Spygate II? Jets filming?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from apdynasty23. Show apdynasty23's posts

    Spygate II? Jets filming?

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/11/photo-of-jets-employee-with-sideline-camera-creates-stir/
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    Saw this.  Someone's got some splainin to do.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TitleTown11. Show TitleTown11's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    Ironic - interested to see how strongly the NFL pursues this
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    In Response to Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?:
    [QUOTE]Ironic - interested to see how strongly the NFL pursues this
    Posted by TitleTown11[/QUOTE]

    My guess is not at all since it isn't being made a big deal like the Pats situation. If I was Kraft I'd make a huge stink and make sure that the Jets get a $1mil fine and get their 1st rounder taken away if they make the playoffs or a 2nd if they don't, just like the Pats
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    Of course, they had permission.  NOTT!  I can't even see the Pats giving the Jest permission to use the toilet.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BelichickforPresident. Show BelichickforPresident's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    Interesting.  But is there a chance that it was some pre-approved film project?  I look forward to finding out.  If it is a violation of the rules . . . will be quite the delicious irony.
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BelichickforPresident. Show BelichickforPresident's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    As I suspected, Profootballtalk is reporting that it was a permitted "club video crew," working within the rules.  Darn.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoNotSleepOnThePats. Show DoNotSleepOnThePats's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/11/jets-explain-presence-of-camera-man-on-sidelines/

    All you have to do is wear a lime green vest and you won't get in trouble.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mike-J-D. Show Mike-J-D's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    all i know is a precedent has been set.  certain punishments were levied for this "crime" and now the Jets should have to pay it.  and fans of other teams will be calling for the Jets heads.

    either that or it'll be swept under the rug and forgotten within days.  that's what i'm betting on.  it's not as fashonable for the brainwashed masses to hate the Jets. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoNotSleepOnThePats. Show DoNotSleepOnThePats's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    So all Matt Walsh had to do was wear a lime green vest and Spygate would never have happened?  I'm sorry but this stinks of corruption.  Goodell better investigate.
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BelichickforPresident. Show BelichickforPresident's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    It certainly seems to be a loophole in the rules that teams can exploit and likely do.  And yet those simple-minded "Patriots cheated (and other teams are innocent)" will continue to see the football world in black and white.  Such naivety. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    Well, until Kraft issues a statement saying it was allowed, then it's BS.
    Even then, all films should be viewed by the Nfl upon completion.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    There was a picture of a guy in a green jets shirt with a video camera that surfaced from the very game the Pats were busted in and nothing was ever looked into about that.





     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    Fact- Roger Goodell was once an employee of the Jets.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from profootball. Show profootball's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    May be this is the reason the Pats lost to the Jets in the playoff last year!!!!!
    In Response to Spygate II? Jets filming?:
    [QUOTE]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/11/photo-of-jets-employee-with-sideline-camera-creates-stir/
    Posted by apdynasty23[/QUOTE]
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from jcour382. Show jcour382's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    start the investigation... 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    In Response to Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?:
    [QUOTE]I agree.  We all saw the Jets guy on the sideline.  The one different there, I might add, is he wasn't panning to our sideline, but panning on their sideline, vertically up and down, which gives them some excuse.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    What excuse? The memo stated no video equipment on the sideline.

    "Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent’s offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines"


    Nobody in their right mind can say Goodell didn't overblow the spygate affair.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?

    In Response to Re: Spygate II? Jets filming?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Spygate II? Jets filming? : No. We didn't run it enough or show run in the first half, turned it over and gave NY great field position. That's why.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    Wrong yet again. We let them score 14 points in the 4th quarter.
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share