1billsfan Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Roger Goodall gave us all a bold face lie when he said that he has no reason to not believe the Pats that these tapes were not used during the games. No reason???? Walsh said he was told to not get caught. Didn't Belichick say he thought what they were doing was within the league rules? That's an outright lie. This thing isn't going away. The NFL is desperately trying to cover up the biggest scandal in league history. I have to laugh when I hear Goodall telling us how unprecedented his non-suspention penalty was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Roger Goodall gave us all a bold face lie when he said that he has no reason to not believe the Pats that these tapes were not used during the games. No reason???? Walsh said he was told to not get caught. Didn't Belichick say he thought what they were doing was within the league rules? That's an outright lie. This thing isn't going away. The NFL is desperately trying to cover up the biggest scandal in league history. I have to laugh when I hear Goodall telling us how unprecedented his non-suspention penalty was. Yawn.... Oh look, new power rankings are out! And there's a feature on Tony Homo singing "take me out to the ballgame on NFLN"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billadelphia Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Did anything happen today? Didn't see anything on ESPN yet, but I think that hearing is supposed to be today. Also, I agree 100% with that. It's such a bold attempt to cover their tracks that it doesn't even make sense. The article that was put up the other day about the questions Goodell SHOULD ask was a great one, but I doubt that those are the questions that he will ask Walsh. Did anyone tell you to be sneaky with this or hide it? Who did you answer to? Who else on the team watched the tapes and when? etc, etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bschmoove Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Let's never forget the NFL destroyed a batch of spygate tapes before! Goodell = Richard Nixon in the Oval Office with a bottle of scotch and a handful of valium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Did anything happen today? Didn't see anything on ESPN yet, but I think that hearing is supposed to be today. Also, I agree 100% with that. It's such a bold attempt to cover their tracks that it doesn't even make sense. The article that was put up the other day about the questions Goodell SHOULD ask was a great one, but I doubt that those are the questions that he will ask Walsh. Did anyone tell you to be sneaky with this or hide it? Who did you answer to? Who else on the team watched the tapes and when? etc, etc.... Shocker of all shockers, Goodell says everything Walsh told him was consistent with what they already knew. LINK NEW YORK -- After meeting with former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh for more than three hours, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said no new information had come to light as a result and indicated that the Spygate scandal had run its course. Goodell also said he was told by Walsh that the Patriots did not have a videotape of a walk-through practice of the St. Louis Rams prior to the 2002 Super Bowl. The Boston Herald had previously reported that such a tape existed, but Goodell said Tuesday he was able to verify that there is no such tape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fewell733 Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Roger Goodall gave us all a bold face lie when he said that he has no reason to not believe the Pats that these tapes were not used during the games. it especially doesn't make sense since at the very Jets game where they were caught, the tape was to be given to the coaches (or whatever they are) at the half. Also they taped games against non-division opponents where they wouldn't be playing them again that year - taping the AFC championship game against the Steelers for instance. Schlereth called Goodell out on it right after the press conference. Also they remain unconvincing about exactly what the league knew when he handed out the fine back in October. There is a lot of non-playing time in the NFL that could be used to analyze and organize data gathered from tapes. Long halftimes, and an ever growing amount of commercial breaks. This is even more true in the playoffs and especially the Superbowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Roger Goodall gave us all a bold face lie when he said that he has no reason to not believe the Pats that these tapes were not used during the games. No reason???? Walsh said he was told to not get caught. Didn't Belichick say he thought what they were doing was within the league rules? That's an outright lie. This thing isn't going away. The NFL is desperately trying to cover up the biggest scandal in league history. I have to laugh when I hear Goodall telling us how unprecedented his non-suspention penalty was. Ticket sales seem brisk... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch19079 Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 I watched the press conference on ESPN. This is my take. I do think that "most" of the tapes were made so they would know the signals in the next game (mostly division games). Though, I do believe that they taped just about every single game, on the off chance that they would play them again later in the season. But most of the attention had to be on division opponents and expected playoff opponents. The Commish said that Walsh had the tapes in his possession through out the game and turned them in after the game was over. (though the jets tapes were caught at half time.....) but what I do not understand is that the commish said that the patriots actions from 2001 to 2007 were illegal, and the patriots knew it was illegal, and walsh knew it was illegal. And the pats even told walsh not to get caught. But then the commish said that is was ok at that time to scout coaches and tape their signals. And that every one knew this and took steps to protect their signals, and changed them often. And based on that belief, he didnt believe that it gave the pats THAT big of an advantage. I know they changed "clerified" the rule before this last season to make it illegal to tape coaches signals for any purpose (even if it was not used during that game). And the pats still cheated in the jets game, were caught, and fined for that. Then the commish added, that the fine and loss of a draft pick were for the entire act of video taping coaches signals (dating back to 2001 based on the confession of Bellicheck). Were teams allowed to tape opposing coaches signals back in 2001? That is exactly what the tapes looked like to me. Was that illegal? He first said it was, then said it was not when trying to downplay their advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fewell733 Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 I watched the press conference on ESPN. This is my take. I do think that "most" of the tapes were made so they would know the signals in the next game (mostly division games). Though, I do believe that they taped just about every single game, on the off chance that they would play them again later in the season. But most of the attention had to be on division opponents and expected playoff opponents. The Commish said that Walsh had the tapes in his possession through out the game and turned them in after the game was over. (though the jets tapes were caught at half time.....) but what I do not understand is that the commish said that the patriots actions from 2001 to 2007 were illegal, and the patriots knew it was illegal, and walsh knew it was illegal. And the pats even told walsh not to get caught. But then the commish said that is was ok at that time to scout coaches and tape their signals. And that every one knew this and took steps to protect their signals, and changed them often. And based on that belief, he didnt believe that it gave the pats THAT big of an advantage. I know they changed "clerified" the rule before this last season to make it illegal to tape coaches signals for any purpose (even if it was not used during that game). And the pats still cheated in the jets game, were caught, and fined for that. Then the commish added, that the fine and loss of a draft pick were for the entire act of video taping coaches signals (dating back to 2001 based on the confession of Bellicheck). Were teams allowed to tape opposing coaches signals back in 2001? That is exactly what the tapes looked like to me. Was that illegal? He first said it was, then said it was not when trying to downplay their advantage. Goodell definitely didn't seem consistent on a number of points. Maybe he should have had a league atty present for the press conference. he could have used one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Roger Goodall gave us all a bold face lie when he said that he has no reason to not believe the Pats that these tapes were not used during the games. No reason???? Walsh said he was told to not get caught. Didn't Belichick say he thought what they were doing was within the league rules? That's an outright lie. This thing isn't going away. The NFL is desperately trying to cover up the biggest scandal in league history. I have to laugh when I hear Goodall telling us how unprecedented his non-suspention penalty was. But none of us were there in NE so we don't have any proof those videos were ever used by BB to cheat! Who made any of us judges in this? You can't judge him until you have facts, or were there when he did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 But none of us were there in NE so we don't have any proof those videos were ever used by BB to cheat! Who made any of us judges in this? You can't judge him until you have facts, or were there when he did it. Make me an offer on the Peace Bridge. It's for sale. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bflojohn Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Pure logic would dictate the advantage MUST have been a good one because they did this for 8 years!! Otherwise, the exercise was a colossal waste of time and resources. The question seems to be whether the Patriots gained the advantage during the contest with taping going on..... well they did this in an AFC Championship game, so again logic would seem to dictate an advantage was gainged during the game, to me! They were simply NOT gaining an advantage for NEXT season, that's totally illogical, people! They concieved of a way to telegraph information DURING a game "in progress", so as to gain their unfair advantage. The other "fly in the ointment" to me is the caveat of "don't get caught" and I doubt the evil empire had ONLY Mr. Walsh doing this for the good of the effort to CHEAT! I do believe the walk thru does exist.... but that's just me!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 move along, nothing to see here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 move along, nothing to see here Nice gum shoe impersonation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 Make me an offer on the Peace Bridge. It's for sale. GO BILLS!!! Are you assuming he is guilty based off of what the media is reporting? And not giving him the benfit of the doubt since you were not there first hand and don't have any credible evidence to base your decision on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 Are you assuming he is guilty based off of what the media is reporting? And not giving him the benfit of the doubt since you were not there first hand and don't have any credible evidence to base your decision on? No. I'm assuming his guilt based on the lie they caught him in. Belichik said he thought it was within the scope of the rules to tape opposing coaches signals. Yet the Pats were so certain of being within the rules they made sure to remind Walsh NOT to tell anyone what he was up to. Naivete is one thing. Gullibility is quite another. So about that Peace Bridge offer... GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 No. I'm assuming his guilt based on the lie they caught him in. Belichik said he thought it was within the scope of the rules to tape opposing coaches signals. Yet the Pats were so certain of being within the rules they made sure to remind Walsh NOT to tell anyone what he was up to. Naivete is one thing. Gullibility is quite another. So about that Peace Bridge offer... GO BILLS!!! Well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evanstoprobowl Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 Does anyone remember the 60 minutes expose the BB did after winning the Superbowl a few years ago? I remember him showing off the Pats state of the art video equipment and talking about how important breaking down video was. BB made it seem like he was a genius at this. It looks a little different now. He was flaunting his guilt to the world. I wouldn't be suprised if that interview isn't replayed sometime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 But none of us were there in NE so we don't have any proof those videos were ever used by BB to cheat! Who made any of us judges in this? You can't judge him until you have facts, or were there when he did it. Shoot dude, the NFL only exists because of fan passion, it's part of the brand. we judge coaching calls, draft choices, play selections, free agents, cheerleaders, ownership issues----that IS the nfl unless you're fortunate enough to pull for the SB winning team. i think we have a right to judge them. we have a right to jump to conclusions. belichick broke the rules, repeatedly, and even did so after the rule was 'clarified' while playing a coach who one can only assume knew he broke the rules to begin with. on top of that, the original tapes were inconceivably destroyed, and apparently rg didn't believe BB was forthright on his explanation of the "misunderstanding of the rules". so, we're left with a guy who broke rules, telling a story the lead investigator doesn't totally believe, and only a near decade of wrongdoing, and we're told that the tapes were made for apparently no reason and provided no competitive advantage. absurd. ridiculous. and, call me a conspiracy theorist, but why would i believe anything the guy said when he's already proven a liar? i gotta be honest, i don't like being treated like a fool. i could tape the first quarter of the bills game, drive it to my office three miles away, and have it up and running to the parts i wanted to see before the second quarter started for analysis. could a multi-million dollar organization have a better system than that? a good and well-coached team decided to try and gain additional competitive advantage by breaking the rules and subsequently misrepresenting what happened. how much that helped them is anyones guess, but we do know with certainty they tried to gain advantage when they should not have. in the end, absent anything else, the fine and draft choice loss is what it is, and the penalty obviously will stick. i can live with that, because like the 1990 Bills will always be remembered for their losses at crunch time, this lying sack of crap will always be remembered for cheating at crunch time. 20 years from now...."oh yeah, the cheaters?". the flip side is...$750k and a first round draft choice was a small price to pay for championships in dispute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 Inside the NFL on ESPN is FINALLY saying the Pats* gained a huge advantage by cheating. They also are not buying that the tapes weren't used during the games they were taped. A good example is the Pittsburg game - when did they expect to see them again- It was the AFC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME, they weren't going to play them in the Super Bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts