MovieChat Forums > Tom Brady Discussion > Matt Walsh says nothing new- SPYGATE IS ...

Matt Walsh says nothing new- SPYGATE IS FINALLY OVER!


Matt Walsh finally met with the NFL Commissioner and had nothing new to say on the whole spygate issue. He provided tapes of the Patriots filming from the sidelines which is exactly what the Commissioner received from Bill Belichick months ago.

It's now clear why Matt Walsh wanted immunity. He misled everyone into thinking that he had a tape of the Rams walk-through practice. His lawyer claims that he never said that he had such a tape. But Mr. Walsh was well aware that the public was under the impression that he did have such a tape. He could have easily cleared everything up back in February, but instead he chose to enjoy the limelight. I don't know if his actions are criminal, but they're certainly unethical.

And then there's Mr. Specter, whose months of complaints benefited absolutely no one. It turned out, that the NFL had done a thorough job investigating Spygate. He'll probably complain about something else now, even though he should acknowledge that the whole matter is now closed. Mr. Specter has damaged his own reputation during the past several months because he received $500,000 from Comcast, who is involved in a bitter dispute with the NFL. Although he claims that the money he's received did not motivate him to publicly question the NFL, one has to wonder.

The Commissioner showed Mr. Walsh's tapes to the media today. Unfortunately, the public has yet to see a side-by-side comparison between the tapes at the Patriots took from the sidelines as opposed to tapes that are filmed from the approved press box area. Until someone points out the differences between taping from the two locations, it's mere speculation as to what kind of advantage (if any) is gained by filming from the sidelines. And Patriots haters will continue to ignore the fact that all teams had multiple signal callers which made signal stealing nearly impossible.

Next year's schedule is easier than last year's, so I expect the Patriots to once again go deep into the playoffs.

reply

This message has been deleted by an administrator

reply

This message has been deleted by an administrator

reply

Who needs to eat crow? Just because there was no walk through before the Ram's game doesn't change the fact that the cheating went on for a lot longer than Belicheat admitted to. They even taped an AFC championship game. I for one never did believe that tape of the Ram's existed. I think it was a plant to divert attention away from all the other wide spread taping by the Pats. The entire time Belicheat has been there, he has been cheating. Yes, I agree, now its time for the story to go away, but the fact that there is no Ram's tape doesn't change the facts already known.

reply

There wasn't any cheating involved. People keep forgetting the three-paragraph NFL bylaw allows taping; it is about in-game use of taped footage, not taping. Belichick's interpretation of the rule was correct and Goodell inadvertantly admitted such when he noted teams considered taping years ago but decided against it out of thinking that it wouldn't help them that much.

reply

Bill Belichick - The Cover up.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2008/05/18/with_belichick_the_cover_up_is_most_revealing/?page=2

Here is what Bill Belichick has done: He has placed Patriots fans on the defensive for the rest of their lives.

He has been exposed as being monumentally disingenuous at best and utterly duplicitous at worst. There can no longer be any doubt that he engaged in a practice he knew was against the rules.

The big question we cannot answer is how important it all was, really. Did his illegal practice of taping opponents' defensive signals aid his team's chances of victory in certain games by 20 percent? Ten percent? Three percent? One-10th of 1 percent? Not at all? No one will ever know.

Right now, it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter, because the only thing that does matter now is the image of the New England Patriots. The sports community now associates the Patriots with cheating. The three Super Bowl championships are, and forever will be, under suspicion. The thought will never go away.

Let Mike Martz, coach of the vanquished Rams in the 2002 Super Bowl, absolve the Patriots all he wants. A year from now, five years from now, 50 years from now, who will know or remember what Mike Martz said? The Patriots have been irrevocably stained. They will be, in the eyes of many, the reverse Black Sox. They will be the team that broke the rules. Their three Super Bowls will be regarded as ill-gotten gain.

And Bill Belichick still hasn't fessed up.

Bob Kraft should be livid.

How could anyone not feel sorry for Bob Kraft? He hired a man he believed to be a superior coach, and his judgment appeared to be vindicated with three Super Bowls in four years. Kraft had presided over a phenomenal transformation, assuming control of the team when it was a distant fourth in the affections of local professional sports fans and seeing it grow to a point where his team was a strong 1-A to the mighty Boston Red Sox.

He had inherited Bill Parcells, and he made a mistake by hiring Pete Carroll, but he hit the lottery by hiring the dour defensive genius, ignoring those who said there was no reason Belichick would be any more successful as a head coach in Foxborough than he'd been in Cleveland, where he had alienated players, media, and the entire constituency.

His was said to be a model organization, where the owner owned, the personnel people found the right players, and the dour defensive genius coached 'em right up to championships, or close to 'em.

And now?

And now he has to live with the reality that he presides over the most despised and reviled franchise in all of contemporary American sport, and all because the coach he trusted has betrayed him.
Remember that glorious evening in New Orleans when the Patriots captivated the nation by taking the field en masse rather than individually? Remember those clutch drives orchestrated by Tom Brady, those game-winning kicks by Adam Vinatieri, and all the other snapshot moments in the three Super Bowls?

more stories like thisTainted, all of it.

Not here, of course. We in New England will make an attempt to separate fact from fiction and real life from fantasy. With so much at stake, we will think it all out, knowing intellectually that what Belichick did, in all likelihood, did not materially affect the biggest games. We know there was no taping of that infamous Rams 2002 walkthrough. We know that the issue in Super Bowl XXXVI was the way Martz went away from Marshall Faulk; that the issue in Super Bowl XXXVIII was, well, nothing, really; and the issue in Super Bowl XXXIX was Andy Reid's horrendous clock management.

We know all this. The problem now is that the rest of the world no longer cares. The rest of the world only knows that Bill Belichick thought he was above the law.

What we have here is a football version of Watergate.

Bill Belichick is Richard Nixon. Brilliant. Tormented. Paranoid. Controlling. Highly suspicious of the media.

Watergate was overkill. There was no need for it. Like, was Richard Nixon ever really in danger of losing the 1972 election to George McGovern? Spygate was likewise unnecessary. Belichick was, and is, a great football coach. Why did he not trust his own genius to win games honestly, especially after winning his first Super Bowl? Was he that obsessed with victory? Weren't all those hours staring at tapes enough? Did he think he had a divine right to victory? Clearly, something was churning inside that head.

He has turned out to be far more complex than we ever dreamed, hasn't he? Whoever would have believed Bill Belichick would have had such a tangled personal life? Who really knows this man?

Whatever his motivation, it wound up manifesting itself in colossal arrogance. For after being warned about continuing his illegal practice in a 2006 game at Green Bay, he did it again in, of all places, Giants Stadium the very first game in 2007. What kind of a statement was that? Was he saying "(naughty word) you" to Eric Mangini, a former ally who was now The Enemy?

Remember the ultimate moral of Watergate: The cover-up is worse than the crime.

Now we know that Bill Belichick covered up, and may still be covering up. Matt Walsh says he was told to prepare a cover story for his activities, even as Bill Belichick continues to insist that he had "misinterpreted" the rule in question. He alone of the 32 coaches was confused. Amazing. The commissioner didn't buy it, and neither should anyone else.

The cover-up is what matters now. Bill Belichick has yet to seek mercy from the National Court of Public Opinion. He has his story, and he's sticking to it. He's going to stonewall it, just as he stonewalls a routine injury inquiry. It's just his nature, apparently.

The sad truth is that he is the best coach. All reasonable people know that the 2007 season was 100 percent legitimate. No team in NFL history was ever under more scrutiny than the Patriots from Games 2 through 16 in the regular season, plus their entire postseason. Under this microscope, they won their first 18 games and came within 35 seconds of winning the last one, and it took two improbable plays on one down (an unprecedented Eli Manning escape and a phenomenal catch by David Tyree) to beat them.

The Patriots could easily win again next year. Bill Belichick could do it by choosing to play 10-on-11 all season long, just to show how competent he is, but it wouldn't matter. The damage has been done.

There is no way out. As long as Bill Belichick is the coach of the New England Patriots, America will despise this team. But a resignation or a dismissal would only lend legitimacy to the entire concept of wrongdoing.

This is not what Bob Kraft had in mind.


reply

Why are you quoting Bob Ryan? He doesn't get it, either.

"America will despise this team." For what? There wasn't any cheating; the hatred reflects poorly on the critics. And why would Belichick resign when he didn't do anything wrong?

Get real, ksncpd.

reply

Acording to you he doesn't get it. That's your opinion. To many of us, he is right on the money.

reply

"Now we know that Bill Belichick covered up, and may still be covering up. Matt Walsh says he was told to prepare a cover story for his activities, even as Bill Belichick continues to insist that he had "misinterpreted" the rule in question. He alone of the 32 coaches was confused. Amazing. The commissioner didn't buy it, and neither should anyone else."

Whether or not Belichick misinterpreted the rule, isn't the issue. You're overlooking the fact, snpcd, that the memo sent out a few weeks before last season began clearly indicated THAT VIDEOTAPING FROM UNAPPROVED LOCATIONS WAS A LEAGUE WIDE PROBLEM. The NFL had turned the other way and had never enforced the rule. How could Bill Belichick foresee that the NEW commissioner would act any differently? The NFL had sent out memos before, but had never taken any action to enforce the rule. THAT'S WHY BOB KRAFT CANNOT BE LIVID WITH BILL BELICHICK.

You also have to remember that the Patriots caught the Jets illegally videotaping a game last year. And the Patriots simply escorted the cameraman out of the stadium. It was reasonable for Bill Belichick to assume that if A Patriots cameraman was caught, the same thing would be done. He obviously underestimated how underhanded Eric Mangini actually is.

And as you may recall, NFL officials were present at the Green Bay game (that you referred to) AND THEY DID NOTHING. It was the Green Bay personnel who apprehended a Patriots cameraman prior to the game beginning. He was right out in the open where everyone could see him, AND YET THE NFL OFFICIALS TURNED A BLIND EYE AS USUAL.

In the now infamous Jets game, the same thing happened. The Patriots cameraman was out where everyone could see him. NFL officials took no notice of him. It was the Jets personnel who apprehended him. Do you see a pattern here? The NFL was not enforcing the rule. If the Jets hadn't pushed the issue, the NFL probably would've maintained its laissez-faire approach regarding videotaping.

We'll never know whether Commissioner Goodell would've actually enforced the rule if the first team to have been caught this past year were a last-place team, instead of the elite New England Patriots. When the lowly last-place Miami Dolphins admitted to using illegal audiotape last year, the NFL did nothing. It was just bad luck that the Pats were the first ones caught.

"The cover-up is what matters now. Bill Belichick has yet to seek mercy from the National Court of Public Opinion. He has his story, and he's sticking to it. He's going to stonewall it, just as he stonewalls a routine injury inquiry. It's just his nature, apparently."

Even if he didn't misinterpret the rule, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT HIM TO SAY! The truth of the matter is that the NFL permits stealing signals by videotaping from the approved location. If he emphasized that fact, then the integrity of the league would be criticized for ever allowing stealing signals. And Bill Belichick has watched for 30 years as the NFL has turned a blind eye to the rule about videotaping. It's been standard operating procedure for teams to videotape from unapproved locations without any punishment.

I think he's showed incredible restraint and has shielded the NFL from scrutiny.

reply