Official PATSeriks vs Cowboys thread. Bring it bitches!!!!

upstart · Post by **upstart** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:30 pm

Headhunter wrote:Punching it in for a 3 score lead with 20 seconds left probably didn't go over too well either.

Wade Phillips flapping his lips on Peter Kings show last week probably didn't go over too well in the Pats locker room before the game.

Neely8 · Post by **Neely8** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:30 pm

Headhunter wrote:Punching it in for a 3 score lead with 20 seconds left probably didn't go over too well either.

How long did it take your team to score twice last Monday? The Pats were up by two scores. They decided they needed a third to make sure. They ran their 4th string RB. Maybe your great "D" could have tried stopping them??

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:56 pm

Neely8 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:Punching it in for a 3 score lead with 20 seconds left probably didn't go over too well either.

How long did it take your team to score twice last Monday? The Pats were up by two scores. They decided they needed a third to make sure. They ran their 4th string RB. Maybe your great "D" could have tried stopping them??

I know the Cowboys didn't drive the ball 99 yards for a touchdown, kick an onside kick, and drive another 50+ yards for another touchdown in 20 seconds with no timeouts. So shove the whole 2 score bullshit up your ass Neely. As stated before, you were the better team, no questions about it. However, your coach is a punk bitch and she'll get hers sooner or later. Bullshit move on her part all the way.

Neely8 · Post by **Neely8** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:04 am

DallasFanatic wrote:
Neely8 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:Punching it in for a 3 score lead with 20 seconds left probably didn't go over too well either.

How long did it take your team to score twice last Monday? The Pats were up by two scores. They decided they needed a third to make sure. They ran their 4th string RB. Maybe your great "D" could have tried stopping them??
I know the Cowboys didn't drive the ball 99 yards for a touchdown, kick an onside kick, and drive another 50+ yards for another touchdown in 20 seconds with no timeouts. So shove the whole 2 score bullshit up your ass Neely. As stated before, you were the better team, no questions about it. However, your coach is a punk bitch and she'll get hers sooner or later. Bullshit move on her part all the way.

Your coach opened his big fat mouth this week. I told you want was going to happen. Read Bill Simmons article today. They have given the big "F You" TD to all their opponents. Wear it like a badge of honor. Like I said maybe your badass 5-0 defense should have, oh I don't know, STOPPED THEM???? I have the Dallas D on my 6-0 fantasy team however the Pats couldn't run it up enough. All the haters of Belichick and the Pats can choke on it. Oh and plus there were so many people who had their popcorn ready around the country. We didn't want those kernals to all go to waste... BWAHAHAHAHAHA

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:41 pm

So the logic you dudes are running with is that Our coach made unkind comments about Belichicks sportsmanship, so to show him up he acts unsportsmanlike?

So he gets caught cheating, so he's going to be a classless douchebag and try to run up the score on every opponent?

Tell me how that works out for you. I'm guessing it ends in a cheap injury on Brady's knees.

Neely8 · Post by **Neely8** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:31 pm

Headhunter wrote:So the logic you dudes are running with is that Our coach made unkind comments about Belichicks sportsmanship, so to show him up he acts unsportsmanlike?

So he gets caught cheating, so he's going to be a classless douchebag and try to run up the score on every opponent?

Tell me how that works out for you. I'm guessing it ends in a cheap injury on Brady's knees.

Actually your coach said that the Patriots success was "tainted". Now the majority of that is aimed at Belichick. It does however also relate to the players. Your coaches comment wasn't just about Belichick but by proxy the entire team.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:36 pm

Until the defense walks off the field and says they quit, game on. Anyone who bitches about running up the score can piss off.

Intimidation is one of the main psycological tools used int he game today. The Colts went into Dallas last year and got punched in the mouth. The Paycheats went in and stepped on their throat. I guarantee you...week 9...if it is Pats vs. Colts in the next game of the century, it will be in the COlts head how dominant the Paycheats have been.

And HH, yes, if you run your mouth, expect it to get butffucked.

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:37 pm

So by proxy, the entire team is classless douchebags who don't know what sportsmanship is all about? They all felt slighted, so they all threw sportmanship out the window.

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:47 pm

If that's how you want to justify it for yourself, sure.

The whole team were classless cheating douchebags already before kickoff.

Jorvorskie Lane, RB for A&M, said the following the week they played Miami:

"You can't stop this offense."

Miami put 9 on the line the whole game and buttfucked us in the mouth. We deserved it because Lane ran his mouth. I don't give a flying fuck if they run it up in the 1st or 4th.

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:51 pm

IndyFrisco wrote:And HH, yes, if you run your mouth, expect it to get butffucked.

Care to link us all up with that "running" of his mouth. It's a disputed quote that there is no video or audio of, and of the principals involved, one stands to profit (by readership/viewership) by sensationalizing the story.

Wow, look at him run his mouth.

If that is what you truly believe, that Belichick ran the score up because of a disputed quote, it only makes him look like that much bigger of a twat. Even if Phillips did say exactly what he is quoted as saying. Can you dispute it? Are the Patriots Superbowls not tainted by the air of cheating? Can you honestly say that a team that didn't win any of their Superbowls by more than 3 points and just got nailed cheating can honestly say their wins aren't tainted?

We all know the answer to that question.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:58 pm

Don't start with the cheating and tainted debate with me. I think the Paycheats are as guilty as OJ. However, if I'm playing them next weekend, I'm not going to a SI reporter and saying it. It's just feeding the monster.

Peter King, while a hack in many's eyes, is a pretty reputable reporter. I'll take Satan's word over any college or pro coach's word. Coaches, plain and simple, are a bag of lies that will say anything to keep their job. Reporters, to some degree, have to be accountable for their words. Some, like the cunt who did the Bobby Reid story, sensationalize. King? Not so much.

Homer on, though.

Nacho · Post by **Nacho** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 2:09 pm

IndyFrisco wrote:Don't start with the cheating and tainted debate with me. I think the Paycheats are as guilty as OJ. However, if I'm playing them next weekend, I'm not going to a SI reporter and saying it. It's just feeding the monster.

Peter King, while a hack in many's eyes, is a pretty reputable reporter. I'll take Satan's word over any college or pro coach's word. Coaches, plain and simple, are a bag of lies that will say anything to keep their job. Reporters, to some degree, have to be accountable for their words. Some, like the cunt who did the Bobby Reid story, sensationalize. King? Not so much.

Homer on, though.

All reporters sensationalize... It's their freaking job...

Personally I think the Pat's didn't give a rip about any comments made prior to the game about their cheating. Hell Belecheat thinks he is above cheating and any other moral ground and or anyone else in the NFL so why would it bother him....

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:16 pm

the stink of self righteousness pretty much permeates this thread.....

anybody that doesn't believe their team/coaches will do anything to gain an advantage (be it legal or not) is an idiot......

the only difference is that Belichick got caught.....

carry on......

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:47 pm

Regarding the sideline videotaping issue... does anyone know the year this rule was instituted?

Bucmonkey · Post by **Bucmonkey** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:16 pm

2004 I believe ucant.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:16 pm

Headhunter wrote:Can you honestly say that a team that didn't win any of their Superbowls by more than 3 points and just got nailed cheating can honestly say their wins aren't tainted?

We all know the answer to that question.

Word!!!!!!!! We all know Belichick, Brady, and the offense is nothing without their "cheating."

Sin,
Patriots 2008 Super Bowl Champs = most TD's by a QB in a season, highest QB rating in a season, most pts scored in a season, etc, etc, etc...

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:21 pm

Bucmonkey wrote:2004 I believe ucant.

Well... good. I guess that means 2 out of 3 SB's are not "tainted" then, right? What a relief.

Headhunter · Post by **Headhunter** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:27 pm

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:
Word!!!!!!!! We all know Belichick, Brady, and the offense is nothing without their "cheating."

Ucant, why can't you separate the two? Why do they have to be mutually exclusive. Most Pats fans seem to be unable to separate the fact that other fans not only view them as a very good team, but also as suspected cheaters?

Belichick, Brady, and company have been together for many years now. If Belichick is a known cheater, how does Brady escape that dispersion? I believe that to be the very definition of being tainted.

But again, we've been over all of this. I only brought up the running up the score as a possible reason Phillips was "not warm" when shaking Belichicks hand after the game.

The game was settled on the field, and I don't think the conclusion can be debated. The Cowboys got their asses served to them.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:59 am

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:
Bucmonkey wrote:2004 I believe ucant.

Well... good. I guess that means 2 out of 3 SB's are not "tainted" then, right? What a relief.

The first one is obviously tainted by the fact that ...... they lost to the Raiders.

Fumble, game over.

Any non-biased fan of football knows it.

NE will be the champions of this regular season.
Let 'em have their giggles.

They'll be gettin' hosed come playoff time.