Walsh Gives NFL 8 Tapes of Pats Cheating
 

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 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. 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, Buffalo Bills, Cleveland Browns and San Diego Chargers. The team also made video of the Pittsburgh Steelers in the 2002 AFC Championship Game.
Walsh's tapes do not include the video of the St. Louis Rams' 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.

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....

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

they don't call him rerun for no reason.

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.

:LOL:

:rockon:

Hey just making an observation....

I just want this to go away. It's not good for the game at all.

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

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 = http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/images...s2/soapbox.gif against Herm

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.

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.

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.

Asterisk em!

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 think that's true.

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

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.

LMAO

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.

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.

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.

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.

The truth hurts doesn't it?

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

Seriously?

If the Pats videotaped our signals and walk through's, their whole team would just get dumber by the minute

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...

I agree.

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...

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.

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.

Why did they have to cheat to try and beat the Bills,thats just sad...........

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...

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?

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.

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

Not correct.

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/f...ome&position=2

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

"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".]

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.

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

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.

Ah, I see your point.

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

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?pro...cter&type=lgns

PUNISH THEM MORE! The damn champ game! They better get hit hard for that. Pitt should be screaming for Belifuks head.

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.

They basically got away with it, may as well move on.

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

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.

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".

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.

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...

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.

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.

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

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?

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

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.

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

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.

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

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?

Excerpts from The New York Times article written by Greg Bishop
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/sp...ts&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.

Spygames -- the long, long, LONG tradition of spying in the NFL.

http://www.thesportgallery.com/sport...ug-nflspy.html

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-...ad.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.