Gate D Debauchery Continues!
Fans, NFL December 10th. 2007, 3:55pm
In a shocking (!) development, after last month’s well-publicized story about Jets fans congregating at notorious Gate D in the Meadowlands and turning it into Panama City north on Sundays – ladies leave the coy at home – one might think a beefed up police presence would shut the debasement down. Wrong! Now fans from all over the stadium are making the trek to Gate D, sort of as if it were a pilgrimage to Mecca. Bored with Sunday’s 0-0 stinker late in the second quarter, Jets fans slowly rose and made their way to Gate D, hoping for a peep show. Fame-hungry women obliged.
By the time halftime was under way, the security staff, which had grown noticeably, was vastly outnumbered. Then the vulgarity began as fans, 12 deep in some spots, urged women to show their breasts. Some tossed plastic beer bottles or cigarettes into the center of the spiral, which was blocked off by a chain-link fence. A few children witnessed the unruly behavior, which, according to several fans and stadium workers, has been a ritual at Jets games for years.
“We removed six people for instigating,†said Dennis Robinson, who last week took over as the president and chief executive of the sports authority. “And a couple of young ladies were asked to move on that were taunting.€
Imagine that phone call. You’re with dad and teenage brother at a Jets game and then you call them up at halftime saying you got kicked out of the stadium for urging women to show their breasts. Not sure what you’d miss more – the boobies or Eric Mangini’s incredibly strange play-calling.
Gate D: More Fans, More Security, More Abuse (NY Times)
PS – We went 6-for-6 in our picks last week. Had you taken all those guys just to win … you would have hit a six-teamer. We’ll try to go 7-for-7 this week.
20 Responses to “Gate D Debauchery Continues!”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


December 10th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
dude, dude, dude, dude, dude, dude, yes, dude, head, ginger, dude, dude, dude, dude.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
cmon i thought i was going to see some tits
oh well, back to youporn
December 10th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
damn sluts
December 10th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
I was befuddled by Mangini’s decisions while watching the game yesterday, but now I’m beyond befuddled. Somehow, in his mind, when you’re losing 17-12, you’re “down two scores.”
I would be interested to know when was the last time a team, trailing by more than 3 points with the ball inside the opponents’ 25-yard line and with under 2 minutes to go, kicked a field goal. I’ll see what I can find out.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Mangini was counting on a made field goal, and then a safety on defense to tie it. Man was playing it safe…
December 10th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
I agree Brian, what is even more confusing is why Mangini did not kick it deep after making it 17-15. With three timeouts, they could have stopped them(big if) and had enough time to kick a winning FG. If you are going to kick an onside, just go for it on 4th and 10. He even kicked another FG with 30 seconds left! He must have the Nuge on his fantasy team.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
With 3 timeouts, I could (almost) have understood if he kicked the field goal, then played defense and used the time outs to force a punt. Granted, that would have given very little margin for error, with one first down being enough to let Cleveland run out the clock, but the odds were probably better of doing that and trying to drive for the winning field goal in the remaining 1:15-1:30 than to try to recover a second consecutive on-side kick.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
You were 3 for 3 against the spread. And you picked all favorites. Total B.S. when people make picks with no spread and then claim they know what they are talking about after the fact. Like Jim Donnon on Saturday mornings. Who gives a fuck?
December 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
excuse me. 3 out of 6 against the spread.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Mac G– We were posting simultaneously. As you can see, I agree.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
just like the whole spygate thing, the whole gate d thing is being blown way out of proportion.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
More fun than betting with the spread – picking straight up winners and combining them into a parlay. Which pays better, hitting a 6-teamer with winners for $10 or picking six games with the spread and hitting three? Guess it’s all about perspective .. some people like to load up on one game they like, others like do make small parlay bets, picking winners. I’d rather have action on several games than just one.
Guess we’ll make it more clear – moneyline picks are the way to go (in our opinion) for parlays.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
TBL – Out here in Vegas, you gotta make your parlay picks against the spread…a little more challenging than making some chump bet with Joey from Bayside…
December 10th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
J Rod – Who deals with bookies? Linesmaker, baby. Obviously picking a 5-team parlay against the spread pays better than 5-teamer moneyline … but it’s also much, much harder.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Picking six big favorites in a money line parlay isn’t going to pay out all that well. I don’t recall any of the money lines for those games, but I’d be curious to see what it would have paid.
December 10th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
I think I went to high school with that Erin McDermott girl in that article. She was a cute little number back then.
December 10th, 2007 at 9:58 pm
a five-teamer, picking four winners and one covering the spread (Jags) pays $66 on a $10 bet.

(technically $76, since you get your $10 back)
December 10th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
Parlay bets are the bets of suckers.
December 11th, 2007 at 3:40 am
Is “the security staff” New York Times speak for “The Lil’ Sizzler”? Because judging by what was happening, maybe it had “grown considerably”…
December 11th, 2007 at 10:49 am
Nothing wrong with taking the money line. The payout is much smaller but a W is a W.