PDA

View Full Version : Football Walsh Gives NFL 8 Tapes of Pats Cheating


noa
05-07-2008, 08:58 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3386162

Ex-Pats employee Walsh sends NFL video of Pats' taping

After brokering a deal to protect himself, former New England Patriots (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=nwe) employee Matt Walsh has finally turned over his evidence in the videotaping controversy.
The New York Times reported and the NFL confirmed on Wednesday that Walsh sent eight tapes to the league that show the Patriots recording the play-calling signals of five opponents in six games between 2000 and 2002.
Taping the signals of opposing teams is prohibited by league rules, and the Patriots were already fined $750,000 and docked a first-round draft choice in September for taping the New York Jets (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=nyj). NFL commissioner Roger Goodell left open the possibility that more penalties could be levied.
A Patriots employee from 1997-2003, Walsh reached an agreement to turn over the tapes in exchange for being indemnified from all future legal fees.
The New York Times obtained a list of the Walsh tapes, and the league confirmed that list, which says that the Patriots taped offensive and defensive coaches in regular-season games against the Miami Dolphins (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=mia), Buffalo Bills (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=buf), Cleveland Browns (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=cle) and San Diego Chargers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=sdg). The team also made video of the Pittsburgh Steelers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=pit) in the 2002 AFC Championship Game.
Walsh's tapes do not include the video of the St. Louis Rams (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=stl)' walkthrough before the 2002 Super Bowl, as reported by the Boston Herald.
"Mr. Walsh has never claimed to have a tape of the walk-through," said Walsh's lawyer Michael Levy, according to the Times. "Mr. Walsh has never been the source of any of the media speculation about such a tape. Mr. Walsh was not the source for the Feb. 2 Boston Herald article."
Walsh has separate meetings scheduled on Tuesday with the commissioner and Senator Arlen Specter in which he is expected to provide additional details about the taping process.
Under his agreement with the league, Walsh can retain copies of his videotapes, but he cannot use them without the consent of the NFL.

el borracho
05-07-2008, 09:02 PM
Well, let's see... six new cases, I guess they forfeit their first round pick in the next six drafts.

Reerun_KC
05-07-2008, 09:04 PM
Well, let's see... six new cases, I guess they forfeit their first round pick in the next six drafts.
And they still would beat the Herm lead Chiefs 6 straight....

noa
05-07-2008, 09:05 PM
And they still would beat the Herm lead Chiefs 6 straight....

Wow, way to turn this into a Herm bashing moment.

Brock
05-07-2008, 09:06 PM
Wow, way to turn this into a Herm bashing moment.

they don't call him rerun for no reason.

Mecca
05-07-2008, 09:08 PM
Well, let's see... six new cases, I guess they forfeit their first round pick in the next six drafts.

Actually this is nothing new, all of the stuff on those tapes was admitted to by the Patriots to the commissioner.

The only way they'd have gotten more punishment would be if he had the tape of the walkthrough.

Reerun_KC
05-07-2008, 09:09 PM
they don't call him rerun for no reason.
:LOL:

:rockon:

Reerun_KC
05-07-2008, 09:09 PM
Wow, way to turn this into a Herm bashing moment.
Hey just making an observation....

cdcox
05-07-2008, 09:11 PM
I just want this to go away. It's not good for the game at all.

milkman
05-07-2008, 09:12 PM
Hey just making an observation....

I believe that would be speculation, rather than observation, and I would speculate you are probably right.

stlchiefs
05-07-2008, 09:13 PM
Actually this is nothing new, all of the stuff on those tapes was admitted to by the Patriots to the commissioner.

The only way they'd have gotten more punishment would be if he had the tape of the walkthrough.

How do you know this? It was reported that they admitted some videotaping, but how do you know they specifically admitted to these incidents?

Reerun_KC
05-07-2008, 09:16 PM
I believe that would be speculation, rather than observation, and I would speculate you are probably right.
Reerun = http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies2/soapbox.gif against Herm

tk13
05-07-2008, 09:16 PM
I don't recall any information saying they taped their first AFC Championship Game under Belichick. And to be honest, if they'd do it then, they were probably doing it fairly often.

irishjayhawk
05-07-2008, 09:46 PM
I just want this to go away. It's not good for the game at all.

What's worse for the game is the lax punishment. It's like when the Broncos literally cheated with Vasoline and got a free timeout and a, what?, $5000 fine?

cdcox
05-07-2008, 09:51 PM
What's worse for the game is the lax punishment. It's like when the Broncos literally cheated with Vasoline and got a free timeout and a, what?, $5000 fine?

I don't consider giving up a 1st round pick and the massive fine on BB to be lax.

I agree that Denver's penalties for their multiple infractions of cheating the salary cap, greasing jerseys, illegal martial arts blocking techniques, circumventing the draft order, and bribing officials were extremely lax. But now their titles are generally considered to be shams throughout the league, so I'm not sure what it gained them.

kcchiefsus
05-07-2008, 09:53 PM
Actually this is nothing new, all of the stuff on those tapes was admitted to by the Patriots to the commissioner.

The only way they'd have gotten more punishment would be if he had the tape of the walkthrough.

No, that is not true. Bob Kraft came out recently and said there was nothing to the tapes. They never admitted anything at all about these tapes. The punishment they have already received only deals with the taping of the New York Jets.

Brock
05-07-2008, 09:53 PM
Asterisk em!

irishjayhawk
05-07-2008, 09:54 PM
I don't consider giving up a 1st round pick and the massive fine on BB to be lax.

I agree that Denver's penalties for their multiple infractions of cheating the salary cap, greasing jerseys, illegal martial arts blocking techniques, circumventing the draft order, and bribing officials were extremely lax. But now their titles are generally considered to be shams throughout the league, so I'm not sure what it gained them.

1st round pick? They let them keep the #7. Why? Once a pick is that teams, isn't it fair game to take away? Seems to me they just gave the illusion of punishment. And that "fine" on BB is lax because he can make it up easily.

irishjayhawk
05-07-2008, 09:55 PM
No, that is not true. Bob Kraft came out recently and said there was nothing to the tapes. They never admitted anything at all about these tapes. The punishment they have already received only deals with the taping of the New York Jets.

I think that's true.

Mecca
05-07-2008, 09:55 PM
1st round pick? They let them keep the #7. Why? Once a pick is that teams, isn't it fair game to take away? Seems to me they just gave the illusion of punishment. And that "fine" on BB is lax because he can make it up easily.

I guess they should have just taken all their picks then eh?

Brock
05-07-2008, 09:56 PM
I don't care. There's nothing you can really do to them at this point, they already have the rings.

beach tribe
05-07-2008, 09:59 PM
I don't care. There's nothing you can really do to them at this point, they already have the rings.

Those aren't the only rings they want. Reguardless the NFL is not going to do shit.

Mr. Flopnuts
05-07-2008, 10:00 PM
they don't call him rerun for no reason.

LMAO

irishjayhawk
05-07-2008, 10:34 PM
I guess they should have just taken all their picks then eh?

Well, to say they'll take their first round pick and skip over a traded pick (which is THEIRS) to take #31, is a bit lax, yes.

Should they have taken all their picks? No.

Have they been punished for all 8 tapes that have now come to light? No.

Extra Point
05-07-2008, 10:35 PM
And they still would beat the Herm lead Chiefs 6 straight....

Without requesting an english-english translation, I can tell you this:

The Chiefs can only beat the hard teams on their schedule. Like, how many previous SB winners have the Chiefs beat the following preseason/season? I can think of at least 4: SF, STL, GB, NE.

Fruit Ninja
05-07-2008, 10:50 PM
I just want this to go away. It's not good for the game at all.
I think its better for the game. Look at what happend with the NBA ref that was busted for gambling on NBA games. Its a thing of the passed now. IT will be the same for the NFL. NFL is such a huge juggernaut, that it wont even phase it.

stlchiefs
05-07-2008, 11:39 PM
No, that is not true. Bob Kraft came out recently and said there was nothing to the tapes. They never admitted anything at all about these tapes. The punishment they have already received only deals with the taping of the New York Jets.

That is what I recall as well. The fact that Mecca has posted again, but not backed up his previous statement further strengthens my belief in this.

CoMoChief
05-08-2008, 12:24 AM
Wow, way to turn this into a Herm bashing moment.

The truth hurts doesn't it?

CoMoChief
05-08-2008, 12:25 AM
Without requesting an english-english translation, I can tell you this:

The Chiefs can only beat the hard teams on their schedule. Like, how many previous SB winners have the Chiefs beat the following preseason/season? I can think of at least 4: SF, STL, GB, NE.

Who gives a shit about who we beat in the preseason?!?!?!

Seriously?

CoMoChief
05-08-2008, 12:32 AM
If the Pats videotaped our signals and walk through's, their whole team would just get dumber by the minute

Rausch
05-08-2008, 12:40 AM
I don't care. There's nothing you can really do to them at this point, they already have the rings.

I'm sure Donk fans are burning all thier SB good-stuffs as we speak. The shame must be-....wait.

If I had that moment, just once, of my team winning the whole whad would I care if they said we cheated 2-3 years later?

No.

Not just no, but HELL NO.

For that moment, on SB weekend, to be the best after sOOOOOOOOOOoooo many years of....no.

At this point I'd strangle my neighbor's grammy while she slept for a ring...

ClevelandBronco
05-08-2008, 12:51 AM
I don't consider giving up a 1st round pick and the massive fine on BB to be lax.

I agree.

I agree that Denver's penalties for their multiple infractions of cheating the salary cap, greasing jerseys, illegal martial arts blocking techniques, circumventing the draft order, and bribing officials were extremely lax. But now their titles are generally considered to be shams throughout the league, so I'm not sure what it gained them.

Trophies, rings and joy, baby. Trophies, rings and joy.

Rausch
05-08-2008, 12:53 AM
Trophies, rings and joy, baby. Trophies, rings and joy.

Exactly.

Don't get me wrong, I ****ing loathe you for it. I'll forever deteste the cheatin donx.

Would I mimic that model for a ring?

In a ****ing heartbeat...

ClevelandBronco
05-08-2008, 12:54 AM
...Have they been punished for all 8 tapes that have now come to light? No.

Do we already know that? I mean, are you sure or are you guessing? Your sources on the matter are undoubtedly better than mine because I have no sources whatsoever.

ClevelandBronco
05-08-2008, 12:59 AM
Exactly.

Don't get me wrong, I ****ing loathe you for it. I'll forever deteste the cheatin donx.

Would I mimic that model for a ring?

In a ****ing heartbeat...

Well, I hope you can separate me from the team. (I know I do, and I'm pretty sure that the Broncos wouldn't bail me out of jail. Come to think of it, I didn't get to lift the trophy and they must have forgotten to send me my ring.)

I didn't cheat. I'm only guilty of celebrating my ass off.

chiefs1111
05-08-2008, 01:00 AM
Why did they have to cheat to try and beat the Bills,thats just sad...........

Rausch
05-08-2008, 01:01 AM
Well, I hope you can separate me from the team. (I know I do, and I'm pretty sure that the Broncos wouldn't bail me out of jail.)

I didn't cheat. I'm only guilty of celebrating my ass off.

I'd planed to destory the entire state of Colorade to be sure, but now that you mention it, I should probably send out a few emails first...

ClevelandBronco
05-08-2008, 01:07 AM
I'd planed to destroy the entire state of Colorado to be sure, but now that you mention it, I should probably send out a few emails first...

I know that I'd really, really, really appreciate it if I could get on that mailing list.

Have I ever admitted to you how much I admired and respected Eddie Kennison?

Rausch
05-08-2008, 01:22 AM
Have I ever admitted to you how much I admired and respected Eddie Kennison?

Good start. I got to meet the guy and he seemed ****ing cool as hell to me. And at the time I looked like a cult leader.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 05:49 AM
What's worse for the game is the lax punishment. It's like when the Broncos literally cheated with Vasoline and got a free timeout and a, what?, $5000 fine?


Lax? It was the heaviest punishment ever levied by the NFL in its entire history.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 05:50 AM
No, that is not true. Bob Kraft came out recently and said there was nothing to the tapes. They never admitted anything at all about these tapes. The punishment they have already received only deals with the taping of the New York Jets.


Not correct.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 05:55 AM
I know Patriots hating is in vogue, but you guys need to pay attention a little better before spouting off. The Pats admitting all this ages ago, so Walsh's tapes prove NOTHING that they didn't already ADMIT ***AND*** were punished for this past year.

“This is consistent with what the Patriots had admitted they had been doing, consistent with what we already knew,” NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told the Associated Press last night.

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/football/patriots/view.bg?articleid=1092644&srvc=home&position=2

the Talking Can
05-08-2008, 06:10 AM
I know Patriots hating is in vogue, but you guys need to pay attention a little better before spouting off. The Pats admitting all this ages ago, so Walsh's tapes prove NOTHING that they didn't already ADMIT ***AND*** were punished for this past year.



http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/football/patriots/view.bg?articleid=1092644&srvc=home&position=2

creams exist for a vag in your condition



or should we shut down all non-pats fan approved discussion of the Patriots?

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 06:14 AM
creams exist for a vag in your condition



or should we shut down all non-pats fan approved discussion of the Patriots?

I'm not uptight about it. Just trying to make sure people get it right.

What they did was bad enough. Putting incorrect spin on it to make it looks worse is hardly necessary.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 06:15 AM
A little more along the same lines. Seems like (as many expected) Walsh gave the NFL nothing new. It's unfortunate he felt the need to get involved at all.


Goodell explained that the league's penalty against the Patriots early last season was for the totality of the team's videotaping actions, and that coach Bill Belichick acknowledged he had videotaped opposing signals since the start of his Patriots head coaching career.

If Walsh had new information, Goodell reiterated that he was committed to seeing it.
"If it's just taping of defensive signals, we know that," Goodell said April 2 at the NFL's annual meeting in Palm Beach, Fla. "The Patriots admitted to that. He seems to imply that he has something different and certainly something I would be concerned with if it's true. So, I'd like to see the evidence."

Fairplay
05-08-2008, 06:21 AM
I think if the league would implement NHL rules i.e. take out a player from the defense/offense for 3 games plus take another number one pick from them.

That would be interesting.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 06:27 AM
I think if the league would implement NHL rules i.e. take out a player from the defense/offense for 3 games plus take another number one pick from them.

That would be interesting.


Dunno a darn thing about these NHL rules, but which player would you pick? And why would you punish a player anyway? And at that point you're entangling the Union. It wouldn't seem to make alot of sense.

And you can't take "another number one pick" when the "new" information/tapes contain NOTHING that is actually, you know, new. :D

Fairplay
05-08-2008, 06:33 AM
Let the team take their pick who sits out.

Also the NHL is Union (i presume). I'm just saying it make the game more challenging for them. And neat to see how the other teams would play them formation wise with that factor.

The Bad Guy
05-08-2008, 06:51 AM
And they still would beat the Herm lead Chiefs 6 straight....

Do you get tired of saying the same shit in every single post?

Only a dickface like you would take a completely-unrelated thread and turn it into a Herm bash.

Your act is about as old as Dice Clay's.

cadmonkey
05-08-2008, 06:53 AM
Thank GOD Walsh threw his hat in the ring for all of 8 tapes of already admitted to cheating. That was very worth the nonsense.

DOUCHEBAG.

Chiefnj2
05-08-2008, 07:19 AM
I know Patriots hating is in vogue, but you guys need to pay attention a little better before spouting off. The Pats admitting all this ages ago, so Walsh's tapes prove NOTHING that they didn't already ADMIT ***AND*** were punished for this past year.



http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/football/patriots/view.bg?articleid=1092644&srvc=home&position=2

"consistent with what we already knew" doesn't mean they knew precisely which games were taped. It just means that - "yeah, we knew they taped opposing teams." If the NFL's position was that they knew the Pats taped every single game since Belichick took over, then that was not made clear to the fans.

The statements issued by the league and Belichick were certainly drafted in a manner to insinuate only the Jets game was at issue.


"This episode represents a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid longstanding rules designed to encourage fair play and promote honest competition on the playing field," Goodell wrote in a letter to the Patriots.

["This episode" makes it look like a single episode.]

Belichick responded with a statement shortly after Goodell's ruling became public.


"As the Commissioner acknowledged, our use of sideline video had no impact on the outcome of last week's game. We have never used sideline video to obtain a competitive advantage while the game was in progress."

[Again, Belichick specifically references the outcome of "last week's game".]

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 08:15 AM
"consistent with what we already knew" doesn't mean they knew precisely which games were taped. It just means that - "yeah, we knew they taped opposing teams." If the NFL's position was that they knew the Pats taped every single game since Belichick took over, then that was not made clear to the fans.

I agree that the NFL was not very clear about what the Patriots had done -- at least not initially. They clearly wanted to seem firm on this issue, while burying it as a fast as possible, while giving out a minimum of details.

Nonetheless, it is now VERY clear that the Patriots had told Goodell waaay back when that they had taped every game since BB took over.

Repeat:

Goodell explained that the league's penalty against the Patriots early last season was for the totality of the team's videotaping actions, and that coach Bill Belichick acknowledged he had videotaped opposing signals since the start of his Patriots head coaching career.

Chiefnj2
05-08-2008, 09:07 AM
I agree that the NFL was not very clear about what the Patriots had done -- at least not initially. They clearly wanted to seem firm on this issue, while burying it as a fast as possible, while giving out a minimum of details.

Nonetheless, it is now VERY clear that the Patriots had told Goodell waaay back when that they had taped every game since BB took over.

Repeat:

That may be true, but I have yet to see (not that I looked very hard) a direct quote from Goodell that says "Belichick admitted to taping every single game since he became head coach."

Goodell is responsible for all of this lingering news since he tried to bury it as quickly as possible without disclosing details.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 09:12 AM
That may be true, but I have yet to see (not that I looked very hard) a direct quote from Goodell that says "Belichick admitted to taping every single game since he became head coach."

Goodell is responsible for all of this lingering news since he tried to bury it as quickly as possible without disclosing details.


Re-read my quote. That's exactly what Goodell said. Pats admitting taping every game since BB became coach. For the third time:

coach Bill Belichick acknowledged he had videotaped opposing signals since the start of his Patriots head coaching career

Chiefnj2
05-08-2008, 09:22 AM
Re-read my quote. That's exactly what Goodell said. Pats admitting taping every game since BB became coach. For the third time:

[/B]

You are quoting a Boston article that did not put Goodell's statement in quotes. The article reads:

"Goodell explained that the league's penalty against the Patriots early last season was for the totality of the team's videotaping actions, and that coach Bill Belichick acknowledged he had videotaped opposing signals since the start of his Patriots head coaching career."

I'm just saying, I don't recall seeing the exact quote from Goodell.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 09:40 AM
Ah, I see your point.

:shrug: Can't find a quote, but it's a direct quote from Specter after he met with Goodell.


WASHINGTON (AP)—Bill Belichick has been illegally taping opponents’ defensive signals since he became the New England Patriots (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/nwe/;_ylt=AjV97I6LTFEJHddWvF.37VYdsLYF)’ coach in 2000, according to Sen. Arlen Specter, who said NFL commissioner Roger Goodell told him that during a meeting Wednesday.

“There was confirmation that there has been taping since 2000, when Coach Belichick took over,” Specter said.

Specter said Goodell gave him that information during the 1-hour, 40-minute meeting, which was requested by Specter so the commissioner could explain his reasons for destroying the Spygate tapes and notes.

“There were a great many questions answered by Commissioner Goodell,” Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters after the meeting. “I found a lot of questions unanswerable because of the tapes and notes had been destroyed.”

Goodell said Belichick told him he believed the taping was legal; Goodell said he did not concur.

“He said that’s always been his interpretation since he’s been the head coach,” the commissioner said. “We are going to agree to disagree on the facts.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?prov=ap&slug=ap-goodell-specter&type=lgns

Tuckdaddy
05-08-2008, 09:49 AM
PUNISH THEM MORE! The damn champ game! They better get hit hard for that. Pitt should be screaming for Belifuks head.

irishjayhawk
05-08-2008, 09:50 AM
So there's been 7 seasons of cheating and they got 1 first round pick taken away. And further, they magically skipped over the #7....

Call it the most severe punishment ever levied but that doesn't mean it was fair.

Brock
05-08-2008, 09:54 AM
They basically got away with it, may as well move on.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 09:55 AM
So there's been 7 seasons of cheating and they got 1 first round pick taken away. And further, they magically skipped over the #7....

Call it the most severe punishment ever levied but that doesn't mean it was fair.


I agree. Given the lack of significant competitive advantage it afforded, it was probably too harsh. But hey, reasonable minds can disagree. :evil:

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 09:55 AM
They basically got away with it, may as well move on.


Please. If you had a 1st round pick taken away from you you'd be screaming about it. Given the Pats success with 1st rounders, that was a starting-caliber player we lost for the next 5+ years.

Brock
05-08-2008, 09:56 AM
Please. If you had a 1st round pick taken away from you you'd be screaming about it. Given the Pats success with 1st rounders, that was a starting-caliber player we lost for the next 5+ years.

I wouldn't be screaming about it if we had cheated our way to three super bowl victories. Quit your goddamn poor mouthing. You got over, congratulations.

irishjayhawk
05-08-2008, 10:00 AM
Please. If you had a 1st round pick taken away from you you'd be screaming about it. Given the Pats success with 1st rounders, that was a starting-caliber player we lost for the next 5+ years.

But see, that's misleading. The #7 pick was yours too. But they took the lower pick. That's more telling than "just a first round pick".

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 10:10 AM
I wouldn't be screaming about it if we had cheated our way to three super bowl victories. Quit your goddamn poor mouthing. You got over, congratulations.

I hope some day we find out exactly what they were used for, and what kind of competitive advantage, if any, it provided. I've never seen anything that would suggest that it gave much of one, but OTOH, if it didn't give any, then why do it?

Given that it seems nearly everyone in NFL coaching circles either did it themselves or knew that everyone else did it, I'm fairly convinced it didn't provide much of an edge -- or at least no more of an edge than other nefarious practices that go on such as Howard Mudd's infamous signal stealing efforts, etc.

:shrug: Maybe someday we'll know for sure one way or the other.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 10:14 AM
But see, that's misleading. The #7 pick was yours too. But they took the lower pick. That's more telling than "just a first round pick".

No, they took the PATRIOTS' pick, not a pick that we acquired by trade. One was our pick, and the other was a pick we got by a trade. Why should the penalty be worse because we made the trade? If we had made no trade, then it's obviously going to have to be the 31 pick.

Instead, we made a trade so instead of the 31 pick its the 7 pick? How does that make sense?

And how is my statement "misleading". With a #7 pick I'd expect a Pro Bowler, and with the #31 I'd expect a solid starter. Instead of 2 starters (one likely exceptional), we only have 1.

Logan Mankins was the #32 pick a few years ago and is now an All Pro. The Pats know WTF they're doing. This isn't Bradway losing a pick here...

irishjayhawk
05-08-2008, 10:16 AM
No, they took the PATRIOTS' pick, not a pick that we acquired by trade. One was our pick, and the other was a pick we got by a trade. Why should the penalty be worse because we made the trade? If we had made no trade, then it's obviously going to have to be the 31 pick.

Instead, we made a trade so instead of the 31 pick its the 7 pick? How does that make sense?

Umm, the penalty was a first round pick. Regardless of a trade, the #7 pick was the PATRIOTS pick. So it's fair game.

They fine you a first round pick. You have two first round picks. The higher one is the one that should be chosen. How does that not make sense?

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 10:24 AM
Umm, the penalty was a first round pick. Regardless of a trade, the #7 pick was the PATRIOTS pick. So it's fair game.

They fine you a first round pick. You have two first round picks. The higher one is the one that should be chosen. How does that not make sense?

Obviously it does to you because you want to exact the maximum vengeance. In theory they could have tried to take whatever they want. The entire 2008 draft. The next 10.

But they do have more to worry about than keeping irishjayhawk happy. They exacted the heaviest punsihment, BY FAR, on any team in NFL history. Sorry if it wasn't enough for you, but perhaps you should weigh in your scales of justice the fact that it's not at all clear that this entire thing was either (1) isolated to the Patriots, or (2) all that significant in terms of determining outcomes of games.

You want the death penalty for what may well end up being driving 60 in a 55. I'm not sure that's all it was, but you're not sure either.

Garcia Bronco
05-08-2008, 10:45 AM
Obviously it does to you because you want to exact the maximum vengeance. In theory they could have tried to take whatever they want. The entire 2008 draft. The next 10.

But they do have more to worry about than keeping irishjayhawk happy. They exacted the heaviest punsihment, BY FAR, on any team in NFL history. Sorry if it wasn't enough for you, but perhaps you should weigh in your scales of justice the fact that it's not at all clear that this entire thing was either (1) isolated to the Patriots, or (2) all that significant in terms of determining outcomes of games.

You want the death penalty for what may well end up being driving 60 in a 55. I'm not sure that's all it was, but you're not sure either.


Your team got fined that much because they broke a written rule after being explicitly told not to do it in a written letter. BB is a disgrace and he always has been. Don't try an act like New England is a victim. It's pathetic.

Chiefnj2
05-08-2008, 10:53 AM
Given that it seems nearly everyone in NFL coaching circles either did it themselves or knew that everyone else did it, I'm fairly convinced it didn't provide much of an edge -- .

Where is your proof that "nearly everyone in the NFL coaching circles" did it themselves?

irishjayhawk
05-08-2008, 11:01 AM
Obviously it does to you because you want to exact the maximum vengeance. In theory they could have tried to take whatever they want. The entire 2008 draft. The next 10.

But they do have more to worry about than keeping irishjayhawk happy. They exacted the heaviest punsihment, BY FAR, on any team in NFL history. Sorry if it wasn't enough for you, but perhaps you should weigh in your scales of justice the fact that it's not at all clear that this entire thing was either (1) isolated to the Patriots, or (2) all that significant in terms of determining outcomes of games.

You want the death penalty for what may well end up being driving 60 in a 55. I'm not sure that's all it was, but you're not sure either.

They fined them a 1st round pick. And they skipped over the higher 1st round pick. I'm sorry, but that's pretty lame. And it's tapes of 8 games, and probably the little of the 7 seasons. And you're telling me one 1st round pick (WHICH THEY SKIPPED OVER THE HIGHER ONE) is fair?

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 11:29 AM
Your team got fined that much because they broke a written rule after being explicitly told not to do it in a written letter. BB is a disgrace and he always has been. Don't try an act like New England is a victim. It's pathetic.


From a Broncos fan no less. This is rich...

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 11:30 AM
Where is your proof that "nearly everyone in the NFL coaching circles" did it themselves?


That's only half my quote, isn't it.

I think many did it (not most, but many), and that those that didn't do it, knew that many others did. As proof I primarily cite Jimmy Johnson's statement that what the tape showed was the same as what he was taugh tto do by a Chiefs scout waay back when.

This wasn't some nefarious invention on Belichick's part.

noa
05-08-2008, 11:32 AM
This wasn't some nefarious invention on Belichick's part.

Probably not. He should have just been more careful about disposing of the evidence and knowing who to trust.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 11:32 AM
They fined them a 1st round pick. And they skipped over the higher 1st round pick. I'm sorry, but that's pretty lame. And it's tapes of 8 games, and probably the little of the 7 seasons. And you're telling me one 1st round pick (WHICH THEY SKIPPED OVER THE HIGHER ONE) is fair?


Why yes, I believe that's exactly what I'm saying.

You have NO IDEA (neither do I), whether the Patriots just ended up being the scapegoat for 8 other teams that had been doing this right up until last year. Nor do you have any idea (neither do I) whether this stuff really made a lick of difference in actually, you know, winning and losing games.

And let me point out that when you are caught for speeding, you aren't fined for every speeding violation you had during your entire life.

I know you think BB should have been forced to commit seppuku, but there isn't any logic in that based on what you know.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 11:33 AM
Probably not. He should have just been more careful about disposing of the evidence and knowing who to trust.


What he should have done was to STOP when the NFL issued written requirements that he do so. That was really, stunning stupid.

buddha
05-08-2008, 11:40 AM
Obviously, Kraft and the other brass at NE are going to say that this was all known and covered ground. Would you expect them to come out and say that these are new offenses and they should be royally punished for each act?

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 11:41 AM
Obviously, Kraft and the other brass at NE are going to say that this was all known and covered ground. Would you expect them to come out and say that these are new offenses and they should be royally punished for each act?


Why don't you try reading Arlen Specter's statements quoted in the media from this past February where he says that Goodell told him that the Pats admitting this had been SOP since BB became coach in 2000?

Dylan
05-08-2008, 12:14 PM
Excerpts from The New York Times article written by Greg Bishop
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/sports/football/08nfl.html?_r=1&ref=sports&oref=slogin

The New York Times obtained a list of the Walsh videotapes. The information was later confirmed by Walsh’s lawyer, Michael Levy, from the Washington offices of McKee Nelson.

On Tuesday, Walsh is scheduled to speak with Commissioner Roger Goodell and Senator Arlen Specter in separate meetings. Walsh could provide additional information at that time, including how the taping worked, how extensive it was, which Patriots employees were involved and the significance of the evidence he handed over.

The first tape is dated Sept. 25, 2000, from a game the previous day. The last is from Sept. 29 two years later.

All the tapes are scheduled to arrive at N.F.L. offices Thursday morning.

Levy would not say whether Walsh was behind the camera on each tape, but confirmed that Walsh obtained the first seven tapes during his time in the Patriots’ video department, which ended after the 2002 Super Bowl.

The last tape, in September 2002 against the Chargers, was shot by someone else after Walsh left the video department for a job in the scouting department that ended in early 2003.

The Chargers tape shows raw footage, Levy said, of the San Diego coaches from the Patriots’ sideline, followed by a shot of the scoreboard showing time, down and distance. The tape contains no footage of actual plays during the game, only the sequence, which the Patriots could match to play tape.

The other seven tapes are more sophisticated. They show shots of the opposing coaches’ signals, followed immediately by a shot of the play, usually from the end zone camera, Levy said.

The tape from the A.F.C. championship game is the most extensive, showing two angles of each play.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 01:22 PM
Spygames -- the long, long, LONG tradition of spying in the NFL.

http://www.thesportgallery.com/sport-stories/1967aug-nflspy.html

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 01:27 PM
Jimmy Johnson on doing the EXACT same hting as Belichick, and how it was common in the NFL, **BUT** that the NFL punsihing the Pats was deserved because the NFL tried to stop it and the Pats basically stupidly ignored their orders to do so:


http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=82335

Jimmy Johnson thinks Spygate is overblown We originally posted this WFAN interview as having been conducted during Super Bowl week. It actually dates back to September. Regardless, it’s still interesting to note how commonplace former Cowboys coach Jimmy Johnson feels the use of cameras is by NFL teams. He admits he used them to steal signs all the time.

Q: How about the spying thing Jimmy. You’re a coach does that bother you what Belichick did?

JJ: Oh please. I’ve said it on our show. Eighteen years ago a scout for the Chiefs told me what they did, and he said what you need to do is just take your camera and you go and zoom in on the signal caller and that way you can sync it up. The problem is that if they’re not on the press box side you can’t do it from the press box, you have to do it from the sideline. This was 18 years ago.

Q: You think the NFL came down too hard on them?

JJ: No, no, I said it on the show. He was wrong for doing it for the simple reason that the league knew this was going on not just in New England but around the league. And the league sent out the memorandum to all of the teams saying you cannot do this. And so that’s when Bill Belichick was wrong. After he got the memorandum saying don’t do it any more, he did it.

Q: Did you ever steal signals?

JJ: Oh in a heartbeat, yeah. Yes I did.

Q: Via video, Jimmy? Or no?

JJ: Oh yeah, I did it with video and so did a lot of other teams in the league. Just to make sure that you could study it and take your time, because you’re going to play the other team the second time around. But a lot of coaches did it, this was commonplace.

Q: But did you do it by taping the signal caller?

JJ: Yeah.

Q: Oh you did.

JJ: That’s what I’m saying. I was saying one of Marty Schottenheimer’s scouts, Mark Hatley, who has passed away now, Mark told me that’s how they did it, and Howard Mudd their offensive line coach with Kansas City, who now coaches for Tony Dungy, he was the best in the entire league at stealing signals.

Q: Where’d you put your guy who was videotaping? Where was he?

JJ: My guy was up with my camera crew in the press box. So you’d just put an extra camera up with your camera crew in the press box who zoomed in on the signal callers. That’s the best way to do it, but anyway you can’t always do that because the press box camera crew might be on the same side as the opposing team. If they’re on the same side as the opposing team that’s when you need to do it from the sideline.

Tuckdaddy
05-08-2008, 02:01 PM
Spygames -- the long, long, LONG tradition of spying in the NFL.

http://www.thesportgallery.com/sport-stories/1967aug-nflspy.html

It's so common that they got slapped for it already but nobody else has? I don't see anyone coming to their aid with that bullshit of "everyone does it" either. It's not legal pure and simple and I don't think everyone is doing it.

Belicheat is suppose to be a genius football coach but he needs a guy to illegaly tape signals with a Sony Handycam on the sideline? What a douche.

I hope they get hit hard for the AFC Championship game. They may have cost the Steelers millions in SB revenues. Id' be wanting some serious ass over this shit if I'm the owner of Pitt.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 02:44 PM
It's so common that they got slapped for it already but nobody else has? I don't see anyone coming to their aid with that bullshit of "everyone does it" either. It's not legal pure and simple and I don't think everyone is doing it.

Belicheat is suppose to be a genius football coach but he needs a guy to illegaly tape signals with a Sony Handycam on the sideline? What a douche.

I hope they get hit hard for the AFC Championship game. They may have cost the Steelers millions in SB revenues. Id' be wanting some serious ass over this shit if I'm the owner of Pitt.


*sigh*

Try reading the article. Try understanding that the Pats already admitted all thsi, that the NFL already knows it, and that there will be no further punishment. Try understanding that lots of people in the NFL "cheat" in lots of different ways, and that the NFL came in recently ('06 or whatever) and said "hey, stop it, we're serious", and the Patriots, presumably unlike everyone else and quite stupidly, didn't.

Did you read JJ's quote, even. Your beloved Chiefs used to do EXACTLY the same thing.

Garcia Bronco
05-08-2008, 03:53 PM
From a Broncos fan no less. This is rich...


How so? What rule did we break? You don't know because we did not break a written rule.

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 04:00 PM
How so? What rule did we break? You don't know because we did not break a written rule.


The salary cap is all unwritten? And I have no doubt that the NFL has a written "bad sportsmanship" catchall that rightly encompasses things like spraying yourself with pam or whatever the frack your boys did.

Dylan
05-08-2008, 04:03 PM
The salary cap is all unwritten? And I have no doubt that the NFL has a written "bad sportsmanship" catchall that rightly encompasses things like spraying yourself with pam or whatever the frack your boys did.

sigh*

Try reading the article. Try understanding that the Pats already admitted all thsi, that the NFL already knows it, and that there will be no further punishment. Try understanding that lots of people in the NFL "cheat" in lots of different ways, and that the NFL came in recently ('06 or whatever) and said "hey, stop it, we're serious", and the Patriots, presumably unlike everyone else and quite stupidly, didn't.

Did you read JJ's quote, even. Your beloved Chiefs used to do EXACTLY the same thing.


Let's wait until next week. ....:thumb:

Amnorix
05-08-2008, 04:39 PM
Meanwhile, Amnorix thinks its very unfortunate that Senator Spector thinks is a federal matter, or that it is deserving of his time as opposed to, you know, things of national importance. I'm sure the fact that he is an Iggles fan and that the Pats beat them in the SB has nothing to do with his continuing involvement.


Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) issued the following statement regarding the eight videotapes that Matt Walsh has turned over to the NFL:

“I think it is very unfortunate that the NFL has already started its ‘nothing new’ spin before watching the tapes or finding out what Mr. Matt Walsh has to say. Let’s see where the evidence leads.

Ari Chi3fs
05-08-2008, 04:49 PM
i used to like the Patriots as my 2nd favorite team... I have a Bledsoe Jersey, even. But, **** Belicheat and the Patriots. They are ****ing cheaters and have scarred the NFL with their weak ass need to **** other teams over to get an unfair advantage.

Belicheat should be forced to resign... so teh Chiefs can sign him.

irishjayhawk
05-08-2008, 05:54 PM
Meanwhile, Amnorix thinks its very unfortunate that Senator Spector thinks is a federal matter, or that it is deserving of his time as opposed to, you know, things of national importance. I'm sure the fact that he is an Iggles fan and that the Pats beat them in the SB has nothing to do with his continuing involvement.

You have my full agreement there. Get that shit out of courts. Along with baseball's steroids.

Garcia Bronco
05-08-2008, 06:51 PM
The salary cap is all unwritten? And I have no doubt that the NFL has a written "bad sportsmanship" catchall that rightly encompasses things like spraying yourself with pam or whatever the frack your boys did.


We did not cheat the salary cap nor did we break a written rule. We made cash loans from players and paid them interest on the loans. It actually had nothing to do with the NFL. We used the money to pay for upfront costs on our new stadium. We didn't video tape the other team to make in game adjustments and cheat on the field.

Garcia Bronco
05-08-2008, 06:53 PM
Meanwhile, Amnorix thinks its very unfortunate that Senator Spector thinks is a federal matter, or that it is deserving of his time as opposed to, you know, things of national importance. I'm sure the fact that he is an Iggles fan and that the Pats beat them in the SB has nothing to do with his continuing involvement.


You mean like fraud? I agree that the local authorites should arrest Bellichek, but I have no problems with the committee investing the Patriots crimes since the local authorites have decided to ignore their duty.

Valiant
05-08-2008, 06:54 PM
I agree that the NFL was not very clear about what the Patriots had done -- at least not initially. They clearly wanted to seem firm on this issue, while burying it as a fast as possible, while giving out a minimum of details.

Nonetheless, it is now VERY clear that the Patriots had told Goodell waaay back when that they had taped every game since BB took over.

Repeat:



If that is the case on the bolded part.. You guys got off Scots free with only losing one 1st round pick and a fine.. Goodell did bail you out.. Every member of the staff should have been fired and banned from football, and the owner hit with a couple 100million dollar fines and prohibited from winning your division and playoffs for a couple years..

Count Zarth
05-08-2008, 06:59 PM
The Broncos are innocent, I tell you! INNOCENT!

http://uranus.ckt.net/%7Egochiefs/cheatingdonks3.gif

http://uranus.ckt.net/%7Egochiefs/cheatingdonks4.gif

Dylan
05-08-2008, 09:16 PM
And the pressure is on --- LMAO They don't give a eff ... They'll take you right down... ROFL

The New York Times

Sports of The Times

A Decade of Sins Deserves a Year Out
By HARVEY ARATON
Published: May 9, 2008

What an extensive video library Bill Belichick turns out to have produced. Eight more spy tapes sent to N.F.L. headquarters for Commissioner Roger Goodell’s viewing pleasure by a former student in the New England Patriots’ film noir studies program. Who knows how many more taped over or discarded over the last eight years?

Imagine the documentary possibilities for those talented folks at NFL Films, provided Goodell hasn’t already tossed the evidence into the fireplace with Tom Brady-like precision in a reprise of his mysterious spin cycle last fall.

Now that the “totality of conduct” for which Belichick was cited by Goodell has officially expanded to the length of his tenure in New England, shouldn’t he be further punished as a serial offender, a con man who not only broke the rules but established secretly taping opponents as standard operating procedure?

“If your wife cheats on you once, maybe you can forgive her, but if she cheats on you over the course of your entire marriage, that becomes unforgivable because she has flouted the rules, shown no respect for your marital contract,” said Sharon K. Stoll, director of the Center for Ethics at the University of Idaho and the author of “Sports Ethics: Applications for Fair Play.”

“That is apparently what happened in this case, a disregard for the organization and its rules and it’s a big mess that the N.F.L. has on its hands because this coach happens to be an American icon, a man who has had a book written about him by David Halberstam,” Stoll said. “The league has to stand up and make a strong statement because the last impression it wants to leave is that this particular coach was above those rules.”

Let me digress before explaining why I believe Belichick should now be barred from coaching the Patriots for one season, on top of the $750,000 in fines and the forfeiture of a first-round draft pick levied on him and the Patriots by Goodell last fall. (The money was the equivalent of a parking ticket and the draft pick not all that punitive in a year when the Patriots also had the 10th pick, from New Orleans.)

In another context, I would gladly concede that my proposed punishment falls well short of fitting the crime. Espionage in a sport played and promoted as recreational warfare would seem to be a natural extension of the competition. Defending one’s team against it would require nothing more complicated than what a third-base coach does, disguise his signals, in full view of an entire ballpark six or seven times a week.

But these are the rules set forth by the N.F.L., enforced by Goodell and reportedly reinforced in a league memo sent to the teams in 2006. To which Belichick at the very least responded by videotaping the Jets in the 2007 season opener that touched off the so-called Spygate affair, now encapsulated in its own online entry of the same name on Wikipedia.org.

In other words: embarrassment to the league in perpetuity, courtesy of its team of the decade and reigning coaching genius.

As rumors of additional tapes circulated before the Giants crushed the Patriots’ dream of a perfect season in Phoenix in February, including one of a filming of a St. Louis Rams pre-Super Bowl practice in 2002, Goodell made a point of saying, “It was not something that was done on a widespread basis.” Already you get the idea he wants everyone, especially the crusading Senator Arlen Specter, to believe there is nothing in the newly submitted tapes that Belichick hasn’t already detailed, as if all of this was already on the table for public inspection.

The good news for Goodell is that the Patriots’ former video coordinator Matt Walsh apparently did not have the aforementioned tape that would have tainted at least one of the three Super Bowls claimed by Belichick’s Pats. But the real news here is, again, the establishment of Belichick’s cheating then (2000 to 2002), now (last season) and if we may extrapolate based on reasonable cause, in all likelihood in between.

His explanation, his word, on this matter means as much as Roger Clemens’s on family values. “There obviously has been some lying going on — ‘oh, we did it once; we misinterpreted the rules, we didn’t mean to,’ ” said Stoll, the ethicist. As a liar and a cheater, what separates Belichick on the grand behavioral plane from your basic synthetic warrior who gets suspended four games when he produces a dirty test?

Augmented by logic, the facts suggest Belichick has been cheating for almost a decade. And since replacing Paul Tagliabue, Goodell has fashioned himself the zero-tolerance commissioner, cracking down hard on those — players, that is — who would compromise the runaway popularity of the league with antisocial acts. Shouldn’t that policy be applied even more stringently to those in control?

“They need to send a message here,” Stoll said.

One year out. Then let’s see Belichick dare spy again in 2009.

KcMizzou
05-08-2008, 09:34 PM
The Broncos are innocent, I tell you! INNOCENT!

http://uranus.ckt.net/%7Egochiefs/cheatingdonks3.gif

http://uranus.ckt.net/%7Egochiefs/cheatingdonks4.gifI can't believe they didn't get so much as an un-sportsman like conduct penalty out of that.

Complete bullshit.

Ugly Duck
05-08-2008, 11:47 PM
We did not cheat the salary cap nor did we break a written rule.

Oh... so the NFL slapped you down for no reason whatsoever. Kinda like they're slapping down Belicheat. Maybe we should all then just take the asterisks off of the Bronco & Belicheat SuperBowls...

ClevelandBronco
05-09-2008, 12:27 AM
Oh... so the NFL slapped you down for no reason whatsoever. Kinda like they're slapping down Belicheat. Maybe we should all then just take the asterisks off of the Bronco & Belicheat SuperBowls...

Okay.

Uh, were they there?

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 05:56 AM
We did not cheat the salary cap nor did we break a written rule. We made cash loans from players and paid them interest on the loans. It actually had nothing to do with the NFL. We used the money to pay for upfront costs on our new stadium. We didn't video tape the other team to make in game adjustments and cheat on the field.


Neither did the Patriots.

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 05:57 AM
You mean like fraud? I agree that the local authorites should arrest Bellichek, but I have no problems with the committee investing the Patriots crimes since the local authorites have decided to ignore their duty.


You don't even know what the Patriots did, so perhaps you should save spouting off for something you do know about instead of your wild and incorrect guesses.

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 05:58 AM
If that is the case on the bolded part.. You guys got off Scots free with only losing one 1st round pick and a fine.. Goodell did bail you out.. Every member of the staff should have been fired and banned from football, and the owner hit with a couple 100million dollar fines and prohibited from winning your division and playoffs for a couple years..


I understand your hatred and jealousy. Let it all out.

the Talking Can
05-09-2008, 06:07 AM
has there ever been such a thin skinned fan of a successful team?

hilarious....

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 06:14 AM
has there ever been such a thin skinned fan of a successful team?

hilarious....


I only argue when people have the facts wrong. Forgive me for trying to set them straight.

At least I don't argue that they did nothing wrong. That's the Donx fans.

Tuckdaddy
05-09-2008, 07:00 AM
*sigh*

Try reading the article. Try understanding that the Pats already admitted all thsi, that the NFL already knows it, and that there will be no further punishment. Try understanding that lots of people in the NFL "cheat" in lots of different ways, and that the NFL came in recently ('06 or whatever) and said "hey, stop it, we're serious", and the Patriots, presumably unlike everyone else and quite stupidly, didn't.

Did you read JJ's quote, even. Your beloved Chiefs used to do EXACTLY the same thing.

The Pats get caught and now everyone is a cheat. Whatever! Belicheat has been doing this for 8 years. He should be punished for 8 years worth not just a few games. Anyone that thinks he didn't video tape every year is just being stupid. The genius label can be officialliy removed. Genius's don't need Sony Handycams to win football games.

Garcia Bronco
05-09-2008, 07:15 AM
Oh... so the NFL slapped you down for no reason whatsoever. Kinda like they're slapping down Belicheat. Maybe we should all then just take the asterisks off of the Bronco & Belicheat SuperBowls...


I explained why they fined us. But it didn't result to an on field advantage. Further more it was so Pat Bowlen could get his new stadium up and running. What we have here is a coach deliberately cheating opponents. That's why God saw fit to let these guys win 18 games in-a-row only to lose the one that mattered most.

Garcia Bronco
05-09-2008, 07:17 AM
You don't even know what the Patriots did, so perhaps you should save spouting off for something you do know about instead of your wild and incorrect guesses.

Yes we do know what they did, clown. So take your "elite" cheating team and stick it where the sun doesn't shine. LMAO

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 07:59 AM
The Pats get caught and now everyone is a cheat. Whatever! Belicheat has been doing this for 8 years. He should be punished for 8 years worth not just a few games. Anyone that thinks he didn't video tape every year is just being stupid. The genius label can be officialliy removed. Genius's don't need Sony Handycams to win football games.


18-1 without video.

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 08:00 AM
Yes we do know what they did, clown. So take your "elite" cheating team and stick it where the sun doesn't shine. LMAO


:shrug: I'm havign more fun on Sundays in the fall, and I"m perfectly happy with my Dynasty team. I know you don't like hearing how Brady is better than Elway, but he certainly has done more with less than HorseFace ever did.

Garcia Bronco
05-09-2008, 08:19 AM
:shrug: I'm havign more fun on Sundays in the fall, and I"m perfectly happy with my Dynasty team. I know you don't like hearing how Brady is better than Elway, but he certainly has done more with less than HorseFace ever did.


Now that you've gotten that out of your system. There is no way that Tom Brady is a better QB than John Elway was. Don't insult yourself. Don't get me wrong, Tom Brady is good. I feel confident that his success has nothing to do with reviewing video tape of defense signals. He is however not the athlete on the field that John Elway was.

And Tom Brady has always had as much or more than John Elway ever did from a talent perspective. I doubt you followed the Broncos enough in the 80's to actually know what you are talking about.

Chief Faithful
05-09-2008, 08:30 AM
Now that you've gotten that out of your system. There is no way that Tom Brady is a better QB than John Elway was. Don't insult yourself. Don't get me wrong, Tom Brady is good. I feel confident that his success has nothing to do with reviewing video tape of defense signals. He is however not the athlete on the field that John Elway was.

And Tom Brady has always had as much or more than John Elway ever did from a talent perspective. I doubt you followed the Broncos enough in the 80's to actually know what you are talking about.

On this point, Garcia, we agree. Elway did more year after year with less talent than any QB in history. Elway was the best QB I've seen play the game.

Garcia Bronco
05-09-2008, 08:41 AM
On this point, Garcia, we agree. Elway did more year after year with less talent than any QB in history. Elway was the best QB I've seen play the game.


I think he was the greatest athlete to play the position. He is certainly in the discussion about the greatest ever. To me that includes Sammie Baugh, John U, Otto Graham, Joe Montana, Terry Bradshaw, and Tom Brady as well.

I think the only guy around now that could surpass Elway in the athlete discussion is JaMarcus Russell.

RNR
05-09-2008, 08:43 AM
On this point, Garcia, we agree. Elway did more year after year with less talent than any QB in history. Elway was the best QB I've seen play the game.

Agreed cussed him hated the team he played for but he is the best I have seen also

RNR
05-09-2008, 08:47 AM
I think he was the greatest athlete to play the position. He is certainly in the discussion about the greatest ever. To me that includes Sammie Baugh, John U, Otto Graham, Joe Montana, Terry Bradshaw, and Tom Brady as well.

I think the only guy around now that could surpass Elway in the athlete discussion is JaMarcus Russell.
I hope you are right but there is a world of difference between what might be and what is. The kid has a long way to go.

Garcia Bronco
05-09-2008, 08:56 AM
True RNR, but he's got the physical tools to be a man amongst boys. Cutler has a super strong arm and Russell's is stronger.

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 10:47 AM
I think he was the greatest athlete to play the position. He is certainly in the discussion about the greatest ever. To me that includes Sammie Baugh, John U, Otto Graham, Joe Montana, Terry Bradshaw, and Tom Brady as well.

I think the only guy around now that could surpass Elway in the athlete discussion is JaMarcus Russell.


How many HOF'ers has Brady had on his teams? Heck, how many All Pros/Pro Bowlers?

And "athlete" isn't all that important, is it? We're talking about QBs, not decathletes. Michael Vick was the best damn athlete in the NFL probably, certainly among QBs, but that didn't mean he won games.

Garcia Bronco
05-09-2008, 12:05 PM
How many HOF'ers has Brady had on his teams? Heck, how many All Pros/Pro Bowlers?

And "athlete" isn't all that important, is it? We're talking about QBs, not decathletes. Michael Vick was the best damn athlete in the NFL probably, certainly among QBs, but that didn't mean he won games.


To this point John Elway played with zero HOFer's. Zimmerman goes in this year. We aren't even far enough along to see who will be in the HOF with Brady. You've got no point there. As far as the Pro Bowler aspect, that's a popularity contest. Like your left tackle, he made it to the pro bowl this season. He was the most popular LT in the Super Bowl this season too. They were calling his name out all night.

And "athletic" is very important, but you would be right that's it's not the only thing. There is the mental aspect to being successful. John Elway had both.

RNR
05-09-2008, 01:04 PM
How many HOF'ers has Brady had on his teams? Heck, how many All Pros/Pro Bowlers?

And "athlete" isn't all that important, is it? We're talking about QBs, not decathletes. Michael Vick was the best damn athlete in the NFL probably, certainly among QBs, but that didn't mean he won games.

To compare Vick to Elway is just silly, Brady is on the list of those talked about in terms of alltime greats and he is far from done. That said I have seen many of those on the list play and Elway stands out as the best to me. The Patriots have had a heck of a run and IMO with Elway behind center they would be even better.

Amnorix
05-09-2008, 01:19 PM
To compare Vick to Elway is just silly, Brady is on the list of those talked about in terms of alltime greats and he is far from done. That said I have seen many of those on the list play and Elway stands out as the best to me. The Patriots have had a heck of a run and IMO with Elway behind center they would be even better.

Hey, do you mind? I'm trying to dial him up and you keep interrupting. :D :p

RNR
05-09-2008, 01:33 PM
Hey, do you mind? I'm trying to dial him up and you keep interrupting. :D :p
My bad :)

Dartgod
05-09-2008, 01:39 PM
I can't believe they only got one free time out out of that.

Complete bullshit.

FYP... /Donkey Fan

Bill Parcells
05-09-2008, 01:44 PM
I think Amnorix should be promoted to senior public relations spokesperson for the Patriots. he should also legally represent Bellichick in all of these video taping matters. the spin he's putting on is fantastic!

Dylan
05-11-2008, 03:36 AM
When the new season starts, we'll probably find Belichick* in the janitors room washing the mops.

How is it Walsh turned over 8 tapes, and the Patriots handed over 7? Surely NE has a bigger library than Walsh. --no?

ESPN.com
One tape turned over by Walsh shows Patriots also stole offensive signals
By Mike Fish
Updated: May 9, 2008

From Day 1 of the Spygate saga in September, the controversy over New England's illicit videotaping practices has centered on the Patriots' efforts to steal their opponents' defensive signals. But the tapes delivered via FedEx to NFL headquarters in New York on Thursday morning also include evidence of an effort by New England to steal offensive signals, which would broaden the extent of the team's surveillance operation.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and staff members began viewing the eight tapes within hours of their long-awaited delivery, in anticipation of Tuesday's scheduled interview with former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh. As part of an indemnification pact reached last month with the league, Walsh agreed to turn over any videotapes or related materials he had from his tenure with the team.

Perhaps the surprise entry on the list of videotaping documents Walsh turned over to the league was tape No. 3, labeled "OFF Signals" from New England's game against the Miami Dolphins on Oct. 7, 2001. That is the only tape labeled as such on a copy of the list obtained by ESPN.com. Walsh's attorney, Michael Levy, confirmed it was the lone footage in Walsh's possession of offensive coaches' signaling from the sidelines.

"[It] contains shots of Miami's offensive coaches signaling Miami's offensive players, followed by a shot from the end zone camera of Miami's offensive play, followed by a shot of Miami's offensive coaches signaling Miami's offensive players for the next play, then edited to be followed by a shot of the subsequent Miami offensive play," Levy said of the tape. "And that pattern repeats throughout the entire tape, with occasional cuts to the scoreboard."

Harvey Greene, a spokesman for the Dolphins said: "All the people who were here then are gone. We have nothing to gain by saying anything. Bill Parcells, Jeff Ireland and Tony Sparano weren't around when that happened."

Goodell has made repeated references to the stealing of defensive signals by New England. That is, in part, presumably because the league has allowed direct radio communication from a coach to the quarterback since the 1994 season, diminishing the need for hand signals.

"We don't know [about attempts to steal offensive signals] yet because we haven't looked at the tapes," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Thursday before the league had completed its review of the new evidence. "All we have is the list supplied last night [by Walsh's attorney]. One of them is labeled 'OFF signals.' None of the others are listed that way. Let us look at the tapes and we'll have more to say about that.

"The rule which the Patriots violated was the policy that prohibits use of equipment for the taping of offensive or defense signals. I know there've been references to defensive signals, which is more logical. But let us look at the tapes and verify what is on there."

Although Walsh turned over eight tapes this week, the number of games in which he personally videotaped opposing coaches is unclear. One source told ESPN.com that it "absolutely" is not the case that the six games on the eight tapes are the only instances the Patriots taped opponents during Walsh's tenure with the team.

One of the eight tapes in the package was shot by someone other than Walsh. It is a Sept. 29, 2002, game against San Diego, which was shot after Walsh was promoted from the video department. That tape captures just the coaches on the sideline, and the scoreboard before the game action is edited in.

The Patriots declined the opportunity to comment on Thursday. Stacey James, the Patriots' vice president for media relations, said Wednesday he expected the team will wait to issue a statement until after Walsh meets with Goodell.

The advancing sophistication in New England's videotaping practices apparently is also evident on the tapes, which begin with a Sept. 25, 2000, game against Miami and run through that 2002 game against San Diego. It's also obvious throughout that the video shooter has one job on game day: to capture the opposing team's sideline coaches.

In one of the last tapes that Walsh shot -- the 2002 AFC Championship Game against the Pittsburgh Steelers -- the finished product includes sideline footage of the Pittsburgh coaches sending in signals, followed by a scan of the scoreboard that captures down, distance and game time, followed by two separate shots of the ensuing play, one from above the press box and the other from an end zone camera.

"The other seven tapes show the final product, which is a series of coaches' signals, followed by the play, followed by coaches' signals and then the next play -- all lined up one after another," said Levy, who represents Walsh. "So the final videotapes contain the opposing coaches' signals lined up directly with the play that was run, one after another."

Goodell is likely to quiz Walsh on these issues at their meeting scheduled for 7:30 a.m. Tuesday. Walsh is scheduled to travel to Washington later in the day to meet with Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.


Specter has been critical of the NFL for destroying evidence turned over in September by New England, including six other tapes and notes from other taped games. Although those tapes only date back to the 2006 season, Aiello, the NFL spokesperson, said Thursday the notes dated to at least the 2002 season.

The notes were destroyed, and Aiello said he is uncertain whether there is any record of the games involved. He did say that Goodell previously informed Specter that details on the taping of the 2002 AFC Championship game, as well as three other games with Pittsburgh, were part of the notes.

Aiello said it has yet to be decided whether the Walsh tapes will be made public. But as the tapes arrived at the league office in New York, officials were relieved to find the package didn't include a long-rumored video of the St. Louis Rams' walk-through practice the day before the 2002 Super Bowl, which would have put a huge cloud over the league's marquee event.

"That is a fair assumption," Aiello said of the feelings of relief in the league office. "I'd rather leave those questions and answers to the commissioner, but it's unfortunate that that had been reported, and apparently there's no substance to it."

Quarterback Drew Bledsoe, who was on the Patriots team that beat the Rams in the Super Bowl, told the Boston Herald he's followed SpyGate in the media.

"To be honest with you, my take now is the same as it's always been," Bledsoe told the newspaper. "Every team in the league is trying to do everything they can to get ahead. I'm sure most, if not all, are bending the rules in some way, shape or form. This just happened to be one that was very public, and the organization has been reprimanded for it.

"As a player here, I never did see anything other than what was already reported. Was it a violation of the spirit of the rules? Absolutely, it was, but I think all of that has been readily acknowledged."



Specter Seeks Cooperation
Sen. Arlen Specter warned the NFL not to rush to judgment Thursday, suggesting the league is premature in trying to put the Spygate saga to rest.
Specter, R-Pa., spoke as commissioner Roger Goodell and top league officials prepared to view videotapes turned over by former New England Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh. Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has been critical of the investigation the league conducted into the Patriots' illicit taping practices.
"I think it is very unfortunate that the NFL has already started its 'nothing new' spin before watching the tapes or finding out what Matt Walsh has to say," Specter said. "Let's see where the evidence leads."
Walsh, employed by the Patriots from 1997 to 2003, is scheduled to meet with league officials Tuesday in New York. After that session, he is to travel to Washington and sit down with Specter and his staff.
Specter formally requested the league make available to him the evidence turned over by Walsh, which consists of eight tapes dating from 2000 through 2003. But as of Thursday night he had not gotten confirmation on when, or even if, he'd get the tapes.
"As a matter of basic fair play, I got to have the time to prepare," said Specter. "It's equal access … I'm waiting for them."
Goodell, however, suggested in a letter last Friday that Specter would eventually gain access to the tapes, saying: "Once I see the material I will be in a better position to respond … [I'm] confident we'll be able to make satisfactory arrangements for you or key staff to review the material."
Specter has complained about the lack of cooperation from the NFL as his staff has attempted to delve into the matter. Very few key individuals have spoken when approached by staff members. And attorneys for the Patriots and New York Jets have advised team employees against speaking with Specter.
"I got three pages of people who refused to talk to me,'' he said.

-- Mike Fish, investigative reporter

milkman
05-11-2008, 08:10 AM
Now that you've gotten that out of your system. There is no way that Tom Brady is a better QB than John Elway was. Don't insult yourself. Don't get me wrong, Tom Brady is good. I feel confident that his success has nothing to do with reviewing video tape of defense signals. He is however not the athlete on the field that John Elway was.

And Tom Brady has always had as much or more than John Elway ever did from a talent perspective. I doubt you followed the Broncos enough in the 80's to actually know what you are talking about.

I would argue that Randall Cunningham, Donavan McNabb, Michael Vick, and even Bobby Douglass are/were more athletic.

What Elway did better than anyone was combine his athletic ability with his ability to make plays in the passing game, with only Steve Young and Fran Tarkenton as real contenders.

Cntrygal
05-11-2008, 01:52 PM
Why did they have to cheat to try and beat the Bills,thats just sad...........


To ensure against the proverbial "trap game"... after all, we kicked their ass in week 1 of 2003 (31-0) - only to lose with the same score in week 16.

Then the fish beat them 21-0......

So why tape the two teams vying for the bottom of the division? 4 wins

Dylan
05-11-2008, 03:31 PM
I still believe that K.C. Chiefs will head into "Asterick Nation" to play Don Capers Patriots*. I believe when Goodell faces the press Tuesday, he'll say, that they knew all along the Patriots were stealing offensive as well as defensive signals. I/M/H/O, he should think that over carefully.

Goodell is on record for saying, the tapes had no value. Then why were they doing it? More importantly, if they had no value , why did the video equipment become more sophisicated in the last seven years before the were caught? What's interesting here, who was behind the camera taping after Walsh left? More to the point, the commissioner destroyed all the tapes and notes back in Sept. The New York Times was able to obtain a copy of the rule changes. I'll leave the link below. If you remember, it was someone from Goodell's office that leaked the tape to the press.

The NY Times and ESPN made the correct news judgment --assigning investigative reporters to this story months ago. The media will not let this go away. In my humble opinion, it seems Goodell is their main focus.

~SIGH...Done with my rant now~ ;)

I'll post the Times newsworthy article in the next post --

Dylan
05-11-2008, 03:41 PM
The New York Times has obtained a copy of the confidential NFL Rulebook.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/05/11/sports/10nfl.190.1.jpg

The story: Interesting. ....

In Cat and Mouse Game, Patriots Are Central Players
By GREG BISHOP and MICHAEL BRICK
Published: May 11, 2008

Long since the days of leather helmets and the V-formation, the N.F.L. has embraced technological advances that have brought dizzying changes to coaching strategy in the past decade.

With the advances have come new temptations for coaches to gain an unfair advantage. Every Monday during the football season, the league says, it fields complaints from and about many teams.

If a persistent problem is identified, the league’s eight-member competition committee suggests changes to rules. In discussions of changes since 2000, one team, the New England Patriots, has surfaced more than any other, according to a longtime N.F.L. team executive with direct knowledge of the meetings.

The committee heard accusations that the Patriots had taped opposing coaches’ signals, placed microphones on defensive players to steal quarterbacks’ audible signals and manipulated clocks and coach-to-quarterback radio systems.

The league has handled the complaints internally, finding no proof for all but one, which was lodged by the Jets last year, said its chief spokesman, Greg Aiello. In the Jets case last fall, when the Patriots were caught using video cameras to film defensive signals, the team and its coach, Bill Belichick, were fined, and the team forfeited a first-round draft pick. Since then, a former team employee has sent the league videotapes containing evidence of similar spying dating to 2000.

A spokesman for the Patriots, Stacey James, said the accusations were without merit, except for a videotaping violation to which the team has admitted.

In an e-mail message responding to questions posed by The New York Times, James said, “We believe that this inquiry is patently biased and that a truly objective report would investigate all instances of these complaints, not exclusively those against the Patriots.”

Even when suspicions and accusations have not resulted in disciplinary action, an internal committee has responded to them during the updating of the league’s confidential rulebook, known as the game operations manual, to keep pace with the high-tech spying complaints, league officials say.

“What we wanted to do was give some clarification, give some forewarning that we have new technologies, too,” said Ray Anderson, the league’s executive vice president for football operations, who oversaw the changes to the manual. “We did all of that, very frankly, to upgrade after we saw in various places and heard in various places the suspicions by a variety of folks.”

Copies of the 2007 manual obtained by The Times show that many of the recent changes concern policies on the placement of cameras and microphones, among other tactics the Patriots have been accused of pressing to their advantage.

The N.F.L. team executive said the Patriots were the subject of most of the accusations discussed in the rules committee’s deliberations. The team’s recent success and tight-lipped approach, as personified by Belichick, has played a role.

“They were the only team, really,” the executive said. “Clearly, they were the team mentioned far more than anybody else.”

Once the Patriots were caught taping, it only served to heighten speculation about what else they might be doing.

The Jacksonville Jaguars lodged a complaint against the Patriots about the failure of a coach-to-quarterback radio system during a January 2006 playoff game, a former Jaguars executive said.

The N.F.L. team executive said the rules committee had discussed that complaint in particular. Aiello said the league had found no violation.

“Other than the videotaping of coaching signals, there has been no evidence to substantiate a claim of misconduct by the Patriots on any of these matters,” Aiello wrote in an e-mail message.

But in the league’s changes to its operations manual for 2007, it mandated that neutral operators, who have not previously worked that team’s home games, run the coach-to-quarterback radio systems, as well as game clocks, for playoff games. This off-season, Commissioner Roger Goodell put in place more measures to offset cheating. They included lowering the standards necessary to impose discipline, along with yearly certification by each team that it had complied with rules and reported violations.

The N.F.L. has disclosed only select passages from the operations manual. Among professional sports leagues, the N.F.L.’s position on its manual is hardly unusual. The National Basketball Association has an operations manual distributed only to league and team personnel. Major League Baseball has a book of bulletins sent only to its clubs. The National Hockey League also has an internal document.

The manual, which is separate from the playing rules, governs the use of new technologies, in addition to covering mundane matters like the color of yellow that must be painted on goal posts.

League officials rewrote many sections of the manual at the outset of the 2007 season, before the Patriots were caught using video technology to steal signals from coaches of the division-rival Jets.

In a preface to the 2007 operations manual, league officials listed “changes to policies.”

In addition to requiring neutral operators for coach-to-quarterback radio systems during playoff games, the league said players with radio components in their helmets must wear a decal — a lime-green dot — “displayed on the midline of the rear of the helmet.”

Under radio system malfunction, the league promised to make unannounced visits to teams to make sure no one tampered with the systems.

And under stadium video locations, the guide to changes said, “Reworded: entire section.”

The N.F.L. team executive said the changes to the manual matched complaints against the Patriots.

“When they change the rules, they don’t mention teams,” the executive said. “But in my mind, a lot of it was from New England.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/sports/football/11nfl.html?_r=1&ref=sports&oref=slogin