PFT: Walsh Was Fired for Tape-Recording Conversations...Belichick Speaks

[theogt]

POSTED 7:07 a.m. EST, February 18, 2008​

WALSH WAS FIRED FOR TAPE-RECORDING CONVERSATIONS

​

Finally (and wisely), the Patriots are beginning to put their side of the Spygate I and II stories into the stream of public knowledge.

​

And, to their credit, they're not doing so by leaking information to the media on an off-the-record basis, but by making their position known in on-the-record interviews.

​

For starters, Patriots V.P. of player personnel Scott Pioli tells the Boston Globe that former team employee Matt Walsh was fired in January 2003 for secretly recording conversations between himself and Pioli.

​

Pioli, who rarely speaks to the press, told the Globe that he became aware of the situation because "two other employees saw him doing it, and I checked after, and heard it on the tape myself."

​

Walsh's lawyer, Michael Levy, called Pioli's version of the events "a complete fabrication."

​

"This is a predictable and pathetic effort to smear Mr. Walsh's character rather than confront the truth about the Patriots' conduct," Levy said. (And it's also predictable that Levy would call it a smear campaign, even if this kind of behavior is necessary to a full understanding of Walsh's overall credibility.)

​

Pioli also explained to the Globe the work that Walsh was doing for the team in late 2002 and early 2003.

​

"He had come from video, so the first few months his job was to make highlight tapes of draft-eligible players, guys who were going to be free agents," Pioli said. "It's like the entry-level position that we have all the scouting assistants in. It's essentially the same job that I did 15 years ago, which was making copies, picking people up at the airport, data entry, more of the highlight tapes of the players, the draft-eligible guys.

​

"The job he was doing, there were two other guys doing it, so essentially the work he was doing wasn't up to the same level as the other people, in my opinion. However, I found out he was secretly tape recording our conversations and he was fired."

​

Of course, none of this changes the fact that Walsh knows something (or thinks he knows something) that has been of interest to more than a few journalists since September 2007 and that has made him the subject of a legal chess match regarding whether and to what extent he'll be protected against litigation if/when he tells his story to Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) or 60 Minutes.

​

Though information regarding why he was fired is relevant to his overall credibility, the content of any videotapes he might have won't lie. Until those tapes are disclosed, however, we're going to be a little skeptical about whether anything relevant or useful is on them. Or about whether there even are any tapes.

​

It's all the more reason for the league and Levy to work out a deal, so that Walsh can engage in a high-stakes game of Show-'n'-Tell.​

 

[theogt]

POSTED 9:42 a.m. EST, February 18, 2008
BELICHICK SPEAKS OUT ON SPYGATE

In the same Boston Globe article in which Pats V.P. of player personnel gives the team's take on the termination of Matt Walsh, coach Bill Belichick talks for the first time since September 2007 about the Spygate situation.

As to Walsh, Belichick says that he "couldn't pick Matt Walsh out of a lineup."

As to the notion that the Pats spied on the Rams before Super Bowl XXXVI, Belichick had this to say: "In my entire coaching career, I've never seen another team's practice film prior to playing that team. I have never authorized, or heard of, or even seen in any way, shape, or form any other team's walkthrough. We don't even film our own. We don't even want to see ourselves do anything, that's the pace that it's at. Regardless, I've never been a part of that.

It's a broad a denial as Belichick can issue, but we're confused as to why he'd even mention that the Pats don't tape their own walk-through practices. Of course a team won't tape it's own walk-through -- there's no benefit to it from the standpoint of assessing or grading players because they're, you know, walking. For an opponent, however, access to the walk-through practice would have tremendous value from the standpoint of deciphering the game plan.

Frankly, including the "we don't even tape our own walk-throughs" angle in his argument makes us wonder whether the normally tight-lipped Belichick is going a bit too far.

Meanwhile, Belichick went back to Spygate I (i.e., the taping of defensive coaching signals) and tried to defend practices that the league already has deemed to be a violation worthy of a $500,000 fine to Belichick, a $250,000 fine to the team, and the loss of a first-round draft pick.

Belichick explained that he merely misinterpreted the rule.

"My interpretation was that you can't utilize anything to assist you during that game," Belichick said. "What our camera guys do is clearly not allowed to be used during the game and has never been used during that game that it was shot."

Belichick also had this to say about the taping of defensive coaching signals:

"On the tape of the signaling that we talk about, that film usually wasn't even completed until Thursday or Friday of the following week. It was that low of a priority. In other words, the video guys had so much other stuff to do on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday getting ready for the other game, that a lot of times that film wasn't even processed until later in the week."

Again, Belichick could be going too far. Why on earth would the video staff prepare, for example, video taken on Sunday of the Jets' defensive coaching signals for the following week's game? The value in making the tape arises when they prepare to play the Jets again that year -- or when they face teams coached by members of the current Jets defensive staff in future seasons.

Moreover, we're confused about why Belichick would even dredge up Spygate I. Here's what Belichick had to say on the topic:

"I wasn't comfortable talking about it earlier in the year because my No. 1 job is to win football games. The more distractions there are, I think the harder it is to prepare. I thought the more conversation about this would just take away from what my primary job and our primary job is, which is to win football games.

"I felt like now, the season has been over for a couple weeks, there are certainly a lot of questions out there about it, I thought this would be the timely point to address it as opposed to during the season, at any point. Of course, it came up a number of times."

But, right now, the only question that anyone still cares about arising from the five-month-old incident is what tapes or other materials Belichick gave to the league, and why the stuff was promptly destroyed.

Belichick didn't address any of those issues on Sunday. It's unclear whether he ever will in a setting other than a Congressional hearing room. Or a courtroom.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I am curious why the guy felt the need to record his conversations with the VP?

Wonder if it was the idea that they were asking him to do something that was against the rules and he wanted to have them on tape saying it and also keep a copy of a video tape they had him record.

Curious.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

this Walsh is a sneaky, little *****

 

[khiladi]

"The job he was doing, there were two other guys doing it, so essentially the work he was doing wasn't up to the same level as the other people, in my opinion. However, I found out he was secretly tape recording our conversations and he was fired."

What's the big deal? Your guy was ordering his staff to secretly tape other team's practices....

 

[khiladi]

"I felt like now, the season has been over for a couple weeks, there are certainly a lot of questions out there about it, I thought this would be the timely point to address it as opposed to during the season, at any point. Of course, it came up a number of times."

I like this latest excuse. When it happened, he said the following:

"It's over, and we're moving on," Belichick said. "Right now, all of my energy and focus and attention is on the San Diego Chargers and our game Sunday night. So, that's where we're at."

 

[big dog cowboy]

I am curious why the guy felt the need to record his conversations with the VP?

Wonder if it was the idea that they were asking him to do something that was against the rules and he wanted to have them on tape saying it and also keep a copy of a video tape they had him record.

Curious.

It's called the "cover your ***" defense.

 

[burmafrd]

The Pats keep looking worse and worse and it seems they have no clue that they are the bad guys here.

 

[burmafrd]

Not suprising the Daily Turd would be putting out articles defending the Pats and company.

 

[DallasFanSince86]

The Pats keep looking worse and worse and it seems they have no clue that they are the bad guys here.

Sure does look that way, don't it?

 

[theogt]

Not suprising the Daily Turd would be putting out articles defending the Pats and company.

I'm not sure these are exactly defending the Pats. Disclosing that they fired him for taping conversations doesn't exactly help their case. Why did he feel the need to tape conversations? This actually adds fuel to the fire that he has something.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I'm not sure these are exactly defending the Pats. Disclosing that they fired him for taping conversations doesn't exactly help their case. Why did he feel the need to tape conversations? This actually adds fuel to the fire that he has something.

doesn't that strike you as being a little paranoid, though?

I mean, taping conversations, stashing tapes away?

we all know he has something, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that he has the evidence of Patriot cheating, but everything that's starting to come out about this guy makes him look like a wacko

 

[khiladi]

I'm not sure these are exactly defending the Pats. Disclosing that they fired him for taping conversations doesn't exactly help their case. Why did he feel the need to tape conversations? This actually adds fuel to the fire that he has something.

I believe they are now trying to create the image that even if Walsh has tapes, he has a tendency to do things that aren't authorized by the team. What this essentially means is that Pioli is trying to argue that Walsh does things on his own.

The fact is, they have been silent, but now that the Walsh story has blown into something they never thought would happen, they are trying to play damage control. The timeline of these statements prove the Patriots even more ridiculous and desparate.

 

[conner01]

the bottom line is he either has the tapes or he does'nt. if he does there will be some problems for the pats, if he does'nt then this is all for nothing

 

[theogt]

I believe they are now trying to create the image that even if Walsh has tapes, he has a tendency to do things that aren't authorized by the team. What this essentially means is that Pioli is trying to argue that Walsh does things on his own.

Good point. Very shady. Oh well, if he has tapes, they're screwed, even if they claim they didn't authorize it or view them. No one will believe them.

 

[Ren]

LOL the Pats are trying to set up the "he taped other teams on his own" excuse if this really was the case why have they not said so before now?

The pats where actually caught doing this crap after he was gone anyway so excuse me if I chose not to believe this

 

[Ren]

we all know he has something, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that he has the evidence of Patriot cheating, but everything that's starting to come out about this guy makes him look like a wacko

and that somehow surprises you? they're doing their best to take away his credibility right now cause of the brewing s***storm

 

[Kangaroo]

doesn't that strike you as being a little paranoid, though?

I mean, taping conversations, stashing tapes away?

we all know he has something, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that he has the evidence of Patriot cheating, but everything that's starting to come out about this guy makes him look like a wacko

Hey if you work for the Mafia sometimes you need evidence to keep a bullet out of your brain or think about it in that manner. (It saved Tom Cruise )

 

[theogt]

POSTED 3:41 p.m. EST, February 18, 2008
MAYBE THE MEDIA SHOULD EYEBALL WALSH

Though we're edging ever closer to becoming part of the "real" media, we're still a long way away from having the kind of time and resources that would allow us to engage in a comprehensive investigation of a key figure in one of the various stories about which we often tend to blather.

If, for example, we had the time and/or the resources, we'd devote a chunk of it to finding out more about Matt Walsh.

Precious little has been done by the media to find out more about him, or to get a general feel for whether he generally can be believed. From our perspective, we think that what he says (and how he says it) about Spygate II will say much about whether he is credible. Until he talks, however, there's work that can be done to get a better idea of who he is and what he's about.

For starters, the contention that Walsh secretly recorded conversations with Pats V.P. of player personnel Scott Pioli is great way to get a good feel for whether Walsh is a truth-teller. Walsh's lawyer calls the rare public utterance from Pioli a "complete fabrication." So if the Pats and/or Pioli can prove that it happened, the failure of Walsh to tell the truth to his lawyer on that topic would be relevant in connection with an assessment of whether he's telling the truth about what he might eventually tell Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) or anyone else.

Other easily available information to scrutinize is Walsh's bio for his current job. In it, he says that he "served primarily as an Area Scout and Video Assistant from 1996-2003" with the Patriots. But Pioli told the Boston Globe that Walsh was never an Area Scout. So if the Pats and/or Pioli can prove this, it would be another strike against him.

In fact, Walsh's overall bio requires the full-blown Fran Foley treatment. Based on the article regarding his then-looming nuptials, he was 28 in July 2004 and is a Gemini. Thus, he's presently 31. Unless he pulled a Doogie Howser (or a Forrest Gump), it's hard to cram everything he claims to have done into the period of time that would require him to get a college degree, play two years of pro hockey, train with the U.S. National Bobsled team, spend a year working for an Arena League team, seven with the Pats, one with NFL Europe, and then become an assistant golf pro in Hawaii.

The article about his wedding describes his time with the Pats as including "operations, public relations, video/game planning, area scout." Game planning? Um. Okay.

Other questions about Walsh should be asked. Such as, for example, how he found -- and how he can afford -- a Washington, D.C. lawyer who specializes in white-collar crime and government investigations. Could it be that Senator Specter hooked Walsh up with Michael Levy, and/or that Levy is handling the matter at no charge as a "favor" to the Senator?

So while we're uncomfortable with the notion that NFL Security is looking up on the guy, we think that the media has an obligation to do so, especially if the media (us included) is going to continue to write about the inflammatory things that Walsh supposedly knows.

 

[Big Dakota]

LOL the Pats are trying to set up the "he taped other teams on his own" excuse if this really was the case why have they not said so before now?

The pats where actually caught doing this crap after he was gone anyway so excuse me if I chose not to believe this

Nail on the head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't buy it, the public won't buy it and Specter sure as hell won't buy it. If the NFL won't get these guys let them swear under oath they didn't know and then let and investigation by the justice department see who is lying. I really hope it goes that far because we all know the cheatriots are lying SOB's.