So, now it can be asked: Was the Patriots dynasty built on a lie?It was not built on a lie; it was 'built' because a rule that was in place when this game took place benefitted the Patriots. Other than an effort in self-serving controversy generation, I don't see the need to call or interpret this rule change as something nefarious or dishonest, or as an excuse to rewrite history.
OK, maybe that’s a little harsh. But the NFL rules committee on Wednesday eliminated the phony “Tuck Rule,” which means the team’s first championship never should have happened.My off the cuff response - this is simply foolish. A rule was in the playbooks, and Woodson's tackle of Tom Brady resulted in an incomplete pass, and starting in 2013 this will result in a fumble / turnover. I think he's really reaching here; anything to take shots at the Patriots organization.
It really was a fumble, after all.
...After delegitimizing the Patriots when he led off the column...
We can’t blame the Patriots for any of this.
All you can do is play within the rules as they are written. The Patriots didn’t manipulate the system. But Wednesday’s ruling validates what everybody knew all along: The Patriots got lucky. They got a second chance they never should have received. Tom Brady wasn’t trying to tuck the ball next to his body when he was hit. He simply fumbled it and the Patriots should have lost that game to the Raiders.The rest of the column, however, turns into interesting speculation:
What if there had never been a Tuck Rule? Maybe Brady wouldn’t be the best quarterback of all time. Maybe Tom never would have met Gisele. Maybe Bill Belichick would be working in a TV studio with Eric Mangini and Charley Casserly. Maybe Bob Kraft would have gone back to a life of corrugated cardboard. Maybe Patriot Place would be a parking lot. Think of how we’d all miss CBS Scene.If I remember correctly, Giselle introduced herself to Tom after a home game, maybe in 2005. Does she pursue him, say, if he only won two Super Bowls instead of three? Inquiring minds want to know!
And I wonder why he keeps at it with his criticism and cheap shots with CBS Scene. Granted I've never been or dined there, but I'm willing to bet Shank gets half his meals comped at one of / the restaurant there, so why's he bitching?
And what Shank continues to miss is that the system Belichick had built was too good not to succeed even if that Raiders game had gone differently.
ReplyDeleteBy the way Shank, you know why the "Tuck" rule was there in the first place? Because there really isn't such a thing as a fumble on a pass play.
I'm frankly baffled why this rule was changed at all - I've heard Mike Pereira's explanations and I can't buy the "smells like a fumble" explanation for pass plays.