Cheating Patriots coach faces more scrutiny

If the Pats said "Yeah, Roger, we've been doing this for years" and Walsh comes up with tapes further proving this, how is this news?

I'm all for New England getting punished even more if there is new evidence that reveals things not previously known, but as far as I had understood it, the Pats have been doing this for the length of Billy B's coaching tenure, and just because Walsh has tapes of this doesn't mean that this is new proof or proof that the Commish didn't know about.

 

But you are making the opposite assumption, that there is nothing new here, simply because you want it that way. You want this to be over because you know, at least on some level, this tarnishes the recent history that you are so proud of.

Do I think the taping, as we have heard it explained so far, won or lost a Super Bowl? Probably not. But the destruction of evidence makes me think it is possible that they did more than we know.

Also, the Patriots have been willing to cheat. That makes me wonder what else they have been doing.

And this was not about misunderstanding the rules. That is complete bullshit. The league office expressly told every team in the league to stop doing this before the 2007 season, but the Patriots did not stop. In fact, they continued to do it against the Jets, even though Mangini knew about the practice and would not hesitate to turn them in. I believe it was done out of arrogance, believing the NFL wouldn't want to open this up for discussion, so they could continue to cheat and get away with it.

Sorry, when you stop thinking the rules apply to you, that is when you become capable of pulling anything and worthy of scrutiny.

 

One thing that I think warrants mentioning in these threads when everyone starts scolding fanboys and telling them it's unprofessional. It's equally as unprofessional if you take your anti-fanboy venom against a certain team to your job. Just sayin'.

 

Yeah, but it's OK if you're anti=Patriots. At least that's what Tom Jackson told me.

 

Herald didn't out a source, but it did apologize with today's papers ...

 

Why do you discredit anyone who may believe that the Herald and Tomase acted improperly or that this issue is now dead as a Patriots fanatic? I know Tomase and he's an O.K. guy, but I have to wonder about several elements of that article.

First, Goodell said in his presser that he asked Walsh if he knew of anyone else he should speak with. Walsh said no. We forget that Walsh was fired because he was taping Pioli's telephone conversations without the GM's permission.

What is extremely mind-boggling is that your argument now hinges on a so-called conspiracy theory within the NFL. Do you truly think that all 31 other owners would lie up directly behind the Commish on this major controversy? Are the Patriots that popular across the league?

Essentially, your argument is that we don't know that a tape was not made of the walk-through. You can't prove a negative, dude. How can the Patriots prove that no walk-through tape exists beyond what they have already done? Believe what you want, but I'd like to think that my fellow journalists would want more proof than that.

Whereas you admonish schizenaic as a fanboi and for lacking objectivity, I think you are being equally subjective. Why is it that people think that being objective means being negative or a contrarian? You seem equally passionate in your desire to see something here with the Patriots that is not capable of being seen.

If that tape exists, then Belichick should be suspended for a year. I don't think many people, including Patriots fans, would argue that such an action isn't extremely serious.

For months, however, this meeting has been hailed as the big one, the one where Walsh would release all of the skeletons in the closet and we'd finally have the proof to nail the Patriots. Yet Walsh doesn't have this walk-through tape; he had a total of eight tapes which contained absolutely no information that the organization had yet to already inform Goodell of.

And the Herald acknowledges in their apology in today's paper that they "neither possessed or viewed" such a video or spoke to anyone who did. Walsh is not the source to this article. So who the hell has this tape? Consider the type of person who would have this tape. Consider what rules they would have had to have done to procure this tape in the first place. That type of person is very likely the type of person who would come running out, in search of their 15, with this tape for all the world to see.

So we all realize that the Patriots needed to receive some form of punishment for this rule violation. Sadly, the exact nature of the violation has not been accurately depicted in our business. The problem was not with the actual videotaping; every team videotapes to some degree.

The problem---and I'm not denying that this was a violation deserving of a noteworthy punishment---was that the camera filming the opposition was located on the field. If they had positioned the camera in the coaches' box or in the press box, there is no violation. The Jets and the Dolphins have been found to have similar practices. Hell, Mangini did the same thing in Foxboro in December 2006. THAT DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE ACTIONS OF THE PATRIOTS. I am not saying that, though I am certain you will say otherwise.

You want to know why print journalism is going down the shitter? Because of the hoiler-than-thou attitude. People like Bissinger and others (say, Tony Maz of the Boston Herald, the paper that printed this story) who bitterly scoff at blogs like to speak of the so-called "lack of accountability" of bloggers.

Yet the Herald publishes a huge story that relies on only one unnamed source. This story is about a videotape, yet the video is not viewed or possessed by either the Herald or the unnamed source. The story sparks a massive firestorm that endures for three months. This story is published the day before a Super Bowl that had perhaps the biggest build-up of any in recent memory.

But Tomase won't be fired. Nor will his editors. And anyone who suggests "legal action" is laughed off as a self-righteous Patriots fan-boi. I'm not saying that any of these actions should be undertaken, but I'd hate to think that the Herald can simply skate by with a measly apology in its Wednesday editions.

Essentially, I ask, what will need to happen before we just move the fuck on? This story has dominated headlines since the first week of September. Think about that for a second.

Now you can proceed to condescendingly refer to me as another blinded Boston fanboi. Whenever a board member refers to another poster with a differing viewpoint as a fanboi, it reminds me of the political tactics of the Bush White House. As in, instead of engaging in a civil debate, you call the other guy a wimp, ask where the opponent's war medals are, say that the terrorists will kill you if you don't vote for me, tell South Carolina that McCain underwent psychological exams when he arrived home from Vietnam, and that you can't support the troops and detest the war at the same time.

 

A measly apology?
Blowing out the front and back pages?
Fanboi.

 

Thanks for joining up, fanboy.

There are so many holes in your little rant it isn't even funny.

Bottom line: The NFL made up its mind before viewing the evidence. I would be willing to bet there was more incriminating evidence among the materials the league office destroyed than anything Walsh had.

And the other franchises backing up the league office has NOTHING to do with popularity. It has to do with protecting the league's image. Try thinking things through next time.

 

Calling all NFL writers -- what are the penalties for players who scalp their SB tickets?

 

F_B, have you tried calling a media relations guy for one of the teams? I think they sign a release. I know I had to sign a few releases when I did a little intern work that covered a few different topics.

If it was not busting one of his or her own players, I think a PR guy would give the info over fairly easily.

It's might also be small print in a player's contract.

 

Genco, Donald Fehr proved collusion against the baseball owners in a court of law. If that can be done, I will never say never about owners, in any sport, organizing together on a cause.