Colts Cheating???

[Nadine]

10 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

FWIW, there was a lengthy disclaimer in the footer of the article, if you could make it past all the terrible pop-ups and spam ads...

 

 

That didn't appear for me but, I have a tracker blocker on my browser so, that may have stopped it.  Your telling me that they intentionally posted fake news as a way to bring up deflate-gate?

[AZColt11]

11 minutes ago, Nadine said:

That didn't appear for me but, I have a tracker blocker on my browser so, that may have stopped it.  Your telling me that they intentionally posted fake news as a way to bring up deflate-gate?

That would not shock anyone.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

So almost 30 years ago Indy supposedly cheated?????  This has significance now??????

 

 

Ooops...fat fingers 20 years ago.

[southwest1]

"A “hearing aid” or any type of electronic device would amount to a clear and blatant violation of the rules."

 

Let's say for the sake of the argument that Peyton was complicit in violating this rule. I don't believe it BTW. I'm just playing devils advocate for giggles. Wouldn't Howard Mudd get credit for being fresh & innovative? Think of it like just another way of altering the flow of the QB's cadence or snap count by to quote actor Kevin Costner as Billy Chapel in "For The Love Of The Game" as clearing the mechanism & removing all outside distractions allowing all teammates on the field to get in the zone? 

 

Even if I accepted Tarik Glenn's premise that it gave Manning & the offense any unfair competitive advantage, Peyton still needed to get in the right formation & execute the play flawlessly right? And why would Glenn who won a Championship with 18, throw dirt on a future HOF player now? What purpose does it serve him in 2017 actually. It's like slamming a former girlfriend for helping you win the Nobel Peace Prize & your crowning achievement or milestone. 

 

I wanna know what Mr. Glenn thinks The Sheriff did to him to tarnish his impeccable reputation like this. Dude, what the hades is wrong with you man? You don't drag out dirty laundry & screw over former teammates like this not in a media outlet publicly like that. 

 

Note to Glenn: Conspiracy theories only gain traction when your team loses [A SB] not wins. Jesus, even little kids grasp this concept. Just sayin'.

 

A ring traditionally is supposed to mask hypothetically a multitude of sins & foster brotherhood, forgiveness, & lifelong bonds man come on. 

[southwest1]

1 hour ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

So almost 30 years ago Indy supposedly cheated?????  This has significance now??????

Exactly my brother. You took the words right out of my mouth RR7. Fake outrage now is darn near hysterical isn't it? Glenn needs a refresher course in relevancy & timeliness. 

 

I still respect Tarik & appreciate his 2006 contributions naturally, but he didn't just miss the boat here. He missed the entire bleeping harbor metaphorically speaking. 

[Shadow_Creek]

15 hours ago, NorthernBlue said:

Yeah wanted to post this yesterday but wasn't sure if it was really worth it to be honest.

 

If they really did cheat, I mean I guess you could say they probably deserved a punishment.

 

But like, are you gonna really levy a fine or suspension on the team 19 years after something happened? Nah.

I bet ya all 31 other teams did something way similar Anyway.

[indyagent17]

10 hours ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

So almost 30 years ago Indy supposedly cheated?????  This has significance now??????

30?

[GoPats]

12 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It's because deep down they know Peyton was just as great as Brady and BB. They wont admit it but they know it. Andrew has yet to prove his worth on that level but Pats fans are very knowledgeable and they know it's a matter of time that he does. Luck still has 10 years left easily in his career, Tom maybe 2 or 3. Patience.

 

Don't get me wrong because I respect ya, but you're fishing in the wrong pond with this theory. In our eyes the Brady/Manning thing ended with the 4th title and then last year just put more distance between them. And while I do like Luck, he's not even in the same discussion as those two yet. 

 

 

[TheRustonRifle#7]

Lol!  Fat fingers!!!!! 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, GoPats said:

 

Don't get me wrong because I respect ya, but you're fishing in the wrong pond with this theory. In our eyes the Brady/Manning thing ended with the 4th title and then last year just put more distance between them. And while I do like Luck, he's not even in the same discussion as those two yet. 

 

 

Fair enough. When I do my QB's list I have Tom at #1 actually, Montana at #2, and Peyton #3 (Unitas is like a 3B). I think Peyton getting that 2nd Ring and doing it with 2 different teams moved him into the Top 3. It's just not the Rings, combine that with his 5 League MVP's - he is Top 3. I guess my initial point is there isn't much difference between 1 and 3 and IMO most Pats know this (you cant go wrong with any of those 3). Of course most Pats fans will say Tom is the best hands down but when I used to serf Pats message Boards I could see the hidden respect for Peyton by the why people posted. Regarding Andrew, assuming he comes back 100% from his surgery I think in 2 or 3 years he will be the best QB in the league, if not he will be Top 3. I have faith in Ballard putting a good team around him. He just needs more help. I couldn't stand Grigson, glad he's gone.

[GoPats]

33 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Fair enough. When I do my QB's list I have Tom at #1 actually, Montana at #2, and Peyton #3 (Unitas is like a 3B). I think Peyton getting that 2nd Ring and doing it with 2 different teams moved him into the Top 3. It's just not the Rings, combine that with his 5 League MVP's - he is Top 3. I guess my initial point is there isn't much difference between 1 and 3 and IMO most Pats know this (you cant go wrong with any of those 3). Of course most Pats fans will say Tom is the best hands down but when I used to serf Pats message Boards I could see the hidden respect for Peyton by the why people posted. Regarding Andrew, assuming he comes back 100% from his surgery I think in 2 or 3 years he will be the best QB in the league, if not he will be Top 3. I have faith in Ballard putting a good team around him. He just needs more help. I couldn't stand Grigson, glad he's gone.

 

I completely agree on Grigson, I feel like he set you guys back and wasted a couple of Luck's early prime years. I was surprised they kept Chuck though! I think the Colts are going to be much better this year and you're my pick to win the division again. 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, GoPats said:

 

I completely agree on Grigson, I feel like he set you guys back and wasted a couple of Luck's early prime years. I was surprised they kept Chuck though! I think the Colts are going to be much better this year and you're my pick to win the division again. 

 

Yeah I usually don't make my predictions until after Pre-season but I think 10-6 with a healthy Luck is very attainable. Our schedule looks favorable as well. Regarding Chuck, it's a make or break year for him. If we don't win the Division I think he's gone. 10-6 will win the South, Texans still don't have a QB and are looking at 9-7, Titans are a mystery but could go 9-7. Jags have some great talent on Defense but that team stinks every year and they are going nowhere with Bortles.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, GoPats said:

 

Don't get me wrong because I respect ya, but you're fishing in the wrong pond with this theory. In our eyes the Brady/Manning thing ended with the 4th title and then last year just put more distance between them. And while I do like Luck, he's not even in the same discussion as those two yet. 

 

 

So you are using super bowls to determine who is the better QB between Brady and Manning?  I don't buy that because super bowls are team orientated. Two of the Pats super bowls were because of games just plain given to them. Two more super bowls wins came from the foot of the kicker. I am not saying Brady didn't have anything to do with those wins but it was the Patriots as a team that won those rings. Brady didn't do anything by himself just like there are no QBs who do anything by themselves. Using super bowls rings as a guide on who is the better QB is just fandom. For Gods sake there are QBs who have rings that were not even starters in the regular season.

[NannyMcafee]

On 7/5/2017 at 11:33 AM, Chrisaaron1023 said:

I saw this yesterday.. I'm surprised it took this long for a thread to be started lol

 

this freaking guy bashed the colts..http://boston.cbslocal.com/2017/07/04/former-colts-lineman-admits-to-salacious-cheating-scheme-to-help-peyton-manning/

 

just salty of the deflatgate

 

The sarcasm that drips from this article just goes to show how little, the entire city of Boston takes cheating seriously. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

14 hours ago, Nadine said:

That didn't appear for me but, I have a tracker blocker on my browser so, that may have stopped it.  Your telling me that they intentionally posted fake news as a way to bring up deflate-gate?

 

Technically not fake news, Tarik Glenn (although he misspoke) did say they used hearing aids. But yes, they leveraged this into another Deflategate gripe session for sure.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

So you are using super bowls to determine who is the better QB between Brady and Manning?  I don't buy that because super bowls are team orientated. Two of the Pats super bowls were because of games just plain given to them. Two more super bowls wins came from the foot of the kicker. I am not saying Brady didn't have anything to do with those wins but it was the Patriots as a team that won those rings. Brady didn't do anything by himself just like there are no QBs who do anything by themselves. Using super bowls rings as a guide on who is the better QB is just fandom. For Gods sake there are QBs who have rings that were not even starters in the regular season.

By his Post that is what he is doing. I factor in everything and if someone has Brady at #1 I understand it because he has the Stats and a couple of MVP's to go with it + 4 SB MVP's - he has a great Clutch factor. Having Belichick has helped him a bunch though IMO = the Pats have been a Greatly Coached team which usually means the team has been great. I am not sure how much Spygate and Deflategate should be factored in ranking Brady either?? If one still wanted to say Montana I wouldn't argue it because he put up great Stats as well for the era he played in and he also won 2 League MVP's. He also had 0 INT's in the 4 SB's he played in. How much should the Pats losing to the Giants in 2007 be held against Brady? Yeah he led them to the go ahead score late in the game but he also only put up 14 points and they lost to an inferior team blowing an undefeated season. Montana was 4-0 in SB's. Lastly Peyton has 3 huge things that neither of those 2 have. He has 5 League MVP's which means basically individually he was the best player in the league 5 different years, he won a SB as a starter with 2 different teams which no other QB has done, and he had the best individual season statistically of all-time in 2013 when he threw for 55 TD's and 5477 Yards. Those records will never be broken in 1 season IMO which he has the bar set there for a 16 game season. So if someone wanted to say Peyton, I wouldn't go bonkers over it and say RINGS though. Peyton has won 2 Rings as a starter which only 11 other QB's have done so it wasn't like he was chopped liver in the Playoffs all the time. He has also been to 4 SB's with 4 different Coaches. He made the SB coached by Caldwell, Fox, and Kubes  Won with Kubes. Yeah it was mainly Denver's Defense but Peyton played Good vs the Pats in the AFC Title Game. He is also 3-1 vs Brady/BB in Title games so I think the choke label is absurd when people use it.

[GoPats]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah I usually don't make my predictions until after Pre-season but I think 10-6 with a healthy Luck is very attainable. Our schedule looks favorable as well. Regarding Chuck, it's a make or break year for him. If we don't win the Division I think he's gone. 10-6 will win the South, Texans still don't have a QB and are looking at 9-7, Titans are a mystery but could go 9-7. Jags have some great talent on Defense but that team stinks every year and they are going nowhere with Bortles.

 

Oh man if Indy underachieves and they DON'T get rid of Pagano... I would be furious if I were you. 

 

Tennessee might be a bit of a dark horse. Depends on Mariota. But I wouldn't worry too much about Houston. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, GoPats said:

 

Oh man if Indy underachieves and they DON'T get rid of Pagano... I would be furious if I were you. 

 

Tennessee might be a bit of a dark horse. Depends on Mariota. But I wouldn't worry too much about Houston. 

I think in order for Chuck to keep his job, Colts need to win the Division and a Playoff game.

[GoPats]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

So you are using super bowls to determine who is the better QB between Brady and Manning?  I don't buy that because super bowls are team orientated. Two of the Pats super bowls were because of games just plain given to them. Two more super bowls wins came from the foot of the kicker. I am not saying Brady didn't have anything to do with those wins but it was the Patriots as a team that won those rings. Brady didn't do anything by himself just like there are no QBs who do anything by themselves. Using super bowls rings as a guide on who is the better QB is just fandom. For Gods sake there are QBs who have rings that were not even starters in the regular season.

 

It's not that simple... Super Bowls are part of it, yes. I'm looking at the big picture though. Highest winning percentage of any QB by far, most playoff appearances/wins, he has the volume stats, etc-etc. 

 

Using championships to judge greatness is far from "fandom." It's a huge part of the legacies of several quarterbacks. Like I said before, there's no magic formula when it comes to QB legacies. But winning five titles over the course of 15+ years, when you're really the only constant on the players' side, is an achievement that's been unmatched. 

 

No one's going to say Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino. But QBs don't win multiple titles by being in the right place at the right time. 

 

If Manning's resume read like Brady's, you guys would be all over this. Trust me. 

 

[GoPats]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think in order for Chuck to keep his job, Colts need to win the Division and a Playoff game.

 

I agree, at minimum. A lot of it depends on how they get there, but if the Colts aren't in the mix, it's time for Chuck to move on. 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

9 minutes ago, GoPats said:

 

It's not that simple... Super Bowls are part of it, yes. I'm looking at the big picture though. Highest winning percentage of any QB by far, most playoff appearances/wins, he has the volume stats, etc-etc. 

 

Using championships to judge greatness is far from "fandom." It's a huge part of the legacies of several quarterbacks. Like I said before, there's no magic formula when it comes to QB legacies. But winning five titles over the course of 15+ years, when you're really the only constant on the players' side, is an achievement that's been unmatched. 

 

No one's going to say Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino. But QBs don't win multiple titles by being in the right place at the right time. 

 

If Manning's resume read like Brady's, you guys would be all over this. Trust me. 

 

Yeah it's a mixture like you said. I wouldn't have Brady #1 if his stats were like Terry Bradshaw's. Brady has the Rings and Stats but Montana and Peyton both are in this convo IMO.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

By his Post that is what he is doing. I factor in everything and if someone has Brady at #1 I understand it because he has the Stats and a couple of MVP's to go with it + 4 SB MVP's - he has a great Clutch factor. Having Belichick has helped him a bunch though IMO = the Pats have been a Greatly Coached team which usually means the team has been great. I am not sure how much Spygate and Deflategate should be factored in ranking Brady either?? If one still wanted to say Montana I wouldn't argue it because he put up great Stats as well for the era he played in and he also won 2 League MVP's. He also had 0 INT's in the 4 SB's he played in. How much should the Pats losing to the Giants in 2007 be held against Brady? Yeah he led them to the go ahead score late in the game but he also only put up 14 points and they lost to an inferior team blowing an undefeated season. Montana was 4-0 in SB's. Lastly Peyton has 3 huge things that neither of those 2 have. He has 5 League MVP's which means basically individually he was the best player in the league 5 different years, he won a SB as a starter with 2 different teams which no other QB has done, and he had the best individual season statistically of all-time in 2013 when he threw for 55 TD's and 5477 Yards. Those records will never be broken in 1 season IMO which he has the bar set there for a 16 game season. So if someone wanted to say Peyton, I wouldn't go bonkers over it and say RINGS though. Peyton has won 2 Rings as a starter which only 11 other QB's have done so it wasn't like he was chopped liver in the Playoffs all the time. He has also been to 4 SB's with 4 different Coaches. He made the SB coached by Caldwell, Fox, and Kubes  Won with Kubes. Yeah it was mainly Denver's Defense but Peyton played Good vs the Pats in the AFC Title Game. He is also 3-1 vs Brady/BB in Title games so I think the choke label is absurd when people use it.

If Brady were switched  teams it would be Manning with the same numbers as Brady. They were so close in talent the difference was the teams, not the QBs. The Colts and the Patriots benefited from playing in weak divisions so division titles were pretty much given to both teams.

Brady always had a decent running game and the Patriots special teams were always at the top of the league. Defense? There is no question who had the better defense his whole career except when Manning went to the Broncos.

With that defense at Denver before injury caught up with Manning he had his best season in his career, That showed had the Colts had even a team as close to the Bronco's Manning would have had as good if not better career as what you give Brady credit for.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

2 hours ago, GoPats said:

 

If Manning's resume read like Brady's, you guys would be all over this. Trust me. 

 

 

It would've been really interesting to see Manning with a coach of Belichick's caliber. He had 3 head coaches in Indianapolis alone, 2 of which were terrible.

[2006Coltsbestever]

22 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

If Brady were switched  teams it would be Manning with the same numbers as Brady. They were so close in talent the difference was the teams, not the QBs. The Colts and the Patriots benefited from playing in weak divisions so division titles were pretty much given to both teams.

Brady always had a decent running game and the Patriots special teams were always at the top of the league. Defense? There is no question who had the better defense his whole career except when Manning went to the Broncos.

With that defense at Denver before injury caught up with Manning he had his best season in his career, That showed had the Colts had even a team as close to the Bronco's Manning would have had as good if not better career as what you give Brady credit for.

I really don't disagree with your Post, like I said if one wanted to say Brady, Montana, or Peyton were the best ever I don't see how anyone could get upset over it. I love Peyton and always throw out examples to why he could arguably be the greatest but I also am not biased either. That is why when some don't take my lists seriously it bothers me because I am far from biased. I cant stand the Patriots but can only look at things objectively. That Top 3 I listed and even including Unitas can be in any order technically and I wouldn't have a problem with it. I think my Post above explains my thoughts.

[IndyScribe]

This has been debunked as false. The SBnation writer jumped the gun and copied Florio without fact checking.

[Synthetic]

19 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

I find it hilarious that Pats fans, who have a team that has won 5 superbowls since Brady has been there, still obsess with a Colts team that has been an irrelevant 8-8 the past 2 seasons.  Tell ya what, if it was my team that had won those 5 superbowls, I'd be carefree what anybody else thought.

 

Anxiety runs high in Pats land apparently.

 

I don't think they obsess over the Colts at all. Actually, it's the other way around. Look at the number of threads about the Patriots are posted in the General NFL forum....Not a week goes by without some topic about them being brought up. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

9 minutes ago, Synthetic said:

 

I don't think they obsess over the Colts at all. Actually, it's the other way around. Look at the number of threads about the Patriots are posted in the General NFL forum....Not a week goes by without some topic about them being brought up. 

I haven't been on their Message Boards lately as in since the season ended but they have a couple that are their main one's, like The Planet for example. When I did frequent those Boards to read those comments they do bring the Colts up a lot. They bash us when we lose and Peyton comes up a lot too so it really is both of us doing it. I don't disagree with you regarding this Forum Posts about the Pats a lot but so do their Forums about the Colts. Some of things they have Posted about Deflategate is so insane that I cant repeat it. Some of the names they have called Peyton I cant either so they are just as bad. Hey, that is the Internet  

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Synthetic said:

 

I don't think they obsess over the Colts at all. Actually, it's the other way around. Look at the number of threads about the Patriots are posted in the General NFL forum....Not a week goes by without some topic about them being brought up. 

I don't think that is true at all. Matter of fact their sites get just as crazy if not more than this one.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I haven't been on their Message Boards lately as in since the season ended but they have a couple that are their main one's, like The Planet for example. When I did frequent those Boards to read those comments they do bring the Colts up a lot. They bash us when we lose and Peyton comes up a lot too so it really is both of us doing it. I don't disagree with you regarding this Forum Posts about the Pats a lot but so do their Forums about the Colts. Some of things they have Posted about Deflategate is so insane that I cant repeat it. Some of the names they have called Peyton I cant either so they are just as bad. Hey, that is the Internet  

This is very true. One of their sites really don't have any rules so you can say whatever you want no matter how rude or nasty you care to get.

I can't remember exactly what the site was but when I mentioned I was a Colts fan and just wanted to see what the site was like I got called names I hadn't heard since I was in the military.

[2006Coltsbestever]

22 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

This is very true. One of their sites really don't have any rules so you can say whatever you want no matter how rude or nasty you care to get.

I can't remember exactly what the site was but when I mentioned I was a Colts fan and just wanted to see what the site was like I got called names I hadn't heard since I was in the military.

I have never commented on their Boards but I just know they obsess about the Colts and say bad things about our Franchise a lot by reading their comments. So I needed to point that out for people that think otherwise. They are actually worse then we are at times. I have read it first hand. Its the Internet like I said so it happens a lot. Unless one goes to other teams Sites they probably wouldn't know that. My guess is, Bogie doesn't go on Pats Sites so no biggy.

[crazycolt1]

9 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I have never commented on their Boards but I just know they obsess about the Colts and say bad things about our Franchise a lot by reading their comments. So I needed to point that out for people that think otherwise. They are actually worse then we are at times. I have read it first hand. Its the Internet like I said so it happens a lot. Unless one goes to other teams Sites they probably wouldn't know that. My guess is, Bogie doesn't go on Pats Sites so no biggy.

I will never go back to a Patriots site just because of the insulting results of the times I did.

Matter of fact if you don't have the right zip code there is one that won't let you in anyway. It's completely closed to any fan except Patriot fans. I could just imagine how the Colts are discussed in that site. 

[jameszeigler834]

On ‎7‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 11:48 AM, bluebombers87 said:

So if this was Peyton's rookie season, or even the year after, hearing aid technology like that (picking up specific noise and block out background noise), would almost have to require a microphone. Not sure how easy that would be to conceal while still functional.

 

I wonder if Glenn meant they used ear plugs on the side Manning wasn't on to help block out noise on that side.

 

Again, skeptical as it came from Florio.

Its all nonsense.

[Jules]

Meh........

[JPPT1974]

Indeed trying to bring up cheating again? There is no proof it seems. 

[southwest1]

8 hours ago, GoPats said:

 

It's not that simple... Super Bowls are part of it, yes. I'm looking at the big picture though. Highest winning percentage of any QB by far, most playoff appearances/wins, he has the volume stats, etc-etc. 

 

Using championships to judge greatness is far from "fandom." It's a huge part of the legacies of several quarterbacks. Like I said before, there's no magic formula when it comes to QB legacies. But winning five titles over the course of 15+ years, when you're really the only constant on the players' side, is an achievement that's been unmatched. 

 

No one's going to say Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino. But QBs don't win multiple titles by being in the right place at the right time. 

 

If Manning's resume read like Brady's, you guys would be all over this. Trust me. 

 

This is actually right on the money & well written too GP. I can't argue with anything you said here. It always makes me laugh when I hear some football fans claim with a straight face that SB victories don't matter. They most certainly do & they do indeed cement  legacies as you suggested. Then, detractors will bring up how football is a team sport & guys like Marino & Kelly are HOF recipients who never won a championship. Right like Marino or Kelly wouldn't give darn near anything to have a ring on their NFL resume. Privately behind closed doors I guarantee both QBs would love to have bling on their finger. Trust me. Also, not always, but more often than not; the players with the highest salaries are your best players on the roster. So, don't try to convince me that several filler guys win Championships. They don't meaning this team approach is overblown in most cases. 

 

If legacies are defined in the post season by all accounts in the NFL record books, then the elite & best of the best are ranked by rings. To quote Herm Edwards, "you play to win the game" & what's the most important game to win? Why the SB of course. 

 

Regarding your very last sentence, I will concede this to you publicly: If Manning had say 4 SBs rings to his credit, no INDY fan would give a crap about his 5 MVP Awards. That is the truth. 

[southwest1]

12 hours ago, GoPats said:

 

Don't get me wrong because I respect ya, but you're fishing in the wrong pond with this theory. In our eyes the Brady/Manning thing ended with the 4th title and then last year just put more distance between them. And while I do like Luck, he's not even in the same discussion as those two yet. 

 

 

Your last sentence is an accurate one considering that the only Championship Game Chewbacca ever played in; INDY got pulverized in. 

 

Luck gets credit for making it that far. He just needs to reach that level consistently more frequently now. With Ballard running the GM office now, I think Andrew will make his presence known. Enough said. 

[southwest1]

8 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think in order for Chuck to keep his job, Colts need to win the Division and a Playoff game.

 

8 hours ago, GoPats said:

 

I agree, at minimum. A lot of it depends on how they get there, but if the Colts aren't in the mix, it's time for Chuck to move on. 

 

I couldn't agree more gentlemen. 

[oldunclemark]

On ‎7‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 0:11 PM, fatboy said:

So everyone is clear, using ear pieces to better hear (on the road) was and is still legal.  Nice work, Massachusetts Holes.

That's what I thought..all teams used earplugs in loud road games didn't they?

[AZColt11]

6 hours ago, Synthetic said:

 

I don't think they obsess over the Colts at all. Actually, it's the other way around. Look at the number of threads about the Patriots are posted in the General NFL forum....Not a week goes by without some topic about them being brought up. 

That's because they're good and they're winning.  I think they have a shot to go undefeated this season and that was one of the thread topics.  But to say Pats fans (or at least those who are calling themselves Pats fans) don't care about the Colts is hogwash.  I don't go to the Pats' sites but whenever you read an article on a website such as NFL.com, ESPN, CBS, etc. about the Colts, and it has open comment discussions, you will ALWAYS find Pats fans there mentioning deflategate, Colts banners, etc.  I just think that is so funny that they still even care.  The Pats have been winning Superbowl after Superbowl it seems and the Colts have been 8-8 the last two seasons and can't even win their own putrid division and yet Pats fans still seem to care.  I know I wouldn't.

[southwest1]

30 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

The Pats have been winning Superbowl after Superbowl it seems and the Colts have been 8-8 the last two seasons and can't even win their own putrid division and yet Pats fans still seem to care.  I know I wouldn't.

The strange thing about winning so many SBs though is that you still need another rival to spar with or comically rub our nose in it when Brady got suspended for 4 game & still won the Lombardi trophy in OT in a game Atlanta should have never lost with essentially 1 FG as opposed to slinging the ball all night long. 

 

What I'm getting at here is this: It's not just a jealously argument to NE fans anymore. Now, it's the added bonus of a symbolic middle finger to us for trying to derail Brady's greatness in Foxboro's eyes. The AFC East sucks meaning the Pats only real competition is Denver & INDY. Hades, they're still mad at us for 4 & 2 man. 

 

Also, the Pats know that until INDY figures out how to hang with Pittsburgh, which NE always demolishes BTW; the Colts are no threat to them right now at all let's be honest. Do I like Pagano as a person? Yes. Can he take us to the Promiseland? No. Until we get a new leader nothing will change & NE can continue to breathe easy. That's where I'm at. I hope Chuck finds another NFL gig because it won't be here next yr.