Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Did the Jets spy on the Pats?

  1. #1

    Did the Jets spy on the Pats?

    Oh man this would be interesting:

    JETS NABBED FOR SPYING LAST YEAR?

    In this same vein, Jay Glazer of FOX reported on Sunday that there are rumors that the Pats busted the Jets in 2006 for the very same thing for which the Jets busted the Pats in 2007.

    Per Glazer, the Patriots nabbed the Jets at Gillette Stadium last year, but New England opted not to get the league involved. Instead, the Pats merely asked the Jets to stop it.

    Glazer also says that the league source "confirmed" the accusation. But the Jets deny it. G.M. Mike Tannenbaum told Glazer that there's "absolutely no truth to that whatsoever! Completely false!" (Okay, Mike! We get the point!)

    Either way, we can understand why the Patriots didn't turn the Jets in. After all, the Pats were doing the same damn thing, and weren't prepared to give up the practice (or potentially get themselves in trouble) by blowing the whistle on the Jets.

    And isn't it a little ironic that the Pats told the Jets to stop videotaping defensive signals when the Pats apparently were doing it themselves? Isn't that like telling a guest to take off his shoes at the front door of your house -- while you're in the process of traipsing around the shag with the remnants of the dog's dinner from the day before on your own?

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by wadeski
    Oh man this would be interesting:

    JETS NABBED FOR SPYING LAST YEAR?

    In this same vein, Jay Glazer of FOX reported on Sunday that there are rumors that the Pats busted the Jets in 2006 for the very same thing for which the Jets busted the Pats in 2007.

    Per Glazer, the Patriots nabbed the Jets at Gillette Stadium last year, but New England opted not to get the league involved. Instead, the Pats merely asked the Jets to stop it.

    Glazer also says that the league source "confirmed" the accusation. But the Jets deny it. G.M. Mike Tannenbaum told Glazer that there's "absolutely no truth to that whatsoever! Completely false!" (Okay, Mike! We get the point!)

    Either way, we can understand why the Patriots didn't turn the Jets in. After all, the Pats were doing the same damn thing, and weren't prepared to give up the practice (or potentially get themselves in trouble) by blowing the whistle on the Jets.

    And isn't it a little ironic that the Pats told the Jets to stop videotaping defensive signals when the Pats apparently were doing it themselves? Isn't that like telling a guest to take off his shoes at the front door of your house -- while you're in the process of traipsing around the shag with the remnants of the dog's dinner from the day before on your own?
    If this were true I would think NE would have brought it up immediatley after the fact. JMO

  3. #3

    Wow 20 views and no reply's?

    Go figure.

  4. #4
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,827
    Who cares? Let's just move one, get over it.

  5. #5
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Jetslandistan
    Posts
    531
    This garbage is in the same vein, as the *it's Mangini that's the bad guy* BS...
    all, I suspect, either Pats damage control, or media spin to cover for the Pats/BB.
    We see this subterfuge stuff, in the political realm, all the time.
    Like in the past couple of weeks, the Iraq war was a big issue in Congress, which is a bad issue for the GOP. So, they made a big deal about an ad in the Times, all to divert attention away from the real story.

    Why people let themselves be manipulated, and pay any credence to spin, I'll never know.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by burf
    This garbage is in the same vein, as the *it's Mangini that's the bad guy* BS...
    all, I suspect, either Pats damage control, or media spin to cover for the Pats/BB.
    We see this subterfuge stuff, in the political realm, all the time.
    Like in the past couple of weeks, the Iraq war was a big issue in Congress, which is a bad issue for the GOP. So, they made a big deal about an ad in the Times, all to divert attention away from the real story.

    Why people let themselves be manipulated, and pay any credence to spin, I'll never know.
    Why would the Pats want to do damage control on something that is almost over and forgotten in the press? Seems to me this would have been leaked by the Pats early on in the investigation if that were so.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us