SabreFan1

I'd be surprised if they got anything from tax subsidies beyond the usual write-off for incurring business related losses. The bulk of their operating cash comes from investment, donations, sponsorships, and sales. As for being a "need". That's ridiculous. I'll copy/paste what I wrote in October:

I was mostly agreeing with you. +/- by itself and taken out of context is not a tell all stat. The Sabres' years of poor goaltending and shaky pairing mates contributed to his numbers. It seems to be a combination of buying into Krueger and accepting that Botterill isn't sending him anywhere. If you can find an German-English or French-English translation of it, he wrote a best-selling book called, "Teamlife - Beyond Setbacks to Success".

Motivation has a lot to do with performance. Just look at how many players magically have career years when their contract is up for renewal.

To be fair, this is the first season in a while where Risto has been motivated enough to actually play defence. That's all Ralph Krueger's influence this year. His shot is still relatively inaccurate the harder it is, so I'm hoping he finds someone to fix that next.

HAHAHAHA!!! I'LL TAKE IT!!!!!!!!

Marky just won this team at least one point. Could be 2 already if the rest of the team would cooperate.

He's a solid teammate and a decent dman. His problem is that he can't stay healthy to save his life which makes him overpaid. I can't see the Sabres getting much for him. Being a contract year, if he's continually made a healthy scratch, he'll see his next contract's pay drop by millions. Nobody will want to pick him up for anything close to the $6 million (5.1 cap) that he's making this year.

I was talking about the immediate deaths, not the scaldings from the water.

Unless Goodell is willing to p*ss off a lot of owners by deciding this alone, my guess is that he has a conference call in the morning with some of the more influential owners to decide what's going to be done.

I have no hate for the Patriots, but for the sake of the game, I really hope the NFL doesn't sweep this under the rug. Taking away championships will never happen and it's a silly proposal, but at a bare minimum they need to see heavier fines than the first Spygate and more lost picks. Like I said, this is an election year. Don't give politicians an easy way like this to get their faces in the news cycle. I can see Trump now tweeting something like, "Looks like I'll also have to drain the NFL swamp".

Can you give me a link to it. It's not on his Twitter timeline and I don't see any new articles on it on NFL.com If his reporting turns out to be accurate and it's just swept under the rug again, there's going to be an owner revolt in the off-season. Jerry Jones already has a bone to pick with Goodell and he still has influence in the league.

While I wouldn't kick her out of bed, I have never thought Melania was very pretty. I think Ivanka is more attractive than Melania. As does Daddy Trump.

They're friends and I think Kraft even gave him a Super Bowl replica ring, but Trump was once also good friends with Bill and Hillary Clinton too. He turns on people when it's to his advantage. It's one of his many slimy qualities.

You're making the same assumptions over and over without anything to back them up. We're just going in circles which is getting us nowhere fast. This kind of arguing reminds me of when I took on half of CDC about Lu's cap recapture. People kept saying what the NHL could and couldn't do. I kept trying to explain why the cap recapture would happen if he retired. Nobody would listen. Finally it happened this season and grand delusions of Aquaman suing the league went up in smoke. The league has wide latitude on what they can do. Furthermore with sports betting now federally legal, Congress could decide to get involved in this for some election year attention. If that happens, attention-hog Trump could jump in with the DOJ since he already has multiple bones to pick with the NFL.

I only just dug into this story today because it initially seemed like it was going to go away, but in the comment sections I've read plenty of fans claiming that he was wearing Pats gear in an attempt to make their argument more credible. I helped a few old teammates that went onto a local Div. 3 program after high school to study their playbook in their freshman year. It was much the same as high school was, just more plays to memorize. Their binders even had a tentative schedule of the rotation of the signals. Like with high school, same set of signals, just used on a rotation basis that was subject to change. No idea if they ever did rotate them because once my old teammates learned their playbooks freshman year, I went onto hockey at my school and I didn't really keep in touch with them. I only got to know one Div. 1 football player from my University well enough to get a peek at his playbook and it didn't have any signal pages. So as to how Div. 1 programs handle their signals, I have no first-hand knowledge. Again - The smartest people don't go into videography. If this guy has done this other times, he may have gotten lazy and a bit too comfortable. Pro cameras usually have eyehole viewfinders rather than pop-out screens. I've read nothing in articles that have said he was using a consumer-grade camera. If he was, that's all the more damning since you wouldn't use a consumer-grade camera to take professional video. I choose to believe you're being facetious here.

The Patriots actually had a half believable explanation for the PSI in the balls so I'm still not 100% sure that to this day that they were guilty of deflating them. The evidence is so circumstantial and the NFL knew it. On top of that, Brady did better with max inflated footballs so there was no true benefit to deflating them in the first place. The punishments were harsh on the circumstantial evidence because with the original Spygate, Goodell softened the blow against the Patriots and destroyed the evidence because he basically owed Kraft because Kraft was a driving force for him having been made the NFL commissioner earlier. With the original Spygate, it came out that the cameramen back then were prepared to use the exact same excuse that the one who got busted the other day ended up using. Google and find ESPN's Spygate article from 2015. People involved in the original sang like birds for it.

Now you're just making stuff up and repeating a version of what the rest of the delusional fanbase is saying. Part of the problem is that the the Patriots only got permission from Cleveland. They never approached the NFL for permission like they were supposed to by rule. That's why the NFL immediately confiscated the film in the first place. As for the Boston gear. Patriots fans all over the internet have morphed a Bruins jersey into the guy was wearing Patriots gear. It boils down to the cameraman was smart enough to not wear team gear, but wasn't smart enough to wear non-descript clothing. You don't become a cameraman in life because you were so smart you had so many other choices. I played both football and hockey. We rotated signals (football) and call outs (hockey). We didn't create new ones monthly and certainly not weekly. We had roughly the same rotation from my freshman to my senior year. Our Varsity football coach even used many of the same plays, signals, and terminology that he used when he was a college football coach. The terminology always stayed the same. You don't rotate terminology because you're asking for trouble at some point if you do.

If the owner ever sees the light and becomes more serious about his product on the field, all he needs to do is borrow a large lump sum of money from a bank and use an equal percentage of his team as collateral. Businesses all over the country do it to finance large projects. The downside would be the interest paid on the loan. That would come from his pocket. That's why I say that he would have to pry open his wallet.

Like I said, "You're another delusional Pats fan pulling weak arguments out of your butt to defend the indefensible." You're mistaken, the NFL can do plenty. Why do you think that the Deflategate penalties were so heavy? They were an extension of the original Spygate penalties.

Of the over 40 games that they filmed between 2000-2007, they all weren't of winning teams. The Bengals have a first year DC and a first year HC, so I can definitely see Belichick getting as much film on them as he can to learn signals and tendancies. If the Bengals owner decides to pry open his wallet, they could be a force in a couple of years with loads of cap space and Joe Burrow as their QB. Then Belichick would already have footage of them to reference in the future. You don't just do something this risky to win just one game at the end of a season.

According to Warren Sharp, the idiot in the Bruins jersey filming the Bengals sideline asked if he could delete the footage and pretend that nothing happened...

Take this in the nicest way possible... You're another delusional Pats fan pulling weak arguments out of your butt to defend the indefensible. They've already been busted doing the exact same thing once before a decade ago. Eric Mangini, a once Belichick close friend and fellow coach, said that he told Belichick that he knows that he films every team, just don't film his team (Jets). Belichick stayed silent on the other end of the call, so Mangini called and spilled the beans to the NFL who promptly busted them in the act at the next game after years of uncaught cheating. Belichick completely cut off Mangini after that. They would never have gotten caught during the first Spygate had a former Patriots insider spilled the beans to a clueless NFL. The evidence was of the one time against the Jets. The NFL didn't need to see, "more than one game of them doing this". That's a ridiculous argument. Add to that, they're using an excuse that they also tried to use the first time. The Patriots are repeat offenders. They've already established a pattern. If someone robs a car and gets convicted of it then sent to prison and then gets caught again years later robbing another car, their past offense gets used against them in the second trial since it shows that they have a penchant for stealing. The judge and jury don't ask if he's stolen other cars on top of the ones that he's already caught stealing. I was willing to give the Patriots the benefit of the doubt, but even if someone is taking B-roll footage of a sideline, they wouldn't need more than a minute or two since only a few seconds would be used in any media production. That's why they call it "B-roll", it's secondary footage, not 8 minutes of main focus footage. When you focus on just one thing, that's called A-Roll or main story footage.

Holy crap... They did it again. I thought it was possible that this was all going to get worked out and it was a misunderstanding, but nope, 8 full minutes of the film is focused solely on the Bengals sideline. It would have been more, but NFL security busted the Cheatriots and took away the camera/film. https://theathletic.com/1447919/2019/12/10/dehner-jr-sources-say-patriots-video-focused-for-8-minutes-on-bengals-sideline/ (paywall)