Here is the thing I have been wondering about since Spygate came to light. Of all the teams that the New England Patriots reportedly stole signals from, never once have I read the Oakland Raiders. Maybe I am just a sports-romantic who is still upset about the "tuck rule," or maybe I am on to something here. The tuck rule is no Immaculate Reception. Franco Harris was lucky. This is the Immaculate Deception. Tom Brady was "lucky."
THE FUMBLE, THE TUCK, THE WHO KNOWS WHAT
Everyone wonders: How can stealing-signals be that important? Well, chew on this. How did Bill Belichick know that CB Charles Woodson would be coming for Tom Brady? How did Tom Brady know to pump-fake? How did Bill Belichick know exactly what to challenge when he threw the red flag? Were the Patriots stealing signals during the Snow Job (if you remember, the Patriots stunk in the first half before looking brilliant in the second half)?
Did a Boston paper fabricate the story about the Patriots taping the walkthrough for the St. Louis Rams, which is true, but as a red herring to discredit Matt Walsh? Gee, I wonder.
The fact is—had the refs upheld Greg Biekert’s fumble recovery: GAME OVER. The ramifications of such: No Adam Vinatieri heroics and a trade-deal, and the bench loomed as the future of QB Tom Brady, not QB Drew Bledsoe (who they traded to Buffalo). No "genius" Bill Belichick either. Meanwhile, Coach Jon Gruden *probably* would not have been traded from Oakland to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, who of course defeated the Oakland Raiders in the 2002 Super Bowl.
THE PATRIOTS AND THE NFL
The Patriots began taping signals in 2000. Moreover, the two games before the Snow Job were both against New England's archrival, the New York Jets (a team which we know had signals stolen). Nevertheless, even if New England did not steal from Oakland (but probably did), they could have extrapolated it from the two games in 2001 between the Jets and Raiders.
Coincidentally, the reason for the back-to-back games was that the NFL postponed the Jets-Raiders game from Week Two due to 9/11. (Note: I do not claim that the NFL postponed games from Week Two as part of the cover-up.)
The Jets won Game One in the final week, after Oakland deactivated K Sebastian Janikowski for that week with cellulitis, and replaced him with Brad Daluiso. Daluiso missed an FG and PAT that would have made the difference. The Raiders then won Game Two in the Wild Card round on the heroics of Jerry Rice.
Moreover, the Patriots could have stolen signals during the Snow Job (as I alluded to). If you remember, the Patriots stunk in the first half of that game before looking "brilliant" in the second half. Bill Belichick might not have expected to challenge a fumble recovery, but could have easily expected to challenge whether it was a sack or an "incomplete pass."
Charles Woodson blew through a wall of players on the strongside on that play. The blocking-backs and ends for New England then were too slow (Antowain Smith, Marc Edwards, Jermaine Wiggins) to pick up a blitzing cornerback like Woodson, thus, I believe that Belichick knew what was about to happen and told Brady to take a hit on a pump-fake. That way, he would not lose the yards and would in effect receive a timeout when the Patriots had no timeouts to use in order to change the formation. Plus, there were no hot receivers on that play and so if Brady had released in the direction he pump-faked, he would have been penalized for intentional grounding. It was unexpected to challenge a fumble recovery, but Belichick knew it would not matter.
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, May 13, 2008:
"Goodell met with former Patriots assistant Matt Walsh for more than three hours today. He had previously reviewed tapes of eight games, including the 2002 AFC Championship game between the Patriots and Steelers, that Walsh turned over to Goodell's office. The tapes showed the Patriots filming opposing coaches as they were giving signals during games."
The fact is—Roger Goodell destroyed tapes by Matt Walsh before anyone else could review them: How do we know that they did not implicate the Patriots in stealing-signals for the most important play in their recent history?
Destruction of evidence however, is indicative of a cover-up and prima fascia evidence of a conspiracy. They were not covering-up a tape of the Rams walkthrough, but evidence that would prove that the Raiders truly were jobbed.
You mean to tell me that the Patriots would steal-signals DURING the 2002 AFC Championship Game in Pittsburgh, but that the Patriots would not steal-signals during the 2002 AFC Divisional Playoff on their home turf?
The other fact remains. That playoff game was the first meeting between New England and Pittsburgh in Bill Belichick's tenure as head coach. To believe that the Patriots would not steal-signals during the game with Oakland, would be a conspiracy theory. Or should I say: a black hole in logical thinking?
QUESTIONS NEED ANSWERS
If anyone were asking these questions, the integrity of the game would be embroiled in jeopardy. As far as my concern goes, the New England Patriots stole their legacy; and to be punished only by losing one draft pick and paying a mediocre fine is a travesty.
I am dead serious about my questions. I want to know the answers. I could be wrong. I doubt it though. The fact is—the Patriots have done enough to eviscerate any benefit of the doubt. Al Davis, if there is anyone to sue though, it is the New England Patriots to find out exactly what those Patriots have stolen. This one could also prove that the NFL has conspired against Al Davis. No one truly knows who “made the call,” and the Head of Officials is still spinning the call as a tuck.
As well, I actually wanted to see the New England Patriots win the Super Bowl in 2001 (after the Snow Job of course), because of what their win would symbolically mean in the wake of 9/11. Frankly, I not only believe that the Patriots stole their legacy. Their propaganda also stole my patriotism.
If you doubt my argument simply ask: Can you disprove my argument? No, you can't—Roger Goodell destroyed evidence!
comments (31) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
The NFL will deal with this issue like they always do with the Raiders; silence.
from 4 months ago
your correct, wait they mail a letter of apology then silence.
4 months ago
I've read this article now 5 times, and still am not sure if you are being serious or not. Part of me thinks this must be tongue in cheek, this person can't possibly be saying that the Patriots won the Tuck Rule game because of possibly taping defensive signals?
I will be the first to admit the patriots got lucky on that call, that i think the refs, even on replay, got the call wrong. But are you really saying that because the patriots taped signals, that they knew woodson was coming on a blitz - so instead of designing a play to beat the blitz they knew was coming, they thought the better idea was to have tom brady pump fake, get sacked, loose the ball, and put the decision in the hands of the replay official? and hope that the officials reversed the call?
and instead of coming up with a play to pick up yardage against the blitz you say they knew was coming from taping signals, the patriots decided instead to just fumble the ball, and then hope to get the call reversed because they gained so much out of it - an incomplete pass and next down rather then try to come up with a play that might have actually picked up yardage?
and then you go on to say that if it wasn't for taping signals, bill belichick would not have challenged a close call of was the QB throwing or not when there was nothing to lose at that point (lose the challenge, or don't challenge, and game over - win the challenge, still alive).
by the way, tuck rule game was in january 2002. the previous game between the patriots and the raiders, 1994. I really hope this article is a joke, because if it is not, of all the theories people have come up with to show how the patriots never would have won a game the last seven seasons had it not been for taping signals, this is by far the dumbest.
4 months ago
Bill Belichik has devised crazier things than that. Remember when the Patriots look the safety against Denver just so they'd get better field position, even though it cost them 2 points at the time?
from 4 months ago
I don't really know what this means - because the Patriots came up with an intelligent, totally legal strategy that helped them win the game, then that means that they would intentionally try to have Brady fumble, only to get the ball back on replay? One, the announcers for the game said the Patriots should take the safety against Denver, so while it was not a traditional play, it wasn't really all the crazy. And second, what did the Patriots gain from the replay call? They lost a down and got the ball back in the same spot - why would they ever intentionally want that to happen?
4 months ago
good read. check out my Dwayne Bowe article.
4 months ago
Well I do know one thing, the Patsies and the refs for such game would never dare cheat in Oakland. They all know none of them would get out alive. The game after the 'Tuck Rule' when the Pasties came to Oakland it was one of a very few times they didn't cheat and voila, they lost.
Your theory is actually plausible, but I am not so sure I would bet the farm on that. But I do believe that there was definitely something on those tapes to completely indict the Patsies and for Goodall to 'destroy evidence' is deplorable.
I am with Joey Porter and believe that Spygate isn't over.
BTW, anyone know what happened with that Jets fan that is a lawyer who was filing a class-action suit against the NFL and the Patsies for fraud?
4 months ago
I think you and Joey Porter are right. I think that there was stuff on the tapes Goodell destroyed that showed more than they are willing to admit. Otherwise why destroy the tapes?
I don't think stealing signals had anything to do with the Tuck play itself. I disagree that the Tuck is not like the Immaculate Illegal Forward Pass, even more to the point it is a lot like the Raider's "5th down" which came against the Patsies in Oakland in the 4th quarter of their 1976 playoff game with Stabler throwing the game winner on an extra down at the goaline. Those are all questionable calls that went the home teams way in the playoffs, the Tuck, Immaculate POS and 5th Down are all homer calls.
That said the Patriots are cheaters, and as a Raider fan, that wouldn't bug me, Just Win Baby, but the Raiders were never so arrogant or stupid as to get caught. Asterisk, for stupid. Watch the Bills win the East this year.
4 months ago
There's a serious wrench in your whole theory: The Patriots didn't play the Raiders in the 2000 or 2001 season. Where would they have gotten the signals from?
Please do some fact checking before you post crazy conspiracy theories.
from 4 months ago
You didn't read what I said. I clearly pointed out that the Raiders played the Jets twice in 2001 and that the Pats are known to have stolen signals from the Jets, and that they could have learned from what they stole in analyzing Oakland. I also said that the Pats could have stolen-signals DURING the Snow Job and used that information in the 2nd half--as I also said, the Pats stunk in the first half and then looked "brilliant" in the 2nd half. I also said that the Pats might now have expected to challenge a fumble recovery but whether it was a sack or an incomplete pass. Charles Woodson came from the weak side on that play when he was normally a strongside cornerback. The blockers for New England then were too slow to pick up a blitzing cornerback, thus, I believe that Belichik knew what was about to happen and told Brady to take a hit on a pump fake because that way, he would not lose the yards.
from 4 months ago
I apologized from that one comment down, but still...
Look, even Matt Walsh said that they didn't use the tapes during any games.
And what the hell do you mean? You're saying that they "stole signals" from the Jets, which means they filmed the JETS signals. They did not STEAL the Jets tapes of Oakland. That would be a whole different matter, and quite frankly didn't happen.
The Forward-Motion rule is a well-accepted pass. The Tuck Rule is a clarification of that rule. The rule basically says that if the Quarter back begins to tuck the ball back mid-throw because he's going to get hit, and it comes out before he's secured it against his body, it still counts as a forward pass. IE, the in-between period from a pass-to-tuck transition is considered a forward-pass. The forward motion is what Belichick was challenging, and the head-ref cited that rule in his decision that the ball was a forward pass and not a fumble. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuck_rule
You are insane for thinking that it was a plotted-pump-fake hit. How do you know it was even a pump fake? Do you think the even expected someone to be in the backfield? You plan that on screen plays, that's about it. Even it that were the case, it would not be against the rules; there's no rule that says you can't pump fake the ball while taking a hit draw the forward-motion ruling. To even want to do that, though, you would have to know you were going to fumble beforehand
I submit that you are insane, and not qualified to have an opinion; you are a conspiracy theorist.
4 months ago
Looks like I should do my own reading. You'll have to forgive me, as you are completely insane, and I don't feel the need to read your insane ramblings.
Either way, this is a far-out there conspiracy theory. Even if they pulled signals from the Jets games, this wouldn't be a violation of NFL rules. The video they would have used is league distributed, and every team pulls signals from those.
Besides, it's not like teams don't change their signals.
4 months ago
of all the ridiculously stupid things written in this column, this may be the dumbest - "Did a Boston paper fabricate the story about the Patriots taping the walk-through for the St. Louis Rams, which is true, but as a red herring to discredit Matt Walsh?"
So did they fabricate the story, or was it true? it can't be both. either the story was true that the Patriots taped the walk-through, or it was fabricated on the part of the Boston Paper.
that in a close call trumps your absurd logic that the patriots because they taped signals knew woodson would be blitzing, and actually wanted him to sack brady, all in the hopes of getting the call then overturned on replay. This article is simply idiotic, and I wish bleacherreport would remove it. There are so many well written, well thought out articles on this site. This detracts from everything else. I actually feel stupid for wasting my time reading and adding a comment. But this piece of garbage article should not be allowed to stand with your "dumb" theories (note just because you put a word in quotations, doesn't really mean anything if it wasn't actually a quote).
your idea that the Patriots stole signals from another team's game against the Raiders is equally as dumb as anything you write - how would that be cheating? This is tortured logic at its worst.
4 months ago
Wow.
OK, first off, the tuck rule call was the correct call. It was made in games before that game and has been made after. It is a bad rule, granted, but a rule still.
Secondly, the Raiders have a BAD organization. That is why Gruden left. That is why your team has done so poorly over the last decade or so.
The only thing the Pats stole from teh Raiders was Randy Moss.
from 4 months ago
The Raider have had a bad organization.... Hmmm.... you know you could almost pull this statement off if the 'Horrible Oakland Raider' organization didnt have 3 superbowls and the highest winning percentage off all time to slap that statement in the face. Secondly, Gruden didnt leave by choice.... he was tossed by Davis for a draft pic and a little mula. Thirdly, Moss wasnt stole from the Nation, he also was tossed for a draft pick. And it looks like Moss accomplished in his first year what he did with the Raiders... No ring. Im not impressed by the Pats, nor will I be next year as they are scorn with the easiest schedule in the league. I believe the NFL is trying to create a Dynasty in the Pats... such as the Yankees in MLB.... Their trying to sell it, problem is no ones buying it. The pats are getting called out in all angles and Karmas finally catching up to bite them in the ass(Or it just did last superbowl)
God Bless the Silver & Black
4 months ago
The Patriots easiest schedule argument just shows that the person making it has no clue what they are talking about. The NFL does not pick and choose how schedules are put together, there is a formula that applies to every single team, every single year - play teams in your division twice, play teams in the other divisions in your conference that finished in the same place you did, play all the teams from a division in the AFC, play all the teams from a division in the NFC (and all teams from the same division play the same conference as the other teams from the division - so Steelers/Bengals/Browns/Ravens all play teams from the same division)
The Patriots will play each team in their division twice (6 games), since the Pats finished 1st in AFC East, they will play the other AFC division winners (3 games, Colts, Chargers, Steelers), on a rotating basis, they play each team from an AFC division(this year, AFC west, 3 games - KC, Denver, Raiders) and each team from an NFC division (this year, NFC west, 4 games - SF, Rams, Seattle, Cardinals).
I am not a Patriots fan, never have been. They were beyond arrogant and stupid when they broke the rules, and I would have liked to have seen a harsher punishment from the league (suspension for Belichick). But I have become so tired of all the piling on, and all the outrageous and illogical theories of how they benefited (this article) or how the NFL is trying to help the Patriots (their 2008 schedule), that I now find myself defending the Patriots.
When people lose credibility, which has long since happened with the handling of the spygate issue, that the story moves away from where it should be (what the Patriots did) and on to the irrational attacks against them.
4 months ago
by Andrea
from about 2 hours ago
Gruden didnt leave by choice.... he was tossed by Davis for a draft pic and a little mula.
Mike49er: God..you are so clueless. Didn't leave by choice? AL WANTED TO KEEP HIM, nitwit..$ AMOUNTS WERE TOSSED ABOUT..Gruden's lawyer finally relayed Gruden's message that 'THERE ISN'T ENOUGH MONEY ON THE PLANET TO KEEP ME HERE WORKING FOR THAT MAN". Gruden wanted out, TB wanted Gruden, and that's how the deal came about.
Now, as hard as this is for you, Andrea...THINK ABOUT IT..IF Al had..as you stated "tossed" Gruden, he would have gotten nothing. As well, the only way the deal would have gone down is if GRUDEN WANTED IT..NOT GERITOL AL...Gruden.
I told you..don't try and discuss the Raiders..stick to Scrabble.
========================================================
Thirdly, Moss wasnt stole from the Nation, he also was tossed for a draft pick.
Mike49er: See above about you being as sharp as a rock. One move that Lame is credited with is already labeled as one of the all time dumbest moves in the history of the NFL.
Moss TOLD THE RAIDERS HE DIDN'T WANT TO STAY, you fool...and Lame let him go for a 4TH ROUND PICK...which, by the way, that pick is now #4 ON THE RAIDERS DEPTH CHART..in other words, you gave up one of the best WR's in the NFL FOR NOTHING.
====================================================
I believe the NFL is trying to create a Dynasty in the Pats... such as the Yankees in MLB....
Mike49er: As already stated, who each team plays is set in concrete long before any season even starts..has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NFL MAKING INDIVIDUAL DECISIONS...it's a set formula. All they decide is what date and times the games are played.
My suggestion to you is go to the library, get a few books on football, and read.
You'll enjoy the game more, and you'll avoid setting yourself up to come across as so..."slow".
from 4 months ago
Moss was let go cuz he was a problem child, kinda like you:)
Gruden left because of Als influence.
Reading books on the NFL hasnt helped you:) btw we have internet who needs to go to the library anymore genius.
Something you will never have, Football intangible intelligence. of course you know nothing using stats either. well i guess your up the creek all the way around.
4 months ago
i deem this article highly offensive to football fans with any sense whatsoever.
from 4 months ago
i agree:)
4 months ago
Wow. With all the Raiders have gotten away with over the years, you sure have some big balls to complain.
With regard to spygate, it is a non-issue. Here's why:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/25207-Spygate-The-Biggest-Non-Issue-In-Sports-In-Quite-Some-Time
4 months ago
i dont know if there was any spygating against the Raiders in the snowjob, but alot of people dont mention something that wouldve made the tuck thing non existent. we had 13 penalties called against us against their 1 and yet i see Rice and Brown getting mugged 15 yds downfield. there were so many PIs that werent called against the Pats, to me the conspiracy was more of that then spygate. and one play Brown was blatantly put down on the ground while the ball was sailing over him and it was a crucial part of the game. It would be like if Tyree was pulled down before the pass got there and no call and the Pats end up winning the SB because of it. Not to mention in the snow the WR has much more an advantage because the defender cant as easily just cut with him. this was the first year of the Pats getting to SB with a relatively new team and your gonna tell me that HOFers Brown and Rice cant get open in the snow knowing how to from experience in the league, lol. anyone who believes that is more ignorant about this game than ever.
4 months ago
OF course the uncalled blow to the head which was not called must never enter into your thinking - Did you somehow miss seeing Brady's head snap back after CHarles Woodson whacked him??
Of course when Ray Hamilton really did not touch Stabler - they sure did call that one.
Selective Raider memory as usual.
Raiders are giving the old Patriots a real run for their moeny these dyas as the worst team in the NFL.
from 4 months ago
The fact is, Roger Goodell destroyed evidence and the Patriots don't have the benefit of the doubt. If you gave some honest thought to my argument, you'd at least say that I have legitimate questions that should be answered. I could be wrong--but Roger Goodell can't disprove me because he destroyed evidence.
4 months ago
http://www.thesportgallery.com/sport-stories/1967aug-nflspy.html
from 4 months ago
What he destroyed was all the evidence that NE had of other teams taping them...
4 months ago
just like with Roger Clemens, if you dont run they wont chase. meaning if the Pats had just been up front and admitted everything in the first place, all the new stuff wont be coming up. by actually avoiding the truth other stuff that wasnt part of the initial cheating will come up. like playing players on IR in practice when thats not allowed too.
Think about all the other stuff thats coming up about Roger Clemens, if he just admitted and came clean in the first place the media wouldnt be on his tail and he wouldnt be scrutinized now finding out other stuff he did thats really messing his life up.
4 months ago
The scandal is about motives and integrity. Who's againts the Patriots? Matt Walsh who have no integrity and may a motives against Belichick. Goddel? Now if some one is questioning Goddel's integrity and motives then they must first take their case against the NFL organization's integrity which host all team in the NFL, before they take it against one team which is the Pats. The theory about the tail (Pats) wagging the dog (NFL Goddel) would be absurd here.
Having said that, it is not logical that some who still believes in the integrity of the NFL organization to question the destruction of the tapes by Goddel.
To my opinion the worst thing is the integrity of the press such as Boston Herald. It is so logical that there's a significant effect of that story releasing one day before the Superbowl to the bad performance of the Patriots which loose the Superbowl.
This is like before your wedding, someone tells you future bride bad things which is not true about yourself and the wedding eventually called off by the bride. One would easily make cause-effect the connection.
THE MOST DEPRESSING THING IS THAT IN THE US PEOPLE CAN PUNISHED THE PATS BEFORE THEY ARE PROVEN GUILTY.
The lack of integrity of the press and of the senate (Specter) are what makes US in such economic slump it is in right now.
4 months ago
Roughing the passer. Next.
Oh 1976 divisional, check isnot paid in full. A ref has to give the Patriots the win, not because there was a rule, but because he was a Patriots fan. Yes, when asked about it referee Ben Dreith said, "I'm a Raiders fan."
4 months ago
If we're gong to split hairs on the spygate deal, I've split quite a few of them in another article here... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/12791-My-Thoughts-on-Spygate-120308 Be sure to follow the links, as they provide some more insight. Please keep an open mind and actually check out the links and do some more research. While I keep reading about how this is a cover up mainly because Goodell destroyed the tapes the Pats gave him initially, I don't see any one saying that he destroyed them becuase someone in the NFL leaked one of them to the press, and it made it out on news in Boston-so there were tapes of some teams (Jets maybe?) signals being shown on the 6 o'clock news. This didn't sit well with the commish and owners alike, so in the interest of the teams (and not having their signals shown to the entire world), the tapes were destroyed. Again, no one mentioned that-there seems to be a lot of one sided views going around here.
I'm not trying to start anything here, I'm just pointing something out.
4 months ago
Good point, Steve. Plus there's something else no one ever thinks about. Goodell only destroyed the copies the NFL had. Jay Glazer of FOX still has the leaked copies, so it's not like all the copies were destroyed and no one can ever check out the tapes ever again. Bits of one of Glazer's copies was broadcast on FOX's pregame show back in September. So, with other copies available, it's not like anything was "covered up." Check out Glazer's interview where he talks about the tapes at:
http://deadspin.com/383677/jay-glazer-owns-the-nfl
write a new comment