Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Ward, post: 1470647, member: 1958"] Both of those excerpts to me have pretty much the same end game. The specifics of the severity of the Pats actions and how much those games were impacted by them was a direct threat to the image of the league which would potentially end up harming all of the owners pockets if league popularity suffered. The first one says the videos had to be destroyed because they threatened the game itself and threatened livelihoods. Second one ends with saying if that gets out, that hurts your business. Technically the owners all agreed to keep it quiet but it doesn't mean it was an amicable agreement. FWIW I've been telling people in Boston since February that ESPN likes to run with stories and pointed out multiple examples from the Bernie Fine situation. I agree full heartedly that ESPN creates news and pushes agendas I just don't see it in those two excerpts. [/QUOTE]