AzWins23
Registered User
I just heard on ESPN radio tonight, that a former New England Patroits player has said that Bill Belichek has been video taping teams since 2000.
I'm going to find a link.
I'm going to find a link.
The spygate saga continues......
- Thread starter AzWins23
- Start date
OP
OP
AzWins23
Registered User
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/sports/football/22patriots.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
INDIANAPOLIS — The Patriots’ pattern of illicitly videotaping the signals of opposing N.F.L. coaches began in Coach Bill Belichick’s first preseason with the team in 2000, a former Patriots player said. The information was put to use in that year’s regular-season opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Belichick’s debut as New England’s coach.
Victoria Arocho/Associated Press
Patriots cornerback Ty Law tackling Keyshawn Johnson in Bill Belichick's first game as coach.
The secret taping of signals, which is against league rules, continued at least through three championship seasons to the 2007 season opener against the Jets, when the Patriots were caught and subsequently sanctioned by the league.
As coaches and executives gathered here Thursday for the N.F.L. scouting combine, many saying they were satisfied with the league’s investigation and ready to move on, new details were emerging about the history of the Patriots’ videotaping.
According to several executives in the league, the season opener against the Jets was not the first time the Patriots had been spotted taping another team’s defensive coaches at Giants Stadium. In the final preseason game of 2006, the Patriots were caught taping a Giants defensive assistant giving signals, the executives said.
The incident prompted a letter addressed to all teams seven days later from the N.F.L. vice president Ray Anderson that detailed the league’s interpretation of the rules. That letter was cited by Commissioner Roger Goodell when he punished the Patriots.
Belichick has said that he misinterpreted the league’s bylaws, telling Goodell that he thought it was permissible to use electronic equipment as long as the information was not used in the same game. That explanation has been greeted with disbelief by some peers and league officials.
In a news conference last week, Goodell said Belichick’s explanation led to the assumption that he had been videotaping opponents’ signals “as long as he has been head coach.”
The league’s nine-member competition committee spent three days this week discussing various rules changes that it might recommend for next season. After a 90-minute briefing on the Patriots’ videotaping activities Thursday by Goodell and three league vice presidents, the committee said taping rules would not be changed in the aftermath of the controversy.
“The rules are very, very clear,” said Tennessee Titans Coach Jeff Fisher, a committee member. “There is no need to be more specific or clarify any rules whatsoever.”
Questions linger about how much of an advantage the Patriots may have had if they intercepted defensive signals. Under Belichick, the Patriots have often run a no-huddle offense, which forces opponents to quickly call a defensive play. N.F.L. rules allow quarterbacks to hear instructions from coaches — through a headset and into a speaker in the quarterback’s helmet — until there are 15 seconds left on a play clock. When the defensive play call is deciphered, the Patriots could call a play to counteract. The Patriots lost the 2000 opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, when videotape of signals was used in preparation, according to the former Patriots player, who was among several former players interviewed by the N.F.L but said he did not want to speak publicly because the investigation is continuing.
The Patriots appear to have continued the practice of taping opposing signals for seven years. Last September, Goodell fined Belichick $500,000, fined the Patriots $250,000 and took away one of team’s first-round draft choices in 2008. After the sanctions were announced, the Patriots submitted six tapes, from games in 2006 and 2007, and some notes that dated to 2002, Goodell said. The tapes and notes were destroyed days after being handed to the league, because Goodell considered the matter closed.
But questions remain about how wide and deep the Patriots’ taping habits extended. Senator Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican who met with Goodell last week, is among those still questioning why the league was so quick to sanction the Patriots and destroy the evidence.
Goodell met with the competition committee Thursday to discuss his handling of the spying case. Committee members seemed satisfied and eager to turn the page.
“We were all satisfied, every one of us,” said John Mara, the Giants’ president. “All of us have our different opinions about the Patriots, but we were all satisfied that this thing was investigated properly and that they came to the proper conclusion.”
Bill Polian, the president of the Indianapolis Colts, said: “It’s behind us. It’s time to move forward.”
But emerging details continue to pull the league back in time. On Feb. 2, The Boston Herald reported that the Patriots might have taped a St. Louis Rams walkthrough practice the day before the teams played in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won, 20-17, on a last-second field goal. Belichick, speaking to The Boston Globe, recently denied that the practice was taped.
In the hallway at the convention center here, Mike Martz wanted to talk about his new job as San Francisco’s offensive coordinator. Instead, reporters peppered him with questions about the Patriots. Martz was the coach of the Rams when the teams met in the Super Bowl six years ago.
He took exception to the theory that the Patriots could not have gleaned much information from taping the walkthrough. He said indeed they could, but added that was not the point.
“For somebody to say that, it’s kind of disgusting,” Martz said. “The whole point is if they really cheated. To say he took some steroids and it did help or it didn’t help, that’s never the point. The point is, to all these high school coaches and high school kids and college kids, that if they did cheat, that’s the point.”
Martz said he assumed the walkthrough report was false. A similar sentiment was voiced by Chicago Bears Coach Lovie Smith, the Rams’ defensive coordinator that season.
“It’s just hard for me to fathom anyone would do anything like that,” Smith said. “I’m sure, if there’s something to it, No. 1, it will come out later. Time has a way of taking care of all things.”
Martz was asked if he wanted the N.F.L. to continue investigating the walkthrough. “Of course,” he said. “I was involved in that. I was responsible for a lot of people in that game.”
Executives dismissed any lingering notions that the Patriots’ taping opponents was a common practice around the league.
“I don’t want the outside perception to be, ‘Boy, there are all these teams and they’re all doing all these things,’ ” said Rich McKay, the Falcons’ president and a member of the competition committee. “Because it’s not true.”
Belichick was not seen in the hallways of the convention center Thursday. Representatives of 21 teams are scheduled to meet with reporters for news conferences from Thursday to Sunday. Belichick and the Patriots are not among them.
INDIANAPOLIS — The Patriots’ pattern of illicitly videotaping the signals of opposing N.F.L. coaches began in Coach Bill Belichick’s first preseason with the team in 2000, a former Patriots player said. The information was put to use in that year’s regular-season opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Belichick’s debut as New England’s coach.
Victoria Arocho/Associated Press
Patriots cornerback Ty Law tackling Keyshawn Johnson in Bill Belichick's first game as coach.
The secret taping of signals, which is against league rules, continued at least through three championship seasons to the 2007 season opener against the Jets, when the Patriots were caught and subsequently sanctioned by the league.
As coaches and executives gathered here Thursday for the N.F.L. scouting combine, many saying they were satisfied with the league’s investigation and ready to move on, new details were emerging about the history of the Patriots’ videotaping.
According to several executives in the league, the season opener against the Jets was not the first time the Patriots had been spotted taping another team’s defensive coaches at Giants Stadium. In the final preseason game of 2006, the Patriots were caught taping a Giants defensive assistant giving signals, the executives said.
The incident prompted a letter addressed to all teams seven days later from the N.F.L. vice president Ray Anderson that detailed the league’s interpretation of the rules. That letter was cited by Commissioner Roger Goodell when he punished the Patriots.
Belichick has said that he misinterpreted the league’s bylaws, telling Goodell that he thought it was permissible to use electronic equipment as long as the information was not used in the same game. That explanation has been greeted with disbelief by some peers and league officials.
In a news conference last week, Goodell said Belichick’s explanation led to the assumption that he had been videotaping opponents’ signals “as long as he has been head coach.”
The league’s nine-member competition committee spent three days this week discussing various rules changes that it might recommend for next season. After a 90-minute briefing on the Patriots’ videotaping activities Thursday by Goodell and three league vice presidents, the committee said taping rules would not be changed in the aftermath of the controversy.
“The rules are very, very clear,” said Tennessee Titans Coach Jeff Fisher, a committee member. “There is no need to be more specific or clarify any rules whatsoever.”
Questions linger about how much of an advantage the Patriots may have had if they intercepted defensive signals. Under Belichick, the Patriots have often run a no-huddle offense, which forces opponents to quickly call a defensive play. N.F.L. rules allow quarterbacks to hear instructions from coaches — through a headset and into a speaker in the quarterback’s helmet — until there are 15 seconds left on a play clock. When the defensive play call is deciphered, the Patriots could call a play to counteract. The Patriots lost the 2000 opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, when videotape of signals was used in preparation, according to the former Patriots player, who was among several former players interviewed by the N.F.L but said he did not want to speak publicly because the investigation is continuing.
The Patriots appear to have continued the practice of taping opposing signals for seven years. Last September, Goodell fined Belichick $500,000, fined the Patriots $250,000 and took away one of team’s first-round draft choices in 2008. After the sanctions were announced, the Patriots submitted six tapes, from games in 2006 and 2007, and some notes that dated to 2002, Goodell said. The tapes and notes were destroyed days after being handed to the league, because Goodell considered the matter closed.
But questions remain about how wide and deep the Patriots’ taping habits extended. Senator Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican who met with Goodell last week, is among those still questioning why the league was so quick to sanction the Patriots and destroy the evidence.
Goodell met with the competition committee Thursday to discuss his handling of the spying case. Committee members seemed satisfied and eager to turn the page.
“We were all satisfied, every one of us,” said John Mara, the Giants’ president. “All of us have our different opinions about the Patriots, but we were all satisfied that this thing was investigated properly and that they came to the proper conclusion.”
Bill Polian, the president of the Indianapolis Colts, said: “It’s behind us. It’s time to move forward.”
But emerging details continue to pull the league back in time. On Feb. 2, The Boston Herald reported that the Patriots might have taped a St. Louis Rams walkthrough practice the day before the teams played in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won, 20-17, on a last-second field goal. Belichick, speaking to The Boston Globe, recently denied that the practice was taped.
In the hallway at the convention center here, Mike Martz wanted to talk about his new job as San Francisco’s offensive coordinator. Instead, reporters peppered him with questions about the Patriots. Martz was the coach of the Rams when the teams met in the Super Bowl six years ago.
He took exception to the theory that the Patriots could not have gleaned much information from taping the walkthrough. He said indeed they could, but added that was not the point.
“For somebody to say that, it’s kind of disgusting,” Martz said. “The whole point is if they really cheated. To say he took some steroids and it did help or it didn’t help, that’s never the point. The point is, to all these high school coaches and high school kids and college kids, that if they did cheat, that’s the point.”
Martz said he assumed the walkthrough report was false. A similar sentiment was voiced by Chicago Bears Coach Lovie Smith, the Rams’ defensive coordinator that season.
“It’s just hard for me to fathom anyone would do anything like that,” Smith said. “I’m sure, if there’s something to it, No. 1, it will come out later. Time has a way of taking care of all things.”
Martz was asked if he wanted the N.F.L. to continue investigating the walkthrough. “Of course,” he said. “I was involved in that. I was responsible for a lot of people in that game.”
Executives dismissed any lingering notions that the Patriots’ taping opponents was a common practice around the league.
“I don’t want the outside perception to be, ‘Boy, there are all these teams and they’re all doing all these things,’ ” said Rich McKay, the Falcons’ president and a member of the competition committee. “Because it’s not true.”
Belichick was not seen in the hallways of the convention center Thursday. Representatives of 21 teams are scheduled to meet with reporters for news conferences from Thursday to Sunday. Belichick and the Patriots are not among them.
RON_IN_OC
https://www.ronevansrealty.com
I think the reason many of the NFL Execs and Owners are "satisfied" with Goodell's investigation and punishment is because the Pats aren't the only team guilty of this. They were just the only team caught and made an example of. If the investigation were to go deeper I'm sure many other teams would get busted for doing the same thing.
Capital Card
The Kobayashi of Kool-Aid
How about this as a resolution:
If found that the Pats did illegally tape the Rams SB walk-though, the league should strip NE of their first SB trophy and award it to the Rams.
This would then transfer the rath of the football Gods from us having an undeserved championship (1925) to St. Louis. (If the league could strip Pottsville of their trophy, why not the Pats now?)
Of course, I'm kidding, but then again....I do kind of like it.?
Go Cards!!!
If found that the Pats did illegally tape the Rams SB walk-though, the league should strip NE of their first SB trophy and award it to the Rams.
This would then transfer the rath of the football Gods from us having an undeserved championship (1925) to St. Louis. (If the league could strip Pottsville of their trophy, why not the Pats now?)
Of course, I'm kidding, but then again....I do kind of like it.?
Go Cards!!!
BigRedMO
Registered
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2004
- Posts
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 12
So as long as everybody is doing something it is ok? Try that logic on next time you get pulled over for speeding. I guess the Holocaust was ok because all of Germany was doing it? Steroids would be ok if all the baseball players did them? Right or wrong in my book is not based on how many people are doing it.
moklerman
Rise from the Ashes III
That is a possibility but from watching the interview snippets of the competition committee on Total Access, I think it's more of a case of the committee doing damage control and trying to salvage Goodell's reputation and authority.
Everytime Fisher, Polian, etc. spoke, it was to state how the commissioner did a thorough job, he wasn't wrong in how he handled things, his explanation for burning the evidence was to their satisfaction, etc. The NFL protecting it's own, is all it is.
I didn't get the impression at any point that they were trying to avoid exposing other teams doing the same thing. I certainly haven't heard any allegations in that regard. No whisper, rumor or anything else that any other teams were doing it.
Along those lines, Fisher and the committee stated there was no reason to re-visit or re-word/describe the language of the rule. He said it was very clear and they wouldn't make any changes. That implicates New England in my book.
RON_IN_OC
https://www.ronevansrealty.com
Dude, re-read my post. I never said any of this was ok. I just gave a reason, from my opinion, that the other NFL owners and execs were satisfied with Goodell's reaction to Spygate.
Lloydian
Registered
I'm sure there is nothing I can say that will make you think that Rich McKay is telling the truth, but let's face it, the Patriots are the only team this charge has been made against, and they are the only team that evidence has been produced about.
Let me know when you have evidence that another team has done it.
BigRedMO
Registered
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2004
- Posts
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 12
You are correct that you did not defend that logic. I just get tired of hearing that defense even as an explanation. To me that explanation should be just as reviled as I murdered my 2 year old child because she was crying. I here the defense that everybody is doing it applied to everything under the sun, particulary politics. It is ok for my party or person to break the law because so and so did. Anyway, did not mean to jump you.
Belichek has done more harm to the NFL than any other single person I can think of. A sports league's worst nightmare is that the legitimacy of results is in doubt. If the NFL can prove he has done this since 2000 they should throw the book at him. Permant banning from the NFL is not too extreme.
Last edited:
Spygate is circling the drain.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 88,186
- Reaction score
- 39,791
Yeah I think Walsh failing to deliver the tape of the superbowl walkthrough is huge for NE. Apparently they had already admitted taping as far back as 2000, and Walsh agreed to immunity in exchange for giving them everything he had. So he agreed if he held back tapes, his immunity would go away. So he has forfeited the chance to bring out the tape of the Superbowl thing which seemed to be what the NFL really wanted.
I expect they'll slap BB's hand this time since he'd already admitted it. Would be interesting to know WHEN he admitted it, before Walsh came out in public or after.
CardinalChris
Big Man Himself
This is old news. This is exactly what the league found out from the first probe, and BB admitted he taped games dating back to 2000. What is missing is the superbowl walk through Walsh claimed he had. Now he doesn't have them.
Similar threads
