought at a Wal-Mart...they aren't the real NFL balls. So the give on these rubber balls is probably a lot more noticeable than a real pigskin.

Good point, sorry to have missed that. It does illustrate the pressure difference nicely even though stiffer pigskin wouldn't be as visually dramatic.

 

[Sum1]

Good point, sorry to have missed that. It does illustrate the pressure difference nicely even though stiffer pigskin wouldn't be as visually dramatic.

Yes, agreed very much so.

 

[LesBaker]

What leads you to believe this Les?

Supposedly after Spygate Goodell and Belichick had an agreement or understating that BB was going to come clean in his press conference and admit what he did was wrong and apologize. And as we know he didn't do that, he deflected and said he just misunderstood the rules. We know that is a lie because Goodell sent out a memo expressly forbidding filming because originally the Packers (I think it was them) were caught, then the Patriots were warned. And he flagrantly ignored the memo, then bullshitted Goodell about coming clean.

Goodell was, according to reports, livid with him for not doing the mea culpa thing because it made the NFL look even worse.

He hosed Roger, and we know if you lie to Roger he wants his pound of flesh, ask Vick.

40 people are/were/have been investigating this thing. FORTY. That's a big number and when I heard it the first thing I though was "he wants revenge". IMO he wants to catch Belichik so he can smash him. Kraft and Goodell may be friendly, but I can assure you there is no such warm and fuzzy between BB and RG.

If the NFL can link someone, anyone, in the Patriots organization to this he will find a way to hold Belichik responsible under the "ignorance is no excuse" mantra. Just like he did when SPayton lied to him about Bountygate.

Lying to Goodell has proven to have dire consequences and BB better hope and pray that nothing can link a team member to those footballs being under inflated on purpose.

 

[Greg Stone]

I think this "inflation gate" is not as much an issue of the cheating done in filming the Rams practice before that Super Bowl. That is the reason the NFL destroyed the film evidence!!! They wold have had to award the Rams as winners OR replay the game.

This situation is NOT THAT! The Colts got creamed 45 - 7! Don't tell me underinflated footballs gave them that victory.

FINE THEM or whatever...and let's move on!

Bull, they might not have had home field advantage or beaten Baltimore without cheating. The fact that the one game was a blowout doesn't mean they would have made it to that game without cheating.

 

[RamWoodie]

Bull, they might not have had home field advantage or beaten Baltimore without cheating. The fact that the one game was a blowout doesn't mean they would have made it to that game without cheating.

Prove they cheated Baltimore first...then...I might listen.

 

[Greg Stone]

Les, I think it's gone beyond that. Goodell has to smash the Patriots to distract the mounting anger from his own complicity.

 

[Sum1]

 

[Greg Stone]

Prove they cheated Baltimore first...then...I might listen.

LOL Hilarious, the burden of proof is on me rather than the Patriots. The Colts first raised the deflated ball accusations in game 16. Then we are to suppose that the Patriots went straight until playing the Colts again. Look at the fumble stats linked in another thread that provide compelling evidence that they have been doing this for years.

 

[Alan]

RamWoodie missing some details:
This situation is NOT THAT! The Colts got creamed 45 - 7! Don't tell me underinflated footballs gave them that victory.

I think you might be forgetting that we're not talking about just one game. This is much more likely to have been an ongoing thing and how many of their their victories went their way because of this. Both in the running game vis-a-vis fumbles and in the passing game. Plus of course, it's a incidence of deliberate cheating and how can you not address that?

 

[RamWoodie]

LOL Hilarious, the burden of proof is on me rather than the Patriots. The Colts first raised the deflated ball accusations in game 16. Then we are to suppose that the Patriots went straight until playing the Colts again. Look at the fumble stats linked in another thread that provide compelling evidence that they have been doing this for years.

I think you might be forgetting that we're not talking about just one game. This is much more likely to have been an ongoing thing and how many of their their victories went their way because of this. Both in the running game vis-a-vis fumbles and in the passing game. Plus of course, it's a incidence of deliberate cheating and how can you not address that?

You both are ALLEGING things that haven't been proven. In the past it was PROVEN. In this NOTHING is proven except the balls were obviously deflated. I'm inclined to agree the Pats did it...but prove it gave them a 45-7 win.

I'm bitter about the SB cheating against the Rams too...but I won't let that bias me either.

 

[Boffo97]

but prove it gave them a 45-7 win.

Prove it didn't.

We don't know ANYTHING about how that game would have gone if it was played fair.

If the Patriots won 200-0, they still should have the game forfeited.

 

[RamWoodie]

Prove it didn't.

We don't know ANYTHING about how that game would have gone if it was played fair.

If the Patriots won 200-0, they still should have the game forfeited.

I don't have to...and you're in la-la land if you think they'll forfeit that game.

 

[Greg Stone]

You both are ALLEGING things that haven't been proven. In the past it was PROVEN. In this NOTHING is proven except the balls were obviously deflated. I'm inclined to agree the Pats did it...but prove it gave them a 45-7 win.

I'm bitter about the SB cheating against the Rams too...but I won't let that bias me either.

What in the past was proven? The evidence was destroyed and Bellichick says he did nothing he knew to be illegal and refuses to discuss it.

 

[Alan]

RamWoodie stating the obvious:
You both are ALLEGING things that haven't been proven. In the past it was PROVEN. In this NOTHING is proven except the balls were obviously deflated. I'm inclined to agree the Pats did it...but prove it gave them a 45-7 win.

Of course we're alleging something that hasn't been proven, that's what "alleging" means. Nothing has been proven but if true it's easy to understand why many football fans are so outraged and why we're not ready to "move on" until we do find out the truth. If we ever do.

We're all suspicious. Rightly so IMO.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I'm inclined to agree the Pats did it...but prove it gave them a 45-7 win.

The Patriots are a better team than the Indy Colts. Deflated balls or not they beat Indy 9 out of 10 times. Not the point...IMO.

 

[LesBaker]

Of course we're alleging something that hasn't been proven, that's what "alleging" means. Nothing has been proven but if true it's easy to understand why many football fans are so outraged and why we're not ready to "move on" until we do find out the truth. If we ever do.

We're all suspicious. Rightly so IMO.

Of course we're alleging something that hasn't been proven, that's what "alleging" means. Nothing has been proven but if true it's easy to understand why many football fans are so outraged and why we're not ready to "move on" until we do find out the truth. If we ever do.

We're all suspicious. Rightly so IMO.

I'm not suspicious. I think they did it. The only question is "did it matter".

And there are two ways to think about that.

It didn't make a difference so it's no big deal.

There was a rule that was willfully violated and they should be punished.

Everyone falls into one of those two categories.

 

[Boffo97]

I don't have to...and you're in la-la land if you think they'll forfeit that game.

First off, you mean you can't. And of course you can't. Which is why the game needs to be forfeited. We don't know what that game would be like without cheating, but it isn't the cheaters we should be giving benefit of the doubt to.

Second, I don't think the game will be forfeited, because Goodell has shown by now he is completely corrupt and cares only about making the owners money. Fair play be damned.

Third, even if you believe the Pats would have won anyway, cheaters should still be punished even if they won the game 200-0.

 

[Alan]

LesBaker with this:
I'm not suspicious. I think they did it. The only question is "did it matter".

And there are two ways to think about that.

It didn't make a difference so it's no big deal.

There was a rule that was willfully violated and they should be punished.

Everyone falls into one of those two categories.

I think they did it too but until I get more facts I'm going with the literal meaning of suspicion and calling it that. Temporarily.

Here's my two + one for Cheatriot fans:

They did it and should be punished for cheating regardless of the effect.
They did it and should be punished because it had an effect.
+
They did it but it didn't make a difference so no big deal.

 

[Ramrasta]