arthurracoon
The Cardinal Smiles
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/sports/football/15nfl.html?ref=football
WASHINGTON — After meeting with a former New England Patriots employee who helped the team spy on opponents, Senator Arlen Specter on Wednesday described the team’s illicit videotaping tactics as more systematic and deliberate than what the N.F.L. has acknowledged publicly.
Mr. Specter, a Republican from Pennsylvania, said the former employee, Matt Walsh, described elaborate measures by the Patriots to conceal their filming of opponents’ signals. Mr. Walsh also explained how the Patriots’ coaching staff gleaned strategic information from members of the team’s video crew who had watched the St. Louis Rams’ walk-through practice before the 2002 Super Bowl.
He also identified more games and opponents that were filmed by the Patriots and detailed the advantages the team gained in later games.
Mr. Specter, a longtime Philadelphia Eagles fan, has battled with the N.F.L. on several issues over the years. This time, with his continued criticism of the league’s investigation into the Patriots, he is raising questions about the legitimacy of the Patriots’ accomplishments — which include three Super Bowl titles this decade, one against the Eagles, and an 18-0 record last season before a loss to the Giants in the Super Bowl.
Mr. Specter said the league should initiate an inquiry like the one commissioned by Major League Baseball to explore the use of performance-enhancing drugs in that sport. “They owe the public a lot more candor and a lot more credibility,” Mr. Specter said.
The N.F.L. responded in a statement: “We respectfully disagree with Senator Specter’s characterization of the investigation conducted by our office. We are following up.”
The news conference came one day after Mr. Specter and N.F.L. Commissioner Roger Goodell conducted separate interviews with Mr. Walsh. At Mr. Goodell’s news conference on Tuesday, he said he considered the matter closed, but would reopen his investigation if new information became available.
Mr. Specter and Mr. Goodell have long disagreed on what information is considered new and what information is relevant.
Mr. Goodell has said that Patriots Coach Bill Belichick admitted to misinterpreting league rules on videotaping, which probably dates to the beginning of his tenure in New England in 2000. Mr. Specter said that information was not made public until he met with the commissioner in February.
At a news conference before the Super Bowl 12 days before that meeting, Mr. Goodell did not answer a question about how far back the videotaping went. He also said that league officials “think it was quite limited.”
Mr. Specter cited other details that have not been revealed by the league. Mr. Walsh says was instructed to say he was filming “tight shots” or filming highlights if another team asked why the Patriots had an extra camera. The red light on Mr. Walsh’s camera was broken to conceal that he was recording. If Mr. Walsh was asked why he was not filming the play on the field, he was supposed to indicate that he was filming the down marker. During the American Football Conference championship game in 2002, against the Steelers, Mr. Walsh was instructed not to wear the Patriots’ logo, Mr. Specter said.
Mr. Walsh, who worked for the Patriots from 1997 to 2003, provided the league with eight videotapes from 2000 to 2002. The Patriots provided the league with six tapes from late in the 2006 season to the 2007 preseason.
Mr. Specter said Mr. Walsh also told him about games taped in between, when Mr. Walsh was a Patriots season-ticket holder and witnessed his successor, Steve Scarnecchia, engage in similar videotaping against the Steelers (September 2002 and October 2004) and Cowboys (November 2003).
Mr. Walsh told Mr. Specter that there were more games, but he could not recall specifics.
After Mr. Walsh handed over the eight videotapes last week, much was made about what he did not have — video of the Rams’ walk-through practice. The Boston Herald apologized on its Web site on Tuesday and in print editions on Wednesday for an erroneous report in February that said the Patriots had taped the walk-through.
At his Tuesday news conference, Mr. Goodell acknowledged that Mr. Walsh had been at the walk-through, along with the rest of the Patriots’ video crew. After the news conference, a league lawyer clarified that Mr. Walsh had seen Rams running back Marshall Faulk lining up as a kick returner, and some of the Rams’ offensive formations.
Brian Daboll, a former Patriots assistant now with the Jets, asked Mr. Walsh about what he had seen. Mr. Specter revealed Wednesday that Mr. Walsh told Mr. Daboll, and Mr. Daboll drew diagrams of the formations Mr. Walsh described. The Patriots defeated the Rams, 20-17, in the Super Bowl. The Rams were considered a heavy favorite.
“It’s significant,” Mr. Specter said.
Mr. Daboll, in a statement, said: “It’s a league matter. I am cooperating with the league.”
Mr. Specter also challenged Mr. Goodell to initiate an independent investigation, similar to the Mitchell report, baseball’s examination of performance-enhancing drugs led by the former Senator George J. Mitchell. Selling and using steroids without a prescription can be criminal offenses; no one has been accused of criminal behavior in the N.F.L.’s cheating scandal.
In his reasoning for a similar investigation, Mr. Specter noted the N.F.L.’s antitrust exemption, the conflict between the N.F.L.’s and the public’s interests in the matter and the example the Patriots set for youth by cheating. So far, no other members of Congress have expressed an interest in the Patriots, but Mr. Specter said he could provide them with the information he has gathered.
Mr. Specter, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, stopped short of saying he would initiate immediate congressional interest in the matter, saying, “I hope the commissioner will do this on his own.”
If the N.F.L. does not conduct an investigation, Mr. Specter said, “it’s up to Congress to investigate and take corrective action; there might be hearings.”
“If the public loses confidence in professional football, it will be like wrestling,” he said.
Mr. Specter said the N.F.L. never gave a plausible explanation for why it destroyed the tapes from the initial investigation, which began after a Patriots employee was caught filming the Jets’ defensive signals during a Sept. 9 game. At that time, the Patriots were fined $250,000 and lost a first-round draft pick, and Belichick was fined $500,000. On Tuesday, the N.F.L. said the team would not be further punished.
Mr. Specter criticized the league for playing down the significance of taping signals.
Mr. Goodell has said he does not believe the taping “affected the outcome of any games.” Mr. Specter said the Patriots’ system of code-breaking was too sophisticated, the methods too concealed, for taping not to have an effect. He called it an “insult to the intelligence of people who follow it.”
He listed several instances in which the Patriots taped one game and improved the next time they played those teams, highlighting one story from Mr. Walsh in particular. Mr. Walsh first filmed opponents’ signals in the 2000 preseason, against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. After the Patriots used the signals in the 2000 opener against Tampa Bay, Mr. Walsh told Mr. Specter, he asked an unidentified Patriots player about the signals.
Mr. Specter said Mr. Walsh told him the player met with Mr. Belichick, his longtime assistant Ernie Adams and the assistant Charlie Weis, now the head coach at Notre Dame, to discuss how the team would make use of the signals. Mr. Specter said Mr. Walsh said the player told him this helped the Patriots anticipate 75 percent of the plays called by the opposing team.
The Patriots did not respond to a request seeking comment. A Notre Dame spokesperson declined a request to speak with Mr. Weis, saying it was not a Notre Dame matter.
Mr. Specter also addressed whether he was motivated to pursue this issue because of his relationship with Comcast Corp. One of his largest supporters, Comcast is currently in a dispute with the N.F.L. over distribution of the NFL Network.
“They have been campaign contributors, along with 50,000 other people,” Mr. Specter said. “The last campaign cost $23 million dollars. I don’t know what they contributed, but I’ve been at this line of work for a long time, and no one has ever questioned my integrity.”
WASHINGTON — After meeting with a former New England Patriots employee who helped the team spy on opponents, Senator Arlen Specter on Wednesday described the team’s illicit videotaping tactics as more systematic and deliberate than what the N.F.L. has acknowledged publicly.
Mr. Specter, a Republican from Pennsylvania, said the former employee, Matt Walsh, described elaborate measures by the Patriots to conceal their filming of opponents’ signals. Mr. Walsh also explained how the Patriots’ coaching staff gleaned strategic information from members of the team’s video crew who had watched the St. Louis Rams’ walk-through practice before the 2002 Super Bowl.
He also identified more games and opponents that were filmed by the Patriots and detailed the advantages the team gained in later games.
Mr. Specter, a longtime Philadelphia Eagles fan, has battled with the N.F.L. on several issues over the years. This time, with his continued criticism of the league’s investigation into the Patriots, he is raising questions about the legitimacy of the Patriots’ accomplishments — which include three Super Bowl titles this decade, one against the Eagles, and an 18-0 record last season before a loss to the Giants in the Super Bowl.
Mr. Specter said the league should initiate an inquiry like the one commissioned by Major League Baseball to explore the use of performance-enhancing drugs in that sport. “They owe the public a lot more candor and a lot more credibility,” Mr. Specter said.
The N.F.L. responded in a statement: “We respectfully disagree with Senator Specter’s characterization of the investigation conducted by our office. We are following up.”
The news conference came one day after Mr. Specter and N.F.L. Commissioner Roger Goodell conducted separate interviews with Mr. Walsh. At Mr. Goodell’s news conference on Tuesday, he said he considered the matter closed, but would reopen his investigation if new information became available.
Mr. Specter and Mr. Goodell have long disagreed on what information is considered new and what information is relevant.
Mr. Goodell has said that Patriots Coach Bill Belichick admitted to misinterpreting league rules on videotaping, which probably dates to the beginning of his tenure in New England in 2000. Mr. Specter said that information was not made public until he met with the commissioner in February.
At a news conference before the Super Bowl 12 days before that meeting, Mr. Goodell did not answer a question about how far back the videotaping went. He also said that league officials “think it was quite limited.”
Mr. Specter cited other details that have not been revealed by the league. Mr. Walsh says was instructed to say he was filming “tight shots” or filming highlights if another team asked why the Patriots had an extra camera. The red light on Mr. Walsh’s camera was broken to conceal that he was recording. If Mr. Walsh was asked why he was not filming the play on the field, he was supposed to indicate that he was filming the down marker. During the American Football Conference championship game in 2002, against the Steelers, Mr. Walsh was instructed not to wear the Patriots’ logo, Mr. Specter said.
Mr. Walsh, who worked for the Patriots from 1997 to 2003, provided the league with eight videotapes from 2000 to 2002. The Patriots provided the league with six tapes from late in the 2006 season to the 2007 preseason.
Mr. Specter said Mr. Walsh also told him about games taped in between, when Mr. Walsh was a Patriots season-ticket holder and witnessed his successor, Steve Scarnecchia, engage in similar videotaping against the Steelers (September 2002 and October 2004) and Cowboys (November 2003).
Mr. Walsh told Mr. Specter that there were more games, but he could not recall specifics.
After Mr. Walsh handed over the eight videotapes last week, much was made about what he did not have — video of the Rams’ walk-through practice. The Boston Herald apologized on its Web site on Tuesday and in print editions on Wednesday for an erroneous report in February that said the Patriots had taped the walk-through.
At his Tuesday news conference, Mr. Goodell acknowledged that Mr. Walsh had been at the walk-through, along with the rest of the Patriots’ video crew. After the news conference, a league lawyer clarified that Mr. Walsh had seen Rams running back Marshall Faulk lining up as a kick returner, and some of the Rams’ offensive formations.
Brian Daboll, a former Patriots assistant now with the Jets, asked Mr. Walsh about what he had seen. Mr. Specter revealed Wednesday that Mr. Walsh told Mr. Daboll, and Mr. Daboll drew diagrams of the formations Mr. Walsh described. The Patriots defeated the Rams, 20-17, in the Super Bowl. The Rams were considered a heavy favorite.
“It’s significant,” Mr. Specter said.
Mr. Daboll, in a statement, said: “It’s a league matter. I am cooperating with the league.”
Mr. Specter also challenged Mr. Goodell to initiate an independent investigation, similar to the Mitchell report, baseball’s examination of performance-enhancing drugs led by the former Senator George J. Mitchell. Selling and using steroids without a prescription can be criminal offenses; no one has been accused of criminal behavior in the N.F.L.’s cheating scandal.
In his reasoning for a similar investigation, Mr. Specter noted the N.F.L.’s antitrust exemption, the conflict between the N.F.L.’s and the public’s interests in the matter and the example the Patriots set for youth by cheating. So far, no other members of Congress have expressed an interest in the Patriots, but Mr. Specter said he could provide them with the information he has gathered.
Mr. Specter, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, stopped short of saying he would initiate immediate congressional interest in the matter, saying, “I hope the commissioner will do this on his own.”
If the N.F.L. does not conduct an investigation, Mr. Specter said, “it’s up to Congress to investigate and take corrective action; there might be hearings.”
“If the public loses confidence in professional football, it will be like wrestling,” he said.
Mr. Specter said the N.F.L. never gave a plausible explanation for why it destroyed the tapes from the initial investigation, which began after a Patriots employee was caught filming the Jets’ defensive signals during a Sept. 9 game. At that time, the Patriots were fined $250,000 and lost a first-round draft pick, and Belichick was fined $500,000. On Tuesday, the N.F.L. said the team would not be further punished.
Mr. Specter criticized the league for playing down the significance of taping signals.
Mr. Goodell has said he does not believe the taping “affected the outcome of any games.” Mr. Specter said the Patriots’ system of code-breaking was too sophisticated, the methods too concealed, for taping not to have an effect. He called it an “insult to the intelligence of people who follow it.”
He listed several instances in which the Patriots taped one game and improved the next time they played those teams, highlighting one story from Mr. Walsh in particular. Mr. Walsh first filmed opponents’ signals in the 2000 preseason, against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. After the Patriots used the signals in the 2000 opener against Tampa Bay, Mr. Walsh told Mr. Specter, he asked an unidentified Patriots player about the signals.
Mr. Specter said Mr. Walsh told him the player met with Mr. Belichick, his longtime assistant Ernie Adams and the assistant Charlie Weis, now the head coach at Notre Dame, to discuss how the team would make use of the signals. Mr. Specter said Mr. Walsh said the player told him this helped the Patriots anticipate 75 percent of the plays called by the opposing team.
The Patriots did not respond to a request seeking comment. A Notre Dame spokesperson declined a request to speak with Mr. Weis, saying it was not a Notre Dame matter.
Mr. Specter also addressed whether he was motivated to pursue this issue because of his relationship with Comcast Corp. One of his largest supporters, Comcast is currently in a dispute with the N.F.L. over distribution of the NFL Network.
“They have been campaign contributors, along with 50,000 other people,” Mr. Specter said. “The last campaign cost $23 million dollars. I don’t know what they contributed, but I’ve been at this line of work for a long time, and no one has ever questioned my integrity.”
