Specter wants answers from NFL RE: Spygate Tapes

[SirFozzie]

You gotta be kidding me. Two days before the Super Bowl? I guess Specter's just a frustrated Eagles fan that his team lost in the Super Bowl to the Pats and is using his power to cause havoc.


Chalk one up for the Easterbrook-types, you know the mad conspiracy-theorists..

Maybe, you know because A) The original tape had leaked out quicker then you can say "Call a plumber", B) If some but not all tapes had been leaked, the clubs who were the subject of the tapes would have been subject to a competitive disadvantage, and C) What use would it be to keep them? I don't think that they'd be suitable for an NFL Films document.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3225539

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) wanted to hear the NFL's explanation for the purging of evidence in the infamous "Spygate" case involving the New England Patriots. He wrote commissioner Roger Goodell on Nov. 15. He got no response.

Specter, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote Goodell again more than a month later, after getting no acknowledgment to the initial communication.

Two days before the Super Bowl, there is plenty of response.

In a phone interview Thursday with The New York Times, Specter said the committee at some point will call on Goodell to discuss why the league destroyed the tapes that revealed the Patriots had been spying on the competition.

"That requires an explanation," Specter told The Times. "The NFL has a very preferred status in our country with their antitrust exemption. The American people are entitled to be sure about the integrity of the game. It's analogous to the CIA destruction of tapes, or any time you have records destroyed."

An NFL spokesman told The Times that Specter's letters did not reach the league until late last week, and there was no mention of the letters on the occasions the two parties had communicated on other issues. Specter said his office had been told by the NFL that there would be no response until after Super Bowl XLII.

Spygate came to the forefront in September, when New York Jets security officials discovered a Patriots video assistant recording the Jets' defensive signals during the Sept. 9 game at Giants Stadium. The videocamera and tape were confiscated. Goodell also ordered the Patriots to turn over all videotape, notes and files involving taping of opponents' signals.

The Patriots got hit by the most severe penalty in NFL history -- coach Bill Belichick was fined $500,000, the team was fined $250,000 and also will lose a first-round pick in the draft in April.

Subsequently, the league said it had destroyed the tapes after looking at them. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello, in a September e-mail to ESPN.com, wrote that the reason for destroying them was "so that our clubs would know they no longer exist and cannot be used by anyone."

Specter, a lifelong Philadelphia Eagles fan who still calls sports radio stations on Monday mornings, said he was concerned about the integrity of sports.

"I don't think you have to have a law broken to have a legitimate interest by the Congress on the integrity of the game ... What if there was something on the tapes we might want to be subpoenaed, for example? You can't destroy it. That would be obstruction of justice," Specter said to The Times.

There is no timetable for when the committee would call upon Goodell, who has a previously scheduled news conference Friday morning in Phoenix.

The possibility exists that Patriots employees or other NFL personnel would have to testify before the committee.

"It's premature to say whom we're going to call or when," Specter said. "It starts with the commissioner. He had the tapes, and he made the decision as to what the punishment could be. He made the decision to destroy them."

[rkmsuf]

give it a rest already

[stevew]

Fuck the RINO. I can't wait till he retires or dies.... although then we'll get stuck with another Philly politician in the senate, most likely Spendell.

[SirFozzie]

"I don't think you have to have a law broken to have a legitimate interest by the Congress on the integrity of the game ... What if there was something on the tapes we might want to be subpoenaed, for example? You can't destroy it. That would be obstruction of justice," Specter said to The Times.

In other words, don't destroy anything, ever, because somewhere, sometime, some senator might want to subpoena it.

I also love how he compares it to the CIA destroying tapes.

[rkmsuf]

Specter wants answers from NFL RE: Spygate Tapes


He already got his answer. It was "fuck off".

[ISiddiqui]

He already got his answer. It was "fuck off".

His response: Bye, bye anti-trust exemption :cool:

[rkmsuf]

yeah, that will happen

[Pumpy Tudors]

Why is this "Spygate" shit even still coming up? It shouldn't have been such a big story when it came up months ago, and it sure as hell shouldn't be such a big story now.

[Galaxy]

Always glad to see our government focusing on the important issues.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Oh, this isn't about Rachel Specter? Never mind, then.

[Cringer]

This is dumb.

/expert analysis

[Ksyrup]

"I believe that I have no more significant responsibility than protecting the integrity of the game and promoting public confidence in the NFL, and that our actions in response to the Patriots' taping was entirely consistent with that responsibility."


I demand that Quiksand open an investigation into the Commissioner's appalling grammar.

[rkmsuf]

I want to know who actually destroyed the tapes. Did they call in Ed Hochuli to tear them apart with his bare hands?

Maybe Najeh Davenport shit on them.

[MalcPow]

Unreal.

[Passacaglia]

"I don't think you have to have a law broken to have a legitimate interest by the Congress on the integrity of the game ... What if there was something on the tapes we might want to be subpoenaed, for example? You can't destroy it. That would be obstruction of justice," Specter said to The Times.

Wow and wow.

[Axxon]

"I don't think you have to have a law broken to have a legitimate interest by the Congress on the integrity of the game ... What if there was something on the tapes we might want to be subpoenaed, for example? You can't destroy it. That would be obstruction of justice," Specter said to The Times.
r
In other words, don't destroy anything, ever, because somewhere, sometime, some senator might want to subpoena it.

I also love how he compares it to the CIA destroying tapes.

Sorry Fozzie but in this case, if you're going to get special tax status that no one else enjoys then I'm afraid the government could very well ask this in reference to keeping that status. Certainly there are issues that are not illegal per se but would influence this special status.

Seems fair to me if my government is giving away my money that you'd have to be accountable for your business. No one is saying that Joe Citizen would be treated the same way so your objection doesn't work. Nice hyperbole though!

Personally on this issue the american public has clearly shown that they have no problems with rule breaking, lack of integrity or morals from their heroes so why should a senator care? Hero worship has clearly supplanted god worship and many would say that's a plus because they can then once in a while back a winner even if the winner plays by a different set of rules. It's neato.

That's the more honest hyperbole IMHO. ;)

[Axxon]

Dola,

to make my point perfectly clear we've gone from a "Say it ain't so Joe" society to "don't say shit Joe, we don't care anyway, you entertain us" society.

[gstelmack]

What exactly is the special tax status they get? As I understand it, they have an exemption that lets them negotiate TV deals as a league rather than as 32 individual teams. I'm not aware of any other special privileges they receive. And that's not enough to dig into this type of competitive issue (I actually think it's a fairly minor privilege that pretty much every league does.

Now, if they want to dig deeper into NFL Network and how Sunday Ticket violates the "we'll give you this privilege as long as you make sure the games are widely available" proviso that was part of the original agreement that gave the NFL this ability, then Congress has a case.

[Crapshoot]

Awesome - why don't you people have the same objections when they pull this shit with baseball? (and for those who do, I appreciate the consistency).

[Passacaglia]

Sorry Fozzie but in this case, if you're going to get special tax status that no one else enjoys then I'm afraid the government could very well ask this in reference to keeping that status. Certainly there are issues that are not illegal per se but would influence this special status.

Seems fair to me if my government is giving away my money that you'd have to be accountable for your business. No one is saying that Joe Citizen would be treated the same way so your objection doesn't work. Nice hyperbole though!

Personally on this issue the american public has clearly shown that they have no problems with rule breaking, lack of integrity or morals from their heroes so why should a senator care? Hero worship has clearly supplanted god worship and many would say that's a plus because they can then once in a while back a winner even if the winner plays by a different set of rules. It's neato.

That's the more honest hyperbole IMHO. ;)

What do you mean by 'the government' in that post?

[Passacaglia]

I mean, it's one thing if we're talking about tax breaks and financial documents, but this is a body enforcing its own rules. It's like asking my company for evidence that the list of who brings in treats each Tuesday is being done in a fair manner.

[BishopMVP]

Crapshoot, I'm pretty sure most people on this board have been against the way Congress has treated the steroid issue."I don't think you have to have a law broken to have a legitimate interest by the Congress on the integrity of the game ... What if there was something on the tapes we might want to be subpoenaed, for example? You can't destroy it. That would be obstruction of justice," Specter said to The Times.Legal scholars of the board - that's not obstruction of justice is it? Destroying something that shows nothing illegal prior to receiving word of any investigation?

[MalcPow]

What exactly is the special tax status they get? As I understand it, they have an exemption that lets them negotiate TV deals as a league rather than as 32 individual teams. I'm not aware of any other special privileges they receive. And that's not enough to dig into this type of competitive issue (I actually think it's a fairly minor privilege that pretty much every league does.

Now, if they want to dig deeper into NFL Network and how Sunday Ticket violates the "we'll give you this privilege as long as you make sure the games are widely available" proviso that was part of the original agreement that gave the NFL this ability, then Congress has a case.

This is right. The NFL's antitrust exemption is pretty limited and pertains to its ability to negotiate broadcast rights collectively. It does not have the broad rights that MLB is afforded that allow it to block franchise movement and even contract or eliminate teams against the will of their owners. There's certainly no tax benefit being granted. You could even argue that the wild success of the NFL increases tax income through ticket sales, merchandising, salaries, etc.

[mckerney]

Oh great, another senator wants to go play Kennesaw Mountain Landis. This asshole needs to get back to writing bad checks.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Oh great, another senator wants to go play Kennesaw Mountain Landis. This asshole needs to get back to writing bad checks.
Folks we got some bad news, at this point we started both TWB Stuff on my dynasties but failed., anyhow we will start a new Dynasty that is similar to Time Warp Baseball except with Real MLB Players from 1901 to Now. (Like Ken Griffey Jr., Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Gaylord Perry, Babe Ruth, Honus Wagner, and much more.) and new created players by users across the OOTP Dev. Forum, and a new twist to top it off when we reach 1980 students boys and girls (Like Jay Jianoran), and Former Beauty Pageant Contestants (Miss Teen USA, Miss USA, Miss Universe, etc.) so will begin at 1901.

(Shot: Branch Rickey's House)

PROLOGUE: IN AD 1901 MLB WAS CHANGED

Branch Rickey (Talking to Himself): What Happened?, Someone Changed the League, We Get Signal, What?, Open this Door, It's You!

Kenesaw Mountain Landis: How are you Branch!, All Your Baseball are Belong To Us, you are on the way to fix MLB!

Branch: what you say?

Kenesaw: You get to own The Baseball Players Association, make your time., (Kenesaw Laughs)

And so the season has just begun.

To Be Continued...............

[Axxon]

What exactly is the special tax status they get? As I understand it, they have an exemption that lets them negotiate TV deals as a league rather than as 32 individual teams. I'm not aware of any other special privileges they receive. And that's not enough to dig into this type of competitive issue (I actually think it's a fairly minor privilege that pretty much every league does.

Now, if they want to dig deeper into NFL Network and how Sunday Ticket violates the "we'll give you this privilege as long as you make sure the games are widely available" proviso that was part of the original agreement that gave the NFL this ability, then Congress has a case.

I don't think its universal that sports get the exemption.

hxxp://espn.go.com/mlb/s/2001/1205/1290707.html


I'd say if WWE gets the same exemption then leave the NFL alone but if the integrity of the league is why the NFL has a right that other leagues don't then it's fair to verify whether the NFL still deserves it since integrity of the league has been sullied at least.

If it's such a minor exemption then fine, let them drop it and no one complains. People can see another pseudo sport adopt the time honored "lie, cheat and steal" motto because we know people eat that up and those of us who want to watch sports events can know to look elsewhere.

If the exemption is meaningful, and Specter isn't just doing this now.

2006
hxxp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/07/AR2006120701608.html

2007
hxxp://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/12/20/senate-may-take-a-look-at-nfl-antitrust-exemption-to-end-nfl-net/

I don't see why the league which is basically not allowing its services to be viewed by the public should get ANY benefit from the government and if the results of said league are called into question because they are not determined fairly on the field then I want them to have it even less.

If football is so popular there's no reason for it to have any exemptions and if it isn't popular enough to stand without them, then tell me again, why the public should be giving this to them. How important is a sport anyway?

Last, isn't this the type of question that a conservative is supposed to ask? How can he be a RINO if he's asking about cutting a government entitlement?

[Axxon]

Folks we got some bad news, at this point we started both TWB Stuff on my dynasties but failed., anyhow we will start a new Dynasty that is similar to Time Warp Baseball except with Real MLB Players from 1901 to Now. (Like Ken Griffey Jr., Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Gaylord Perry, Babe Ruth, Honus Wagner, and much more.) and new created players by users across the OOTP Dev. Forum, and a new twist to top it off when we reach 1980 students boys and girls (Like Jay Jianoran), and Former Beauty Pageant Contestants (Miss Teen USA, Miss USA, Miss Universe, etc.) so will begin at 1901.

(Shot: Branch Rickey's House)

PROLOGUE: IN AD 1901 MLB WAS CHANGED

Branch Rickey (Talking to Himself): What Happened?, Someone Changed the League, We Get Signal, What?, Open this Door, It's You!

Kenesaw Mountain Landis: How are you Branch!, All Your Baseball are Belong To Us, you are on the way to fix MLB!

Branch: what you say?

Kenesaw: You get to own The Baseball Players Association, make your time., (Kenesaw Laughs)

And so the season has just begun.

To Be Continued...............

I've read that dynasty guy. Wasn't he on greydog with this??

[Izulde]

I've read that dynasty guy. Wasn't he on greydog with this??

OOTP boards for certain, as I remember him.

[Axxon]

This is right. The NFL's antitrust exemption is pretty limited and pertains to its ability to negotiate broadcast rights collectively. It does not have the broad rights that MLB is afforded that allow it to block franchise movement and even contract or eliminate teams against the will of their owners. There's certainly no tax benefit being granted. You could even argue that the wild success of the NFL increases tax income through ticket sales, merchandising, salaries, etc.

It also allows them to use their monopoly powers to select who can and can't see it's product which grants it a boatload of money and limits access to their product, you know, taxpayers.

I don't see the problem. If you want any special favors, no matter how small, you have to be willing to play by the rules and if they want to change the rules on you, that's life.

Oh wait, we know how the NFL treats rule breakers. ;)

[Axxon]

OOTP boards for certain, as I remember him.

I knew I had read him. He was a blast. Funny guy.

[cartman]

Oh, this isn't about Rachel Specter? Never mind, then.

Damn, I miss those body spray commercials.

[Passacaglia]

It also allows them to use their monopoly powers to select who can and can't see it's product which grants it a boatload of money and limits access to their product, you know, taxpayers.

I don't see the problem. If you want any special favors, no matter how small, you have to be willing to play by the rules and if they want to change the rules on you, that's life.

Oh wait, we know how the NFL treats rule breakers. ;)

Can't anybody select who can and can't see its product? How do they use their "monopoly powers" to do that? I'm assuming you mean on television, and not in person -- as far as I know, anyone can buy a ticket to an NFL game.

[Axxon]

Can't anybody select who can and can't see its product? How do they use their "monopoly powers" to do that? I'm assuming you mean on television, and not in person -- as far as I know, anyone can buy a ticket to an NFL game.

Yes, I mean on television not in person. To discuss the particulars either of my previous links show that this is precisely the issue that has driven Senator Specter for years. It's not so much that we can't get directv but that the NFL has given directv a monopoly and won't allow any other providers to bid against them thus limiting anyone in the country without a south facing view from getting the NFL.

[gstelmack]

Awesome - why don't you people have the same objections when they pull this shit with baseball? (and for those who do, I appreciate the consistency).

The baseball / steroid issue involves actual lawbreaking.

Of course, as pointed out elsewhere, I believe that most on this board think even the baseball thing is a bit out there for Congress.

[gstelmack]

It also allows them to use their monopoly powers to select who can and can't see it's product which grants it a boatload of money and limits access to their product, you know, taxpayers.

And yet Congress won't look into how the NFL is treading on thin ice here (as I pointed out above). I think they have a legitimate reason to hold hearings on the NFL related to the exemption, this just isn't it.

Your apartment complex has a legitimate right to enter your apartment for maintenance purposes, but not to come in, grab a beer from your fridge, and plop down on the couch to watch the tube.

[Axxon]

The baseball / steroid issue involves actual lawbreaking.

Of course, as pointed out elsewhere, I believe that most on this board think even the baseball thing is a bit out there for Congress.

I believe Congress should get out of the sports business altogether and drop all exemptions and protections for these rich businesses but for some reason, although these protections are trivial as you pointed out before, the sports themselves fight tooth and nail to keep them. Hmm, wonder why???

[Axxon]

And yet Congress won't look into how the NFL is treading on thin ice here (as I pointed out above). I think they have a legitimate reason to hold hearings on the NFL related to the exemption, this just isn't it.

Your apartment complex has a legitimate right to enter your apartment for maintenance purposes, but not to come in, grab a beer from your fridge, and plop down on the couch to watch the tube.

Actually, I don't think we're that far apart. I want the exemptions gone and I welcome any inquiry into this if it can be justified. I believe they have better issues as you do but I think any issue is valid until we get a solution that actually serves the public interest which the current system doesn't.

[Axxon]

Dola, my apartment complex gets money from me so I deserve protections. The government is providing exceptions for them. That's a proactive benefit with no reciprocation. Thats how I see it.

If that's wrong my thought is wrong but if you want a benefit from me I can make you justify it or drop the benefit. I don't have to even have a reason, you're getting a bennie.

Kinda different arguments it seems to me.

[MalcPow]

Here's the thing, the DirectTV package is only limiting your ability to watch whatever game you want, wherever you are, if you happen to be in a location that can't accomodate an installation. Plenty of people have access to viewing professional football games, they just don't have full control over what game they're viewing.

Here's why the NFL fights to maintain its own particular exemption. It understands that its growth and great success is largely attributable to the national TV contracts it has been able to negotiate and sign as they have allowed the league to market its product to a much wider audience. Removing the exemption would fractionalize broadcast negotiations and force networks to negotiate terms with teams individually or even encourage some popular teams to form their own networks or distribution channels. Those popular teams would probably then decide it is less and less in their interest to share their lucrative revenues with teams that have no real chance to reciprocate and many of the league's franchises begin to wither and die because they can't remain profitable in an environment like that. Networks will bid big money to air Cowboys games, they won't bid crap for the Bills. So what happens? You see far fewer games than you already do, you pay more for the games you do see, and many of the league's teams face a crippling financial environment.

I think Easterbrook spends way too much time ranting on all this, but I've always assumed his approach was to "threaten" removal of the exemption to force the NFL to provide a better alternative to Sunday Ticket. Actually removing the exemption is extremely likely to create an environment like the one described above. There are too many incentives for the popular teams to slowly move toward their own deals, and nowhere near enough demand for the smaller teams to bring in the kind of money they get through a share of the collective contracts.

That's what I see at least. *shurg*

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Dola, my apartment complex gets money from me so I deserve protections. The government is providing exceptions for them. That's a proactive benefit with no reciprocation. Thats how I see it.

If that's wrong my thought is wrong but if you want a benefit from me I can make you justify it or drop the benefit. I don't have to even have a reason, you're getting a bennie.

Kinda different arguments it seems to me.

You missed the part where in fact the government is actually getting money from the NFL; and quite a lot in taxes generated by its existence (from teams paying tax to the income tax paid the parking attendant).

Let's turn it around a bit. Your analogy is faulty because it attempts to draw a connection between two unrelated issues. The exemption with enforcement of the game rules.

However, if we do apply your analogy, then I could make a pretty good argument that just because a company is given a tax break for investing in R&D, it should have to open up its entire corporate existence to the government, such as disclosing its secret recipe or formula for its product, etc. or changing the way the company decides who gets the reserved parking spaces by the front door. No, that is not a proper avenue for government intrusion. The government should be limited to being able to pry into the corporation's business as it relates to how it spends its money on R&D to get the exemption.

Likewise, the government's interest here should be limited to how the NFL operates with respect to its televising of NFL games, AND NOT how it determines to enforce its game rules -- the very rules the NFL itself propagated. I'd also argue that under your analogy, you would also be in favor of the government requesting that all holding penalties be 15 yards instead of 10 because, hey we're giving you an exemption.

[nfg22]

I have a question. Why is the government able to even bring up an issue that has to do with a game. It has nothing to do with them. Even steriods in the government is stupid, but at least that has a little health issue. Can someone explain any logical basis for this being a factor to the govenment?

[JonInMiddleGA]

This is pretty much as absurd as Congress trying to get involved with the NFL TV deal. Wait, scratch that ... this is more absurd than that (and I find that to be one of the most absurd things in my 40 year lifetime).

At least with steroids in baseball (and wrestling), there's ostensibly some criminal activity involved. And I guess there's at least the possibility of the TV being some violation of their anti-trust exemption.

But this? Damned if I can find any legitimate reason for Congress to be involved in any fashion. Somebody ought to put Specter out of our misery. Then again, given his degree of lunacy I'm surprised he isn't the frontrunner for the presidency.

[gstelmack]

So I see rumors today (which apparently the NFL investigated months ago and rejected) that the Pats taped a Rams walkthrough before their first Super Bowl victory.

I'm finally at the point that, as a Pats fan, I welcome all these stories in the week before the Super Bowl, as I'm convinced it just fires this team up more, and we're getting closer and closer to some of the 537-3 predictions I've seen from celebs...

[ColtCrazy]

At the very least, you have to admit it was slightly odd to have the tapes destroyed within a week of seeing them. Did Goodell even look at them? If the NFL really wanted this to all go away, they should have announced what was on the tapes, what the punishment was, and move on. You'd still have the asteriks freaks against the Pats, but you'd move on as a league. There's something more here. Maybe it's insignificant, but why alll the secrecy then? Just tell us so we stop hearing about this every few months.

[miami_fan]

Thank goodness this was reported by a Boston paper.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

At the very least, you have to admit it was slightly odd to have the tapes destroyed within a week of seeing them. Did Goodell even look at them? If the NFL really wanted this to all go away, they should have announced what was on the tapes, what the punishment was, and move on. You'd still have the asteriks freaks against the Pats, but you'd move on as a league. There's something more here. Maybe it's insignificant, but why alll the secrecy then? Just tell us so we stop hearing about this every few months.

Where have you been? They did exactly what is bolded above. Goodell previously said what was on the tapes (taping of sideline coaches in several games); he fined them, took away a draft pick; and then moved on.

They destroyed the tapes so quickly because it only took one day after they got them for some footage be leaked to Jay Glazer and put on TV.

But as said already, this will do nothing but make it even more likely the Pats will win big tomorrow.

[Arles]

Kurt Warner's been stirring up the pot on this all night out here in Phoenix. I've been around town and heard two interviews where he basically said that the Rams had 7 plays inside the red zone in the final quarter and the only one they scored on was the one play they didn't use in their "red zone walkthrough" the day before.

Again, it sounded a lot like sour grapes, but he sounded pretty adament that this needed to be investigated. Then again, Kurt might have been the only one not drinking tonight, so maybe he just needs to lighten up. ;)

[mrsimperless]

The NFL is apparently not funneling enough money their way. For shame.

The only conspiracy theories that aren't true are the ones planted by the conspirators themselves to discount the truth.

[Galaril]

Where have you been? They did exactly what is bolded above. Goodell previously said what was on the tapes (taping of sideline coaches in several games); he fined them, took away a draft pick; and then moved on.

They destroyed the tapes so quickly because it only took one day after they got them for some footage be leaked to Jay Glazer and put on TV.

But as said already, this will do nothing but make it even more likely the Pats will win big tomorrow.


And also taint the Pats "Dynasty" for alltime rightly or not.

[Maple Leafs]

If the story about taping the Rams turns out to be true, it's going to be huge news. It will make the controversy from the Jets game seem like nothing. And rightly so.

That said, my understanding is that the Pats are accused of taping the Rams red zone walkthrough. That's pretty scummy, but the Rams didn't have any red zone possessions until the fourth quarter last time and they scored a touchdown (albeit on a QB sneak they never practised), so hopefully the "Pats won by cheating" storyline won't get blown out of proportion.

[Dr. Sak]

If the story about taping the Rams turns out to be true, it's going to be huge news. It will make the controversy from the Jets game seem like nothing. And rightly so.

That said, my understanding is that the Pats are accused of taping the Rams red zone walkthrough. That's pretty scummy, but the Rams didn't have any red zone possessions until the fourth quarter last time and they scored a touchdown (albeit on a QB sneak they never practised), so hopefully the "Pats won by cheating" storyline won't get blown out of proportion.

Take this with a grain of salt but Kurt Warner was on the radio and said the only play that the Rams were able to convert (and score on) in their red zone offense was a play that was not in their package the day before in the walk through.

[molson]

Any team that gets caught breaking rules should be punished, but since when have we been so moralistic about sports? Red Auerbach used to turn up the heat in the visiting locker room. Spitballs are remembered fondly in baseball. Teams have signed low-level cast offs from their rivals to get information for as long has sports have been around. Jimmy Johnson had an intern go through the opposing team's trash.

Yawn. The Rams should have secured their practices better (and worked Marshall Faulk into the offense just a little bit).

[Wolfy]

Any team that gets caught breaking rules should be punished, but since when have we been so moralistic about sports? Red Auerbach used to turn up the heat in the visiting locker room. Spitballs are remembered fondly in baseball. Teams have signed low-level cast offs from their rivals to get information for as long has sports have been around. Jimmy Johnson had an intern go through the opposing team's trash.

Yawn. The Rams should have secured their practices better (and worked Marshall Faulk into the offense just a little bit).

Love to see that story's link.

[SirFozzie]

Love to see that story's link.

After seeing the footage, former Cowboys and Dolphins coach Jimmy Johnson - who works as a host on Fox's pregame show - said on the show: "This is exactly how I was told to do it 18 years ago by a Kansas City Chiefs scout. I tried it, but I didn't think it helped us."

Johnson added that "every team has got a file on the other team. I used to send an intern up to the opposing coach's box after the game and go through the trash. Because after the game, what do they do? They take their game plan and their scouting reports and throw them away. My intern would get all of that stuff and put it right in the file."

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2007/09/17/report_belichick_earns_new_deal/?page=2

9/17/2007

[Wolfy]

After seeing the footage, former Cowboys and Dolphins coach Jimmy Johnson - who works as a host on Fox's pregame show - said on the show: "This is exactly how I was told to do it 18 years ago by a Kansas City Chiefs scout. I tried it, but I didn't think it helped us."

Johnson added that "every team has got a file on the other team. I used to send an intern up to the opposing coach's box after the game and go through the trash. Because after the game, what do they do? They take their game plan and their scouting reports and throw them away. My intern would get all of that stuff and put it right in the file."

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2007/09/17/report_belichick_earns_new_deal/?page=2

9/17/2007

3 minutes, impressive. Thanks!

[larrymcg421]

Not sure Jimmy Johnson is who you want to defending the integrity of your team.

[molson]

Love to see that story's link.

So were you calling me a liar? :)

[molson]

Not sure Jimmy Johnson is who you want to defending the integrity of your team.

I wasn't defending their integrity. If you try to read it closer you might get my point. It might help to read it out loud if you're having trouble.

[larrymcg421]

I wasn't defending their integrity. If you try to read it closer you might get my point. It might help to read it out loud if you're having trouble.

I got your point. The thing is, people have been moralistic about Jimmy Johnson, including me, who absolutely despised him while coach of the Dolphins. That's why I don't think he was the best example to use.

[Wolfy]

So were you calling me a liar? :)

Nope or I would have been clear about it. :)

I remember hearing that story about the trash cans but thought it was from a different Coach.

[Alan T]

So, my biggest hope with the Pats losing the superbowl is that all of this rediculously dumb spygate stuff will just die now. This has to be one of the dumbest storylines in the history of dumb, and it just got to annoying levels.

If this could happen, it would really make last night one of the best superbowls I've watched! :)

[Ksyrup]

If the story about taping the Rams turns out to be true, it's going to be huge news. It will make the controversy from the Jets game seem like nothing. And rightly so.

That said, my understanding is that the Pats are accused of taping the Rams red zone walkthrough. That's pretty scummy, but the Rams didn't have any red zone possessions until the fourth quarter last time and they scored a touchdown (albeit on a QB sneak they never practised), so hopefully the "Pats won by cheating" storyline won't get blown out of proportion.

I don't get this line of reasoning at all. At this point, it really doesn't matter whether the Pats got an unfair advantage. All that matters is whether they did it, and it can be proven. If so, Belichick will have lied to the Commish, and he'll be in serious trouble. My guess is that if Goodell gets enough evidence to make a public conclusion that Belichick lied to him about the extent of the taping, then he will be suspended for a year, and the organization will lose multiple draft picks and get hit with an insane fine.

He may only get a couple of unsubstantiated comments from these "sources," and maybe he doesn't feel like he's got enough to call Belichick to the carpet for them. But if there's a smoking gun, I think he's in serious trouble. As with Bonds, Clinton, et al, it's always the lie that brings them down. The effect of the cheating is secondary at this point.

[rkmsuf]

who gives a fuck

[Dr. Sak]

who gives a fuck

Sleep it off man...

[rkmsuf]

Sleep it off man...

I mean really. Bunch of turdherders bitching about this stuff.

I hope the Giants paid off the offensive line of the Pats to throw it. I could care less.

[Dr. Sak]

Interesting article in the NYTimes Today...

New Claim of Taping Emerges Against Patriots (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/sports/football/22patriots.html?ex=1204261200&en=7b8ddff987863917&ei=5099&partner=TOPIXNEWS)

[dime]

NOTHING TO SEE HERE, FOLKS...MOVE ALONG...

there is a difference between gamesmanship and some sort of technology arms race; the nfl doesn't want the team with the fewest scruples and biggest a-v club to have an advantage.

it is ironic that the first time the patriots actually, clearly had the best team on the field they lost the super bowl. those other teams weren't that great to begin with, but now their accomplishments are even more suspect. I thought that vinatieri was their MVP, now it would appear to be their motorola rep.

[Autumn]

I'm a Pats fan, and have tried to remain so this far into the mess, but it's getting more and more disappointing. It's clear the league wants to sweep this under the rug, because it looks ugly. It's also clear the rest of the league, while willing to go along with the party line somewhat, isn't willing to all get painted with the "Everybody does it" brush. I hadn't realized that the "reminder memo" was a direct result of the Patriots being caught taping earlier, and the fact that Belichik has been doing this from day one while knowing it's illegal leaves me really disgusted.

I enjoyed rooting for these Pats the last few years, because it was fun how scrappy they were, seeming always to find some way to win without investing in a philosophy or set of players. Knowing that taking unfair advantages might been part of that repertoire or the source of their luck makes it just stink.

I do imagine this is going to get uglier before it goes away.

[Anthony]

i'm glad this is happening to Belichek.

[rkmsuf]

man the spelling is still horrible

[Anthony]

i don't like him enought to care how to correctly spell his last name.

[rkmsuf]

well whoever this Belichek guy is can't be happy about these allegations

[Horizon]

Is anyone pointing the finger at the NFL Commissioner?

If there was some funny business that happened behind closed doors between the Commissioner and the owner of the Patriots who would investigate this? Could some fellow NFL owners be behind Specter's investigation?

What do you do as an owner if you are in a league where you think your Commissioner has done something wrong?


A President/Commissioner erasing tapes should always be a redflag. :)

[dime]

Is anyone pointing the finger at the NFL Commissioner?

If there was some funny business that happened behind closed doors between the Commissioner and the owner of the Patriots who would investigate this? Could some fellow NFL owners be behind Specter's investigation?

What do you do as an owner if you are in a league where you think your Commissioner has done something wrong?


A President/Commissioner erasing tapes should always be a redflag. :)


well we do know that goodell flat-out lied to everyone in his little speech at the time; he essentially said that the patriot spying was limited to 07 when he knew that it had been happening since day 1 of the belichick era.

that's why it's ridiculous for the nfl and the pats to insist that this was "already investigated" and that they see no point in talking to specter.

[Anthony]

it's only a matter of time until the Great Reveal.


i'm calling it now.



all of pro sports is a farce. from PEDs. to league sanctioned spying to determine outcomes. to doping professional cyclists. to Olympic judges with their own agenda. to shady boxing promoters. to referee's on the take. every professional sport where money can be made, there is something illegal going on. right now we're in the same era like when reality tv 1st came out. we assumed it was all real and authentic, heck, that's why its called "reality tv". then as time went on we've come to understand that even reality can be scripted. now we look back on the height of reality tv and think "how could anyone have ever thought this was real". decades from now we're going to look back on sports in the 21st century and the latter 20th century and mock ourselves for being so naive. sure, there'll still be professional sports, much like professional wrestling didn't disappear as people learned the outcome of the matches were already preplanned. professional sports will be just like wrestling - entertainment - no longer a battle of athleticism.

it's coming. i'm telling you. within a decade. just one entire farce that extends to all sports.

[dime]

David Stern wants to know if Hell Atlantic's widow would like a corsage ahead of time.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Apparently SPECTRE should turn around and investigate Mike Shanahan and the Broncos.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-historynflcheating&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

"More recently, the San Diego Chargers increased their security several years ago at a hill overlooking the practice field at the team facility during weeks when they played the Denver Broncos. Why? It turns out Broncos coach Mike Shanahan had been hiring spies to videotape the Chargers practices. The NFL had been aware of it for several years (at least one NFL official had seen one of the tapes), but didn't step in because it was considered a team issue." - Jason Cole

I am more convinced that whatever the Pats have done is par for the course (although maybe more creative), and if/when more shit hits the fan, it will hit numerous teams.

[dime]

I am more convinced that whatever the Pats have done is par for the course (although maybe more creative), and if/when more shit hits the fan, it will hit numerous teams.


reading between the lines, it seems that the spygate stuff is gaining momentum because so many coaches and owners DO NOT do this kind of thing and resent the notion the pats/nfl are encouraging that "everyone does it". the reactions to the patriots possibly taping the rams' walkthru on the superbowl, etc have not been kind. lovie smith said something to the effect of "I don't believe someone would do that". stupid? yeah he probably is, but it takes a lot to shock an nfl coach.

[Arles]

We'll see. One of the reasons this is still relevant (despite the obvious desire of Goodell to move on) is that so many coaches and GMs are upset that the opiniona you just made are forming by some fans. I think the more people that push this as a "league-wide" issue to downplay the involvement by NE - the more the owners/coaches/GMs will want the investigation to continue.

[Arles]

reading between the lines, it seems that the spygate stuff is gaining momentum because so many coaches and owners DO NOT do this kind of thing and resent the notion the pats/nfl are encouraging that "everyone does it". the reactions to the patriots possibly taping the rams' walkthru on the superbowl, etc have not been kind. lovie smith said something to the effect of "I don't believe someone would do that". stupid? yeah he probably is, but it takes a lot to shock an nfl coach.
Had I seen this comment before I posted, I could have just posted an "I agree" ;)

[Arles]

The Competition Committee seems to disagree with you dime
The competition committee is looking out for the best interests of the league. And, a scandal involving one of the top franchises for the past 6-7 seasons is not good for the NFL.

What's interesting, though, is while the committee as a whole has been following the league. Three of the eight members (McCay, Fisher and Richardson) have all made comments about how the issue is not a simple misunderstanding and that the investigation should continue when/if more info comes out. All three used the exact rationale Dime and I listed above to back this up (ie, don't want people to think it's widespread).

[dime]

The Competition Committee seems to disagree with you dime

I don't think so...the nfl has their talking points in order, the teams the pats beat in the superbowl are coming out and saying they don't care, it wouldn't have mattered and stuff like that. but the competition committee was never involved in the initial "investigation" and it's clear that there wasn't really any investigation at all -- because goodell didn't want the truth to get out. the only quotes I've seen from the committee was jeff fischer saying that the rule belichick claims to have misinterpreted for 7 years "does not need clarification or rewriting, it is very, very clear"

[Noop]

Spin Control. Couldn't have happen to a better bunch of fans.

[stevew]

If everyone is doing this, I'd love to see them called out on it them. Putting aside my obvious unwavering disdain for the Patriots(and Arlen Specter), it would be nice to maybe see a bit more transparency in the process. If this was par for the course, then the Patriots shouldn't lose any picks.

I'd be inclined to think that other people do some shady shit, Shananahan would be on the top of my list for that BTW.

[jeff061]

We'll see. One of the reasons this is still relevant (despite the obvious desire of Goodell to move on) is that so many coaches and GMs are upset that the opiniona you just made are forming by some fans. I think the more people that push this as a "league-wide" issue to downplay the involvement by NE - the more the owners/coaches/GMs will want the investigation to continue.

And more than a few of Belichick's peers would not mind to see him suffer. He's an ass.

[GreenMonster]

Just heard on the radio that a former Pats player said they used to get "audible sheets" one hour before the game. He said they just kinda appeared. I can't wait to hear about this.

It was LB Ted Johnson.

[Ksyrup]

Admittedly, I kinda tuned out on this over the past month or so, but then I read this:

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell struck an aggressive tone about Matt Walsh, a former Patriots (http://www.fannation.com/tags/show_tag/17) video assistant, saying Wednesday that at some point he will run out of patience waiting for a resolution to negotiations aimed at persuading Walsh to reveal what he knows about New England's videotaping practices. Goodell seemed to be turning up the pressure on Walsh to come to an agreement. He emphasized that Walsh was free to talk at any time because there is no confidentiality agreement with the Patriots (http://www.fannation.com/tags/show_tag/17). When asked if he would eventually let Walsh fade away if no agreement could be reached, Goodell was adamant that he would not.

Now, am I completely off-base - or "misremembering" - or wasn't the whole issue of Walsh wanting protection from the NFL premised on some sort of agreement he had with the Pats? Is there some other type of agreement that isn't specifically a "confidentiality agreement" but that he fears would lead him to be sued by the club (perhaps related to turning over physical items he "took" from his former employer), or did he just outright lie about there being an agreement in the first place?

I could swear he and/or his attorney talked about a confidentiality agreement in place that prevents him from speaking freely. I'm confused.

[henry296]

What I've heard is that Walsh is concerned about the potential damage from stolen property and not a confidentiality agreement.

[Ksyrup]

After googling some articles back from the end of February, it turns out he claimed to have a confidentiality agreement, but the Pats deny one ever existed. What a collosal waste of time.

[adubroff]

What I've heard is that Walsh is concerned about the potential damage from stolen property and not a confidentiality agreement.

I believe he also is fearful of a suit by one of the teams/players he taped. Since that jagoff from the Rams has already sued, I can understand his concern. I'm not sure anybody would win a suit like that but it could cost you legal fees, etc.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

If you speak the truth, you have nothing to fear.

[miami_fan]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3363455

Former New England Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh, who has told ESPN.com he has potentially damaging information about the team's taping practices, reached an agreement Wednesday to meet with league officials and turn over any video tapes he might have to support his allegations.



Walsh, employed by the Patriots from 1996 through the 2002 Super Bowl and now an assistant golf pro in Hawaii, is expected to travel to New York and interview with Commissioner Roger Goodell and other NFL officials on Tuesday, May 13. Before the long-anticipated meeting, the agreement calls for Walsh to provide the league any tapes or materials he possesses from his years with the Patriots.



Walsh told ESPN.com in a January interview that he had never been contacted by NFL officials during their investigation of the Patriots' illegal taping practices. It was only after his name surfaced in the media during Super Bowl week that the league attempted to reach Walsh, who worked seven years with the Patriots before being let go in January, 2003.



The Spygate story surfaced after a Patriots' video assistant was caught illegally taping defensive signals from New York Jets assistant coaches during the 2007 season opener. The Jets knew what to look for in catching the Patriots, as head coach Eric Mangini and several assistants, including video director Steve Scarnecchia, previously worked under Bill Belichick in New England.



"If I had a reason to want to go public or tell a story, I could have done it before this even broke," Walsh told ESPN.com in January. "I could have said everything rather than having Mangini be the one to bring it out."



Walsh, 31, is thought to be the last and perhaps most crucial witness in the lingering Spygate saga. He expressed a willingness to speak to NFL officials back in January about insights into the Pats' taping procedures, but attorney Michael N. Levy, a white-collar crime specialist with the Washington-based firm of McKee Nelson, continued negotiating with the league until Walsh was provided full indemnification against possible lawsuits, absent intentional untruthfulness.



"I am pleased that we now have an agreement that provides Mr. Walsh with appropriate legal protections," Levy said in a prepared statement. "Mr. Walsh is looking forward to providing the NFL with the materials he has and telling the NFL what he knows."

Levy said the agreement requires Walsh to provide the NFL with "any documents he may have, including videotapes, that relate to allegations of videotaping of Patriots opponents" by May 8.

It also stipualtes that Walsh must meet with the NFL before being interviewed by any third party, including the media. "Accordingly, Mr. Walsh will not be making any statements at this time," Levy said.

The drawn-out negotiations between Levy and the league's outside counsel, Gregg Levy [no relation], presumably also representing the Patriots' interest, finally closed in on a deal over the past two weeks.



The question now is whether Walsh has first-hand insight or video evidence to advance the story. Walsh has suggested he has video tapes and the agreement is written with that assumption. But if he does have tapes, what do they reveal? And how much more damaging would it be for the Patriots and Belichick?



There's also the issue of what light, if any, he can shed on allegations that the then-underdog Patriots taped the St. Louis Rams' walkthrough the afternoon before Super Bowl XXXVI in 2002. Rumors of the taping first circulated shortly after the Spygate incident last September, and were reported by the Boston Herald, citing a single, unnamed source, on the eve of the Super Bowl.



The Herald story cited an unidentified member of the Patriots' video staff as having filmed the Rams' final practice. Other media outlets subsequently connected Walsh to the alleged taping. ESPN.com, however, has been unable to confirm that the taping took place.



Asked about the rumored taping, Walsh told ESPN.com: "Really, it is nothing that I care to go on the record about or talk about."



Ever since his name surfaced, the league and the Patriots have minimized Walsh's significance to Spygate, while continuing to hit on the theme that the matter has been thoroughly investigated and that it's time to move on. Back in September, the league took away the Patriots first-round draft pick [31st pick in Saturday's college draft], while levying a $500,000 fine against Belichick and a $250,000 fine to the team.



The story has been kept alive by Sen. Arlen Specter, the Republican leader of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who has criticized the league's investigation -- specifically the destruction of notes and six tapes turned over by the Patriots from the 2006 season and 2007 preseason. After initially describing the illegal taping as very limited, Goodell later revealed that Belichick had admitted following the same taping practices since he took over the Patriots in 2000.



Specter has been vocal in expressing frustration with what he views as stonewalling tactics by the league and its teams. His staff has approached individuals with both the Patriots and Jets, only to be told by team attorneys that they would not cooperate with his investigation.



Specter will not be part of the NFL's interview of Walsh, but he and his staff will meet with him later in Washington.

[Ksyrup]

How obvious it was that this would get done before the draft. The league wanted to drag this out so it didn't remain a hot topic, they did so for 3 months, and then on the eve of the biggest day for the sport before training camps open, they announce a deal where the guy isn't going to talk until the middle of the next month so Goodell doesn't have to say anything more than that this weekend. This was probably the plan from January.