Originally posted by: MotionMan
I believe Bonds did use steroids. I was just pointing out that it has not been proven, yet he has already been slapped with an *.
The Pats were actually caught cheating, yet, "since everyone does it" (like steroids, BTW) or "it is not that big of a deal", everyone is ready to let them off the hook.
Another great argument I am seeing is that the Pats would have won without cheating since they are so good, so the cheating should be overlooked. Who is to say that Bonds, who was a pretty good ballplayer to begin with, would not have hit all those home runs without steroids?
I do not condone cheating, it just seems like there is a double-standard as between Bonds and the Pats.
(BTW, so far, in this thread I have been called stupid and an idiot. I do not think that is necessary. Please make your arguments and keep it civil.)
MotionMan
Actually I only said "if you believed he didn't use roids, you were an idiot". However, you do, thus I don't think you are an idiot.
My point is that the Pats were continuing something most (if not all) NFL teams admittedly did the year before. A tactic much like watching old footage of teams. This is a far cry from using steroids, and really no one can help you if you dont understand the difference between the two.
I can't tell if you are trolling, bitter at the pats, or just confused as to what they really did.
If you can honestly tell us what advantage it would have given the Patriots this regular season, I will give you a cookie. The fact is that they do this for future seasons (or even playoffs) for info on the opponents. Much like watching old footage of teams. Do you not understand that most (if not all) teams did this very same thing last year? Were they all cheating?
Facebook
Twitter