what a spin job...at least be a man like that other Pats fan on here who defended BB but acknowledged this doesn't look good and might be indefensible theres no way temperature had anything to do with it. You realize how ridiculous that argument is? That's being ignorant on purpose. It was 50 degrees not -50. They have played NFL football since fuckin 1933 in some of the harshest winter conditions and this was never a problem until sunday's 50 degree game?? And it only affected NE's balls? A team that has a cheating coach and a QB that likes under-inflated balls? What a coincidence...... spare me your BS. It wasn't 11 of 24 balls because that factors in the 12 balls the Colts played with, a team that followed the rules. It was 11 of the 12 balls from NE's side. Also, ESPN licks Patriot balls more than an outlet there is.. what world do you live in?
NFL Nework/.com has been ignoring this update to the story all morning... hope that's not an indication of nothing happening...
My guess nothing will be "officially determined" until AFTER the SB........... http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-were-under-inflated-in-afc-championship-game
The fact they even mentioned that 11 of the 12 balls were under inflated means the Patriot rules have changed. Of course I still don't think anything significant will come out of this.
Noticed this too. My first thought was that this shows they are first a mouthpiece for the NFL--then second, some sort of journalistic entity.
Their fans online are making it sound like its no big deal and that everyone else does it. And that the refs aren't doing their jobs. The evolution of their excuses is pretty fun to watch. That said, a small minority of them are being rational about this.
The fact this latest wrinkle has made the front page of FOX, AP, MSNBC and CBS websites is going to make it very difficult for the NFL to give the Patriots their usual pass or maybe burn the evidence like they did last time.
I can't stand the argument of "the game was a blowout anyway so it wouldn't have matter." The game wasn't even close and it probably wouldn't have made a real difference in the outcome; The Colts were putrid. But that's not the point at all. I'll be very curious to hear what they find exactly, but how could this surprise anyone?
It's basically saying that they believe cheating is OK to a degree, so long as it wasn't obviously the difference between winning and losing.
I don't see how Tom or any of the Pats receivers are without blame either. The one guy who picked the ball noticed it was under inflated, how does no one else? Absolutely no reason to cheat, yet they did.
