Patriots accused of taping Rams before the 2002 Super Bowl

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

I think your wrong. If the tape was of no value, then why bother to go the trouble of acquiring it. It's like someone breaks into a house, steals a load of stuff and then says, "But this stuff isn't even worth that much!" Knowing what plays a team runs in a walkthrough and the order they run them in would be a huge advantage for someone calling a defense.

The Fox article states, "It was not known whether the cameraman was told by the Patriots to film the practice or what he did with the tape, the Herald said."
So the Herald that made these allegations with unidentified sources and a lot of rumors goes even further and says 'it is not known what he did with the tape."
When you or any credible source has actual facts then punishment should be considered, until then it is premature.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

The Fox article states, "It was not known whether the cameraman was told by the Patriots to film the practice or what he did with the tape, the Herald said."
So the Herald that made these allegations with unidentified sources and a lot of rumors goes even further and says 'it is not known what he did with the tape."
When you or any credible source has actual facts then punishment should be considered, until then it is premature.

You stood up and defended the Pats and essentially said that, even if true, this is much to do about nothing. So, I'm not sure why we can't speculate about what should happen if the allegations prove true.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

The Fox article states, "It was not known whether the cameraman was told by the Patriots to film the practice or what he did with the tape, the Herald said."
So the Herald that made these allegations with unidentified sources and a lot of rumors goes even further and says 'it is not known what he did with the tape."
When you or any credible source has actual facts then punishment should be considered, until then it is premature.

Before you were saying it was okay for them to look at the tape because it was of little value. Your new position is that they never looked at the tape at all. I would suggest that if the tape was made, then Belichik almost certainly watched it personally, made notes, and adjusted his gameplan accordingly.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Before you were saying it was okay for them to look at the tape because it was of little value. Your new position is that they never looked at the tape at all. I would suggest that if the tape was made, then Belichik almost certainly watched it personally, made notes, and adjusted his gameplan accordingly.

It is not a new position.
They are two totally different subjects:

1) Did they get an advantage by watching practice tape?
2) Did this tape really exist and what was done with it after it was recorded? Can it be proved?

If you need more explanation let me know.
I never said they did or did not watch the tape. I was referring to what can be proved and how this so called revealing article is nothing but scuttlebutt. .