Top non cheating NFL teams since 2000

George1963 wrote:1  Colts        160-80
2  Steelers    154-85-1
3  Packers     151-88-1
4  Eagles       145-94-1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32 Patriots    0-240


Aww.  Just another crybaby in the long list of them.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

guppy wrote:Hey, all I know is that Donald Trump during his announcement as a candidate for the presidency tried to show how China's leaders are beating out US leaders, so he likened it to Tom Brady and the Patriots playing a high school team.

“People say, ‘Oh you don’t like China,'” Trump said, per TMZ Sports. “No, I love them, but their leaders are much smarter than our leaders. And we can’t sustain ourselves with that. … It’s like — take the New England Patriots and Tom Brady, and have them play your high school football team. That’s the difference between China’s leaders and our leaders. They are ripping us.”


Now with the likes of Donald Trump backing the Tom and the Pats, what more do we really need?

Dmounts wrote:LOL The Colts owner has done enough messing up to take them off the list. The shit that guy got away with, well I'll just say he shouldn't throw rocks in glass houses. 

George1963 wrote:

guppy wrote:Hey, all I know is that Donald Trump during his announcement as a candidate for the presidency tried to show how China's leaders are beating out US leaders, so he likened it to Tom Brady and the Patriots playing a high school team.

“People say, ‘Oh you don’t like China,'” Trump said, per TMZ Sports. “No, I love them, but their leaders are much smarter than our leaders. And we can’t sustain ourselves with that. … It’s like — take the New England Patriots and Tom Brady, and have them play your high school football team. That’s the difference between China’s leaders and our leaders. They are ripping us.”


Now with the likes of Donald Trump backing the Tom and the Pats, what more do we really need?

Donald Trump likening Brady and the Patriots with the communist China. Per TMZ. And you cite this.

Seek help.

George1963 wrote:

“People say, ‘Oh you don’t like China,'” Trump said, per TMZ Sports. “No, I love them, but their leaders are much smarter than our leaders. And we can’t sustain ourselves with that. … It’s like — take the New England Patriots and Tom Brady, and have them play your high school football team. That’s the difference between China’s leaders and our leaders. They are ripping us.”

Donald Trump likening Brady and the Patriots with the communist China. Per TMZ. And you cite this.

Seek help.


I wouldn't thunk it, but you really do have zero sense of humor. 

Your uncontrollable impulse and never-ending need to hammer back at anything I say Patriots related is really not seen as healthy.  You clearly come off as "doth protest too much", which only makes you less credible, not more.

Of course Trump's statement has nothing to do with TMZ per se, as all media outlets covered his statement.  Has nothing to do with communism either.

I'm surprised you need these things explained to you.

Trump is a wacko, but it is pretty clear the point that he, in his own unorthodox style, was attempting to make against the current occupant of the White House.  Ho hum, I'll spell it out for you.

China's leaders so over match our current administration, it would be the equivalent of the powerful Superbowl Champion New England Patriots and their peerless general Tomas Edward Patrick Brady, Jr., a/k/a "Tom Terrific", going up against your local high school team in a football game.

How's that? 

George1963 wrote:Just to review, These are the top four most successful NFL teams who haven't been caught cheating, TWICE, in the last 15 years.

1  Colts        160-80
2  Steelers    154-85-1
3  Packers     151-88-1
4  Eagles       145-94-1


Just to review, these are the scores of the last 4 Patriots-Colts games with A. Luck at QB.


You don't have to do the math, I did it for you. 

Combined scores:  189 - 73.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

~Sheila~ wrote:Gronk on Family Feud...

George1963 wrote:China's leaders so over match our current administration, it would be the equivalent of the powerful Superbowl Champion New England Patriots and their peerless general Tomas Edward Patrick Brady, Jr., a/k/a "Tom Terrific", going up against your local high school team in a football game.



My local HS team is pretty mediocre. The Patriots would kill them.


And cheat.

Admin wrote:

George1963 wrote:China's leaders so over match our current administration, it would be the equivalent of the powerful Superbowl Champion New England Patriots and their peerless general Tomas Edward Patrick Brady, Jr., a/k/a "Tom Terrific", going up against your local high school team in a football game.



My local HS team is pretty mediocre. The Patriots would kill them.


And cheat.

Yet Guppy would be here to tell us how great Tom Terrific and his Patriots are....... over & over.

George1963 wrote:
And to point out that the Patriots kicked the stuffing out of the Cheraw Braves.
Which would of course somehow proves that they didn't cheat.

How many times do I have to tell you.  Here in America it is not necessary to prove a negative.  One does not have to prove his innocence in America.  The burden of proving wrongdoing is on the accuser to prove the charges. 

Which in this case, the accuser has failed miserably.  "Probably" "generally aware".  Millions of dollars, and that's it?   That's the best you could come up with?  "Generally aware"?   What does that even mean anyway?   That you are not "specifically aware"?   Because you're only "generally" aware?   I guess it does, doesn't it?  If the accuser could conclude with any credibility that his target was "specifically aware", he would have said so, wouldn't he?   Couldn't even do that.  Only "generally aware".  

Hahahahahaha.  What an Epic Fail.  Which anyone with half a brain can see.

"Generally aware".   Haahahahahaha.   Oh, the laughter is too much.  Absolutely hilarious.  Laughter tears coming down my face.   "Generally aware".  LMAO.   Hahahahahahahaaha.  Pure comedy.     

I know; I have an idea.  Let's get Allen Iverson to do his "We talkin bout practice" rant.  He can turn it into a "We talkin bout generally aware" rant. 

I can hear it now.   "Not specifically.  Not specifically.  Not actually.  Not actually.  We talkin only "generally."  

It would be absolutely hilarious.

Admin wrote:
Yet Guppy would be here to tell us how great Tom Terrific and his Patriots are....... over & over.


And yet big guy, you'd never be subjected ANY of it if you didn't come on to visit and take a peek at what's happening on a PATRIOTS FORUM.  

Sheesh.

But since you're here, I think its only appropriate that you wish the old man Happy Birthday on his 38th.
(Sweet art.)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

guppy wrote:

George1963 wrote:
And to point out that the Patriots kicked the stuffing out of the Cheraw Braves.
Which would of course somehow proves that they didn't cheat.

How many times do I have to tell you.  Here in America it is not necessary to prove a negative.  One does not have to prove his innocence in America.  The burden of proving wrongdoing is on the accuser to prove the charges. 

Which in this case, the accuser has failed miserably.  "Probably" "generally aware".  Millions of dollars, and that's it?   That's the best you could come up with?  "Generally aware"?   What does that even mean anyway?   That you are not "specifically aware"?   Because you're only "generally" aware?   I guess it does, doesn't it?  If the accuser could conclude with any credibility that his target was "specifically aware", he would have said so, wouldn't he?   Couldn't even do that.  Only "generally aware".  

Hahahahahaha.  What an Epic Fail.  Which anyone with half a brain can see.

"Generally aware".   Haahahahahaha.   Oh, the laughter is too much.  Absolutely hilarious.  Laughter tears coming down my face.   "Generally aware".  LMAO.   Hahahahahahahaaha.  Pure comedy.     

I know; I have an idea.  Let's get Allen Iverson to do his "We talkin bout practice" rant.  He can turn it into a "We talkin bout generally aware" rant. 

I can hear it now.   "Not specifically.  Not specifically.  Not actually.  Not actually.  We talkin only "generally."  

It would be absolutely hilarious.

guppy wrote:

Admin wrote:
Yet Guppy would be here to tell us how great Tom Terrific and his Patriots are....... over & over.


And yet big guy, you'd never be subjected ANY of it if you didn't come on to visit and take a peek at what's happening on a PATRIOTS FORUM.  

Sheesh.

But since you're here, I think its only appropriate that you wish the old man Happy Birthday on his 38th.
(Sweet art.)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Admin wrote:

Yea, Imagine the gall of me to actually read over and see what is put on "MY" board. That's right..... this thing here is mine. I hate to burst your little bubble there scooter, but I will dam well do as I please here.

You mad Bro?   Sounds like it.  No need to raise the temperature. 

Would it make you feel better if I don't celebrate my team?  I'm sorry, but I thought that's what fans do. 

Personally, unlike some other folks on here, I much prefer celebrating my own team, than constantly over-reaching, being petty, and acting like a dork to try to tear down someone else's team.  Not mentioning any names, but we know the score around here.

BTW, thanks for doing the work to put this thing together.

guppy wrote:

Admin wrote:

Yea, Imagine the gall of me to actually read over and see what is put on "MY" board. That's right..... this thing here is mine. I hate to burst your little bubble there scooter, but I will dam well do as I please here.

You mad Bro?   Sounds like it.  No need to raise the temperature. 

Would it make you feel better if I don't celebrate my team?  I'm sorry, but I thought that's what fans do. 

Personally, unlike some other folks on here, I much prefer celebrating my own team, than constantly over-reaching, being petty, and acting like a dork to try to tear down someone else's team.  Not mentioning any names, but we know the score around here.

BTW, thanks for doing the work to put this thing together.

George1963 wrote:

Under the collectively bargined standard of proof.
Guilty.
Without going off on one of your tangents, tell me how Brady can possibly win in court.
Where ALL the judge is going to be looking at is if the procedure that's been in place since 1968, the one that Brady agreed to every time he signed a contract and twice with new CBAs, was followed.
Tell me the mistake in the process.

How about this one:  Under the collectively bargained Competitive Integrity Policy as written, there is no reference to allow or permit disciplining a player for "general awareness", which is the ONLY THING Troy Vincent docked him 4 games for -- "general awareness".    Don't give me about "lack of cooperation" b.s.  He was suspended based on one person's (Wells') far-fetched conclusion of "general awareness", and nothing more. 

Where in the CBA does it allow for disciplining a player for "general awareness"...... of anything?  When you go outside of the CBA-defined boundaries, like they did here, that is a violation of proper procedure.  That is simply doing whatever the hell you feel like doing.  That is exceeding your authority.  


As to the standard of proof I'll say this:   The standard of proof, I agree, is "more probable than not".  What I don't agree is, when using that very standard of proof, what the record shows the conclusion should be.  The conclusion is in the eye of the beholder.   A person other than Wells could EASILY look at the EXACT SAME record that Wells looked at, and just as easily wrote, the following:  "Looking at the evidence as a whole, the record FAILS to establish that more probable than not, a rule was deliberately and intentionally broken by a Patriots employee.  And that same record further FAILS to establish, that more probable than not, Tom Brady played an active role in any misconduct (if there was any), and further FAILS to establish that, more probable than not, he was in any manner generally aware - much less actually and specifically aware - of any such misconduct.  Applying the collectively bargained standard of proof necessary to conclude that a deliberate rule violation took place, THIS  RECORD simply FAILS to provide the factual foundation or reasonable basis to reach such a conclusion."

Same evidentiary record.  Different person interpreting it.  Different result.  Opposite result.  EASILY could happen.  Should have. 

Admin wrote:
My problem with you is you. No I am not mad. But I am tired of your being a dick.

Sure sounds like you're mad to me.

look again assclown

Personal attack = mad in my book.

You have far exceeded celebrating your team.

I didn't know there was a celebration limit for one's own team.  The only reason I celebrate a lot, is because there is a lot to celebrate.  "Fan" is short for "Fanatic" and all that. 
What if I keep my celebration of MY OWN team to the Patriots board, and no other?  Then only Patriot fans, and those non Patriots fans who voluntarily, under their own free will, chose to visit will see my over-the-top stuff.  If I confine myself to the Pats board is there still a limit to which I can celebrate my view of MY TEAM's accomplishments?  I know YOU can do whatever the hell you want here.  You strongly told me so.  But what about me?  What are YOUR rules that govern ME?  I need to know.  Could I possibly get suspended for a quarter of the season for "far exceeding"?

George has playfully debated you

"playfully"?  Really?  You call that "playfully"?   George is a Patriots hater -- self proclaimed.  Doesn't hide it.  Owns it.  Actually wears it proudly like a badge of honor.  All his views and opinions are filtered through that long-held, intense hatred.  So we know in advance how he'll come down on any bit of Pats related news.  He is totally consistent in that regard.  With George it simply "is what it is".   

your almost as relevant as Mummy was.

I'm no "brainiac".  Far from it.  But its "you're".

George1963 wrote:
Where in the CBA does it allow for disciplining a player for "general awareness"...... of anything? 



Article 46.

Interesting interpretation of the language of Article 46 by you.  A federal judge may have a different interpretation.

Article 46 concerns the Commissioner's powers for discipling "conduct detrimental to the league".  The key word is "conduct".   I don't know about you, but to me, having "probable" "general awareness" of something is not the equivalent of actual "conduct".   And of course it goes without saying that the phrase "general awareness" or the word "awareness" do not appear in Article 46.

Conduct:  "The act, manner or process of carrying on."  - Webster's Dictionary. 

Query:  Are you truly "acting" or "carrying on" if you are assigned to possess only "general awareness" of something and nothing beyond that?  Is that really "conduct"?

In his zeal to "get" the Patriots, and thereby boost his own highly criticized image for botching past cases, he went too far.  He exceeded his powers under the CBA by disciplining someone's supposed "general awareness" when he only has the power to discipline someone's "conduct" that he, in the exercise of his judgment, deems detrimental.  At the very least the federal judge should send the case back to arbitration for a rehearing to see if the NFL can establish any actual "conduct" on Brady's part.


In this regard, keep in mind that the Commissioner’s powers [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], as the NFL Players Association has demonstrated in multiple challenges to his decisions in recent years. From the Saints bounty scandal to the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] case to the Adrian Peterson case, the NFLPA has pushed back aggressively and prevailed in multiple high-profile cases.
“The NFL Commissioner does have authority granted by the CBA, but he does not have the right to make up whatever rules he wants,” the NFLPA told PFT via email on Sunday. “Whenever the Commissioner has inflated his rights in the CBA, we have always been there with the needle.”
The puns were surely intended. And the NFLPA surely intends to continue to force the NFL to make fair, impartial decisions in all cases of player discipline.