I honestly thought that this story was dead in the water. Yes, the Patriots got in trouble during week 1 for spying on the Jets. They got busted, fined, and were to defer a 1st round draft pick. But Pennsylvania Senator Nutbag McNut, AKA Arlen Specter, wants the NFL to address the Senate Judiciary Committee:
Specifically, Specter wants to know why the league destroyed video tapes related to "Spygate." He said the committee also wants to question the NFL about the league’s antitrust exemption in relation to its television contract.
Is this sour grapes, seeing that both of his Pennsylvania football teams suffered defeats by the hands of the Patriots? He says he is concerned about the integrity of the game. I say he is a bitter old man. The NFL punished Belichek justly, if not a tad to harsh with that 750k fine, the Pats lost a valuable pick in the 2008 draft, and the Patriots reputation has been damaged significantly that many football fans want an asterisk by their name if and when they win the Super Bowl. What more can Specter do?
As an avid football fan, I could careless. Eric Mangina could have given the Pats the playbook and it would have meant nothing if the Pats didnt execute. I hate the Pats, I mean I place them in the same category as the Dallas Cowboys in terms of hatred, but they proved to the world they didnt need video by making half of the teams who they played their bitch. What is Senator Duesch bag trying to accomplish here??
11 comments:
I still don't get why the Patriots inspire Cowboys/Yankee-level hatred.
There are a couple things I hate. The first is when actors/actresses/celebs talk politics. The other is when politicians get their panties in a knot about sports. I now hate Arlen Specter.
I agree, but going back to past discussions; Its no necessarily the Pats I hate, its the fans who think they are Pats fans but never gave them the time of day until they got good. For the most part, the fair weatherness turning into pure smug and arogance. As much as the Cowboys and Yankees have won in the past, they do not reek nearly as bad of smug as Red Sox/Patriots Nation
I couldnt agree more. Politicians think they know whats best for all of us, including who to and who not to root for. He needs to accept the fact that the Eagles suck and the Pats dominated.
I don't know man, Yankees fans and Cowboys fans are just about the most smug people on earth.
I wouldnt say they are as smug but they are something. Something equally as annoying to me
I don't know guys. I hate the Patriots too, for a variety of reasons. But that's besides the point. Recently we just had a posting here about the lack of prosecution for college football players committing serious crimes. Where do we draw the line? And about politicians "talking about sports"... really? Because "sports" are actually just big business, and the antitrust issues with the NFL and other sports groups have been issues for a long time. People bitch about needing NFL network and bars not allowed to have Superbowl parties- where do you think that comes from? Fine, the Patriots were punished and all, but why should sports be left out of any sort of political actions against businesses, antitrust issues, etc?
I agree with you CityCat but only to a limit. If Sports needs reform then yes, congress and the senate should take some kind of action. Such as steroids. That is a serious concern that each sport dodged and ignored for many years. But Spy Gate is a very petty reason to ignite an anti-trust witch hunt.
What about baseball?? The NY Yankees and there cable only Yankee broadcasts in NY? No anti-trust issues were taken up with MLB. What about Boxing and the fact most fights are on pay-per-view? Hockey isnt even on a National Broadcast, only on paid cable networks. Why start with the NFL and why use Spy Gate as a launch pad?
I just finished listening to Specters press conference and it seemed this investigation is mere bittnerness. He specifically mentioned the Eagles vs Pats Super Bowl in 2005.
I agree that it's probably sour grapes on Specter's part, but antitrust is one of my current pet interets.
FYI, baseball actually has federal antitrust immunity, and any case that has been bought against them has been thrown out because the 14th amendment has been held to apply that immunity to states as well. I'm not a fan of that, but that's the way it is, apparently.
I was under the impression that all major sports have anti-trust immunity. They currently have no competitors and own the rights to all of there over-seas and development leagues.
If the NFL lost its anti-trust, all sports as we see it will be cease to exist. We saw how a mult-league system fairs; i.e. The ABA and USFL, and they all fell flat.
Actually no, the Supreme Court has not expanded antitrust immunity to cover the NFL, baseball alone has full fledged immunity.
Just because no one competes with them doesn't mean there is antitrust immunity. They can still be charged with acting unreasonably, unlike baseball.
But wouldnt Congress go after these unprotected sports like they would Standard Oil or US Steel, or more recently, Microsoft? Or is there an unwritted agreement stating fair practices? What if the Congress strips that unwritted anti-trust agreement? Would they split or force other competitors?
So many questions with equal results. That being frustration!!
Thanks CityCat for the offline legal explanation.
Post a Comment