Oh so they were given permission? Gee I didnt read that. They were given permission by the Patriots, allegedly, not the NFL. The NFL decides who may video tape not a single franchise. Remember, the NFL owns the logo on the side of the helmet not the team. Besides the Jets are saying they had permission not the PATS. The article says the Pats declined to comment. It also said the Jets admitted to taping. All that aside, if they were both taping the same thing what friggin difference would permission make if the end result was the same. I played football at a way lower level than NFL and we changed our signals every game, or at the very least had a different set for each team. So what we have for proof is that the Jets taped games and were allowed to keep the footage. They lost. The Pats did the same thing, had theirs taken away before they could even see it. They won.Poseidon wrote:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=a … ;type=lgnsdeeznutz1245 wrote:
Well, well, well....what do we have here?Nobody else does it huh? Maybe we should put an asterick next to the Jets 2006 season. It should say..................shadowcell_01 wrote:
He didn't videotape the practice. He videotaped the hand signals to see what play was being called next. idiot
*last playoff appearance for a long fucking time so we will bitch about something we do as well.
Idiot
You really need to learn to put up a good argument.
They were given permission. It's not like they did it without asking. The Pats didn't want it so they had him removed. Don't you think the NFL would fine THEM 250K and Mangini 500K (or whatever the fines were) and remove their first round draft pick if it was illegal? It wasn't. What the Pats did was, and the NFL reassured that.
And using insults when trying to argue your already abyssmal points just makes your chance of winning any argument down to about 0%.
P.S. - your logic has failed.
Malloy must go