4. The mid-2000s Chicago Cubs.

tkihshbt wrote:

4. The mid-2000s Chicago Cubs.

Point conceded.
 

forsberg_us wrote:

tkihshbt wrote:

4. The mid-2000s Chicago Cubs.

Was that the Wood-Prior Cubs Dynasty or the Soriano Cubs Dynasty?

I think both qualify as dynasties. When you win 88, 85 and 98 games and three division titles in six seasons, you're a veritable dynasty without question.

So someone with some sense apparently advised Kraft to take his meager punishment and walk away. I'm guessing this is all part of a backroom deal to reduce Brady's suspension. Brady won't take this to court for the aforementioned reason that he'll have to produce his phone. Goodell will end up halving the suspension, and as much as his boyfriends will howl about not getting to watch him run around in his tight pants for the first two games of the season, Belichick will be thrilled to trade a Super Bowl trophy for a worst-case scenario of opening the 2015 season with a 0-2 record in the soft-as-puppy-shit AFC East.

I think the damage has been done to the reputations of all involved that the four Super Bowls are pretty hollow. When I turn on NFL Films in 2030, the Belichick-era Patriots will not be mentioned in the same breath as the Packers, Steelers and Cowboys among the greatest runs. That well has been poisoned so much they should call it Times Beach.

In case any of you think I exaggerate about how many people here would like to have Brady's cock in their mouth.

http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Hundreds-Set-to-Rally-in-Support-of-Tom-Brady-304849661.html

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/police-car-found-abandoned-belongs-patriots-linebacker-120212229--nfl.html

This is weird. Either the Patriots have become so hypersensitive about controversy that they just don't want to deal with even a hint of shenanigans, or they know a whole heck of a lot more than what's been reported so far.

Funny.

Can't wait to hear Brady/Patriots fans explanation for this (from Goodell's actual statement)

On or shortly before March 6, the day that Tom Brady met with independent investigator Ted Wells and his colleagues, Brady directed that the cell phone he had used for the prior four months be destroyed. He did so even though he was aware that the investigators had requested access to text messages and other electronic information that had been stored on that phone. ‎During the four months that the cell phone was in use, Brady had exchanged nearly 10,000 text messages, none of which can now be retrieved from that device. The destruction of the cell phone was not disclosed until June 18, almost four months after the investigators had first sought electronic information from Brady.


In the legal world, that's called spoliation of evidence.  The consequence of spoliation is that the finder of fact (judge/jury/arbitrator) is free to infer that the evidence destroyed was bad for your case.  Basically, Brady just handed the NFL evidence of his knowledge of and participation in deflating the footballs.  If he receives good legal advice, Brady needs to accept his punishment and let this die down.  It's highly unlikely he can win a lawsuit/arbitration given the spoliation issue.  I don't expect his ego to allow that to happen, but that would be the smart move.

Last edited by forsberg_us (7/28/2015 3:21 pm)

Artie, 

I agree with you. Attempts to cheat the game are the among the more serious offenses in sports. Besides, the real punishment for drunk driving, wife beating, dog fighting, etc is supposed to come from a courtroom, not a sports league. Vick was suspended indefinitely, but the feds decided he should be suspended for 21 months. He then got to square with football when he sorted out his legal issues. To me that's how a lot of the "off the field" stuff needs to go down.

"Robert has already addressed this artie."

How'd I do? Sound like Belichick?

"Artie, please let me know how the Patriot apologists spin this one to show Belicheat's genius. I can't wait to hear."

The most ardent of the ballwashers on Boston sports radio are on vacation this week. There was one guy who called the fill-ins on WEEI this morning who said he is "disappointed" in Belichick, but he was quickly dismissed with the "He's won six Super Bowls" retort. The Sports Hub's morning discussion was gleeful schadenfreuding about Peyton Manning's HGH episode.
For the truly committed, there's been a theory espoused that Belichick threw the game to the Jets so the Jets could make the playoffs instead of the Steelers, under the rationale the Steelers are the Patriots' biggest threat in the AFC right now.
Even Comcast Sports New England's Tom E. Curran, who would eat the peanuts out of Brady's shit, dismissed that one.
What's interesting is CubFan went around saying the same thing about La Russa chucking games to the Astros to keep the Cubs out of the playoffs in 2004. 
CubFan is to baseball as PatriotFan is to football. Congratulations.

"I actually heard this one and assumed it had to be getting significant play in New England."

Simmons and Shaughnessy both submitted Tweets, undoubtedly laced with sarcasm, suggesting Belichick threw the game to the Jets, but I think you have to be a true, true believer to actually give that theory any sort of credence.
As brilliant as Belichick is, he would have to - in the midst of his own game - have to calculate the ramifications of the Stealers loss, a Jets win, assume the Bengals or the Broncos aren't going to catch the Patriots for home field, and assume his own team - which has lost three of its last five - is going to beat the Dolphins in Miami this Sunday. There's just too much at stake for the Patriots to dump games. There's no way he even considers forfeiting the possibility of home field advantage to play matchups so he could face the Stealers - a team that lost to the Ravens with Ryan Mallett playing QB - than the Jets, who are playing pretty good defense. 
If his thought processes are that detailed, he should have spent his time counting cards at the Blackjack tables in Vegas and gotten rich that way.

Last edited by artie_fufkin (12/28/2015 12:46 pm)

Artie, this is more of a journalist question more than football, but what are your thoughts on Peter Gammons?

LOL!!!  Suck it New England!!!!

artie_fufkin wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

LOL!!!  Suck it New England!!!!

 
Please tell me they got screwed by the officials or something.

Not sure if they're blaming the officials yet. As of last night, the scape goat was Gostkowski. He missed an XP (his first miss in forever) which caused them to have to go for a 2-pt conversion at the end which failed.