New England Patriots: ESPN's Sal Paolantonio - Time to Move on From Spygate

I can't even imagine that Belichick ever had a conversation with the video assistant to discuss anything, let alone his motives.  Belichick made the decision, the wrong decision, to video tape opponents' signals.  But thinking, let alone actually writing, that the video assistant may have insight into Belichick's actual intent is simply beyond preposterous. 

Paolantonio continues on though, imploring Goodell to grill Walsh (or one might say he is providing last minute instructions to Walsh on what to say in order to keep this story going). 

He is so desperate that he even wrote that we need to find out from the video assistant, "Did Tom Brady" see reports from the taping of signals? 

Sal Paolantonio just wrote in an article on the worldwide leader in sports web site that he wants to know if the video assistant knows what information Tom Brady, and any other name Paolantonio can throw in, received in reports from the coaching staff.  

A possible distribution list in Foxboro for quarterback reports, according to NFL Insider Sal Paolantonio - head coach, offensive coordinator, quarterbacks coach, video assistant, Tom Brady.  

There is no plausible scenario in the history of football where the video assistant would have such information.  

But good ol' unbiased Sal believes Matt Walsh and Tom Brady must have interacted - enough to justify writing it in his column.  If Goodell gets tough with his questioning, we will learn this type of information, according to Paolantonio.  

I find it very telling that people like Paolantonio, who are now coming up with all new theories of what information Matt Walsh could have against the Patriots, had to wait until after it was shown Walsh did not have the smoking gun video tape of the Rams' practice.

Where were all these theories months ago when we first heard about Walsh?  It wasn't until Walsh had nothing to offer, that Paolantonio and company had to dream up reasons why Walsh could still be relevant.  I believe grasping at straws is the term to descrbe Paolantonio's actions.

The second glaring problem with Paolantonio's article is this—the source he wants to get the information from is Matt Walsh. 

Why would we at this point ever listen to or believe for one second anything that comes out of Matt Walsh's mouth?  Walsh is a proven thief and a proven liar.  Other than that though, he makes a credible witness.  He rates somewhere between Rafael Palmeiro and Pete Rose. 

Walsh, had he wanted to, could have put an end to this story months ago, but he lacked the basic integrity needed to do so. 

Very quickly, reason No. 1 not to listen to a word Walsh has to say:  he got fired from the Patriots.  Briefly glossed over in Paolantonio's article.

Reason No. 2: he broke the law by secretly taping conversations with Scott Pioli and then through his lawyer lied about it.  Not mentioned in Paolantonio's article. 

Reason No. 3: he stole from the Patriots. Not mentioned in Paolantonio's article.

Reason No. 4: he lied for months about having a confidentiality agreement. Not mentioned in Paolantonio's article.

Reason No. 5: and the most telling reason, when given numerous opportunities and months to correct a completely fabricated story, Walsh did not say a word. This is thrown in at the end of Paolantonio's article, but not until he had already spent paragraph after paragraph imagining the information Walsh could have against the Patriots.

This article by Paolantonio is a complete hatchet job.  He writes that it is clear from Walsh's tapes that the Patriots taping practices went back to 2000.  This isn't clear because of Walsh's tapes, it is clear because Bill Belichick admitted it to the NFL back in September.  Slight difference.   

Maybe it took the NFL a few months to put that precise information in a press release (surprised it was able to slip by an investigative reporter like Mike Fish for all those months-thought he would get to the truth much sooner with his investigative reporting skills).  That does not take away from the fact the Patriots, and not Matt Walsh as Paolantonio is trying to make readers believe, were the source of the information.  

Why is Paolantonio soiling his reputation by writing such a clearly biased article?  Is it because he is a Philadelphia

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?