PDA

View Full Version : How did this go under the radar?



Since86
02-13-2008, 04:47 PM
As reported by ESPN in September 2007, Belichick privately admitted to Goodell that videotaping opposing team's defensive signals had been his standard practice since he became the New England coach in 2000. Belichick argued that he believed he was within the letter of the rule, as long as he did not use the material on game day.

The commissioner rejected the interpretation, and also cited a league memo distributed prior to the start of the season that specified teams were not to engage in such practice.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3244157

Wow, that's a freaking bombshell and this is the first time I've heard it. The article makes it seem like it's known information.

I know I'm on his ignore, but if PT can defend that then all hope is lost.

Sollozzo
02-13-2008, 04:53 PM
Whoa, I didn't know that either.

Sollozzo
02-13-2008, 04:58 PM
And If videotaping teams defensive signals really was "standard practice" for BB and Co., wouldn't a reasonable person also guess that taping offensive signals was "standard practice" as well?

Lord Helmet
02-13-2008, 04:58 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3244157

Wow, that's a freaking bombshell and this is the first time I've heard it. The article makes it seem like it's known information.

I know I'm on his ignore, but if PT can defend that then all hope is lost.
THEY ONLY DID IT ONCE, I TELL YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ownagedood
02-13-2008, 05:57 PM
Wow, didn't know it.. Makes me even more upset and even more thinking that Goodell is trying to cover up all this for the Pats.. If he wasn't trying to.. Then why hadn't we heard this earlier?

Shade
02-13-2008, 06:46 PM
I heard ESPN discussing this yesterday, but was waiting for a link before posting anything because I didn't want to misrepresent what I half-heard.

How does ESPN keep getting all of this stuff, and nobody else does?

McClintic Sphere
02-13-2008, 09:08 PM
USA Today carried a similiar story: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-02-12-goodell-specter_N.htm

And Profootballtalk.com has issued a request to all readers to see if anyone ever remembers it being mentioned before that the NFL knew that the spying went back to 2000. It seems like Goodell was just trying to slip that in there.

Slick Pinkham
02-13-2008, 09:08 PM
Obviously this is news to all of us, so it is also obvious that they did not report this back in September.

They are wrong in this report, since they are wrong in their facts. They make up stuff as they go along.

Just more bad journalism for their ombudsman to eventually clean up.

McClintic Sphere
02-13-2008, 09:15 PM
Obviously this is news to all of us, so it is also obvious that they did not report this back in September.

They are wrong in this report, since they are wrong in their facts. They make up stuff as they go along.

Just more bad journalism for their ombudsman to eventually clean up.

Pacertom, you need to face up to the reality that these are not the blue collar underdogs representing the American way that you fell in love with back in 2000. There is help out there, if you are willing to admit you need it: http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1192&Itemid=5&limit=1&limitstart=5

Sollozzo
02-13-2008, 11:00 PM
Obviously this is news to all of us, so it is also obvious that they did not report this back in September.

They are wrong in this report, since they are wrong in their facts. They make up stuff as they go along.

Just more bad journalism for their ombudsman to eventually clean up.


Wrong in their facts? What? Goodell apparently has told Specter that the Pats have taped since 00.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/02/13/specter.goodell.ap/index.html

Slick Pinkham
02-14-2008, 12:40 PM
I don't know what to believe, since ESPN says that they reported this "fact" in September, when they clearly did NOT.

It was also reported back then that the penalty Goodell imposed represented a penalty for the "totality" of what the Patriots admitted to doing. He subsequently said that there would be no additional penalties unless new information or evidence came to light.

So far there seems to be no new information or evidence since September, given that Walsh still will not speak even after the NFL offered full indemnity.

I'm disappointed that (according to Specter-- I still want to hear DIRECTLY from Goodell on this) sideline videotaping was occurring before last year.

I'm also confused by when the rule came into effect-- did the 2006 memo merely "clarify" the law or actually spell out the details for the first time? Goodell says the rule was "long standing" so one year doesn't seem long-standing to me, so I guess in some form or fashion the rule existed prior to 2006.

This CNN-SI article, published before spygate, sheds light on why them memo came out, it was according to the author "the most common practice" used by NFL teams to steal signs:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/don_banks/07/06/cheating.nfl/index.html




The "stealing'' of signs -- both on offense and defense -- is the area that's most often cited as fertile ground for cheating. The most common practice is for a team to videotape an opponent's signal-givers on the sideline, and later marry up those indications to the game tape in order to identify tendencies or patterns.

Since86
02-14-2008, 02:22 PM
Miami and Green Bay told the world that they kicked a NE employee off the sideline in the 2006 season and you don't believe that.

You won't believe if he says it, you'll say you need to see the videotape, then you'll say you need to see the time stamp.

You don't want to believe it so you're going to do everything you can not too. Which is exactly what all of us have been telling you for months now.

grace
02-14-2008, 03:33 PM
Wrong in their facts? What? Goodell apparently has told Specter that the Pats have taped since 00.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/02/13/specter.goodell.ap/index.html

Maybe Goodell just misremembered the facts. :shrug:

Slick Pinkham
02-14-2008, 03:35 PM
Miami and Green Bay told the world that they kicked a NE employee off the sideline in the 2006 season and you don't believe that.

--snip--

This is true, and ESPN reported it: In November 2006, during their 35-0 victory in Green Bay, the Packers caught Estrella shooting unauthorized video and told him to stop.

Also, the Boston Globe reported that the people with Buffalo Bills, after spygate, came forward to complain about the Patriots using a camera against them in 2006.

Please tell me about Miami doing the same thing. That is something else that you made up. Just like when you made up from thin air an alleged quote by Peter King, saying that Roger Goodell was sweeping this under a rug. Maybe you have Miami in your head since the Dolphins taped the Patriots offensive snap counts in 2006, before Goodell, and weren't punished.

This is the one fact that I disputed, the item that is completely fabricated in your statement, that Green Bay or any other team "told the world about it" when it happened. They did not go public until THIS SEPTEMBER, and admitted that they never complained to the league. Who knows their motivation for doing nothing-- they saw it as unimportant, or they were part of the "old boy's club" where you don't tell on people, who knows...

It is clear that the league issued a memo, probably because as the CNN-SI article indicated, taping signals had become the "most common practice" of stealing signs in the NFL as a whole.

Belichick was stupid to think that as long as he wasn't deciphering the signals and using information during the same game, it was OK.

Goodell was stupid to destroy the tapes. That's a conspiracy theorist's nightmare. New flash, bozo: I would like to know the full truth.

According to John Clayton of ESPN, in an on-air interview on WEEI in Boston, said that three other NFL teams (not including the Patriots) in 2006 had a staff of assistants and videotapers that studied defensive signals and interpreted signal calls fast enough during halftime to give input for second hald adjustments. I am sure that he won't name his sources, and he doesn't have to. Those teams have covered their tracks by now.

You won't believe Jimmy Johnson, Bill Parcells, Sean Salisbury, or any other former coach or player who laughs at this and says it's nothing, or assures you that for the one team caught there were 25 others glad they escaped the same scrutiny.

Talk to me when Goodell has more information than he had in September, when he decided the fine. If it's proved they taped the walkthrough, fire Belichick and take away the rings! Prove it-- show me the one witness who says yes under oath, to contradict the dozen on record as saying to Goodell that they will say no under oath.

If you are going to rehash the sideline signal taping over and over and over again though, listen to Sean Salisbury's point:

"If the sidelne taping issue is going to be scruntinized so heavily, even to the point that the government is going to get involved in the spygate investigation, then it has to be an umbrella investigation. Just like the Mitchell Report didn't go after one single steroid user, don't just go after the Patriots. There are 31 other teams that should be investigated and I guarantee you that some of them have been violating the same rules."

Slick Pinkham
02-14-2008, 09:57 PM
sorry for the tone with which I opened the last post. I have edited it.

It is so extremely frustrating to have to constantly correct blatant misrepresentations of "how Patriots fans think"

News flashes:

Most Patriots fans want to know the truth and the whole truth, told by people willing to go on the record.

Most Patriots fans were extremely ticked off at Bill Belichick for "misinterpreting" the taping rule, essentially ignoring the 2006 memo that clarified it.

Most Patriots fans think that taping the walkthrough would be a SERIOUS offense and would deserve HUGE punishments, probably including firing. Most are a little put off by unnamed sources and vague "hints" by an ex-employee that he may or may not have something interesting to say, but won't say it even though he was given immunity from prosecution in exchange to promising not to lie and to show the evidence.

there are others I hear all the time, but those are a few biggies.

Shade
02-17-2008, 02:28 PM
Y'know, pt, I seriously really feel for you right now. Being a Pats AND IU fan has gotta suck balls right now. I'm just waiting for the Great Pacers Scandal to rear it's ugly head to complete the trifecta. :uhoh: