Flbillsfan#1 Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 Steve Dumeg was talking to Chris Landry on WDAE Tampa about the Pats.* They both agreed that when the Boston Herald ran the article about the Rams walk through before the Super Bowl, everyone just ASSUMED it was Walsh that had it. Now it is reported he doesn't, they both feel another person must have. They both feel that the Boston Harold had to have had evidence before they ran that story, & will have to further explain where they got the story from to maintain the credibility of the newspaper. Just because Walsh does not have that Video, does not mean it does not exist.
Astrobot Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 My solution is simple. For 6 years, the Pats must have the defensive captain's headset audio broadcast over the stadium's public address system.
WellDressed Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 Check out his other posts. http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?act=S...sult_type=posts You must watch Trading Places to understand.
generaLee83 Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 even if the walkthrough tape existed, the nfl would never let it see the light of day. whether it be under the table cash to make it go away or something else. it would damage the league too much. I agree, I think that's why Goodell played dumb all along and destroyed the original tape. Anything that undermines the credibility of the NFL will never be brought forward if the commish has any say whatsoever. I'm sure some mathematician somewhere crunched the numbers and figured that it would cost he NFL billions over time should the Patriots be exposed. I say screw it though, we've all invested countless dollars and hours into this sport and I'd be willing to invest much more if some honesty was brought forth. Nothing will happen though and the Patriots will probably still win 14 games next season by cheating, Bill Belichik is a bad person by every measure, he'll find a way to win and his butt buddy owner will back him.
generaLee83 Posted May 8, 2008 Posted May 8, 2008 well their dynasty is a joke.. bottom line is the Bills have played some close games against the Pats only to see them walk away with it in the later parts of games... Now we know why, by the 3rd and 4th quarter they were able to make out our signals and adjust. We all watched games where it seemed like they new what we were going to do before we did it, and obviously they did. oif the Bills win a couple of those games our team could've made th eplayoffs once or twice possibly, and the Pats could of lost home field advantage in there... I was in Buffalo 3 or 4 seasons ago during a very snowy blowout loss to the Patriots, the Pats got something like 35 first downs that game, I remember commenting with my Dad about how it was just so freaking amazing that Brady knew exactly where to throw the ball every time. Thanks Dicktriots, thanks for wasting my money and time.
OCinBuffalo Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 You must watch Trading Places to understand. Link to that scene here or in his signature.
d_wag Posted May 9, 2008 Posted May 9, 2008 for those that are saying there is no new evidence here: during the initial investigation last september, if the commish asked belicheat "did you tape offensive signals?" and he answered "no" then we have a problem, as the videotape of just that has been produced by walsh........as that would be new information that should lead to additional sanctions, as per goodell's comments a few weeks ago.........this is the first i've seen offensive signals mentioned around spygate unfortunately the only person who knows the answer to that question is goodell, which is why i think he'll sweep this under the rug, as he did when he off the cuff remarked "we knew they taped games since 2000" 6 months after the investigation was completed.......the only reason he made that remark was because he found out that walsh had tapes that went back that far - how he didn't mention this important detail when handing out the original discipline proves just that........it is blatantly obvious the commish is making it up as he goes along in his effort to make this all go away as soon as possible
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted May 16, 2008 Posted May 16, 2008 Now it is reported he doesn't, they both feel another person must have. They both feel that the Boston Harold had to have had evidence before they ran that story, & will have to further explain where they got the story from to maintain the credibility of the newspaper. Just because Walsh does not have that Video, does not mean it does not exist. yellowcake! yellowcake!
Recommended Posts