Walsh Has Tapes

[SaintsFanForLife]

Walsh has tapes here is the link http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Ah49XqKrSeZBsR_Nb8SA7OFDubYF?slug=ap-mattwalsh-tapes&prov=ap&type=lgns

[SaintsFanForLife]

If he has the tapes I would love to see them.

[RAZERSAINTS]

I would like to see them. I dont think anything major other than some people being suspended will go down. But yea I would like to see what kind of stuff they get from the videos

[Jay]

Copied and pasted:

Let's just think of it like this: if this Matt Walsh guy really did tape the Rams practice before the Super Bowl, and subsequently got fired from the Patriots after that very game, do you think there is any chance they even knew about it? And if they did, what do you think the probability that a tape like that ever leaves their possession would be? My money is on less then .001%.

Furthermore, the guy is asking for total indemnity in order to talk, meaning that he wants the NFL to protect him from potential litigation if he says something, and the NFL is willing to offer him that with one simple rule: he tells the truth.

That's not good enough for him.

So see, something is not adding up here. The Patriots won't so much as smile if it gives away a hint about what they are doing/scheming/game-planning and they have a coach that gives you nothing. Do you mean to tell me that a tape like this has been out there for what, six, seven years and they didn't know and haven't done something about it? I don't buy it.

And why would he come out with it now? Out of the blue. They played in two Super Bowls before this one and the story was huge FIVE months ago. Why now?

I just don't buy it.

[SaintsFanForLife]

Copied and pasted:

Let's just think of it like this: if this Matt Walsh guy really did tape the Rams practice before the Super Bowl, and subsequently got fired from the Patriots after that very game, do you think there is any chance they even knew about it? And if they did, what do you think the probability that a tape like that ever leaves their possession would be? My money is on less then .001%.

Furthermore, the guy is asking for total indemnity in order to talk, meaning that he wants the NFL to protect him from potential litigation if he says something, and the NFL is willing to offer him that with one simple rule: he tells the truth.

That's not good enough for him.

So see, something is not adding up here. The Patriots won't so much as smile if it gives away a hint about what they are doing/scheming/game-planning and they have a coach that gives you nothing. Do you mean to tell me that a tape like this has been out there for what, six, seven years and they didn't know and haven't done something about it? I don't buy it.

And why would he come out with it now? Out of the blue. They played in two Super Bowls before this one and the story was huge FIVE months ago. Why now?

I just don't buy it.
That is a great point I dont undersatand why it would just now come out myself. I think all this stuff just needs to be let go.

[nvot9]

Copied and pasted:

Let's just think of it like this: if this Matt Walsh guy really did tape the Rams practice before the Super Bowl, and subsequently got fired from the Patriots after that very game, do you think there is any chance they even knew about it? And if they did, what do you think the probability that a tape like that ever leaves their possession would be? My money is on less then .001%.

Furthermore, the guy is asking for total indemnity in order to talk, meaning that he wants the NFL to protect him from potential litigation if he says something, and the NFL is willing to offer him that with one simple rule: he tells the truth.

That's not good enough for him.

So see, something is not adding up here. The Patriots won't so much as smile if it gives away a hint about what they are doing/scheming/game-planning and they have a coach that gives you nothing. Do you mean to tell me that a tape like this has been out there for what, six, seven years and they didn't know and haven't done something about it? I don't buy it.

And why would he come out with it now? Out of the blue. They played in two Super Bowls before this one and the story was huge FIVE months ago. Why now?

I just don't buy it.

I'm sick of you trying to constantly defend your classless, cheating patriots. I've read every single post in every thread involving the Patriots cheating, and all you've managed to say is "I don't buy it" and try to compile some random legal evidence to defend them. Give it up man, the Pats have been doing this for years and whether it is considered "cheating" or whatever, is irrelevant because when it comes down to it, it's just down right classless and immoral. The whole reason in my eyes, why the steroids issue with Bonds and Clemens is such a big deal, is because they were great players before but decided to rub everyone's faces in it by cheating to get EVER BETTER. Seems to me like that's a lot like what the Patriots are doing. Whether they're found guilty or not doesn't matter to me anymore, the fact that they've been mentioned in cheating scandals not once, not twice, but on FOUR DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, means somethings up....3 different sources are not going to make the same story up 4 different times (Jets, Rams, and Steelers twice considering it was two separate instances they were alleged to be filming).

So stop being a homer and admit that you root for an amazing team that loves to rub people faces in the dirt and cheats.

[ks_perfection]

Maybe he just copied the tapes? It seems like a prudent thing to do.

[YAYareaRB]

Whoooooo.. I thought you meant Bill Walsh(RIP), I was having a out of body experiance.

[Gay Ork Wang]

wow, how about a Thread: Patriots vs the Rest and post all that stuff
im getting kinda sick with all these new threads every day. Its a big deal?yes, but just keep a ticker pls, its all kinda getting messy on this board

[RAZERSAINTS]

I advise is dont cheat........and they will not catch you

[Beans]

Maybe the tapes will be rickrolled.

[adamprez2003]

the significant aspect of this is Matt Walsh will be called to testify and so the fact that the Patriots reffuse to give him indemnity will be moot becuase he will be fully protected on the stand. This is going to snowball big time. I wouldnt be surprised if at the end they will be stripped of at least one superbowl. who knows maybe they'll be forced to change their name to the New England Asteriks

[Jay]

I'm sick of you trying to constantly defend your classless, cheating patriots. I've read every single post in every thread involving the Patriots cheating, and all you've managed to say is "I don't buy it" and try to compile some random legal evidence to defend them. Give it up man, the Pats have been doing this for years and whether it is considered "cheating" or whatever, is irrelevant because when it comes down to it, it's just down right classless and immoral. The whole reason in my eyes, why the steroids issue with Bonds and Clemens is such a big deal, is because they were great players before but decided to rub everyone's faces in it by cheating to get EVER BETTER. Seems to me like that's a lot like what the Patriots are doing. Whether they're found guilty or not doesn't matter to me anymore, the fact that they've been mentioned in cheating scandals not once, not twice, but on FOUR DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, means somethings up....3 different sources are not going to make the same story up 4 different times (Jets, Rams, and Steelers twice considering it was two separate instances they were alleged to be filming).

So stop being a homer and admit that you root for an amazing team that loves to rub people faces in the dirt and cheats.

Explain to me why it took the fourth occasion for one of the two commishioners to do something. Explain to me why no one else actually in the league gives a crap. Explain to me the actual impact any of this had on the game.

You can't. On any of it.

I will defend the Patriots until I am blue in the face because this is all stupid. The only rule that was broken was the placement of the camera. THAT - IS -IT. They could have been filming upskirts of the Jets cheerleaders and still would have been breaking the exact same rule, but if they were filming the Jets coaches from inside a porta potty on the sidelines, they would be following the NFL rules and could not be penalized.

How 'bout them apples?

The NFL Rule broken says: "all video for coaching purposes must be shot from locations 'enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead.'"

Before the start of this season, the league sent out a memo ammending the rule to state: "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game."

So basically, anything that happened before 2007 was the placement of the camera. Undisputable. The one instance after is out of pure stupidity.

I've never disputed that the Pats did something wrong. But all the ******** after is ridiculous. There is absolutely no proof that this had any effect on any game that has ever been played. No one even knows how the video was used. You just assume.

So no, I don't buy that a disgruntled ex-employee somehow has a tape almost 7 years later that he never felt the need to tell anyone about. And if he does, I don't buy that the Patriots had anything to do with it. And this is proven to be wrong, that's what I am sticking to.

[princefielder28]

Based off of Jay's first post, it appears Mr. Walsh pulled a Brian McNamee and held on to the evidence for quite some time without telling anyone

[Crickett]

Based off of Jay's first post, it appears Mr. Walsh pulled a Brian McNamee and held on to the evidence for quite some time without telling anyone

And thanks to the transitive property of Brian McNamee, anything Walsh says is false and he's a drug dealer.

So the Patriots are in the clear. Wait, wasn't "the clear" a steriod???

[Jay]

Hopefully. I mean he's already lying on resumes to get jobs...

[Packer_Backer]

Jay, how do you even know what are on the tapes? what if the there are other teams walk throughs? Your blatant homerism is kind of sickening. Can't judge any of this till it actually comes out.

[Bigburt63]

Right, since the actual footage of the tapes has not been released nobody knows what was actually taped. you're right, it cannot be said that the patriots were completely innocent in other circumstances, just as you cannot say that the patriots were guilty in previous instances. People who hate the patriots are going to say that they are guilty before eveything comes out. Why is it not ok, then, for some patriots fans to argue that they did not do some of the things that the patriots have been accused of with little to no evidence supporting the claims? All I'm trying to say is that the evidence needs to come out completely (if it ever does) before judgement can be passed.

[Billingsley26]

Jay, how do you even know what are on the tapes? what if the there are other teams walk throughs? Your blatant homerism is kind of sickening. Can't judge any of this till it actually comes out.

But what ever is on the tape is irrelevant at this point. What he is saying is that it is not the tape in itself that is causing this trouble, rather where the camera was that shot the tape. The camera was on the field, which is a no-no. If Matt Walsh was up in a booth at the top of the stadium and shot this film, we wouldn't be talking about this right now. Simple. It really is.

[Don Vito]

These threads are getting ridiculous. Until any of us see video and we know the Patriots actually filmed all of these games these threads are useless. If you hate the Patriots, that is your opinion but there is no need for all of these anti-Patriots threads. We have had like ten on the tapes alone already.

[Mr. Stiller]

But what ever is on the tape is irrelevant at this point. What he is saying is that it is not the tape in itself that is causing this trouble, rather where the camera was that shot the tape. The camera was on the field, which is a no-no. If Matt Walsh was up in a booth at the top of the stadium and shot this film, we wouldn't be talking about this right now. Simple. It really is.

Good freakin' lord.

It doesn't matter where the damn camera is if they taped a private Rams only Superbowl walkthrough. I don't care if the Camera is on Venus, it's Illegal by NFL Rules and cheating.

The fact remains, You and Jay complain for everyone to wait for evidence, yet you guys jump to more conclusions than everyone else. Like you 2 already KNOW whats on the tapes.

[ricowboy]

I am not a Pats fan......With that said....Has anyone thought that Walsh is holding out for immunity just to make $$$$$ off of the whole deal. McNamee was trying to keep himself out of jail. Walsh appears to be trying to make a $$$$ off the whole thing without being held accountable if he lies. Every witness is held accountable if the lie(perjury) on the stand. Why should Walsh be different? Also, Where was Walsh in September? He could have easily been more believable in October. Maybe it took some time for the media man to manufacture evidence? I don't believe a starving golf pro is hiding anything of relevance four months after the investigation.

[adamprez2003]

These threads are getting ridiculous. Until any of us see video and we know the Patriots actually filmed all of these games these threads are useless. If you hate the Patriots, that is your opinion but there is no need for all of these anti-Patriots threads. We have had like ten on the tapes alone already. What are you kidding? This is THE biggest story of the offseason. Walsh will be called in as a witness in the Rams player lawsuit and we'll finally see if he has the goods. If he does, Belichik might be banned, the SB title might be stripped, draft choices might be forfeited. That's an amazing story. You guys are on the verge of going down as the infamous Black Sox of baseball. I mean the only reason anyone cares about this story is because of the repercussions if it's proved you guys taped the Rams practices illegally. Hey I can see how you guys just want this story to go away but you better get used to it, because its here to stay until we find out whether Walsh has the tapes or not

[nfrillman]

Patriots fans on here keep saying there is no proof that any of the taping had any effect on any game. I ask you this, why in gods name would the Patriots do something that is illegal, and continue to do it after being warned, if there was no advantage to be had. The assertion that they would cheat to gain zero advantage is utterly asinine. And you still haven't answered why the Patriots would tape crappy Packers and Lions teams in 2006 for future reference. How in the world would tapes of two bad NFC teams benefit the Patriots in the long term future. Of course that taping was used to gain an advantage in that game, because by the time they would meet those teams again (years down the road), the information would be irrelevant.

[broth223]

Patriots fans on here keep saying there is no proof that any of the taping had any effect on any game. I ask you this, why in gods name would the Patriots do something that is illegal, and continue to do it after being warned, if there was no advantage to be had. The assertion that they would cheat to gain zero advantage is utterly asinine. And you still haven't answered why the Patriots would tape crappy Packers and Lions teams in 2006 for future reference. How in the world would tapes of two bad NFC teams benefit the Patriots in the long term future. Of course that taping was used to gain an advantage in that game, because by the time they would meet those teams again (years down the road), the information would be irrelevant.

Aren't you somewhat refuting your own argument? Think about it. Why would the pats have to tape the crap Lions for? Why would they do something illegal if they could easily win the game without it? I'm not saying you're wrong, exactly, but I can see no reason why you tape practices of bad teams.

[nfrillman]

Aren't you somewhat refuting your own argument? Think about it. Why would the pats have to tape the crap Lions for? Why would they do something illegal if they could easily win the game without it? I'm not saying you're wrong, exactly, but I can see no reason why you tape practices of bad teams.

I'm not talking about practices. I am talking about the original breaking story of taping defensive signals of the Jets. They were also caught taping the Packers and Lions defensive signals, not practices.

[Bigburt63]

Patriots fans on here keep saying there is no proof that any of the taping had any effect on any game. I ask you this, why in gods name would the Patriots do something that is illegal, and continue to do it after being warned, if there was no advantage to be had. The assertion that they would cheat to gain zero advantage is utterly asinine. And you still haven't answered why the Patriots would tape crappy Packers and Lions teams in 2006 for future reference. How in the world would tapes of two bad NFC teams benefit the Patriots in the long term future. Of course that taping was used to gain an advantage in that game, because by the time they would meet those teams again (years down the road), the information would be irrelevant.

Your right, doing something illegal where you stand no gain but risk suffering severe consequences is just plain stupid. But it has been said that the coaches may not have used the tapes and that he filmed the practice on his own. It sounds ridiculously repetitive, but until the actual footage from the tapes is released, we will not know what advantage exactly could be gained from the tapes. We may never know what actually happened, because even if it was proven that the practices were taped, it cannot be proven that they actually used the information from the tapes, or if the information from the tapes was helpful (if that were the case it would more than likely help, but you never know).

[Jay]

Patriots fans on here keep saying there is no proof that any of the taping had any effect on any game. I ask you this, why in gods name would the Patriots do something that is illegal, and continue to do it after being warned, if there was no advantage to be had. The assertion that they would cheat to gain zero advantage is utterly asinine. And you still haven't answered why the Patriots would tape crappy Packers and Lions teams in 2006 for future reference. How in the world would tapes of two bad NFC teams benefit the Patriots in the long term future. Of course that taping was used to gain an advantage in that game, because by the time they would meet those teams again (years down the road), the information would be irrelevant.

I know it didn't effect any games because the commissioner of the NFL said so.

It's as simple as that.

[someone447]

Your right, doing something illegal where you stand no gain but risk suffering severe consequences is just plain stupid. But it has been said that the coaches may not have used the tapes and that he filmed the practice on his own. It sounds ridiculously repetitive, but until the actual footage from the tapes is released, we will not know what advantage exactly could be gained from the tapes. We may never know what actually happened, because even if it was proven that the practices were taped, it cannot be proven that they actually used the information from the tapes, or if the information from the tapes was helpful (if that were the case it would more than likely help, but you never know).

Seriously, seriously, SERIOUSLY! If they taped practices, they definitely used the information on those tapes. But maybe Bonds just collects steroids and he never used them...

[Jay]

I'm not talking about practices. I am talking about the original breaking story of taping defensive signals of the Jets. They were also caught taping the Packers and Lions defensive signals, not practices.

I can tell you right now they have taped absolutely every NFL football game they can since in every possible way since Bill Belichick has been a head coach in the NFL. They see value in it for evaluation purposes. Bill Belichick has a file on every defensive co-coordinator that has been in the NFL since his days with the Browns. He uses all forms of video tapes to learn play calling tenancies and uses the information he has on file whenever coaches change jobs. It's all a part of the process. Is it necessary? Probably not. But somewhere in there, he sees the value in it so they've done it. And they've been caught. Many times. And no one ever did anything about it, which obviously made him think it was OK, just that when he tried to gather information on the road it might be hard. Why is that so ridiculous? I mean really, we all know there were rules, but there are rules that say you're not supposed to simulate snap counts or cut block and teams still do it.

No one wants to talk about that, though. Everyone automatically assumes it is being used in game, and they have since day one, even though the COMMISSIONER OF THE NFL said that is not the case.

But again, no one wants to hear that. I wouldn't have to "defend" anything if people stuck to the facts.

But I've said it once and I'll say it again: NFL fans should want this to go away, because it's only going to get worse from here:

SPYING AN INTERNAL THING, TOO

As the heat continues to rise regarding Spygate II, a reader has forwarded to us a link to a 1999 item from Mike Freeman, then of the New York Times and currently with CBSSports.com, regarding the possibility that the New York Jets (for whom Pats coach Bill Belichick worked at the time), might have been secretly videotaping . . . their own players . . . in the locker room.

The issue came up because an unnamed Jets defensive player entered a small room at the team's practice facility, which contained a bank of video screens. Some of the monitors included images of the locker room.

"A lot of things around here have knocked me for a loop, but this is one of the biggest,'' said the player. ''My first thought was, 'Has the team been spying on us?''' (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9802E4D91631F933A25752C0A96F9582 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1)

In Freeman's article, NFLPA Executive Director Gene Upshaw said that he believes 25 percent of the league's teams use hidden cameras in the locker room.

But Upshaw didn't seem to be all that bothered by it.

"When I'm in Denver, in a meeting with the players at the Broncos' facility, you see certain things in the room and know they're not lights," Upshaw said. "I know management is listening. When I'm in Cincinnati, I know Owner Mike Brown is listening. I don't want to say how I know, but I know. But when it comes to this issue of cameras around the players, it's not a big deal to me, because they are there for the security of our players, and obviously the safety of the players is a primary concern for me. I'd rather err on the side of caution, than have some nut come into the locker room and do something.''

But, Gene, are hidden cameras that no one knows about really going to deter a "nut" from doing anything?

Art Modell, who owned the Ravens at the time, confirmed Upshaw's beliefs: ''Some teams are using surveillance equipment in the locker room, yes. But I'd fire the first guy who did that here. No video cameras, no audiotapes, no eavesdropping.''

''This is a sensitive issue,'' Upshaw said. ''I'm sure it will be talked about a lot in the future.''

It hasn't been. But given the current focus on things the Patriots did or didn't do, let's not forget that there are 31 other NFL franchises that might be doing plenty of things that they shouldn't be doing, and that they merely haven't gotten caught.

[Jay]

Seriously, seriously, SERIOUSLY! If they taped practices, they definitely used the information on those tapes. But maybe Bonds just collects steroids and he never used them...

So now it's practices? Like, plural?

This is exactly what we're talking about...

[Jay]

Good freakin' lord.

It doesn't matter where the damn camera is if they taped a private Rams only Superbowl walkthrough. I don't care if the Camera is on Venus, it's Illegal by NFL Rules and cheating.

The fact remains, You and Jay complain for everyone to wait for evidence, yet you guys jump to more conclusions than everyone else. Like you 2 already KNOW whats on the tapes.

We all know exactly what is on every tape but the one Matt Walsh supposively has. I just find it really hard to believe he has what he says he has and the Patriots allowed that to happen.

I'd also find it really hard to believe if someone told me they had a tape of Monica Lewinsky giving Bill Clinton a blowjob in the oval office.

It kind of works like that...

[CC.SD]

Copied and pasted:

Let's just think of it like this: if this Matt Walsh guy really did tape the Rams practice before the Super Bowl, and subsequently got fired from the Patriots after that very game, do you think there is any chance they even knew about it? And if they did, what do you think the probability that a tape like that ever leaves their possession would be? My money is on less then .001%.

Furthermore, the guy is asking for total indemnity in order to talk, meaning that he wants the NFL to protect him from potential litigation if he says something, and the NFL is willing to offer him that with one simple rule: he tells the truth.

That's not good enough for him.

So see, something is not adding up here. The Patriots won't so much as smile if it gives away a hint about what they are doing/scheming/game-planning and they have a coach that gives you nothing. Do you mean to tell me that a tape like this has been out there for what, six, seven years and they didn't know and haven't done something about it? I don't buy it.

And why would he come out with it now? Out of the blue. They played in two Super Bowls before this one and the story was huge FIVE months ago. Why now?

I just don't buy it.


Wow, and I thought denial was a powerful force when my mom stayed with my dad after he beat her, but you my friend, you take the cake.

[CC.SD]

I know it didn't effect any games because the commissioner of the NFL said so.

It's as simple as that.

Also, this is nutso. Come on now, it's time to use independent thought.

[Jay]

Also, this is nutso. Come on now, it's time to use independent thought.

So Roger Goodell is a liar? And you know this because?

[Billingsley26]

So Roger Goodell is a liar? And you know this because?

Jay, that is exactly everyone's thining on this site. They are bashing the likes of me and you because we are defending with FACTS, yet they are all speculating about this and that and have no truth behind anything. Yet me and you are the bad guys. This is hardly worth it.

[LonghornsLegend]

We all know exactly what is on every tape but the one Matt Walsh supposively has. I just find it really hard to believe he has what he says he has and the Patriots allowed that to happen.
..

You say that now, but I guarantee if something comes out that there is something on those tapes, you will downplay it again and bring up more quotes about other teams who did it...you contradict yourself through this whole argument, you take one stance and when more evidence comes to light you shift it however you can to make you not look bad...


My question to you, is if we are all supposed to believe there was no competitive edge on those tapes, why would Goodell burn the tapes? Does that sound like normal precedure to you? Why do you burn evidence when there's nothing to it, i guess leaving it on file was too much to go through :rolleyes: Its obvious its something going on starting with the shady behavior of Goodell, he brought this on himself by burning tapes so all everyond had left was to take his word, the only time ive EVER, and I mean EVER heard of someone destroying some evidence or files, they didnt want anyone else to see it for a reason.

[Bigburt63]

Seriously, seriously, SERIOUSLY! If they taped practices, they definitely used the information on those tapes. But maybe Bonds just collects steroids and he never used them...

What I meant by that is there is the chance that Walsh acted on his own to tape the practices and the coaches never got a hold of the tapes. Either that or they turned him down, which could be a reason why he was fired ( I believe the day after the superbowl)

[ks_perfection]

It sounds silly and suspicious at first that someone wouldn't agree to a deal where all he has to do is tell the truth. But Goodell might believe the Pats when they say he's lying.

In court people get wrongfully convicted all the time and in those cases it requires a strong belief of guilt. For Goodell and civil litigation the burden of proof is much lower, they just have to believe 1 side a little more than the other, no reasonable doubt matters.

Goodell did do suspicous staff that favors the Pats already concerning illegal taping. Its not unreasonable to think that he will favor them again. Its possible that Walsh believes Goodell is covering for the Pats and has already decided that he is lying before he listens to him or looks at any evidence.

[Bigburt63]

You say that now, but I guarantee if something comes out that there is something on those tapes, you will downplay it again and bring up more quotes about other teams who did it...you contradict yourself through this whole argument, you take one stance and when more evidence comes to light you shift it however you can to make you not look bad...


My question to you, is if we are all supposed to believe there was no competitive edge on those tapes, why would Goodell burn the tapes? Does that sound like normal precedure to you? Why do you burn evidence when there's nothing to it, i guess leaving it on file was too much to go through :rolleyes: Its obvious its something going on starting with the shady behavior of Goodell, he brought this on himself by burning tapes so all everyond had left was to take his word, the only time ive EVER, and I mean EVER heard of someone destroying some evidence or files, they didnt want anyone else to see it for a reason.


Last time I checked people in this country were innocent until PROVEN guilty.

I do agree that no matter what was on the tape, it looks very sketchy for goodell to have destroyed them.

[Jay]

You say that now, but I guarantee if something comes out that there is something on those tapes, you will downplay it again and bring up more quotes about other teams who did it...you contradict yourself through this whole argument, you take one stance and when more evidence comes to light you shift it however you can to make you not look bad...


My question to you, is if we are all supposed to believe there was no competitive edge on those tapes, why would Goodell burn the tapes? Does that sound like normal precedure to you? Why do you burn evidence when there's nothing to it, i guess leaving it on file was too much to go through :rolleyes: Its obvious its something going on starting with the shady behavior of Goodell, he brought this on himself by burning tapes so all everyond had left was to take his word, the only time ive EVER, and I mean EVER heard of someone destroying some evidence or files, they didnt want anyone else to see it for a reason.

Get the **** out of here hahaha. I haven't contradicted myself once during this whole thing. If this turns out to be true, it's going to be worthy of the **** the Pats have been getting, a billion times worse than what they originally got busted for. I've said Belichick was stupid for getting busted since day one. It was a STUPID thing to do. I just don't think it was ever a big deal. Certainly not nearly a big a deal as all the other stuff that goes on that no one gives a **** about. But right, this isn't about everyone else, just the big bad meanies from New England.

But since all of this started, the Pats were supposively:

-Mic'ing defensive lineman
-Had defensive players with QB helmets that have headsets
-Were using defensive signals in game stolen by camera
-Were intentionally cutting out headsets of other teams
-Gave the other team wedgies and stuffed them in their lockers

And it all has been proven untrue. The NFL had someone monitoring/running the headsets in Foxboro ALL YEAR, and guess what... they went out, proving that it had nothing to do with them. And they went out in many other stadiums too. But no one talks about that.

It the same damn song to a different tune all over again. Until the tape exists, I don't believe the Patriots would allow for it to exist. That's my stance, and I am sticking to it.

[nfrillman]

So Roger Goodell is a liar? And you know this because?

Yeah, and Richard Nixon is not a crook because he said he wasn't, Barry Bonds didn't knowingly take steroids because he said he didn't, and the death star was only designed to maintain peace and order in the galaxy because the Emperor said so.

[iloxygenil]

I hope it all breaks wide open and the truth comes out. If they did it legit congrats, if they cheated, ban Bill from football and take away those rings and trophies.

[someone447]

So now it's practices? Like, plural?

This is exactly what we're talking about...

I can guarantee that if they taped one practice, they taped more. This won't have been a one time thing.

[Crickett]

Yeah, and Richard Nixon is not a crook because he said he wasn't, Barry Bonds didn't knowingly take steroids because he said he didn't, and the death star was only designed to maintain peace and order in the galaxy because the Emperor said so.

*waves hand*

These are not the videotapes you are looking for.

[Jay]

I can guarantee that if they taped one practice, they taped more. This won't have been a one time thing.

So it's OK to have this line of thinking with absolutely zero proof that it even happened in the first place, but you're a homer and need to rethink your life if you think the other way. OK. I can see how that makes sense.

[Jay]

Yeah, and Richard Nixon is not a crook because he said he wasn't, Barry Bonds didn't knowingly take steroids because he said he didn't, and the death star was only designed to maintain peace and order in the galaxy because the Emperor said so.

I see, so I should just be thinking independently about everything and assume everyone is lying about everything then, right? Because that's the way the world works. Everyone is lying about everything. We should all walk around paranoid and assuming the worst. Yup, I can see why you are the rational one here and I'm just some silly homer for believing the guy who runs the league.

In that case, I am going to assume the Colts really were piping in noise. They need to be hit with heavy fines and we need a full scale CIA investigation before they blow up that building. God damnit how many games did they win because of that noise?!?! THE PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW.

[CC.SD]

I see, so I should just be thinking independently about everything and assume everyone is lying about everything then, right? Because that's the way the world works. Everyone is lying about everything. We should all walk around paranoid and assuming the worst. Yup, I can see why you are the rational one here and I'm just some silly homer for believing the guy who runs the league.

In that case, I am going to assume the Colts really were piping in noise. They need to be hit with heavy fines and we need a full scale CIA investigation before they blow up that building. God damnit how many games did they win because of that noise?!?! THE PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW.

Unless the piped in crowd noise was telling the Colts the exact play that the opposing offense was going to run, it's not the same situation.

You really are sticking your head in the sand here. It IS crazy to believe the guy who runs the league right now; the guy destroyed evidence for no reason!

I guess I don't blame you. It must be pretty sickening to spend 5 years or so watching a dynasty develop and then watch the whole thing crumble because, oops, they were cheating the whole time.

[Bigburt63]

Unless the piped in crowd noise was telling the Colts the exact play that the opposing offense was going to run, it's not the same situation.

You really are sticking your head in the sand here. It IS crazy to believe the guy who runs the league right now; the guy destroyed evidence for no reason!

I guess I don't blame you. It must be pretty sickening to spend 5 years or so watching a dynasty develop and then watch the whole thing crumble because, oops, they were cheating the whole time.

He obviously destroyed it for some reason, nobody is too sure as to what reason that is. And it also has not been proven true that the patriots were cheating the whole time, at least not with any evidence to support those claims. Its not homerism to believe that the patriots did not cheat without evidence, that is actually how the law works. Until evidence comes out and proves that the patriots were taping games, practices, or whatever, its walsh's word against the patriots, as only goodell really knows what was on the previous tapes.

[Bengals1690]

Jay and Bilingsley:

If the tapes didn't help, then why the hell would they keep breaking the rules and filming teams illegally? Thats like a thief that keeps breaking into houses but never takes anything. It just doesn't make sense.

When there's smoke, 9/10 times there is fire. They wouldn't wake up on random days and say, "Hey, lets go film so-and-sos practice today!". It was definitley not a one time thing.

[Crickett]

Jay and Bilingsley:

If the tapes didn't help, then why the hell would they keep breaking the rules and filming teams illegally? Thats like a thief that keeps breaking into houses but never taking anything. It just doesn't make sense.

But COMMISHIONER GOOD-L SAID!!!!!!! HE SAID!!!!!!!!! HE SAID SAID SAID!!!!!!!!!!

*stomps feet repeatedly*

[Jay]

Jay and Bilingsley:

If the tapes didn't help, then why the hell would they keep breaking the rules and filming teams illegally? Thats like a thief that keeps breaking into houses but never takes anything. It just doesn't make sense.

Because they could, and they didn't think they were breaking rules. Why would someone interfere with a receiver if it is against the rules? Why would someone offer a coach a job while he is under contract and coaching in the Super Bowl? Why would someone pay money to college athletes to get them to go to their school? And you can claim the playing dumb when you get caught shtick shouldn't be believed, but again, when you've been "caught" multiple times over the course of a few years and nothing comes of it, yeah, I'd think it's OK too. So they got kicked out of some other teams stadium. Oh well.

I've already told you what they do with the tapes. And I've said it about 10 times in the last week. I am more than positive they find some form of value in it, somehow, somewhere. You go ahead and believe what you want to believe. You've already made up your mind with no proof whatsoever to support your claim. Rock on with your bad self.

When there's smoke, 9/10 times there is fire. They wouldn't wake up on random days and say, "Hey, lets go film so-and-sos practice today!". It was definitley not a one time thing.

You're right. It might have been a no time thing. And until actual proof comes out, no one knows anything.

But you know, there was some smoke in Foxboro when it came out that the Jets got busted for the same thing, and everyone bought their excuse hook, line and sinker, even though I already posted the NFL rules for video taping for coaching purposes, and the Jets were very clearly breaking them.

But no one cared, because the Jets suck and are completely irrelevant. It does prove, though, that there are a lot of hypocrites out there. Because, you know, where there's smoke, there's fire 9/10 times, and you know, the coach of the Jets benefited from video taping as much as anyone else that's done it, so you know, maybe we should just assume they are doing it every week and every game too? Because clearly that is acceptable here.

You and I both know you're not going to buy that for a second, which is laughable because what you are doing is no different.

[Jay]

Unless the piped in crowd noise was telling the Colts the exact play that the opposing offense was going to run, it's not the same situation.

Where is your proof that the Patriots knew the exact play that was going to be run again? Oh wait, what was that? You don't have any? That's what I thought.

And yeah, I am more then aware I just cued the obvious joke, but even if the evidence was destroyed, we already know what it was because Fox showed everyone.

And again... thank you for proving my point. The only reason anyone cares is because it is the Patriots. If it were anyone else, this would have been the non-story every other cheater in NFL history has become within a week.

Cue the obvious lecture to follow about the fact that we're not talking about anyone else that cheated, the only one that matters is the Patriots. Blah blah blah. It's the same thing over and over...

You really are sticking your head in the sand here. It IS crazy to believe the guy who runs the league right now; the guy destroyed evidence for no reason!

I guess I don't blame you. It must be pretty sickening to spend 5 years or so watching a dynasty develop and then watch the whole thing crumble because, oops, they were cheating the whole time.

We can argue semantics until we're blue in the face or the thread gets locked, and one way or another, one of them is going to happen. I really don't care which it is.

[MasterShake]

Because they could, and they didn't think they were breaking rules. Why would someone interfere with a receiver if it is against the rules? Why would someone offer a coach a job while he is under contract and coaching in the Super Bowl? Why would someone pay money to college athletes to get them to go to their school?


Funny you should ask those questions...because it proves his point.

The reason people do all those things? It gives them an edge to win....the same reason your team cheated.

Having your team cheat can leave a bad taste in your mouth I understand....but be a man, accept it and move on. Your Dynasty is a sham....look to the future.

[nfrillman]

First off, I'd like to know what Fox affliate you were watching that said, "We definitely have all the Patriots Spygate tapes and now we will show them to you."

As for general rules in life, here is one you should probably learn....when someone says something that doesn't make any sense or say they did something that doesn't make any sense, they are most likely lying or at the very least not telling the whole truth. So, with that general life rule in mind, does it make any sense whatsoever for the commish to destroy evidence of cheating. In the history of world I'd be willing to bet that 99% of the time when evidence is intentially destroyed , it is done to cover something up.

[Crickett]

Where is your proof that the Patriots knew the exact play that was going to be run again? Oh wait, what was that? You don't have any? That's what I thought.

And yeah, I am more then aware I just cued the obvious joke, but even if the evidence was destroyed, we already know what it was because Fox showed everyone.

And again... thank you for proving my point. The only reason anyone cares is because it is the Patriots. If it were anyone else, this would have been the non-story every other cheater in NFL history has become within a week.

Cue the obvious lecture to follow about the fact that we're not talking about anyone else that cheated, the only one that matters is the Patriots. Blah blah blah. It's the same thing over and over...

Here is the thing. Its because it was a team that won three championships and almost won a fourth with a perfect record. Despite what you may think, its not because the team was called the Patriots and its not because they hail from New England. If it was a team that went 3-13, yeah, nobody would care. People would probably laugh because that team would be the laughingstock of the league. But it wasn't. You don't think if the Spurs had been caught cheating that it would be a huge scandal? If so, please send me a postcard from whatever world you live on, cuz its not Earth

[Bigburt63]

That's the point. If the Jets pulled the same illegal maneuvers and used the same excuses, then why are they not being scrutinized as much as the patriots. The same offense should receive the same punishment and scrutiny right? Perhaps even more so if it happens (gets caught) second?

Also, Belicheck came out today and said that he could not pick Walsh out of a lineup. Essentially the way it boils down is Walsh's word that the tapes were used by the patriots, and the patriots (Belichick's) word that the tapes were not either known of or used. When/if the tapes are released, there still may never be a resolution to the conflict or have the actual truth come out about the rams tapes.

[yodapoop]

Are these pornos starring Brenda Warner, I'd like to see them then. Otherwise, IDC about Spygate.

[Turtlepower]

Blaming Bellicheck for cheating is like blaming refs for losing the game. Yeah, there are bad calls, but a lot of the time it is because the team ****s up. The Rams didn't run the ball and Big Ben played like crap when it counted. Seriously, stop making all of this a personal issue against your own team.

More pointed to the steelers thread, I guess. =D

[Jay]

First off, I'd like to know what Fox affliate you were watching that said, "We definitely have all the Patriots Spygate tapes and now we will show them to you."

Hahahahaha yeah because that's EXACTLY what I was implying. If you don't know what I am talking about, maybe we shouldn't be having this conversation.

As for general rules in life, here is one you should probably learn....when someone says something that doesn't make any sense or say they did something that doesn't make any sense, they are most likely lying or at the very least not telling the whole truth. So, with that general life rule in mind, does it make any sense whatsoever for the commish to destroy evidence of cheating. In the history of world I'd be willing to bet that 99% of the time when evidence is intentially destroyed , it is done to cover something up.

General rules on life? This is what you have resorted to? Are we going to go over abstinence with a little side of teamwork next? Let me guess, all your t-ball and soccer games ended with a tied score. Dude. I think you need to do a little research on the situation and stop with the hyperbole.

[Jay]

Funny you should ask those questions...because it proves his point.

The reason people do all those things? It gives them an edge to win....the same reason your team cheated.

Having your team cheat can leave a bad taste in your mouth I understand....but be a man, accept it and move on. Your Dynasty is a sham....look to the future.

That's fine. They got caught breaking a rule. They got punished. I'd certainly like to move on, but five months later it's still the biggest story in sports even though it is the most irrelevant.

[Jay]

Here is the thing. Its because it was a team that won three championships and almost won a fourth with a perfect record. Despite what you may think, its not because the team was called the Patriots and its not because they hail from New England. If it was a team that went 3-13, yeah, nobody would care. People would probably laugh because that team would be the laughingstock of the league. But it wasn't. You don't think if the Spurs had been caught cheating that it would be a huge scandal? If so, please send me a postcard from whatever world you live on, cuz its not Earth

Nope, there wouldn't be. Because no one already hates the Spurs. It's the exact same reason why no one asks questions about whether Michael Jordan gambled on basketball games. Everyone loves Michael Jordan. Yet I've read enough to suggest that his epiphany to play minor league baseball was more of a quite "you need to go away for a year" then anything.

And define cheating. If they were caught slipping roofies into their opponents Gatorade before every game, I'd say that's a little different then video recording signals that can already be stolen.

It has become "cheating" because that is the word all the haters have attached to it. Technically, it is cheating, you are right, but you better be prepared to call pass interference, roughing the passer and too many men on the field cheating too, because by your very own definition, it is.

And you proved my point. If this wasn't the New England Patriots, no one would care. Because everyone already hated the Patriots, and this gave them just another reason to hate them. It's the same reason all the chuckleheads call them classless when they do nothing different on the field then any other team in the NFL.

But cheating is cheating right? And the Jets were doing the same thing as the Patriots, yet it got swept under the rug. Kind of kills the point you were hoping to make. And hey, look at me! I can do stuff in all white too! Because you know, it's there, BUT YOU CAN'T SEE IT! OMGZ!!1!

[Gay Ork Wang]

Nope, there wouldn't be. Because no one already hates the Spurs. It's the exact same reason why no one asks questions about whether Michael Jordan gambled on basketball games. Everyone loves Michael Jordan. Yet I've read enough to suggest that his epiphany to play minor league baseball was more of a quite "you need to go away for a year" then anything.

And define cheating. If they were caught slipping roofies into their opponents Gatorade before every game, I'd say that's a little different then video recording signals that can already be stolen.

It has become "cheating" because that is the word all the haters have attached to it. Technically, it is cheating, you are right, but you better be prepared to call pass interference, roughing the passer and too many men on the field cheating too, because by your very own definition, it is.

Well u think everyone hates the Pats just because they are the Pats? I mean sure there are some people out there but seriously u, u believe every single one in the US not being a NE Fan hates the Pats so much that they actually try to steal their championships and try to find ways to make them look bad?

Btw didnt we talk about those things? Yes u have Cheating, and slipping roofies in their gatorade is just as much cheating as Pass Interference and the Video Tapes. Thats why there are fouls. thats why teams/players are penalized for Roughing the Passer or PI. Thats why there are refs in the game. But what u are referring to is just plain bold. U r saying because that is "okay" in a game, u shouldnt be to concerned about a Video Tape, i mean they couldve slipped sth in their drinks but they didnt.

Video Tapes give u a really big advantage. Its like in every other sport or in life. If u know what the Defense/the Others are going to do, its way easier to plan, practice and play against it. Im pretty much over the cheating thing. It happened, its gonna be a sour taste in your mouth every time u gonna talk about the Pats Dynasty. But u are really trying to defend ur team and it is really getting ridiculous...

[Jay]

And what proof do you have that these video tapes gave the Pats any more advantage then the hours and hours of game film they watch? They were not used in game, so I don't understand why people think it is "a huge advantage."

And it's funny you mention being penalized for PI and roughing the passer... isn't that what happened when the Pats got fined the biggest fine in NFL history and stripped of a first round pick? You know... a penalty?

And finally, about the "tape" in question. The Rams have come out and said they went over red zone plays in their walk through. They scored every time they were in the red zone. How would the tape of the walk through helped the Patriots again? Because you know, they scored in the situations the Pats were supposed to know.

And I don't think everyone hates the Pats, just the ones that are commenting here. There are plenty of people out there that root for other teams that think this is completely ******** and needs to go away. There are just a lot of bitter people that feel better about their teams losses with the shred of hope that this is 132942034042 times worse then it actually is, and they are the ones yelling the loudest.

Sadly for them, it's not. And this is about the only case in my time on this message board that I have ever seen it be OK to speculate and assume it's the truth... but only if your speculation ends with the Patriots being scumbag cheaters that need to be lynched in a back alley and then killed by firing squad...

[Gay Ork Wang]

Well isnt it also a speculation on ur side?
I just dont get ur reasoning saying they made these tapes, but they didnt use them, at least we dont have any reason. I mean BB isnt dumb. If he makes these tapes he is going to use them (practices etc.).

I never said they havent been penalized but u put those 2 things on the same level.

[Bigburt63]

Well isnt it also a speculation on ur side?
I just dont get ur reasoning saying they made these tapes, but they didnt use them, at least we dont have any reason. I mean BB isnt dumb. If he makes these tapes he is going to use them (practices etc.).

I never said they havent been penalized but u put those 2 things on the same level.

It is speculation on both sides, which is why it is ridiculous that people shoot down patriots fans for being "homers" when we try to defend our team.

Also, Pioli came out and said that part of the reason Walsh was fired was in part de to his secretly taping other teams practices and such. Therefore, as I have said before, there may never even be proof that the tapes (of the rams) were used by, or even ordered by, BB.

[Gay Ork Wang]

But werent their accusations of taping in the Steelers games? Wasnt Walsh fired after the Rams SB`?

[Bigburt63]

true, there were allegations. I was referring specifically to the rams walkthrough. Other than taping the jets game this year, there havent been any tapes or any other forms of evidence produced to support any other allegations (to my knowledge). Plus, as Jay said before, BB has a library on all of the DC's in the league to pick up on certain tendencies and play calling trends. It is also more speculation as to what is on the tapes that supposedly exist.

[broth223]

Everyone is questioning why would The Pats keep taping if they don't get anything out of it. Why does Walsh sit on these tapes that some what proves that they were cheated out of a SB until years later?

[Jay]

But werent their accusations of taping in the Steelers games? Wasnt Walsh fired after the Rams SB`?

No, it was every football game they could possibly tape. No accusations, it happened. And they did use them to help evaluate all the coaches of every team so that they knew that when Ted Cotrell goes from being the defensive coordinator of the Chargers to being the DC of the Chiefs, what tendancies he has in play calling in certain situations.

But according to Belichick, they were never used in the game. And they have NEVER been caught using them in game. No one is willing to assume that other teams video are taping games, but they are willing to assume the Patriots were using it in game when everything says otherwise and there is absolutely zero proof that they ever did (and the tapes being destroyed has nothing to do with it).

That's all there is to it.

[someone447]

Everyone is questioning why would The Pats keep taping if they don't get anything out of it. Why does Walsh sit on these tapes that some what proves that they were cheated out of a SB until years later?

He waited until he would get the absolute most publicity out of it. I think that is quite obvious.

You Pat's fans are right, maybe BB didn't use the tapes. But maybe Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds only LOOKED at the steroids... Maybe The Black Sox Scandal players were only FRIENDS with the bookie. Maybe the only crime Al Capone committed was tax evasion. Come on, think critically about this. If you are going to risk getting caught doing something illegal, it is because you gain some sort of advantage. Would you go into a bank with a gun, demand all their money, and then leave the money at the door? Of course not.

Jay, you obviously don't remember when MJ went to play baseball. EVERYONE was talking about how Stern told him to take some time off because of his gambling. There has been no evidence he bet on basketball, there is evidence the Pats cheated. You know Richard Nixon was exposed by an anonymous tip.

But go ahead and live in a little fairy tale world where people only *think* about cheating.

[broth223]

He waited until he would get the absolute most publicity out of it. I think that is quite obvious.

You Pat's fans are right, maybe BB didn't use the tapes. But maybe Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds only LOOKED at the steroids... Maybe The Black Sox Scandal players were only FRIENDS with the bookie. Maybe the only crime Al Capone committed was tax evasion. Come on, think critically about this. If you are going to risk getting caught doing something illegal, it is because you gain some sort of advantage. Would you go into a bank with a gun, demand all their money, and then leave the money at the door? Of course not.

Jay, you obviously don't remember when MJ went to play baseball. EVERYONE was talking about how Stern told him to take some time off because of his gambling. There has been no evidence he bet on basketball, there is evidence the Pats cheated. You know Richard Nixon was exposed by an anonymous tip.

But go ahead and live in a little fairy tale world where people only *think* about cheating.

You get more publicity now than if IDK say he did it right after the SB?

And maybe the US Gov really did plan 9/11. Maybe we never did land on the moon. MAYBE AREA 51 REALLY HOLDS ALIANS!!!

[someone447]

You get more publicity now than if IDK say he did it right after the SB?

And maybe the US Gov really did plan 9/11. Maybe we never did land on the moon. MAYBE AREA 51 REALLY HOLDS ALIANS!!!

Other than the fact that all the evidence points to all those being false, while the tapes point to it being true(they did it before, someone who worked in the organization came forward. Plus, I think it is naive to think the government doesn't have some blame in 9/11, even if it was caused by gross incompetence due to how big the bureaucracy is, but I digress.)

If he did it right after the Super Bowl he would have had to compete with the Giants who just ended the perfect season. I wouldn't be surprised if he was going to come forward right after the Super Bowl if the Pats one.

For the record, I don't hate the Patriots, I hate Bill Belicheck.

[broth223]

Other than the fact that all the evidence points to all those being false, while the tapes point to it being true(they did it before, someone who worked in the organization came forward. Plus, I think it is naive to think the government doesn't have some blame in 9/11, even if it was caused by gross incompetence due to how big the bureaucracy is, but I digress.)

If he did it right after the Super Bowl he would have had to compete with the Giants who just ended the perfect season. I wouldn't be surprised if he was going to come forward right after the Super Bowl if the Pats one.

For the record, I don't hate the Patriots, I hate Bill Belicheck.

I'm wrong I didn't read the thread as clearly as I previously thought. For some reason I thought Walsh was a part of the Rams organization... Although I'm not ready to burn the Pats at the stake over tapes that a potentially disgruntled former employee says he has. If the investigation uncovers something that shows a clear cut competitive advantage. Then I say that they should punish the team and Belickeck severely. Banishment is a bit much. I'd say that the punishment should be the same as steroids they are essentially the same minus the health risks. In the sense that they are both methods against the rules of the NFL that gained a competitive advantage.

[someone447]

I'm wrong I didn't read the thread as clearly as I previously thought. For some reason I thought Walsh was a part of the Rams organization... Although I'm not ready to burn the Pats at the stake over tapes that a potentially disgruntled former employee says he has. If the investigation uncovers something that shows a clear cut competitive advantage. Then I say that they should punish the team and Belickeck severely. Banishment is a bit much. I'd say that the punishment should be the same as steroids they are essentially the same minus the health risks. In the sense that they are both methods against the rules of the NFL that gained a competitive advantage.

I am just of the school of thought, that where there is smoke, there is fire. If it comes out he made everything up, then obviously I won't continue to believe they are guilty, but right now, all the signs point to them being guilty.

[Jay]

Yet you can sit there and claim there was no fire in Michael Jordan's case when there was PLENTY of smoke. And I have a huge problem with the term "cheated." I agree that they broke an NFL rule. No doubt about it. There is absolutely ZERO proof that the Patriots used any of the video taped signals inside of that same game. ZERO. As a matter of fact, there is more proof that Jordan might have bet on basketball then there is that the Patriots used any of their video work in game.

Yet it's OK for you to call them cheaters and assume they did use the tapes in game because of some stupid cliche. But suggest Jordan bet on basketball and ooooh no, don't go there!

It's all a hypocrisy. A pretty funny one too. And by admitting you hate Bill Belichick, you're proving that you are just looking for every reason to talk **** as much as I am looking for every reason to defend him. We can go in circles alld ay if that's what you want.

[Bengals1690]

Yet you can sit there and claim there was no fire in Michael Jordan's case when there was PLENTY of smoke. And I have a huge problem with the term "cheated." I agree that they broke an NFL rule. No doubt about it. There is absolutely ZERO proof that the Patriots used any of the video taped signals inside of that same game. ZERO. As a matter of fact, there is more proof that Jordan might have bet on basketball then there is that the Patriots used any of their video work in game.

Yet it's OK for you to call them cheaters and assume they did use the tapes in game because of some stupid cliche. But suggest Jordan bet on basketball and ooooh no, don't go there!

It's all a hypocrisy. A pretty funny one too. And by admitting you hate Bill Belichick, you're proving that you are just looking for every reason to talk **** as much as I am looking for every reason to defend him. We can go in circles alld ay if that's what you want.

did michael jordan's betting give his team an unfair advantage?

[Jay]

I don't know, did Pete Rose's betting give his team an unfair advantage?

Oh and... the man you are all pinning your hopes and dreams on... :

MAYBE THE MEDIA SHOULD EYEBALL WALSH

Though we're edging ever closer to becoming part of the "real" media, we're still a long way away from having the kind of time and resources that would allow us to engage in a comprehensive investigation of a key figure in one of the various stories about which we often tend to blather.

If, for example, we had the time and/or the resources, we'd devote a chunk of it to finding out more about Matt Walsh.

Precious little has been done by the media to find out more about him, or to get a general feel for whether he generally can be believed. From our perspective, we think that what he says (and how he says it) about Spygate II will say much about whether he is credible. Until he talks, however, there's work that can be done to get a better idea of who he is and what he's about.

For starters, the contention that Walsh secretly recorded conversations with Pats V.P. of player personnel Scott Pioli is great way to get a good feel for whether Walsh is a truth-teller. Walsh's lawyer calls the rare public utterance from Pioli a "complete fabrication." So if the Pats and/or Pioli can prove that it happened, the failure of Walsh to tell the truth to his lawyer on that topic would be relevant in connection with an assessment of whether he's telling the truth about what he might eventually tell Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) or anyone else.

Other easily available information to scrutinize is Walsh's bio for his current job. In it, he says that he "served primarily as an Area Scout and Video Assistant from 1996-2003" with the Patriots. But Pioli told the Boston Globe that Walsh was never an Area Scout. So if the Pats and/or Pioli can prove this, it would be another strike against him.

In fact, Walsh's overall bio requires the full-blown Fran Foley treatment. Based on the article regarding his then-looming nuptials, he was 28 in July 2004 and is a Gemini. Thus, he's presently 31. Unless he pulled a Doogie Howser (or a Forrest Gump), it's hard to cram everything he claims to have done into the period of time that would require him to get a college degree, play two years of pro hockey, train with the U.S. National Bobsled team, spend a year working for an Arena League team, seven with the Pats, one with NFL Europe, and then become an assistant golf pro in Hawaii.

The article about his wedding describes his time with the Pats as including "operations, public relations, video/game planning, area scout." Game planning? Um. Okay.

Other questions about Walsh should be asked. Such as, for example, how he found -- and how he can afford -- a Washington, D.C. lawyer who specializes in white-collar crime and government investigations. Could it be that Senator Specter hooked Walsh up with Michael Levy, and/or that Levy is handling the matter at no charge as a "favor" to the Senator?

So while we're uncomfortable with the notion that NFL Security is looking up on the guy, we think that the media has an obligation to do so, especially if the media (us included) is going to continue to write about the inflammatory things that Walsh supposedly knows.

[Bengals1690]

I don't know, did Pete Rose's betting give his team an unfair advantage?

Oh and... the man you are all pinning your hopes and dreams on... :

I honestly have no idea, because he also coached his team. But i would venture a guess no.

But you brought up this MJ betting argument, and thats not cheating. Thats just stupidity.

and a reply to the top post:

why in the hell would they tape teams, but not try to get an advantage out of it? That train of thought doesn't make any sense.

[Jay]

They try to get an advantage out of EVERYTHING. Every team does. Every team watchs all types of film. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Bill Belichick operates inside every possible grey area possible and would take unflushed stool samples out of hotel shitters if it meant he could figure out something for a game plan. And I don't think it is completely ridiculous to think any or every other team does the same thing. And other teams have been caught breaking NFL rules. Some pretty major ones like salary cap and tampering, etc.

Jordan had the ball in his hands more than any other Chicago Bull. Of course he could effect games. That one is a no brainer. I'm not saying he did or didn't, but you know, where there's smoke, there's fire, so by NFLDraftcountdown.com bylaw 36.4 article 6 section 8 amendment 2c, we are therefor to assume he did...

[Bigburt63]

I honestly have no idea, because he also coached his team. But i would venture a guess no.

But you brought up this MJ betting argument, and thats not cheating. Thats just stupidity.

and a reply to the top post:

why in the hell would they tape teams, but not try to get an advantage out of it? That train of thought doesn't make any sense.

First off, Pete Rose has said that he bet his team to win every time, which theoretically would not change the outcome of the game, in most cases.

Second, it has been said before that the patriots tape defenses of other teams to keep a record of what tendencies those teams have as far as play calling. Nobody has proven that the patriots have taped signals and used them in games.

As far as the Walsh tapes, nodoby can prove (other than BB) that the Patriots actually ordered and used the tapes from the Rams walkthrough. It boils down to Walsh's word against BB's word, no proof anywhere. Also, he could be bringing this up now just to make money and remain out of trouble. Why not bring it up after the 2nd superbowl, or the 3rd which was equally as hyped as this past superbowl?

[someone447]

I don't know, did Pete Rose's betting give his team an unfair advantage?

Oh and... the man you are all pinning your hopes and dreams on... :

I don't think Pete Rose should be barred from the HOF, and if it does turn out BB cheated, I don't think he should be barred from the NFL either. What Pete Rose did was not cheating, he always bet on his team. Yes, it probably did affect the games. If he bet on the game, he would be more likely to pitch his closer or top reliever, but I digress.


The article about his wedding describes his time with the Pats as including "operations, public relations, video/game planning, area scout." Game planning? Um. Okay.

If he broke down film, he helped with the game planning...

If you really believe that BB didn't use the spygate film in games, I have some land to sell you...

[skarocksoi]

They try to get an advantage out of EVERYTHING. Every team does. Every team watchs all types of film. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Bill Belichick operates inside every possible grey area possible and would take unflushed stool samples out of hotel shitters if it meant he could figure out something for a game plan. And I don't think it is completely ridiculous to think any or every other team does the same thing. And other teams have been caught breaking NFL rules. Some pretty major ones like salary cap and tampering, etc.

Jordan had the ball in his hands more than any other Chicago Bull. Of course he could effect games. That one is a no brainer. I'm not saying he did or didn't, but you know, where there's smoke, there's fire, so by NFLDraftcountdown.com bylaw 36.4 article 6 section 8 amendment 2c, we are therefor to assume he did...

If he's trying to gain an advantage out of everything, why do you believe that he wouldn't use it in the games? That seems like the biggest advantage of them all.

[someone447]

If he's trying to gain an advantage out of everything, why do you believe that he wouldn't use it in the games? That seems like the biggest advantage of them all.

BECAUSE HE SAID HE DIDNT!!! PEOPLE DON'T EVER LIE!!!

[kwilk103]

theorotically, couldnt belicheat have taped the defensive signals then:

sync them up with the game footage; then when you see the same hand signal x amount of times, and everytime its a certain blitz/coverage (lets use cb blitz for example)

then when you play that team again, and the o-coord or brady sees that signal, they could audible to a more favorable play

is that possible?

[someone447]

theorotically, couldnt belicheat have taped the defensive signals then:

sync them up with the game footage; then when you see the same hand signal x amount of times, and everytime its a certain blitz/coverage (lets use cb blitz for example)

then when you play that team again, and the o-coord or brady sees that signal, they could audible to a more favorable play

is that possible?

Yes, it is likely that is what happened. But I think it is naive to rule out the possibility that they had people breaking it down DURING the games to be used in the second half.

[kwilk103]

thats what i thought they would do; i also assumed they could get the tape at halftime, and have the signals halfway through the 3rd at the latest

at least if i was the coach and cheated, thats what i would do

oh, and the blind homerism in this thread is annoying

[someone447]

thats what i thought they would do; i also assumed they could get the tape at halftime, and have the signals halfway through the 3rd at the latest

at least if i was the coach and cheated, thats what i would do

oh, and the blind homerism in this thread is annoying

Ya, no kidding.

Personally, I have no problem that they cheated. But if you get caught, own up to it and accept your punishment. If you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'

[Bigburt63]

It's not blind homerism to defend your team from pure speculation, which is exactly what is happening with the Walsh tapes. Nobody has seen these tapes (outside of Walsh, and supposedly others) yet people are willing to condemn the patriots as having cheated before the superbowl in 2001 against the rams.

[someone447]

It's not blind homerism to defend your team from pure speculation, which is exactly what is happening with the Walsh tapes. Nobody has seen these tapes (outside of Walsh, and supposedly others) yet people are willing to condemn the patriots as having cheated before the superbowl in 2001 against the rams.

Maybe because they were caught illegally taping earlier this year already?

[Bigburt63]

Maybe because they were caught illegally taping earlier this year already?

But the walsh tapes are from 7 years prior and were said to have been the actions of an employee acting on his own accord

Edit: Who is no longer with the team

[someone447]

But the walsh tapes are from 7 years prior and were said to have been the actions of an employee acting on his own accord

Edit: Who is no longer with the team

Yes officer, I have had about 15 beers...

No officer, that isn't powdered sugar, it is cocaine.

People don't just up and admit to doing something wrong until they have no other choice.

[skarocksoi]

I dont get why people want to believe the Patriots when they say they didnt do it and they didnt cheat and Matt Walsh was acting on his own and they didnt haven anything to do with it despite the fact that he was under their employment. Of course they are going to say those things.

If the entire reputation of one of the most highly respected NFL franchises of the past several years was to come into question, of course they are going to deny all allegations against them. They aren't just going to say "Well, you got us!" They will deny, deny, deny until the truth comes out of what they did. Perhaps they are being truthful, but with the evidence already against them (previous taped games and former employee who backs up cheating claims) its not hard to connect the dots and make pretty easy assumptions.

[Bigburt63]

I dont get why people want to believe the Patriots when they say they didnt do it and they didnt cheat and Matt Walsh was acting on his own and they didnt haven anything to do with it despite the fact that he was under their employment. Of course they are going to say those things.

If the entire reputation of one of the most highly respected NFL franchises of the past several years was to come into question, of course they are going to deny all allegations against them. They aren't just going to say "Well, you got us!" They will deny, deny, deny until the truth comes out of what they did. Perhaps they are being truthful, but with the evidence already against them (previous taped games and former employee who backs up cheating claims) its not hard to connect the dots and make pretty easy assumptions.

the "evidence" of their former employee saying that they taped the walkthrough is not evidence at all. It comes down to his word against the patriots (basically BB's) word, not evidence at all. Also, the evidence of tapes from previous years actually took place after the supposed walkthrough tapes. Am I naive enough to believe that there is no way they were connected, no. But at the same time it does not serve as proof that they actually did tell him to tape the walkthrough, or even use the walkthrough after he taped it (meaning if he came to them and said he had the tape w/out their knowing).

And you answered your first question by yourself. Why would people want to defend them? because, as you go on to say, they have been one of the most highly respected franchises for the past several years. Excuse us for not jumping into the group that is out to get BB out of the NFL, or have the patriots stripped of the superbowl win(s). I for one want the evidence to come out completely (if it ever does) before I pass judgement on something.

[someone447]

the "evidence" of their former employee saying that they taped the walkthrough is not evidence at all. It comes down to his word against the patriots (basically BB's) word, not evidence at all. Also, the evidence of tapes from previous years actually took place after the supposed walkthrough tapes. Am I naive enough to believe that there is no way they were connected, no. But at the same time it does not serve as proof that they actually did tell him to tape the walkthrough, or even use the walkthrough after he taped it (meaning if he came to them and said he had the tape w/out their knowing).

And you answered your first question by yourself. Why would people want to defend them? because, as you go on to say, they have been one of the most highly respected franchises for the past several years. Excuse us for not jumping into the group that is out to get BB out of the NFL, or have the patriots stripped of the superbowl win(s). I for one want the evidence to come out completely (if it ever does) before I pass judgement on something.

An eyewitness is usually enough to convict in a murder case...

I don't want either of those things.

[Bigburt63]

An eyewitness is usually enough to convict in a murder case...

I don't want either of those things.

Never said you did specifically, just that alot of people do.

Also, an eye witness to a murder case is alot different than an ex-employee who has held tapes for years before coming forth and speaking out, who cannot prove that he had actually given the tapes to the Patriots coaching staff, nor that the coaching staff had asked him to tape the walkthrough in the first place.

[someone447]

Never said you did specifically, just that alot of people do.

Also, an eye witness to a murder case is alot different than an ex-employee who has held tapes for years before coming forth and speaking out, who cannot prove that he had actually given the tapes to the Patriots coaching staff, nor that the coaching staff had asked him to tape the walkthrough in the first place.

You can't honestly believe that is the case, can you? Really, really think about that. If he has the tapes, it is quite obvious that the coaching staff told him to do it.

[Billingsley26]

You can't honestly believe that is the case, can you? Really, really think about that. If he has the tapes, it is quite obvious that the coaching staff told him to do it.

Well, something isnt sitting right with me. If he supposedly has all this info, then the peices would be fitting according to him. In fact it is quite the opposite. Pioli is exposing him for what hes worth, and esposing things Walsh is saying, and proving them to be lies. If he had the tapes this would be out already. I odnt believe this Walsh character one bit. He is living a lie.

[Bigburt63]

You can't honestly believe that is the case, can you? Really, really think about that. If he has the tapes, it is quite obvious that the coaching staff told him to do it.

Is it completely unrealistic for an employee to be overzealous and perform an illegal (even bending the rules slightly) task for their employer, thinking that it would please the boss? It is not entirely unthinkable for the patriots to have turned him down if he came forward with the tape, and for them to have never ordered the taping of the walkthrough in the first place.

[Jay]

BECAUSE HE SAID HE DIDNT!!! PEOPLE DON'T EVER LIE!!!

And there is absolutely zero proof that he ever did. Period.

[someone447]

And there is absolutely zero proof that he ever did. Period.

Dude. You must be incredibly naive. You wouldn't break the rules if you weren't going to use it.

[someone447]

Is it completely unrealistic for an employee to be overzealous and perform an illegal (even bending the rules slightly) task for their employer, thinking that it would please the boss? It is not entirely unthinkable for the patriots to have turned him down if he came forward with the tape, and for them to have never ordered the taping of the walkthrough in the first place.

If this was the first time BB has been accused of breaking rules regarding illegal videotaping, I would agree with you 100%. But he has already shown that he will break the rules. If Pacman was arrested for something in a strip club tomorrow, you would believe it is probably true, wouldn't you?

[someone447]

Well, something isnt sitting right with me. If he supposedly has all this info, then the peices would be fitting according to him. In fact it is quite the opposite. Pioli is exposing him for what hes worth, and esposing things Walsh is saying, and proving them to be lies. If he had the tapes this would be out already. I odnt believe this Walsh character one bit. He is living a lie.

Read the original link as to why they haven't been released yet. He wants to make sure he is safe from lawsuits.

[someone447]

For the record, I am completely against Congress getting involved in this in any way, shape, or form.

[Billingsley26]

Read the original link as to why they haven't been released yet. He wants to make sure he is safe from lawsuits.

I have read all of that. I have also read articles in whic Scott Pioli as said that this guy's bio is a lie. Everything he claims to have done or accomplish in his life is a lie. I can only attribute this to him living a lie.

[Jay]

If he's trying to gain an advantage out of everything, why do you believe that he wouldn't use it in the games? That seems like the biggest advantage of them all.

I said he walks along the grey areas. In his opinion, it was OK to tape anything he wanted as long as it wasn't used in game. From 2000-2006, it was known that he was doing it and never a problem, which you know, is why he was never penalized for doing the same thing that he got penalized for doing this year.

I love it how everyone jumps to the defense of stealing signals as long as it wasn't done with a camera. I also love it that everyone automatically assumes the same signals are used in every game all year. That is comical.

And I am not repeating what the video was used for again. I've already gone over that at least five times in this thread. They've been talking about what he used it for here almost all season. But no one wants to hear that. That should be my new sign...

[Jay]

Dude. You must be incredibly naive. You wouldn't break the rules if you weren't going to use it.

Where's your proof that it was used in game? If I need to find proof that other teams video taped, you need to find proof that the Patriots used what they filmed in game. Until then, you've got nothing.

But by your rules, you are incredibly naive to think the Patriots were the only team in the league taping signals.

[someone447]

Where's your proof that it was used in game? If I need to find proof that other teams video taped, you need to find proof that the Patriots used what they filmed in game. Until then, you've got nothing.

But by your rules, you are incredibly naive to think the Patriots were the only team in the league taping signals.

When did I ever say they were the only team in the league taping signals? You are right, I would be incredibly naive to think that. The Patriots were the only team that got caught. Like I said, I have no problem with them cheating, but if they got caught they have to own up to it.

Earlier in this thread I even said, If you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'.

[Jay]

Hmm... I was hoping we could argue in circles all night. Can you maybe go back and disagree with me on something, this is no fun. Trust me, it's better for us both. Awesome.

[Bigburt63]

If this was the first time BB has been accused of breaking rules regarding illegal videotaping, I would agree with you 100%. But he has already shown that he will break the rules. If Pacman was arrested for something in a strip club tomorrow, you would believe it is probably true, wouldn't you?

What BB did in the Jets game is very different from what walsh is accusing them of having done before the superbowl. They taped teams to keep a record of the tendencies in play calling, compared to taping part of a team's gameplan before the game starts. One is going into the grey area, and one is all out cheating.

I may believe it to be true, but I could in no way prove that it was true.

[adamprez2003]

god i hope they strip the patriots of their SB Titles. If only to see the reaction of their fans. Undoubtedlty the most obnoxious fans the NFL has ever produced. You would think the "greatest team in the history of the NFL" with the "greatest QB in the history of the NFL" with the "greatest coach in the history of the NFL" would give it a rest already but I guess the Patriots fans are on the Robert Kraft payroll and must constnatly defend these sleazebags. Now that the greatest QB, Coach and team debates have been lost I guess they have to defend themselves from becoming "the greatest cheaters in the History of the NFL"

[someone447]

What BB did in the Jets game is very different from what walsh is accusing them of having done before the superbowl. They taped teams to keep a record of the tendencies in play calling, compared to taping part of a team's gameplan before the game starts. One is going into the grey area, and one is all out cheating.

I may believe it to be true, but I could in no way prove that it was true.

Does the court use a person's history of abuse against them in a murder case? Of course, why is it any different to do that with BB?

[someone447]

god i hope they strip the patriots of their SB Titles. If only to see the reaction of their fans. Undoubtedlty the most obnoxious fans the NFL has ever produced. You would think the "greatest team in the history of the NFL" with the "greatest QB in the history of the NFL" with the "greatest coach in the history of the NFL" would give it a rest already but I guess the Patriots fans are on the Robert Kraft payroll and must constnatly defend these sleazebags. Now that the greatest QB, Coach and team debates have been lost I guess they have to defend themselves from becoming "the greatest cheaters in the History of the NFL"

As much as I hate him, BB has a legitimate claim to being the best coach ever.

They obviously can't become "the greatest cheaters in the history of the NFL" that would have to be someone who was good enough to not get caught.

[Bigburt63]

god i hope they strip the patriots of their SB Titles. If only to see the reaction of their fans. Undoubtedlty the most obnoxious fans the NFL has ever produced. You would think the "greatest team in the history of the NFL" with the "greatest QB in the history of the NFL" with the "greatest coach in the history of the NFL" would give it a rest already but I guess the Patriots fans are on the Robert Kraft payroll and must constnatly defend these sleazebags. Now that the greatest QB, Coach and team debates have been lost I guess they have to defend themselves from becoming "the greatest cheaters in the History of the NFL"

Never once have I said that Brady is the best QB ever, the patriots are the best team ever, or that BB is the best coach ever. I hate comparing teams,players, coaches from different eras becuase they are all completely different.
I really don't see how they can have their SB titles stripped, as it can be proven that Walsh taped the walkthrough (he admits that). But it cannot be proven that the coaches had any knowledge of the tapes being in existance, nevermind having used them.
Did they tape the Jets game this past season, yes. Did they get caught, yes. Is this proof that they taped the rams walkthrough, no.

[Bigburt63]

Does the court use a person's history of abuse against them in a murder case? Of course, why is it any different to do that with BB?

Usually in a murder case, the prosecution has more evidence than just one person (walsh).

[Gay Ork Wang]

did they say they only have Walsh?

[Bigburt63]

did they say they only have Walsh?

He's the one with the tapes regarding the rams walkthrough. He may come out and say there are others, but I don't believe that he has thus far. If he does it could be a little bit different

[adamprez2003]

As much as I hate him, BB has a legitimate claim to being the best coach ever.

They obviously can't become "the greatest cheaters in the history of the NFL" that would have to be someone who was good enough to not get caught.Before the cheating he still would have had a hard part getting past Lombardi who was almost perfect. Before the cheating he would have been in the conversation though. You really need to let the careers end because when all is said and done, Parcells may end up getting the credit depending what his disciples do. Right now BB is head and shoulders above the rest but wait ten years and see if any of the other Parcells coaches have success. If they do I think Parcells may vault ahead of BB. Not only would he have two rings but he would also have taught the next generation

[adamprez2003]

Never once have I said that Brady is the best QB ever, the patriots are the best team ever, or that BB is the best coach ever. I hate comparing teams,players, coaches from different eras becuase they are all completely different.
I really don't see how they can have their SB titles stripped, as it can be proven that Walsh taped the walkthrough (he admits that). But it cannot be proven that the coaches had any knowledge of the tapes being in existance, nevermind having used them.
Did they tape the Jets game this past season, yes. Did they get caught, yes. Is this proof that they taped the rams walkthrough, no.

You may not have but something happened to the patriots fan base after the panthers SB game. you got a bunch of yahoos that go around making the most ridiculous claims. Just look at this site. There is a thread that in all seriousness states that Tom Brady is the greatest QB of all time. Feel sorry for the oldtimers because your bandwagon is going to have to be fumigated after this batch leaves to go root for the Celtics or Red Sox

As to whether it can be stripped? Anything is possible once public relations comes into play. If there is an actual tape of the Rams walk through, that's enough in my book. Who authorized it doesnt matter. That's for the law courts. This is an internal matter where the proof needed is lower. It is simply going to come down to whether the fans want the title stripped or not. Goodell owes his job to Kraft so he'll defend him up to a point but if there is an outcry over nthe punishment and people demand the Patriots be stripped, they will be stripped

[Jay]

Aww... the poor babies couldn't handle the fact that the Rams might have spied on the Pats and had to lock the thread. That's rich. I think it is hysterical the reaction that thread got, and that people thought it was OK to insult me personally over having the audacity to raise a valid question that was presented six years ago. And to do it all without even knowing my opinion on the situation.

Personally, if it was the Rams and they were spying, I don't care. It doesn't change anything. I would like to thank everyone for proving an enormous point though and that you are all wishing and hoping and dreaming about all of this being true. Calling me a hypocrite is pretty funny considering it's one of those pot-kettle-black situations. But I wouldn't expect anything less from some of those people...

[Bengals1690]

Aww... the poor babies couldn't handle the fact that the Rams might have spied on the Pats and had to lock the thread. That's rich. I think it is hysterical the reaction that thread got, and that people thought it was OK to insult me personally over having the audacity to raise a valid question that was presented six years ago. And to do it all without even knowing my opinion on the situation.

Personally, if it was the Rams and they were spying, I don't care. It doesn't change anything. I would like to thank everyone for proving an enormous point though and that you are all wishing and hoping and dreaming about all of this being true. Calling me a hypocrite is pretty funny considering it's one of those pot-kettle-black situations. But I wouldn't expect anything less from some of those people...


you are ridiculous, honestly. So they Patriots saw a telescope in a house. That proves absolutley nothing, and there is no evidence that anything did happen. The Patriots, on the other hand, have been caught in the act. When more, for lack of a better word, evidence, comes out that sayus the Pats are cheaters, pepole will jump on it. When you bring up a random link from a random site that sayus something that no one has ever heard of anything about, of course no one is gonna belive you.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Seriously? A guy, who u dont even know, watched through a Telescope how a SuperBowl team practices... and u compare that to Tapes of a former Member of the Pats (with or without evidence on them)?
I just dont get ur reasoning

[Billingsley26]

you are ridiculous, honestly. So they Patriots saw a telescope in a house. That proves absolutley nothing, and there is no evidence that anything did happen. The Patriots, on the other hand, have been caught in the act. When more, for lack of a better word, evidence, comes out that sayus the Pats are cheaters, pepole will jump on it. When you bring up a random link from a random site that sayus something that no one has ever heard of anything about, of course no one is gonna belive you.

Yea, evidence that is SAID to be legit from a guy who is living a lie named Mat Walsh. If you call that evidence, then we are good to call that person in the window evidence too. Lol, this is hilarious. You call Matt Walsh's video evidence yet hes holding on to it like a baby. It aint evidence yet, and its just as much evidence as the person in the window with the telescope.

[Billingsley26]

I mean, how can this so called video, be called evidence? It has only been veiwed by Matt Walsh, who is living a lie, and has been exposed by Pioli. Godell hasnt seen the video and neither has anyone else. This guy has been proved to lie about things, hell he lies about his own life. Goodell isnt even calling this evidence. I dont know how this so called video is more evidence than the person in the window.

[Jay]

you are ridiculous, honestly. So they Patriots saw a telescope in a house. That proves absolutley nothing, and there is no evidence that anything did happen. The Patriots, on the other hand, have been caught in the act. When more, for lack of a better word, evidence, comes out that sayus the Pats are cheaters, pepole will jump on it. When you bring up a random link from a random site that sayus something that no one has ever heard of anything about, of course no one is gonna belive you.

1. The New York times is a random site?
2. That was the point, to prove people will jump all over Pats fans for A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G.

Let me repeat that:

A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G

There's nothing ridiculous here. I have as much proof that the Rams spied on the Patriots as you have that the Patriots spied on the Rams. Yet I'm the asshole, and in trying to point out the hypocrisy of the situation, get called a hypocrite. It's humorous.

Suggest the Pats did something, completely unfounded, and the pile on effect begins.

But a Pats fan suggest someone else might have done something wrong, and the tears start to well up and we are either:

1. Hypocrites
2. Making excuses
3. Need to stop worrying about what other teams do.
4. Ridiculous/stupid/dummy-heads and a bunch of other second grade words.

All I want is consistency. People WANT the Pats to be the bad guys. They WANT to make this more than it is. It's a joke, and I am sick of it.

[49ersfan_87]

1. The New York times is a random site?
2. That was the point, to prove people will jump all over Pats fans for A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G.

Let me repeat that:

A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G

There's nothing ridiculous here. I have as much proof that the Rams spied on the Patriots as you have that the Patriots spied on the Rams. Yet I'm the asshole, and in trying to point out the hypocrisy of the situation, get called a hypocrite. It's humorous.

Suggest the Pats did something, completely unfounded, and the pile on effect begins.

But a Pats fan suggest someone else might have done something wrong, and the tears start to well up and we are either:

1. Hypocrites
2. Making excuses
3. Need to stop worrying about what other teams do.
4. Ridiculous/stupid/dummy-heads and a bunch of other second grade words.

All I want is consistency. People WANT the Pats to be the bad guys. They WANT to make this more than it is. It's a joke, and I am sick of it.

I think you need to relax a little..

[Jay]

I think the same can be said about a lot of people here.

[someone447]

I mean, how can this so called video, be called evidence? It has only been veiwed by Matt Walsh, who is living a lie, and has been exposed by Pioli. Godell hasnt seen the video and neither has anyone else. This guy has been proved to lie about things, hell he lies about his own life. Goodell isnt even calling this evidence. I dont know how this so called video is more evidence than the person in the window.

How is video evidence? Really? Assuming he actually has the video, which we have to assume he does(just because of the threat of the lawsuit, and the possibility of his lawyer getting disbarred if he doesn't have it), it proves that someone in the organization spied on the Rams. With BB history of illegal taping, it casts a very big shadow over their championships.

[Billingsley26]

How is video evidence? Really? Assuming he actually has the video, which we have to assume he does(just because of the threat of the lawsuit, and the possibility of his lawyer getting disbarred if he doesn't have it), it proves that someone in the organization spied on the Rams. With BB history of illegal taping, it casts a very big shadow over their championships.

Then in that case, can we not assume that it was someone from the Rams who was in the window? To me it is the same thing. Neither of them have any proof behind them. Everyone is listening to this guy Matt Walsh speak, and believing he has something, which has yet to come out, and not to mention the guy is a fraud, yet everyone believes him. You see my point?

[Billingsley26]

But as of right now, we are all just speculating on everything. Its just a big circle. Around and around. Theres speculation on the video tape, and speculation with the camera at the Patriots practise. Either way, nothing has been proven.

[broth223]

How is video evidence? Really? Assuming he actually has the video, which we have to assume he does(just because of the threat of the lawsuit, and the possibility of his lawyer getting disbarred if he doesn't have it), it proves that someone in the organization spied on the Rams. With BB history of illegal taping, it casts a very big shadow over their championships.

Well the big reason he hasn't shown the video is to show the video he wants to be immune from any and all litigation from the NFL and the NE Patriots organisation (AKA he won't show the video unless he is assured that he won't be sued)

[someone447]

Then in that case, can we not assume that it was someone from the Rams who was in the window? To me it is the same thing. Neither of them have any proof behind them. Everyone is listening to this guy Matt Walsh speak, and believing he has something, which has yet to come out, and not to mention the guy is a fraud, yet everyone believes him. You see my point?

No, no you can't. It is much more likely that it was just a football fan who wanted to see an NFL practice. Matt Walsh WAS A VIDEOGRAPHER FOR THE PATRIOTS ORGANIZATION!!!

Really, think about this as if it were any other team. Would you be saying the same thing? Quit being a homer and look at it objectively. I don't think there is any doubt he actually has the tapes. This is a good article as to why he hasn't released them yet.
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/02/19/why-matt-walsh-wont-talk-publicly-explaining-the-indemnificati/

When exactly has Walsh been shown to be a fraud? When Pioli said he was fired for taping conversations with him? Here is a good article about why that is meaningless right now, if that turns out to be true, then it will probably clear the Pats of blame. But it could just as easily be a character assassination attempt. Pioli grasping at straws because he knows they are in trouble.
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/02/18/patriots-planning-strategic-defense-against-matt-walsh-but-argu/

[someone447]

But as of right now, we are all just speculating on everything. Its just a big circle. Around and around. Theres speculation on the video tape, and speculation with the camera at the Patriots practise. Either way, nothing has been proven.

I would be willing to bet anything that Walsh has the tapes. I think that much is obvious.

[Billingsley26]

No, no you can't. It is much more likely that it was just a football fan who wanted to see an NFL practice. Matt Walsh WAS A VIDEOGRAPHER FOR THE PATRIOTS ORGANIZATION!!!

Really, think about this as if it were any other team. Would you be saying the same thing? Quit being a homer and look at it objectively. I don't think there is any doubt he actually has the tapes. This is a good article as to why he hasn't released them yet.
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/02/19/why-matt-walsh-wont-talk-publicly-explaining-the-indemnificati/

When exactly has Walsh been shown to be a fraud? When Pioli said he was fired for taping conversations with him? Here is a good article about why that is meaningless right now, if that turns out to be true, then it will probably clear the Pats of blame. But it could just as easily be a character assassination attempt. Pioli grasping at straws because he knows they are in trouble.
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/02/18/patriots-planning-strategic-defense-against-matt-walsh-but-argu/

Tht article doesnt clarify anything that I didnt already know.

The 2nd article just offers more speculation as to why they think BB and Scott Pioli are wrong. At this point neither parties are being proved wrong or right. It is mere speculation. And still, I would sooner take BB and Piolis word over Walsh's. That wasn't all I was talking about when I referred to Walsh as being a fraud. Piolo exposed him, by going through all these things that Walsh "claimed" to have done, and ran through how they are damn near impossible. It all adds up in the end, and as of right now, Im really having a tough time believing Matt Walsh. And until I do see something that proves me wrong, Im going to stand by that.

[kwilk103]

I would be willing to bet anything that Walsh has the tapes. I think that much is obvious.

i do too; he would have too much to lose by lying; risking playing golf all year while living on maui, for an attempt at bringing down the pats; thats not worth the risk

[Billingsley26]

i do too; he would have too much to lose by lying; risking playing golf all year while living on maui, for an attempt at bringing down the pats; thats not worth the risk

Apparently risk losing his Patriots Seasons Tickets too.
(As Stated in the first article posted by Someone447)

[someone447]

Apparently risk losing his Patriots Seasons Tickets too.
(As Stated in the first article posted by Someone447)

Ya, I got quite a chuckle out of that.

[nfrillman]

And all Patriots fans take turns looking into their magical mirror and asking, "Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the biggest homers of them all?"

So far you have said that the Patriots taping signals doesn't matter because defensive signals change all the time, then you go on to say the taping is for future reference. Seems a tad contradictory. So if the defensive signals do change all the time, why would the Patriots bother taping them if they would be irrelevant so quickly. If the constant change is the truth, then that leaves immediate use as the only reason for taping. I also find it amusing how the main argument that the Patriots didn't cheat is that they said they didn't. Do/did you defend Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Andy Pettite, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Floyd Landis, Marion Jones, Justin Gatlin, and Florida State since they didn't know the academics scandal was happening(just one of many colleges with the problem) so vehemently, because they all claim that they didn't cheat, thus it must be true.

Now for my previous statement that if someone says something that doesn't make sense, or says they did something that doesn't make any sense then they are probably lying. How does that not make sense to you. Seems like a pretty elementary concept.

Oh, and for the record, there are plenty of people who hate the Spurs. They hate them because they play a "boring" style of basketball. If you honestly believe that no one would be upset if the Spurs, Lakers, Redwings, Devils, Cardinals, Red Sox, Colts, Steelers, or any other team cheated to win championships then you are dillusional.

[Jay]

So far you have said that the Patriots taping signals doesn't matter because defensive signals change all the time, then you go on to say the taping is for future reference. Seems a tad contradictory. So if the defensive signals do change all the time, why would the Patriots bother taping them if they would be irrelevant so quickly. If the constant change is the truth, then that leaves immediate use as the only reason for taping.

Actually, that's exactly why the do it. The watch tape of EVERYTHING. E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G. They watch tape on the head coaches to see how his demeanor effects play calling, whether he is quick to give a guy a hook, etc, etc, etc. It's all part of an enormous database that they have on every coach that has ever graced an NFL sideline.

And guess what, by the definition of the rules in the NFL rule book, and more importantly, the memo that went to every team before the season, video taping signals is not against the rules.

You read that correctly. Video taping signals is not against the rules.

Video taping on the sidelines, from the fifth row, or even in the last row of the stadium, however, is. And by video taping, I mean video taping ANYTHING that can be used for coaching purposes. Meaning what the New York Jets did in Foxboro the year before was against NFL rules.

Of course this is where the predictable "waaaaah you're just a homer" nonsense kicks in (and it's ironic that only Patriot fans are allowed to be called homers on this message board, but I digress), let's take a look at said league memo from 9/6/07:

# In a memo to NFL head coaches and general managers on Sept. 6, 2006, NFL executive vice president of football operations Ray Anderson wrote: "Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

NFL rules state "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." They also say all video for coaching purposes must be shot from locations "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

# In the league's Constitution & Bylaws, it reads: "Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

I gathered a lot out of all of that, and what I gathered the most out of it is that it actually is against the rules to video tape anything from any area accessible to club employees... but that as long as you were shooting "from locations enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead," you can tape anything you want.

I also learned that you couldn't use anything but Polaroid-type cameras or the field phone during the game. That's fine. No team has ever been caught using anything other than those two forms of communication to aid their team during the playing of a game. What this message board has taught me is that you're innocent unless you get caught, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the Patriots got caught using video taped signals during a game that was being played. Actually, I know they weren't, because the league said very specifically that they weren't.

But what I gained the most out of all of that is that no one has any ******* clue what the rules actually are. They seem, I don't know, very contradictory to me. Maybe a little, I don't know, open for interpretation?

If this was Tony Dungy, people would give him the benefit of the doubt. But it's Bill Belichick. And that's fine, he did this to himself, I understand people don't like him and never will outside of New England (unless he becomes your coach, then I guarantee you will love him). But how can someone looking at all of that subjectively not see the flaws in the rules and how someone can say they interpreted the rule differently?

And guess what? They can get some of the same stuff by buying tapes from NFL films. I am pretty confident that Bill Belichick does nothing else in his life other than the New England Patriots. That is all he does. He doesn't go on vacations, he doesn't go out to dinner, he goes to work every single day and tries to find different ways to make his team better. Every way. Even if it will help the team in the absolute most remote way, he's looking for that next way to do it. This was just one small part of an overall package. I am saying this one last time:

THIS is the time of year those videos would start to really get broken down. This is when they would really start focusing on their database, that way when the season rolls around, and all the new coaches are in new places, they can pull up their info and really begin to understand what this coach is all about and what to expect from them. It's all part of the process.

And film study in general is a huge part of EVERY NFL team, and the Patriots are as intense studying film

I have absolutely zero doubt that Bill Belichick saw read those rules and felt like there was a gray area in them and went with it. Over the years, he's probably gotten a few dozen memos just like the one he got on 9/6/07 and he's continued to do things the same way because of his interpretation of the rule... and the fact that every single time his interpretation came into question, nothing happened to him.

Guess what, I got a memo on Monday not to use the urinal on the left in the mens room and I still do it anyway, but you can bet your ass I'll keep doing it until someone gets in trouble because the one on the right is gross. I also get memos every week that I'm not supposed to be using the internet at work or text messaging people on my cell phone, but I still do it anyway. And I've been caught doing it, and no one has done anything about it. But you know what? If we get a new boss on Monday, I may not do any of those things nearly as much just to feel them out and see what I can get away with.

Bill Belichick got cocky. He saw the memo and thought it was the same garbage that had been sent to him countless other times. He probably crumpled it up and threw it in the trash. He found out really quick that the new boss wasn't like the old boss, didn't he?

Now all this Matt Walsh stuff... IF it proves to be true and IF Belichick has anything to do with it, there will be no justifying it. I am in complete agreement that IF it is true, that the action itself is inexcusable. It doesn't matter if the act had no impact on the outcome of the game (and IF it happened, it didn't), the action in no way, shape or form can be condoned. That's all there is to it, and I've said that all along.

I just want this guy to say his piece, let it all play out and get it over with. If they f'ed up, they f'ed up, and I'll deal with it then. All this nonsense in between is just getting nauseating.


I also find it amusing how the main argument that the Patriots didn't cheat is that they said they didn't. Do/did you defend Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Andy Pettite, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Floyd Landis, Marion Jones, Justin Gatlin, and Florida State since they didn't know the academics scandal was happening(just one of many colleges with the problem) so vehemently, because they all claim that they didn't cheat, thus it must be true.

I haven't made up my mind on a lot of those people. I believe Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens definitely cheated and did what they did with the sole purpose of getting ahead of the curve. All the evidence said they did.

I believe Andy Pettite made a mistake and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I feel bad for guys that get hurt and need help getting back. He broke the rules to do it but I don't think he was doing it to do anything other than heal.

I think Shoeless Joe Jackson got screwed.

I have no opinion on anyone else because I don't know enough about it.

Basically, I am willing to judge people on a case by case basis.

Now for my previous statement that if someone says something that doesn't make sense, or says they did something that doesn't make any sense then they are probably lying. How does that not make sense to you. Seems like a pretty elementary concept.

Oh, and for the record, there are plenty of people who hate the Spurs. They hate them because they play a "boring" style of basketball. If you honestly believe that no one would be upset if the Spurs, Lakers, Redwings, Devils, Cardinals, Red Sox, Colts, Steelers, or any other team cheated to win championships then you are dillusional.

You said the Spurs. People don't hate the Spurs because of the people on the team, but like you said, the style they play. You also have to define "cheating."

Terry Francona was on the radio and said part of his job is changing his hand signals every game because the other team has cameras on him trying to figure out his signs. He has also commented about a third base coach on another team that he is friends with (I want to say it was the Twins, but I can't remember for sure) giving him crap after games for changing signals throughout the game just when he was figuring them out.

None of this bothers me. There have been teams accused of having cameras in center field for the purpose of stealing the catchers signs. Guys do it at second and tip off pitches all the time. This doesn't bother me. It's part of the game. Every NFL football team, including the Patriots, send advance scouts to opponents games in the weeks leading up to games with the sole intent of figuring out signals, and teams have guys doing it in game. Now why would the Patriots have to do that if they already had everything on video? I mean seriously.

I don't have a problem with any of that stuff. It's stuff that has gone on in the game since before any of us were born, and it will go on in the game after all of this clears up. I'll guarantee you that the Patriots have tape on all the coaches for this year too, but they did it by following the letter of the leagues rule after having it dumbed down to them. As mentioned, most of it is readily available via a nice sized purchase through NFL films on a week to week basis.

And yes, I really did just type all of that.

[nfrillman]

correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the Patriots got caught using video taped signals during a game that was being played. Actually, I know they weren't, because the league said very specifically that they weren't.

And just how in the hell could they have been caught, do they let camera men and reporters into the locker room area (where presumably they would look at said video). So did the league specifically say this after they asked the Patriots to volunteer any taping or information.

THIS is the time of year those videos would start to really get broken down. This is when they would really start focusing on their database, that way when the season rolls around, and all the new coaches are in new places, they can pull up their info and really begin to understand what this coach is all about and what to expect from them. It's all part of the process.

You know this how? Did Bill let you know this is their process. And you know, if Bill says anything that reassures his innocence, we must believe it without question.

Now all this Matt Walsh stuff... IF it proves to be true and IF Belichick has anything to do with it, there will be no justifying it. I am in complete agreement that IF it is true, that the action itself is inexcusable. It doesn't matter if the act had no impact on the outcome of the game (and IF it happened, it didn't), the action in no way, shape or form can be condoned. That's all there is to it, and I've said that all along.

So now when the tape does come out and Belichick says he didn't "authorize" it or know about it, you can profess his innocence because he claims to have no knowledge of it, and it isn't like someone to lie to keep their ass out of the fire. I also like how you are already bracing yourself for the release of the tape by saying that even if it did happen it had no impact on the game. How exactly do you know this. I think it is far more logical to assume that if the cheating did occur then it did impact the game than to say that yeah they cheated but it didn't help. So will that be your new thought process, that no one can prove it had an impact on the game. That argument would hold a lot more weight if the game wasn't decided by 3 points.

It is growing abundantly clear that you and Patriots fans in general will never admit that the Patriots cheated and benefited from it unless Belichick comes forward and says, "We, the Patriots organization, cheated and did benefit from it." Because no matter how much information comes to light you will always maintain that because Belichick says they are innocent or didn't benefit from it then it must be true, since BB is so undeniably truth driven that his sainthood is inevitable.

[someone447]

If this was Tony Dungy, people would give him the benefit of the doubt.

Nope, no I wouldn't. Everyone cheats, everyone lies. I wouldn't be surprised if more than 50% of the NFL uses or has used performance enhancers. There is not a single professional athlete I would be surprised to learn they took performance enhancers. There is not a single coach who I would be surprised to find out did something illegal to gain an advantage.

[LonghornsLegend]

Aww... the poor babies couldn't handle the fact that the Rams might have spied on the Pats and had to lock the thread. That's rich. I think it is hysterical the reaction that thread got, and that people thought it was OK to insult me personally over having the audacity to raise a valid question that was presented six years ago. And to do it all without even knowing my opinion on the situation.

Personally, if it was the Rams and they were spying, I don't care. It doesn't change anything. I would like to thank everyone for proving an enormous point though and that you are all wishing and hoping and dreaming about all of this being true. Calling me a hypocrite is pretty funny considering it's one of those pot-kettle-black situations. But I wouldn't expect anything less from some of those people...


I thought you were joking, I really didnt think you would serious try to correlate a report saying some players "saw a telescope in a window", with the Pats who got caught, stripped of a 1st rd pick and 500k, obviously if you were caught you had more evidence to go off of then "we saw something in the window, then it was gone, but I saw something up there"....


You are a hypocrit sir, and make yourself look worse every time you post regarding this topic. You Lose.

[Jay]

And just how in the hell could they have been caught, do they let camera men and reporters into the locker room area (where presumably they would look at said video). So did the league specifically say this after they asked the Patriots to volunteer any taping or information.

Which is it? Does someone need to be caught for it to be true or can we just speculate about it? Because I am pretty sure the only thing the Patriots were caught doing was filming from an improper location. Nowhere in any of this has it been confirmed that the Patriots used the film in game. As a matter of fact, based on all the evidence Roger Goodell has seen, he said very specifically that none of this had any impact on the game.

But of course, shame on me for buying into what the Commissioner of the NFL says. Because obviously he's not a very credible source.

But until you give me proof that the Patriots used those tapes in game, it didn't happen. Otherwise, I'm just going to assume every other team in the NFL was doing the same thing, and everyone will have to believe it.

You know this how? Did Bill let you know this is their process. And you know, if Bill says anything that reassures his innocence, we must believe it without question.

I don't know, maybe I live in Massachusetts and we hear things you don't, and more specifically, things you wouldn't want to hear anyway. More specifically, there's a guy who spends four hours a day on the radio here named Michael Holley who actually spent an entire year following Bill Belichick around to write his book.

They talk about this on a daily basis. It's common knowledge here. But no one wants to hear it. Because knowing the truth makes it so much harder to hate the Pats.

So now when the tape does come out and Belichick says he didn't "authorize" it or know about it, you can profess his innocence because he claims to have no knowledge of it, and it isn't like someone to lie to keep their ass out of the fire. I also like how you are already bracing yourself for the release of the tape by saying that even if it did happen it had no impact on the game. How exactly do you know this. I think it is far more logical to assume that if the cheating did occur then it did impact the game than to say that yeah they cheated but it didn't help. So will that be your new thought process, that no one can prove it had an impact on the game. That argument would hold a lot more weight if the game wasn't decided by 3 points.

How do you know anything? How does anyone know? No one will ever know. It will ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS be one persons word vs. the others. That will NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER change.

So you've already convicted them guilty. That's fine. A lot of people thought Michael Vick was innocent before his trial.

It is growing abundantly clear that you and Patriots fans in general will never admit that the Patriots cheated and benefited from it unless Belichick comes forward and says, "We, the Patriots organization, cheated and did benefit from it." Because no matter how much information comes to light you will always maintain that because Belichick says they are innocent or didn't benefit from it then it must be true, since BB is so undeniably truth driven that his sainthood is inevitable.

It's growing abundantly clear that you and Patriot haters in general will never admit that you are basing 95% of your opinion purely on speculation and can't differentiate actual cheating

I don't think it's cheating. I know they broke a rule, and I absolutely have no doubt and can guarantee they benefit from having a database on every coach in the NFL readily available as they change jobs to access whenever they need to. And I absolutely guarantee the tapes in question account for about 5% of the video and information that goes into that database and about 2% of the game preparation.

But I also think they benefit from sending advanced scouts to see the next team they are playing with a pair of binoculars to steal signals. So here is the very simple question I have for you: is stealing signals the cheating? I'm not asking you to put any more thought into the question, it's a very, very, very simple question: is stealing signals in any which way cheating?

If you can't answer that question and only that question (read: I don't want to see the word camera once), then don't even bother, you will have proved all that needs to be said.

[Jay]

I thought you were joking, I really didnt think you would serious try to correlate a report saying some players "saw a telescope in a window", with the Pats who got caught, stripped of a 1st rd pick and 500k, obviously if you were caught you had more evidence to go off of then "we saw something in the window, then it was gone, but I saw something up there"....


You are a hypocrit sir, and make yourself look worse every time you post regarding this topic. You Lose.

Learn to spell the word if you are going to baselessly call me names. You might also want to learn the definition of the word while you are at it. I never said the Rams did it. I also wouldn't care if they did. I simply wanted to see the reaction to "accusations" that were made, I don't know, before the actual game itself, and it was totally worth it. A lot of frauds were exposed. It was completely satisfying.

But hey, you tried really hard to get involved. Good for you!

[kwilk103]

this is exhibit a of why i hate pats fans; their blind homerism is annoying

if the tapes gave the pats no advantage, why do it? i mean coaches already put in a ton of hours studying game film, practicing, etc; if it gave them no advantage, why waste time doing it?

pats fans say it was to get the tendencies of coaches, but what different tendencies do you see from taping signals that you wouldnt see from the game film? you can see the down and distance from the film and the play call; just what other tendencies would you get?

and your naive if you think they didnt sync up the signals with the game film and steal the signals

[someone447]

this is exhibit a of why i hate pats fans; their blind homerism is annoying

if the tapes gave the pats no advantage, why do it? i mean coaches already put in a ton of hours studying game film, practicing, etc; if it gave them no advantage, why waste time doing it?

pats fans say it was to get the tendencies of coaches, but what different tendencies do you see from taping signals that you wouldnt see from the game film? you can see the down and distance from the film and the play call; just what other tendencies would you get?

and your naive if you think they didnt sync up the signals with the game film and steal the signals

BUT, BUT THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T DO IT!!! BB IS INNOCENT I TELL YOU, JUST LIKE OJ!!!! PEOPLE NEVER LIE TO SAVE THEIR OWN ASS!!!

[Jay]

this is exhibit a of why i hate pats fans; their blind homerism is annoying

if the tapes gave the pats no advantage, why do it? i mean coaches already put in a ton of hours studying game film, practicing, etc; if it gave them no advantage, why waste time doing it?

pats fans say it was to get the tendencies of coaches, but what different tendencies do you see from taping signals that you wouldnt see from the game film? you can see the down and distance from the film and the play call; just what other tendencies would you get?

Why study game film at all? Why watch different angles of the same play? Why do any of that? If there is a 1% chance it will help his team win, Bill Belichick will use it. He felt like he was following NFL rules in doing so, and considering it went on for at least seven years before someone said "oh hey, by the way, you can't do that," I think he is completely justified in thinking that, for seven years, after being "caught" several times in between, that what he was doing was within the rules.

Your blind ignorance is annoying. People love to hate Belichick, which is why no one is willing to say "OK, I might buy that." No one even wants to address the fact that he has been doing this his ENTIRE coaching career, the LEAGUE has known about it for YEARS, and that they never did anything about it until this year. Why is that?

and your naive if you think they didnt sync up the signals with the game film and steal the signals

And you are naive to think the Patriots would be the only team doing it. You're not going to let me get away with that, so I am not going to let you do the same with absolutely zero proof to back you up.

[Jay]

BUT, BUT THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T DO IT!!! BB IS INNOCENT I TELL YOU, JUST LIKE OJ!!!! PEOPLE NEVER LIE TO SAVE THEIR OWN ASS!!!

Do you have proof that he did it?

[Bigburt63]

this is exhibit a of why i hate pats fans; their blind homerism is annoying

if the tapes gave the pats no advantage, why do it? i mean coaches already put in a ton of hours studying game film, practicing, etc; if it gave them no advantage, why waste time doing it?

pats fans say it was to get the tendencies of coaches, but what different tendencies do you see from taping signals that you wouldnt see from the game film? you can see the down and distance from the film and the play call; just what other tendencies would you get?

and your naive if you think they didnt sync up the signals with the game film and steal the signals

They were caught taping the signals from an ilegal location. Stealing signals in and of itself is simply part of thje game, and all of sports for that matter.
A perfect example of this is when you watch the caoches and players signal the play in. There is usually 1-2 backup QB's signaling in at the same time (for offense) but with dummy signals (more so in college) to prevent the other team from stealing the signals. Teams change their signals all the time, why would they do this other than to prevent stealing signals? You are naive to think that the patriots are the only ones who have done this. Does this condone what they did, no, they did something wrong and got caught and punished.

[someone447]

Do you have proof that he did it?

Dude, how many times do we have to go over this? They would not break the rule if they weren't going to use it. Signals often times change game by game. I think it is pretty damn obvious he used it during games. You don't always need proof to know someone was guilty. OJ was guilty, but where is the proof?

Like I said before, I have no problem with them cheating. But they got caught cheating, so it is time to accept the consequences. One of those consequences is increased scrutiny. Another is that no one will believe you if you are accused of cheating again, especially when the cheating once again involves illegally taping something.

[Jay]

You didn't answer the question. Do you have proof that they used the video in game? I want a yes or a no, not you doing the Macarena around the question.

And OJ Simpson was found guilty in a court of law. Bad example.

[CC.SD]

I can't believe this thread is still going. Is anything new being said?


Poster: Clearly the Patriots cheated, everyone in the entire world has come to this conclusion, and now we're just waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Jay: The other shoe hasn't dropped quite yet!



Seriously man, you're going to be mad at how much time you wasted typing out these responses when the process really gets going (which we haven't seen yet) and the Pats get the smackdown they deserve. Cheating to win 3 championships is no joke.

Then again, I'm not sure how much more needs to be done by the NFL and Specter. Hypothetically, sure I'd like to see the Patriots get punished, and maybe see some asterisks, but from a historical standpoint, the damage is already done. Nothing is ever going to redeem the 2001, 03-04 Championships in the eyes of the public.

[Jay]

I will never think the camera issue on the sidelines was a big deal. And clearly you guys are avoiding the facts and just talking tough over and over again, so I have a pretty hard time taking you seriously. Read the facts. Do it, I dare you.

But I have never said that the New Orleans incident would be OK if it actually happened. I have said very specifically otherwise. So I don't know where you're getting this stuff.

And why is it no one wants to answer one very simple question?

Is stealing signals (in any way) cheating?

Have some guts and answer the question. I want yes or no. No story. Answer the question.

[kwilk103]

You didn't answer the question. Do you have proof that they used the video in game? I want a yes or a no, not you doing the Macarena around the question.

And OJ Simpson was found guilty in a court of law. Bad example.

oj was found innocent in the court of law

there is 2 compeletely different ways to be convicted; its much easier to be convicted in a civil suit than in a criminal case

[kwilk103]

Is stealing signals (in any way) cheating?

Have some guts and answer the question. I want yes or no. No story. Answer the question.


its not a simple yes or no answer; if youre looking at signals and trying to interpret them, then no its not cheating

if youre taping them, and have the ability to go back and look at them, then yes

[someone447]

I will never think the camera issue on the sidelines was a big deal. And clearly you guys are avoiding the facts and just talking tough over and over again, so I have a pretty hard time taking you seriously. Read the facts. Do it, I dare you.

But I have never said that the New Orleans incident would be OK if it actually happened. I have said very specifically otherwise. So I don't know where you're getting this stuff.

And why is it no one wants to answer one very simple question?

Is stealing signals (in any way) cheating?

Have some guts and answer the question. I want yes or no. No story. Answer the question.

I have read the facts. It is you who needs to critically examine those facts. As much as I dislike BB, I am a football fan first and foremost(even ahead of the Packers.) I would hate for the NFL to be embarrassed like the MLB has been. That is what is happening. It sucks. I hope Walsh is lying. But the evidence just doesn't match up to it. The evidence points to the Pats being cheaters.

Sometimes, I know it isn't the answer you want, but it isn't black and white. Stealing signals in baseball isn't cheating, unless you have a mechanical advantage. It is the same in the NFL. What the Patriots did was cheating. Do other teams do it? I would be naive to think otherwise. Can you understand what the difference is? THE PATRIOTS GOT CAUGHT!!!!!!!!!!

You want proof? Like I said before, it is quite obvious Walsh has the tapes.
That is proof.

[someone447]

And OJ Simpson was found guilty in a court of law. Bad example.

No, OJ was found Not Guilty. He was forced to pay in a civil court, it doesn't have to be beyond a reasonable doubt. For all legal intents and purposes, OJ was innocent.

That statement just shows how good you are at deciphering facts.

[broth223]

And why is it no one wants to answer one very simple question?

Is stealing signals (in any way) cheating?

Have some guts and answer the question. I want yes or no. No story. Answer the question.

The answer to this question is absolutely maybe. By which I mean there is no written rule against sign steeling. That said the Patriots were punished under the "Unfair Acts" section in the NFL Rulebook. http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/unfairacts

This has to be the broadest mandate in all of sports. So in other words the commish calls it cheating and they were punished accordingly. Really the Goodell could have just as easily told the Jets to P!$$ off and not punished the Pats at all.

So really I have to go with whatever Goodell says at this point. People say Oh its not enough! Get those cheating bastards! As a fan of a team that was "Victimized" by the pats (not a pats fan) I think the Spygate thing is blown out of proportion.
And I will just sit here and wait for what Goodell has to say because he didn't have to do a damn thing.

[Billingsley26]

The answer to this question is absolutely maybe. By which I mean there is no written rule against sign steeling. That said the Patriots were punished under the "Unfair Acts" section in the NFL Rulebook. http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/unfairacts

This has to be the broadest mandate in all of sports. So in other words the commish calls it cheating and they were punished accordingly. Really the Goodell could have just as easily told the Jets to P!$$ off and not punished the Pats at all.

So really I have to go with whatever Goodell says at this point. People say Oh its not enough! Get those cheating bastards! As a fan of a team that was "Victimized" by the pats (not a pats fan) I think the Spygate thing is blown out of proportion.
And I will just sit here and wait for what Goodell has to say because he didn't have to do a damn thing.

Theres your answer to the question right there.

[Jay]

No, OJ was found Not Guilty. He was forced to pay in a civil court, it doesn't have to be beyond a reasonable doubt. For all legal intents and purposes, OJ was innocent.

That statement just shows how good you are at deciphering facts.

OJ Simpson was found liable by a court and a jury of his peers in the Civil case. He wasn't forced to pay. He didn't settle. He was found liable. He was found to be responsible for their deaths.

Again, bad example. Nice try.

[Jay]

its not a simple yes or no answer; if youre looking at signals and trying to interpret them, then no its not cheating

if youre taping them, and have the ability to go back and look at them, then yes

Yes, it is a simple question of yes or no. And that's all I wanted for an answer: YES or NO.

If you can't give a one word answer, then don't even bother answering the question because you have been exposed.

[Jay]

And what does the NFL Competition committee have to say?

Competition committee on Patriots
Link|Comments (0) Posted
by Mike Reiss, Globe Staff February 21, 2008 01:03 PM

INDIANAPOLIS -- Members of the NFL Competition Committee just addressed media members here at the combine. Co-chairman Rich McKay indicated that the committee received details regarding the Patriots' taping procedures.

"This morning, we spent a lot of time on the issue of the New England tape situation, just getting a briefing, an understanding of the procedures and everything that went into it," McKay said. "They took us through the investigation, what they did, and what transpired and what they found. They asked our opinion on the penalty, and if there were any suggestions we had that we needed to do from a rules perspective to address it."

Members of the committee seemed to agree that there was nothing from a rules perspective that needed to be further addressed to avoid the situation in the future.

Another member of the committee, Colts president Bill Polian, shared his opinion on the NFL's investigation of the Patriots.

"From my perspective, that was a thorough, fair, efficient process with lots of integrity," he said. "I think its fair to say we [as a committee] were satisfied with the explanation, satisfied with what was done, and at least I am anyway. It's behind us. It's time to move forward."

Giants co-owner John Mara also shared his thoughts of the Patriots' taping procedures.

"I can't speak for everybody else, but I'm just tired of hearing about it," he said. "I think we're all satisfied that it was thoroughly investigated."

So... if the biggest Patriot hater in the NFL, Bill Polian, is satisfied with their explanation, I'm feeling pretty good about the situation...

[adamprez2003]

Well Goodell hopes to talk to Walsh shortly. Soounds like an agreement is soon to be announced

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AoCHNxBVmasx94.d44AKLPBDubYF?slug=ap-goodell-walsh&prov=ap&type=lgns

Hard to say about the other two but if tapes turn up of Rams practices, the Patriots will be stripped of that title

[CC.SD]

And what does the NFL Competition committee have to say?



So... if the biggest Patriot hater in the NFL, Bill Polian, is satisfied with their explanation, I'm feeling pretty good about the situation...

It's pretty clear you're not though. Look at all the time you're spending rebutting all these responses. Look at your attempts at witty dismissals and put downs. You're trying to make yourself feel better, because it is incredibly obvious that the Patriots are seriously, seriously in the wrong here. It's classic guilty behavior. You should be angry at BB and Kraft for allowing this to happen; the easiest way to make it right is to come clean and start over. THAT's where the pressure and effort should be; not justifying cheating. If you're uncomfortable with my use of the word cheating, let's say "morally ambiguous attempts to gain the upper hand."

Anyone looking at this thread objectively can see just how insecure the Patriots fans are, understandably, feeling these days. I'm sure it really sucks, but it's time to take a step back and breathe some fresh air.

[Jay]

So what happens if it comes out if Matt Walsh has nothing?

[kwilk103]

OJ Simpson was found liable by a court and a jury of his peers in the Civil case. He wasn't forced to pay. He didn't settle. He was found liable. He was found to be responsible for their deaths.

Again, bad example. Nice try.

he was also found innocent in court by a jury of his peers in the criminal trial

he did not murder his wife and the other guy (i forget the relationship)

everyone will tell you that he was found innocent; no one really cares he was found guilty in a civil suit; its so much easier to be found guilty in a civil suit

[kwilk103]

So what happens if it comes out if Matt Walsh has nothing?

idk, if it were to go to the senate, he could get tried for perjury

i highly doubt he would go through all this trouble, and risk a lawsuit and a possible perjury charge if he has nothing

[CC.SD]

he was also found innocent in court by a jury of his peers in the criminal trial

he did not murder his wife and the other guy (i forget the relationship)

everyone will tell you that he was found innocent; no one really cares he was found guilty in a civil suit; its so much easier to be found guilty in a civil suit

Bill Belichick's new book: "If I Taped Them."

[someone447]

OJ Simpson was found liable by a court and a jury of his peers in the Civil case. He wasn't forced to pay. He didn't settle. He was found liable. He was found to be responsible for their deaths.

Again, bad example. Nice try.

He was found not guilty of committing the murder. He was found liable in a wrongful death suit. He was still NOT GUILTY. That was the verdict in his case. The civil case has no bearing on his guilt in the double murder. The courts finding of not guilty means that in the eyes of the law he committed no murder. The civil case did not determine he had committed murder, although it was implied.

[someone447]

So what happens if it comes out if Matt Walsh has nothing?

Well, he gets sued by everyone involved with the NFL, his lawyer possibly gets disbarred because he knowingly helped perpetuate fraud, and the Patriots are in the clear.

But it isn't going to happen. He wouldn't claim to be in possession of tapes and risk so much if he didn't have them. He would have just came out and talked about taping the rams walkthrough. He wouldn't have claimed to actually HAVE the tapes.

[someone447]

I do have to say, this is being blown WAY out of proportion.

A class action lawsuit? A senate investigation? Doesn't our government have bigger fish to fry? Shouldn't they try to figure out a way to stop Americans from getting killed in Iraq, schools, or by diseases? But no, they are more concerned with steroids in baseball and illegal taping in football.

AMERICA **** YEAH!...

[Jay]

idk, if it were to go to the senate, he could get tried for perjury

i highly doubt he would go through all this trouble, and risk a lawsuit and a possible perjury charge if he has nothing

Why would he get tried for perjury? If he has nothing, they'll find out before they ever get to court...

[Jay]

He was found not guilty of committing the murder. He was found liable in a wrongful death suit. He was still NOT GUILTY. That was the verdict in his case. The civil case has no bearing on his guilt in the double murder. The courts finding of not guilty means that in the eyes of the law he committed no murder. The civil case did not determine he had committed murder, although it was implied.

He was found to be responsible for their deaths in a court of law. Otherwise he wouldn't have been financially responsible. It's pretty simple. And at this point, it's semantics.

[kwilk103]

Why would he get tried for perjury? If he has nothing, they'll find out before they ever get to court...

reading comprehension

i said if it were to go before the senate, and he lied, it could lead to a perjury charge

[kwilk103]

He was found to be responsible for their deaths in a court of law. Otherwise he wouldn't have been financially responsible. It's pretty simple. And at this point, it's semantics.

being responsible and killing someone are 2 completely different things

if you ask 100 people, if oj was convicted in court, 100 people will say he was found not guilty

[Jay]

Well, he gets sued by everyone involved with the NFL, his lawyer possibly gets disbarred because he knowingly helped perpetuate fraud, and the Patriots are in the clear.

But it isn't going to happen. He wouldn't claim to be in possession of tapes and risk so much if he didn't have them. He would have just came out and talked about taping the rams walkthrough. He wouldn't have claimed to actually HAVE the tapes.

1. He won't get sued by anyone because he's not singing unless he gets complete and total indemnity.

2. I've seen a lot of "unnamed sources" saying that a tape exists, but I have never seen a direct quote from Matt Walsh saying that he has tapes.

I've heard that because of the one week between the Conference Championships and the Super Bowl, the Patriots and Rams shared all video and audio equipment that week. That might explain how he came across the tape, and sure would be a whole lot different then him actually hiding somewhere in the Super Dome

Everyone wants to know why he's doing this. I want him to come up with whatever he does or doesn't have and get it over with more than anyone. I just don't understand why everyone has labeled him guilty without finding the dogs buried in the back yard with all the dog fighting and breeding paraphernalia.

If they did it, they did it. I've said it over and over again. I just don't understand why people think it is OK to throw baseless accusations and speculation everywhere and assume it is factual information. I don't think it's much to ask for people to wait and see what he does or doesn't have and go from there.

[Jay]

reading comprehension

i said if it were to go before the senate, and he lied, it could lead to a perjury charge

Reading comprehension: they won't go to senate if he has nothing.

[Jay]

being responsible and killing someone are 2 completely different things

if you ask 100 people, if oj was convicted in court, 100 people will say he was found not guilty

That's obviously not the case because I disagree.

[someone447]

That's obviously not the case because I disagree.

That is because you are an idiot. It is a FACT that OJ was found not guilty in the murders. There is no room for an opinion there. He was found NOT GUILTY in a court of law.

[Bengals1690]

1. The New York times is a random site?
2. That was the point, to prove people will jump all over Pats fans for A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G.

Let me repeat that:

A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G

There's nothing ridiculous here. I have as much proof that the Rams spied on the Patriots as you have that the Patriots spied on the Rams. Yet I'm the asshole, and in trying to point out the hypocrisy of the situation, get called a hypocrite. It's humorous.

Suggest the Pats did something, completely unfounded, and the pile on effect begins.

But a Pats fan suggest someone else might have done something wrong, and the tears start to well up and we are either:

1. Hypocrites
2. Making excuses
3. Need to stop worrying about what other teams do.
4. Ridiculous/stupid/dummy-heads and a bunch of other second grade words.

All I want is consistency. People WANT the Pats to be the bad guys. They WANT to make this more than it is. It's a joke, and I am sick of it.



If Charlie Manson and Some other guy are both suspects in the same murder case, whos the public gonna think did it? Charlie Manson. Why? Because hes done it before.
The Patriots brought all this hate and people jumping on them onto themselves. I know probably 32 NFL teams cheat, but i also know that only 1 has been caught in the act.

and someone claiming to have tapes is much different than "seeing a telescope in a window".

[someone447]

1. He won't get sued by anyone because he's not singing unless he gets complete and total indemnity.

2. I've seen a lot of "unnamed sources" saying that a tape exists, but I have never seen a direct quote from Matt Walsh saying that he has tapes.

I've heard that because of the one week between the Conference Championships and the Super Bowl, the Patriots and Rams shared all video and audio equipment that week. That might explain how he came across the tape, and sure would be a whole lot different then him actually hiding somewhere in the Super Dome

Everyone wants to know why he's doing this. I want him to come up with whatever he does or doesn't have and get it over with more than anyone. I just don't understand why everyone has labeled him guilty without finding the dogs buried in the back yard with all the dog fighting and breeding paraphernalia.

If they did it, they did it. I've said it over and over again. I just don't understand why people think it is OK to throw baseless accusations and speculation everywhere and assume it is factual information. I don't think it's much to ask for people to wait and see what he does or doesn't have and go from there.

1. He has to have the tapes for the indemnity to be valid. He will have to turn over the stolen tapes. If he doesn't, his indemnity doesn't work.

2. His lawyer says he has tapes. That is why I said his lawyer could be disbarred if he doesn't have the tapes. I am assuming his lawyer has seen the tapes. He is a pretty crappy lawyer if he takes any client at face value.

[someone447]

He was found to be responsible for their deaths in a court of law. Otherwise he wouldn't have been financially responsible. It's pretty simple. And at this point, it's semantics.

No, it isn't. He was found not guilty. That means he is considered by the United States to be not guilty of those murders. The fact that he was held liable in a civil case has no bearing on his guilt. This is not semantics. There are very specific words to use when referring to law. OJ is NOT GUILTY of the murder of Ron Goldman and Nicole Simpson. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. A civil case CANNOT, i repeat, CANNOT determine the guilt of someone in a criminal matter.

[CC.SD]

The OJ metaphor is officially played out.

He was found not guilty, but seriously; come on. Did the one armed man do it? No.

[someone447]

The OJ metaphor is officially played out.

He was found not guilty, but seriously; come on. Did the one armed man do it? No.

Everyone knows he did it. That was the exact point. People lie to stay out of trouble. That is what Jay doesn't understand.

[Jay]

No, it isn't. He was found not guilty. That means he is considered by the United States to be not guilty of those murders. The fact that he was held liable in a civil case has no bearing on his guilt. This is not semantics. There are very specific words to use when referring to law. OJ is NOT GUILTY of the murder of Ron Goldman and Nicole Simpson. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. A civil case CANNOT, i repeat, CANNOT determine the guilt of someone in a criminal matter.

I never said that it had any effect on the criminal case. But it does imply that, according to that jury in that court of law, he was responsible for their deaths. How can you interpret it any other way? They didn't settle out of court, he was actually found to be responsible for those deaths. Considering they were murdered,

So it kind of is semantics at this point, because we're both arguing about two different and what means what. The difference here is that I am not going to bring my personal opinion on the criminal case into play. It doesn't matter what I think, I agree that he was found innocent in that case. But he was found guilty in another. I am sure we all think one court got it right and another got it wrong. But that doesn't matter. A court found him responsible for those deaths. To me, that makes him guilty. The fact that it was in civil court is only the difference between him going to jail and him having to pay a lot of money. Guilty is guilty.

A better example for both sides of our arguments would be Michael Vick and Richard Jewel.

When the Michael Vick situation started, it started just like this, with speculation. Then there were bodies along with craploads of evidence, and people still stuck to the "innocent until proven guilty routine," even though every shred of evidence pointed toward him being guilty as sin. And he lied his way through it all until he reached a dead end. That is a case where I think it is OK to pass judgment before a definitive conclusion has been reached. It was all there, it just needed to go through the formalities (though I am sure there are those that thought the same thing about the OJ case).

Then there is Richard Jewel, a guy who the media absolutely destroyed and essentially convicted of being responsible for the Atlanta Olympics bombings. Then something funny happened and it came out that he really had nothing to do with it, and there was never any evidence to support him being involved to begin with. So after spending weeks and months persecuting the man, they spent a day saying sorry and moved on to the next story, because they are the media and they can do those types of things. That man fought until his death with people labeling him as guilty regardless of the facts.

Right now, you seem to think the Patriots are Michael Vick and I seem to think they are Richard Jewell with respect to the start of their ordeals. I'm not saying the Super Bowl situation didn't happen. I hope it didn't. I don't know one way or another if it did, and realistically, none of us do. I guess what I am asking is for people to let the facts come out, let the situation come to a conclusion and let's go from there.

One way or another, I think this is something we ALL want to go away.

[nfrillman]

Jay, you are really starting to act quite moronic with all your, "Is stealing defensive signals cheating, answer yes or no, no explanation, yes or no, if you can't you are exposed, MUWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!"

Thats like asking, "Hey, is killing someone illegal? Yes or no, no explanation." Well you know what, you can kill someone in self defense, but it is also illegal to just kill people. All questions aren't yes or no answers.

Want another example, how about this, "Is it illegal to drive 40 over the speed limit? Yes or no." Well, if you are hauling ass to get someone to a hospital before they die, they will let that go, but in general it is indeed illegal to drive 40 over. Again, it isn't a cut and dry yes or no answer.

Need another? "Is taking drugs to enhance athletic ability cheating?" Yes or no, answer it, no you can't use any explanation. If you say Yes then you are saying no one can drink protein shakes, use creatine, take an advil to subdue a headache before a game, etc. But be careful, because if you say No then you are promoting the use of anabolic steroids and HGH. Yes or No, pick one. YOU HAVE BEEN EXPOSED!!!!!!!!!!!! MUWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! I AM SOOOO SMART BY COMING UP WITH THAT QUESTION!!!!!!!!!! EITHER WAY THEY ANSWER I CAN SLAM THEM!!!!!!!!!! Simply put, that yes or no question you are asking is freaking idiotic.

[nfrillman]

I will never think the camera issue on the sidelines was a big deal. And clearly you guys are avoiding the facts and just talking tough over and over again, so I have a pretty hard time taking you seriously. Read the facts. Do it, I dare you.

But I have never said that the New Orleans incident would be OK if it actually happened. I have said very specifically otherwise. So I don't know where you're getting this stuff.

And why is it no one wants to answer one very simple question?

Is stealing signals (in any way) cheating?

Have some guts and answer the question. I want yes or no. No story. Answer the question.

You say that you don't condone the illegal taping of the Rams if it happened, but you are also already saying that if it did happen it had no effect on the game. So you really are being a big man about this, if the Patriots did illegal tape the Rams it was a bad thing to do, but alas it didn't matter anyways. So basically you are willing to admit that if they taped them it was illegal (cheating), but unwilling to say it affected the game. I can already see where you are headed with this, "But no one can prove they used it for the game" Somewhere in that dillusional heart and mind of yours, you know that you can never be 100% certain that the Patriots Superbowls were legit, and that tears you up.

[Bigburt63]

You say that you don't condone the illegal taping of the Rams if it happened, but you are also already saying that if it did happen it had no effect on the game. So you really are being a big man about this, if the Patriots did illegal tape the Rams it was a bad thing to do, but alas it didn't matter anyways. So basically you are willing to admit that if they taped them it was illegal (cheating), but unwilling to say it affected the game. I can already see where you are headed with this, "But no one can prove they used it for the game" Somewhere in that dillusional heart and mind of yours, you know that you can never be 100% certain that the Patriots Superbowls were legit, and that tears you up.

It was brought up earlier (I'm not sure by whom) that the tapes focused on what the rams planned to do in the redzone. The rams scored every time they were in the redzone during the superbowl, thus making the arguement that the tapes did not aid them.

[Bigburt63]

Also, I don't see the NFL being able to strip the patriots of the suberbowl victories regardless of what is on the tapes, as it cannot be proven that they were actually used (at least not by the mere presence of the tapes). I am fairly certain that the patriots could sue the nfl for taking away the trophy, championship etc. without proving that they actually cheated.

[kwilk103]

It was brought up earlier (I'm not sure by whom) that the tapes focused on what the rams planned to do in the redzone. The rams scored every time they were in the redzone during the superbowl, thus making the arguement that the tapes did not aid them.

so, basically youre saying since the tapes did not aid them, then its ok?

they attemted to gain an advantage, but it didnt work, so that makes it ok?

if you are, then i dont even know what to say

[Jay]

You say that you don't condone the illegal taping of the Rams if it happened, but you are also already saying that if it did happen it had no effect on the game. So you really are being a big man about this, if the Patriots did illegal tape the Rams it was a bad thing to do, but alas it didn't matter anyways. So basically you are willing to admit that if they taped them it was illegal (cheating), but unwilling to say it affected the game. I can already see where you are headed with this, "But no one can prove they used it for the game" Somewhere in that dillusional heart and mind of yours, you know that you can never be 100% certain that the Patriots Superbowls were legit, and that tears you up.

The act itself is wrong. No doubt about it. That on is one subject on its own.

But whether or not it had an impact on the game is another. It didn't, and I can say that with absolute certainty and even the biggest of haters can't disagree. The Rams have come out and said that the only thing they did during that specific session is walk through red zone plays.

They scored every time they were in the red zone, and didn't get there for the first time until there were 8 minutes left in the fourth quarter.

And they scored.

So no, it did not impact the final score of the game if it happened. I don't see how anyone can say that it did. If the Rams came out and said they walked through the first 15 plays of the game... different story.

I would have no problem with someone being pissed about the act itself, but I would take issue with someone thinking that it had any impact on the final score. Because it clearly didn't. It couldn't have. If the Rams didn't score in the red zone, there would be beef, and I'd buy it.

But that didn't happen. And I have the ability to separate the two issues.

[Jay]

so, basically youre saying since the tapes did not aid them, then its ok?

they attemted to gain an advantage, but it didnt work, so that makes it ok?

if you are, then i dont even know what to say

No one is saying that, and no one will ever say that. It would not be OK if it happened.

It just turns out that it didn't have any impact on the game.

[kwilk103]

thats what youre implying; it didnt have an impact, so the tape didnt matter

[Jay]

In terms of the game itself... it proved not to matter. At all.

That's not condoning the action. I can't even see how you would make that distinction.

[TACKLE]

I don't understand what Matt Walsh has to gain from this. If the tapes have nothing significant than he looks like a fool. If they tapes do have footage of the Rams walk-through, BB and the Patriots can say they did not authorize him to do so and that he did it on his own. This is the same man who was fired from his job for tape recording conversations he had with his boss. He is definitely does not seem like a credible, high-character individual and seems like one who may even be called a rat. Either way Walsh leaves this whole thing looking foolish.

[Bigburt63]

I don't understand what Matt Walsh has to gain from this. If the tapes have nothing significant than he looks like a fool. If they tapes do have footage of the Rams walk-through, BB and the Patriots can say they did not authorize him to do so and that he did it on his own. This is the same man who was fired from his job for tape recording conversations he had with his boss. He is definitely does not seem like a credible, high-character individual and seems like one who may even be called a rat. Either way Walsh leaves this whole thing looking foolish.

That's what I've been saying. Unless he has some mystery 3rd party that is going to come out of left field at some point to try and prove that it was authorized, I don't see how he can prove it or how he benfits.

[Bigburt63]

so, basically youre saying since the tapes did not aid them, then its ok?

they attemted to gain an advantage, but it didnt work, so that makes it ok?

if you are, then i dont even know what to say

Exactly as Jay said, If the patriots actually did this, then I think it is unexcusable. They should not have done it, regardless of whether or not it helped them or not.

[someone447]

That's what I've been saying. Unless he has some mystery 3rd party that is going to come out of left field at some point to try and prove that it was authorized, I don't see how he can prove it or how he benfits.

The tapes are proof enough. If a murder weapon is found and it belongs to a certain person, odds are very likely that person committed the murder. This is the same situation.

[Dam8610]

If he really has these tapes, he should turn them over to senator Spector or sell them to the media. If the NFL gets their hands on them, they'll destroy them, just like the first set of tapes they confiscated.

[someone447]

If he really has these tapes, he should turn them over to senator Spector or sell them to the media. If the NFL gets their hands on them, they'll destroy them, just like the first set of tapes they confiscated.

The NFL will turn them over to Spector. They have no choice.

[Bigburt63]

The tapes are proof enough. If a murder weapon is found and it belongs to a certain person, odds are very likely that person committed the murder. This is the same situation.

Key word "likely." Posession does not prove that he was the one to use it. Perhaps the weapon was stolen, or borrowed. The owner is of course the first place you look, but it doesn't prove anything.
The situation as of right now shows that he cannot prove the tapes were actually used by the patriots. Of course this could change somehow, but as of right now that is the situation.

[Jay]

The NFL will turn them over to Spector. They have no choice.

Sure they do. They are a private company and can do whatever they want within their disciplinary system.

Furthermore, if the tapes do exist, and are in fact stolen, either from the Rams or Patriots, it would not be admissible evidence in a court of law.

Hopefully this can clear up soon so that Spector can get back to his [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory]Magic Bullet Theory[/b] and pandering to Comcast's beck and call.

Arlen Spector has zero credibility. Even the yahoo Patriot haters should be able to see through him.

[someone447]

Sure they do. They are a private company and can do whatever they want within their disciplinary system.

Furthermore, if the tapes do exist, and are in fact stolen, either from the Rams or Patriots, it would not be admissible evidence in a court of law.

Hopefully this can clear up soon so that Spector can get back to his [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory]Magic Bullet Theory[/b] and pandering to Comcast's beck and call.

Arlen Spector has zero credibility. Even the yahoo Patriot haters should be able to see through him.

It is ridiculous they are doing it. It would not be going to a court. It would be a senate investigation that will end up in absolutely no criminal charges.

I will tell you exactly how it will go if Specter gets completely involved.

Walsh will show Goodell the tapes and go to the media with the story. Goodell will severely punish the Patriots. Probably everything short of stripping titles. BB will retire so he isn't banned, but he will in effect be banned from the league. Specter will launch a senate investigation. Goodell will demand the Patriots hand over the tapes. The Patriots will hand over the tapes so they don't face even more punishment from the NFL. Specter will demand the tapes from Goodell. Goodell will give him the tapes. The Senate investigation will come to the conclusion that Goodell did enough to punish them. The whole thing will be over in two years.

The tape will get to Specter AND they will be admissable, because either the Patriots or the NFL will hand them over. It will be a moot point, because the senate won't punish them anyway.

[CC.SD]

I'm not starting a new thread for this, but here's more allegations. Apparently a former Pats player is talking to somebody.

New Claim of Taping Emerges Against Patriots

New York Times
By JOHN BRANCH and GREG BISHOP
Published: February 22, 2008

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/sp...=1&oref=slogin

"INDIANAPOLIS — The Patriots’ pattern of illicitly videotaping the signals of opposing N.F.L. coaches began in Coach Bill Belichick’s first preseason with the team in 2000, a former Patriots player said. The information was put to use in that year’s regular-season opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Belichick’s debut as New England’s coach..."

"...Questions linger about how much of an advantage the Patriots may have had if they intercepted defensive signals. Under Belichick, the Patriots have often run a no-huddle offense, which forces opponents to quickly call a defensive play. N.F.L. rules allow quarterbacks to hear instructions from coaches — through a headset and into a speaker in the quarterback’s helmet — until there are 15 seconds left on a play clock. When the defensive play call is deciphered, the Patriots could call a play to counteract. The Patriots lost the 2000 opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, when videotape of signals was used in preparation, according to the former Patriots player, who was among several former players interviewed by the N.F.L but said he did not want to speak publicly because the investigation is continuing..."

"In the hallway at the convention center here, Mike Martz wanted to talk about his new job as San Francisco’s offensive coordinator. Instead, reporters peppered him with questions about the Patriots. Martz was the coach of the Rams when the teams met in the Super Bowl six years ago.

He took exception to the theory that the Patriots could not have gleaned much information from taping the walkthrough. He said indeed they could, but added that was not the point.

" “For somebody to say that, it’s kind of disgusting,” Martz said. “The whole point is if they really cheated. To say he took some steroids and it did help or it didn’t help, that’s never the point. The point is, to all these high school coaches and high school kids and college kids, that if they did cheat, that’s the point.” "

[someone447]

Key word "likely." Posession does not prove that he was the one to use it. Perhaps the weapon was stolen, or borrowed. The owner is of course the first place you look, but it doesn't prove anything.
The situation as of right now shows that he cannot prove the tapes were actually used by the patriots. Of course this could change somehow, but as of right now that is the situation.

In almost every case, the owner of the gun will be convicted, unless he has an alibi. It won't fly for him to say it got stolen, but he never reported it.

Those tapes are a smoking gun. Let's say that Walsh did tape without being told to. Now, don't you think he would take it to BB? Do you honestly think ANY NFL coach would turn down the opportunity to see film of a closed practice? If the tapes exist(and it seems pretty certain they do) BB saw those tapes. There is no doubt in my mind. There would be no reason for Walsh to sneak in and tape it if he wasn't going to give it to BB.

[someone447]

post

And the hits keep coming.

Where there is smoke, there is fire.

[Jay]

That article is purely speculation and very bad journalism. I can't believe someone would actually print that. The Colts run a no huddle too... THEY MUST BE CHEATING.

And yeah, we know he's been doing it since 2000, and he did it with the Browns too.

[someone447]

That article is purely speculation and very bad journalism. I can't believe someone would actually print that. The Colts run a no huddle too... THEY MUST BE CHEATING.

And yeah, we know he's been doing it since 2000, and he did it with the Browns too.

Dude, the only part that really had any bearing on what we were talking about was the former player. That part wasn't speculation.

[Bigburt63]

In almost every case, the owner of the gun will be convicted, unless he has an alibi. It won't fly for him to say it got stolen, but he never reported it.

Those tapes are a smoking gun. Let's say that Walsh did tape without being told to. Now, don't you think he would take it to BB? Do you honestly think ANY NFL coach would turn down the opportunity to see film of a closed practice? If the tapes exist(and it seems pretty certain they do) BB saw those tapes. There is no doubt in my mind. There would be no reason for Walsh to sneak in and tape it if he wasn't going to give it to BB.

Dude, what are you talking about? Posession of a gun does not automatically mean that person will be convicted. It more than likely will be enough evidence to bring charges against them (they will be CHARGED not necessarily convicted). And I will say it again, the tapes in and of themselves are not proof that the patriots filmed the practice prior to the superbowl in 2001. All that it proves is that Walsh actually taped the walkthrough (he wouldn't go through this without having actually done it, I think we can all agree to that). Now, if he has some sort of other evidence that links BB or another coach to either a) having ordered the tapes, or b) having used the tapes, then the story is different. Until that evidence arises, everything is based on pure speculation.

[LonghornsLegend]

That article is purely speculation and very bad journalism. I can't believe someone would actually print that. The Colts run a no huddle too... THEY MUST BE CHEATING.

And yeah, we know he's been doing it since 2000, and he did it with the Browns too.

I like how all this evidence and claims keep popping up, and your so defensive with your little patriots you cloud your judgement.


But I guess EVERYONE hates the pats, and we know you love using that excuse so lets keep it going...all the senators hate the pats, the people who keep talking hate the pats, walsh hates the pats, anyone who comes out with an article not soaking up the praises hates the pats, get off your high horse...


When everyone was sucking up to the pats all year long on tv and magazines everything was fine, now that its some negative light shown towards your team, it CANT be true, because your a fan and you said so...and there is no way your team could do all these things, everyone is just hating on he pats:rolleyes:


you look worse and worse, I cant wait for you to go into hiding once another penalty comes towards the pats.