Patriots Spygate Fallout: Is Bill Belichick Lying?
OK, lets clear the air first.
I am not in any way, shape, or form, agreeing with Senator Spector about needing a independent investigation into spygate. What I am doing is questioning whether or not Bill Belicheat, I mean Belichick, is telling the truth about not understanding the rules about video taping coaches signals.
First things first, let's read the rule, so we all know it. Page 105 of the 2007 NFL "Game Operations Manual" states, "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game...All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."
Now, to me that is as clear as it can possible be, so I have no idea how in the world Belichick could have not understood that, especially for that long. My 18-month old nephew could understand that rule. Okay that is kind of a wild stretch, but you get my point. I digress...
Matt Walsh comes forward and says "Here are some more tapes. No, there is no video of the Rams' walkthrough, and oh by the way, we did know that we were breaking the rules, no we did not care, and we were instructed on how to aviod being caught."
Bill Belichick fires back that he is telling the truth that he made a "mistake". He even went as far as saying Walsh was a low-level staffer, and was fired for "poor job performace." But wait, I thought Belichick had no idea who he was, and said that he could not pick him out of a lineup. Just smells funny to me, that's all.
They went from really bad to really good pretty quickly. Now, it was not a huge help, because the players still have to execute the plays, so I don't believe that it was a huge advantage.
I am not sure if Goodell should punish the Patriots in light of what Walsh said, or if he even will, and truly I don't really care. There is no way to prove whether Belichick is lying or Walsh is just trying to revenge his firing.
Personally, I think that Belichick is lying, just because it is hard to believe that he misinterpreted a rule for like five years. But still, all I have to say is for God sakes, let it go.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?