Is the Pats win tainted

[Front Porch]

Just curious as I think about this game and how would it impact you if your favorite team was called out as cheating after the Super Bowl.  Obviously thinking of this for Pats fans.

Maybe even worse for a team that has never won before but how would it feel to have others discredit your team win which you have waited years or a lifetime to see.  Or maybe you don't care because your team won. 

I just think for myself the win would have been cheapened. 

[Learjet89]

As has been picked up by national media, Pats fans are acting as if the government has outlawed Dunkin Donuts by starting a GoFundMe to pay the team fine, to considering a class action lawsuit against the league.

I'd personally be of the "scoreboard" attitude, if my team ever won anything 

[Front Porch]

I get that but it also seems like you get tired of being heckled or mocked every time you claimed the ring.

Say the Bengals won but you know for the rest of your life you will have to hear they had to cheat to win.  Part of winning is the respect that comes with it to me. 

It is also one thing if the calls or something else causes the questions.  Not in your hands and easier to blow off.  Thinking of the Steeler Super Bowl or say the OSU National Championship vs Miami. 

I would just hate to the question mark or the yeah but with the ring. 

[Learjet89]

If it were blatant and prolonged cheating, then I would see your point.

At least in the pros, championships and wins aren't vacated like they are in college.

[Justin NoCal]

It's kind of like the Bonds HR record to me. At first you are haha neener neener guy, then you are neener neener he never got caught guy.. Then you're well the pitchers were cheating too guy.

If I'm Pats fan I don't care. I still don't think this was the difference in any meaningful game the Pats played in.

[Front Porch]

I think it is a good comparison. 

Wouldn't it be nice to talk about Bonds without having to justify what he did.  He is almost a classic yeah but guy.  You can't talk about him without addressing the issue. 

[Justin NoCal]

It sure would. I usually preface the convo with he would have been a HOFer anyways.

Part of me thinks this might go away kind of like the Spygate bullshit did. It's kind of a distant memory, I can't say it tainted my view of Bellichick or Brady's legacy. Then again.. Fool me once, shame on you.. Etc

[Front Porch]

Not sure, I have heard several times they hadn't won since Spygate.  It was almost the story that since they caught for Spygate they hadn't won.  So the story was there still. 

[Mike in Parma]

taint. 

[Beavis in KC]

taint. 

Lock.  Archive.

[Stab]

Say the Bengals won 

[Dog]

Yes.  It's tainted.

Mostly because as a Fin fan, I have always despised the Patriots, the Hoodie, the organization, and pretty much the entire North East.

[VicNocal]

It's kind of like the Bonds HR record to me. At first you are haha neener neener guy, then you are neener neener he never got caught guy.. Then you're well the pitchers were cheating too guy.

If I'm Pats fan I don't care. I still don't think this was the difference in any meaningful game the Pats played in.

It's a game of inches. Everything counts in large amounts.

[Front Porch]

I agree with Vic.

If it made no difference why do or worry about it. 

I think we underestimate how much a small change can be the difference in pro games.  To me is like blackjack where the slightest edge repeated over course of 1,000 plays in a season adds up to a significant advantage.

That said they had 4 close games in the regular season (defined as one score either way).  They went 3-1 beating Oakland and the Jets twice and losing to the Packers.  These games may have been decided by a turnover and even just a big third down catch helped by a soft ball.  They had one with Baltimore in the playoffs before this hit.  So they went 4-1 in close games.

They clinched home field because of the wins which allowed them to rest guys in week 17 and or get home field.  How does it play out if they don't have home field. 

So in some ways I get your take it is at best a slight advantage.  Just that I also know that a slight advantage of the over course of 1,000 plays can add up quickly. 

[frankinhouston]

I agree with Vic.

If it made no difference why do or worry about it. 

I think we underestimate how much a small change can be the difference in pro games.  To me is like blackjack where the slightest edge repeated over course of 1,000 plays in a season adds up to a significant advantage.

That said they had 4 close games in the regular season (defined as one score either way).  They went 3-1 beating Oakland and the Jets twice and losing to the Packers.  These games may have been decided by a turnover and even just a big third down catch helped by a soft ball.  They had one with Baltimore in the playoffs before this hit.  So they went 4-1 in close games.

They clinched home field because of the wins which allowed them to rest guys in week 17 and or get home field.  How does it play out if they don't have home field. 

So in some ways I get your take it is at best a slight advantage.  Just that I also know that a slight advantage of the over course of 1,000 plays can add up quickly.

you are an imbecile. cheating is cheating. great if you get away with it (per rome)...get caught, pay the consequences.

f