By now, I'm sure most of the sports world is tired of hearing about it. It has been the hot topic of the NFL off season, and it is the story that just won't die.
Yes, bear with me, but I would like to talk about Spygate.
On Tuesday morning, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell met with former New England video assistant Matt Walsh to review tapes Walsh had in his possession.
The tapes supposedly showed no new evidence, and unless Senator Arlen Specter get his wish, Spygate is essentially dead. Goodell felt that the Walsh tapes showed no new information that the league didn't already know about, thus putting the issue to bed.
There is no one happier about this than Roger Goodell. The league was never able to find the smoking gun, that rumored tape of the Rams' Super Bowl walk-through from 2001.
But let's be honest here. The league didn't want to find it.
I know that the Boston Herald apologized for its "false" story about the alleged tape this morning. Understand though, the Boston Herald would not have published its story unless it had a very credible source. The Herald did not fabricate the story from thin air.
However, the tape was not found, so it must not be true—according to the NFL and the Patriots. But it make me wonder, what was on those destroyed tapes that Goodell had in his possession?
The league released Walsh's video to the media for review late Tuesday morning, but what I am wondering is: Why the inconsistency?
Why release Walsh's tapes, but destroy the ones confiscated from the Patriots video library? Goodell has tap danced all around this issue, giving various excuses.
What was on those tapes? Goodell said it was similar to the same kinds of things presented on Walsh's tapes. But again, what was so kosher about the Walsh tapes, as opposed to those seized from the Patriots. There had to be something.
I understand that the NFL has already fined and punished the Patriots. But I am all for Specter's call for an independent investigation.
Goodell didn't want any part of this from the start. He had been reluctant to meet with Walsh until recently. His punishment was weak and amounted to nothing more then a slap on the wrist to Bill Belichick and the franchise.
Taking away the first pick was a joke. The Patriots still ended up with one of the most coveted linebackers in the draft. Where is the deterrence for any other team doing or attempting to do something similar?
I know that the cheating may have been only a minimal advantage, but when you know what play is being called, that helps. Plus, it is still cheating.
Goodell doesn't want to deal with this issue because he knows the Patriots are the NFL's cash cow. He knows that if the Patriots dynasty is tainted, then so is the NFL over the past six seasons. He might have to deal with taking away championships, if he dug deeper. He might have to deal with suspensions and more punishment, if he really investigated this.
At the end of the day, nothing more will probably come of this situation. But the commissioner, who has been tough on player conduct, let one of the biggest violations of league conduct go. What is he afraid of?
comments (5) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
Long windy article short, you sound like someone who's team the Patriots have smashed one too many times.
1. Take away their championship against the Rams and you give the Rams nothing. All of the benefit of a Super Bowl is in the following season when endorsements and ticket sales increase.
2. If you think taking away Pick 31 from them was not enough then you do not realize the significance of what the Patriots can do with 1 1st round pick. Trade it away for a future pick, trade down and get a few more picks, or pick a position of need. All of these actions would lead to a bolstering of the Patriots who look to be the team to beat in the AFC next season.
You and the rest of the conspiracy people need to hope that the 2008 Patriots are not the 2007 Pats and come out to evicerate a team near you. My poor Chiefs will be their first victims. Take it easy on the Bill!
about 1 month ago
There is a little town out west, maybe you've heard of it, it's called Las Vegas. And just in case you were born yesterday, I have to tell you that in Vegas over the course of the last seven years billions of dollars have been wagered on NFL football games. When you add up all the collective betting on football on a global scale it is hundreds of billions of dollars. A lot of people lost a lot of money because of the Pats cheating.
Now,in the gambling world, its called "fixing a game" when organized cheating occurs within a sports franchise. When this happens you leave the rhelm of sports and enter the sleazy world of crime.
Regardless of what Rodger would have us believe, Specter knows that the Pats had a huge advantage from cheating. So would people betting on the game if they knew about the fix. And lots of people knew about the cheating, probably the whole team. So, how many of them were betting on the games? It's not a stretch to think at some point over seven years organized crime might have gotten wind of it. When a horse race or a boxing match is fixed, they don't loose a draft pick, someone goes to jail. I hope Specter gets to ask questions to some people under oath
about 1 month ago
Are you out of your mind? Do you really think the Boston Herald had a reliable source, and printed the retraction just to be nice? That retraction they ran, all by itself, would almost assure the Patriots a victory if they decided to bring a libel/slander suit against the Herald. And I have to assume you are not from the Boston area, because then you would know, the Herald is a crappy paper - with a few good writers sprinkled in - known for being just slightly better than your average tabloid. I love that you think the punishment was weak - it was far and away the stiffest punishment EVER handed out by the league to a team. And, the conclusion that the Patriots didn't tape the Rams practice is not just based on the fact Matt Walsh didn't have the tape, it is based on interviews of over 50 people, including Walsh, who all said no such taping occurred. This isnt a case where there is no tape because it can't be found - there is no tape, because it never happened.
And to all the people, like the Robert with his idiotic comment above mine, who think this taping was major cheating that gave the Patriots a huge advantage. enough to allow them to win (how did the pats do last year after getting caught? they really struggled?), I ask a simple question - did you watch the tapes that the league released to the media? Did you see one thing on those tapes that you dont get to see on your own watching any game? Why new england did it, i dont know. Obviously they did it for some reason, but to think it was enough to "fix" a game, you are all idiots.
Jimmy Johnson, a former coach with some guts to admit the truth (probably because he knows he is done coaching) admitted he taped opposing coaches, and it was common practice - what do you think of that Robert and Chris and anyone else who thinks like them? Do we need to go back and investigate Johnson's teams?
As a Patriot fan, I would love to see Specter start up a Mitchel Report type investigation, as long as it was into all teams and the use of video tape to violate rules. Because I guarantee, it is a widespread practice.
about 1 month ago
Wow - maybe first you should stop drinking the Patriots kool-aid. And if you read the whole article, you would realize my concern is as quoted " Where is the deterrence for any other team doing or attempting to do something similar? " So next time read the article all the way through, because that is my concern.
And if Jimmy Johnson did it, then yeah it deserves to be looked into the same way baseball looked into Mark McGwire's career and Jose Canseco's. Quit making excuses for cheating and admit that it was wrong. I'll go one further Stew. You are so sure this tape doesn't exist, because it never happened. By your logic Barry Bonds never took steroids because he didn't test positive for them. Get off the band wagon and look at with an objective eye.
from about 1 month ago
Where is the deterrence - you don't think losing a first round pick is a major deterrence? no team had ever lost a top pick for anything, including the salary cap violations of the Broncos and the 49ers. The pats had two major holes entering the 2008 draft - wouldn't it have been great if they still had their pick at the end of the first round to get a defensive back? That is a major deterrent. And I would expect, if another team was dumb enough to do this in the future (especially the Patriots), the next punishment would be even more severe (and should be - if the Pats were to do it again, Id expect major suspension for Belichick at a minimum).
No one has ever framed this debate as one where they honestly care about finding out if other teams acted in a similar fashion - Johnson made the quote that he did it and it was common, and no one cared. Let's get the Patriots, because they cheated, they were the only ones, and vegas and the mob as that idiot Robert posted, were in on it too.
I'm not making any excuses - they cheated, they were caught, they were punished. What is the point in continuing to drag this out when really nothing new has been learned since September. If Walsh had what it was said he had, I would not for a second defend the Patriots. But there is nothing to indicate the Patriots ever did anything but tape signals - that was wrong, they were punished. Just because the Boston herald printed a false story, doesn't mean there is more out there. The Bonds comparison is just stupid - there is a mountain of evidence that Bonds took performance enhancing drugs, from everything in Game of Shadows - which unlike the herald story, is superbly well documented - to his dramatic change in size. with the patriots, there is NOTHING to show they ever did anything more than what they were already punished for. The herald story was false, Walsh had no tape, he said no tape exists to his knowledge, he said he nor anyone else that he was aware of taped the practice, others with the Patriots at the time gave identical accounts of the story to the NFL. There simply is nothing more to this story. If one thinks the punishment should have been more severe for taping signals, fine. I would disagree, but that is a debate. But this continued effort to dig when there is no indication there is anything else, is just a waste of everyone's time.
write a new comment