Lofunzo wrote: bigken117 wrote: Dick Vermeil wrote:
That stuff's been going on forever and I don't think you gain from it.
What else is he going to say?? He's laying low and had nothing to do with the game at hand. I also disagree that there is nothing to gain because, if there wasn't, why would there be a rule against it??
He could say what almost everyone else has said, and that's something along the lines of how the Pats disgraced the game's integrity and it tarnishes their Super Bowl wins and their legacy. Instead he's telling it like it is.
Look, I agree there is a gain from it, but it wouldn't be useful until the next time the teams played each other. It's not like the tape can get fed up to the booth, the booth breaks it down, relays it to the field, it gets relayed to Brady, he audibles, and gets the snap off...if 35 seconds. I just don't see it.
Besides teams have been stealing signs since the beginning of time. That's why coaches cover their mouths with clipboards when they call plays. While I'm not proud they went to that extreme (or got ratted out), it's only a big deal because it was the dominant franchise of this decade that did get caught. If this happened to Buffalo, the story wouldn't drag out like this, there'd be no bitter Steeler fans in the Senate calling to speak with the commissioner, no lead stories on SportsCenter 5 months later, or bitter ex-employees who got canned for looking for other jobs trying to sell their story to cover legal fees.