Specter: Patriots Cheated in '04 Against Steelers

[theogt]

POSTED 10:19 p.m. EST, February 13, 2008​

SPECTER SAYS PATS CHEATED STEELERS IN 2004

​

In a press conference conducted after his Wednesday meeting with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said that notes surrendered by the Patriots to the league showed that the Patriots engaged in videotaping of defensive signals against the Steelers in 2004.

​

The significance? When the Pats and Steelers played during the regular season that year, the Steelers ended New England's NFL-record 21-game winning streak. When they got together again in Pittsburgh in January 2005 (I was there, and I still have a couple of frozen body parts from it), the Pats could have used the information gathered during the regular-season game to topple the Steelers.

​

POSTED 10:04 p.m. EST, February 13, 2008​

SPECTER WANTS NFL TO INDEMNIFY WALSH

​

Chris Mortensen of ESPN reports that Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) wants the NFL to provide indemnity to Matt Walsh for any legal entanglements that might arise from any decision by him to speak about what he knows (or what he thinks he knows) about the past practices of his former employer, the New England Patriots.

​

Last week, Mortensen reported that the NFL would indeed provide such protection.

​

It would create an awkward situation for the Patriots, who would essentially be suing the league if they were to elect to take action against Walsh.

​

Viewing the matter more broadly, why wouldn't the Pats simply release Walsh from his confidentiality agreement, insofar as it relates to any practices that he reasonably believes to be cheating? That's the real question that should be asked, in our view. If the Pats have nothing to hide, why not give Walsh a blank check to talk?

​

Though Specter doesn't have the ability to convene a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee because he's not the chairman, a refusal by the league or the Pats to permit Walsh to talk could be used by Specter to cajole his colleagues into issuing a subpoena to Walsh. ​

 

[Bob Sacamano]

the Pats are going to get bent over

 

[theogt]

Senator Specter Says the Patriots Taped the Steelers Twice During 2004 Season
Posted Feb 13th 2008 7:39PM by Ryan Wilson

Well, it looks like Senator Arlen Specter didn't get around to talking about the NFL's antitrust exemption during today's meet-and-greet with commissioner Roger Goodell. As Michael David Smith wrote earlier, Specter learned that the Patriots have been videotaping opponents since 2000, something that wasn't clear when the league concluded its investigation in September.

In a post-meeting press conference, Specter elaborated. The senator said that "there were notes showing that the Steelers games had been taped." Specifically, two contests during the 2004 season: one on Oct. 31, and the other, the AFC Championship, on Jan. 27.

A couple of things worth pointing out: Pittsburgh smoked the Patriots in the first meeting, 34-20, sacking Tom Brady four times and picking him off twice. Three months later, the two teams met in the conference finals. Unsurprisingly (in hindsight), the Patriots won 41-27, and Brady, sacked just twice in the rematch, finished 14 of 21 for 207 yards with two touchdowns and no interceptions.

Did New England gain an advantage from having videotaped Pittsburgh during the teams' first meeting? There isn't enough evidence to say that, yes, unequivocally the Patriots won because they had the Steelers' defensive signals. But it would also be naïve to suggest that having access to that information had no bearing on the outcome. If that were true, Matthew Estrella (and Matt Walsh before him) wouldn't have had a job.

Either way, this doesn't do much for the Patriots' legacy as one of the best teams in NFL history, and it doesn't do much for Roger Goodell's credibility.

I also wonder if Bill Cowher might want to reconsider his earlier thoughts on the Steelers' other AFC Championship game against the Patriots.

 

[Future]

Chris Mortensen of ESPN reports that Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) wants the NFL to provide indemnity to Matt Walsh for any legal entanglements that might arise from any decision by him to speak about what he knows (or what he thinks he knows) about the past practices of his former employer, the New England Patriots.

If indemnity means he gets a free pass, then I would be all for it.

 

[theogt]

Belichick has been taping since 2000, Goodell tells Specter
By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer
February 13, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Bill Belichick has been illegally taping opponents' defensive signals since he became the New England Patriots' coach in 2000, according to Sen. Arlen Specter, who said NFL commissioner Roger Goodell told him that during a meeting Wednesday.

"There was confirmation that there has been taping since 2000, when Coach Belichick took over," Specter said.

Specter said Goodell gave him that information during the 1-hour, 40-minute meeting, which was requested by Specter so the commissioner could explain his reasons for destroying the Spygate tapes and notes.

ADVERTISEMENT
"There were a great many questions answered by Commissioner Goodell," Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters after the meeting. "I found a lot of questions unanswerable because of the tapes and notes had been destroyed."

Goodell said Belichick told him he believed the taping was legal; Goodell said he did not concur.

"He said that's always been his interpretation since he's been the head coach," the commissioner said. "We are going to agree to disagree on the facts."

Specter, from Pennsylvania, wants to talk to other league officials about what exactly was taped and which games may have been compromised.

"We have a right to have honest football games," he said.

Goodell noted that "we were the ones that disclosed" the Patriots' illegal taping of the New York Jets' defensive signals in Week 1 of last season. Further, Goodell said, they had an admission by Belichick.

"I have nothing to hide," Goodell said.

Goodell also told Specter that that he doesn't regret destroying the Spygate tapes or the notes.

"I think it was the right thing to do," Goodell said.

Still, Specter wants to know why penalties were imposed on Belichick before the full extent of the wrongdoing was known and the tapes destroyed in a two-week span. Asked if he thinks there was a coverup, Specter demurred.

"There was an enormous amount of haste," Specter said.

He scoffed at the reasons Goodell gave for destroying the tapes and notes, particularly about trying to keep them out of competitors' hands and because Belichick had admitted to the taping.

"What's that got to do with it? There's an admission of guilt, you preserve the evidence," Specter said. As for keeping the tapes out of the hands of others: "All you have to do is lock up the tapes."

Belichick was fined $500,000 and the team was fined $250,000 because of the Spygate incident. The Patriots also forfeited a first-round draft pick.

Specter has questioned the quality of the NFL's investigation into the matter and raised the possibility of congressional hearings if he wasn't satisfied with Goodell's answers. Specter also raised the threat of Congress canceling the league's antitrust exemption and reiterated that in the meeting with Goodell.

Goodell also said he has not heard from Matt Walsh, the former Patriots employee who performed some videotaping duties for the team.

Walsh told The Associated Press last week during the Pro Bowl in Hawaii that he couldn't talk about allegations that he taped a walkthrough practice by the St. Louis Rams before the 2002 Super Bowl. New England, a two-touchdown underdog, won that game 20-17.

Goodell said he has offered Walsh a deal whereby "he has to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly" in return for indemnity. Specter said he, too, wanted to talk to Walsh and perhaps offer a different deal.

Goodell also said he reserves the right to reopen the investigation if more information is uncovered.

 

[Rampage]

shocking! but..but... bill belicheat is a genius

 

[tyke1doe]

Belichick has been taping since 2000, Goodell tells Specter
By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer
February 13, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Bill Belichick has been illegally taping opponents' defensive signals since he became the New England Patriots' coach in 2000, according to Sen. Arlen Specter, who said NFL commissioner Roger Goodell told him that during a meeting Wednesday.

"There was confirmation that there has been taping since 2000, when Coach Belichick took over," Specter said.

Specter said Goodell gave him that information during the 1-hour, 40-minute meeting, which was requested by Specter so the commissioner could explain his reasons for destroying the Spygate tapes and notes.

ADVERTISEMENT
"There were a great many questions answered by Commissioner Goodell," Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters after the meeting. "I found a lot of questions unanswerable because of the tapes and notes had been destroyed."

Goodell said Belichick told him he believed the taping was legal; Goodell said he did not concur.

"He said that's always been his interpretation since he's been the head coach," the commissioner said. "We are going to agree to disagree on the facts."

Specter, from Pennsylvania, wants to talk to other league officials about what exactly was taped and which games may have been compromised.

"We have a right to have honest football games," he said.

Goodell noted that "we were the ones that disclosed" the Patriots' illegal taping of the New York Jets' defensive signals in Week 1 of last season. Further, Goodell said, they had an admission by Belichick.

"I have nothing to hide," Goodell said.

Goodell also told Specter that that he doesn't regret destroying the Spygate tapes or the notes.

"I think it was the right thing to do," Goodell said.

Still, Specter wants to know why penalties were imposed on Belichick before the full extent of the wrongdoing was known and the tapes destroyed in a two-week span. Asked if he thinks there was a coverup, Specter demurred.

"There was an enormous amount of haste," Specter said.

He scoffed at the reasons Goodell gave for destroying the tapes and notes, particularly about trying to keep them out of competitors' hands and because Belichick had admitted to the taping.

"What's that got to do with it? There's an admission of guilt, you preserve the evidence," Specter said. As for keeping the tapes out of the hands of others: "All you have to do is lock up the tapes."

Belichick was fined $500,000 and the team was fined $250,000 because of the Spygate incident. The Patriots also forfeited a first-round draft pick.

Specter has questioned the quality of the NFL's investigation into the matter and raised the possibility of congressional hearings if he wasn't satisfied with Goodell's answers. Specter also raised the threat of Congress canceling the league's antitrust exemption and reiterated that in the meeting with Goodell.

Goodell also said he has not heard from Matt Walsh, the former Patriots employee who performed some videotaping duties for the team.

Walsh told The Associated Press last week during the Pro Bowl in Hawaii that he couldn't talk about allegations that he taped a walkthrough practice by the St. Louis Rams before the 2002 Super Bowl. New England, a two-touchdown underdog, won that game 20-17.

Goodell said he has offered Walsh a deal whereby "he has to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly" in return for indemnity. Specter said he, too, wanted to talk to Walsh and perhaps offer a different deal.

Goodell also said he reserves the right to reopen the investigation if more information is uncovered.

Two things in this story confirms what I've stated throughout this situation:

1. Goodell knew the extent of the cheating.

2. Walsh took tapes which were the property of the league and needs indemnity because he "improperly" took that property.

Specter can question Walsh all he wants, but if he doesn't have any evidence - i.e., the tapes - then it's going to be simply he said he said.

But I'm waiting for these tapes Walsh is suppose to have. Will he go Royal Flush or is he just bluffing?

We'll soon find out.

 

[theogt]

1. Goodell knew the extent of the cheating.

Of course he did. And he destroyed the evidence so no one else would find out the extent of it.

 

[Rampage]

Of course he did. And he destroyed the evidence so no one else would find out the extent of it.

who is in your av?

 

[tyke1doe]

Of course he did. And he destroyed the evidence so no one else would find out the extent of it.

We really don't know what he destroyed. There are conflicting reports.
I've seen one story that says the only tapes destroyed were from games late in the 2006 and preseason of 2007.
I haven't heard any other tapes he ordered destroyed, have you? Or maybe you can link to a story that tells which tapes were destroyed from what games.

 

[dadymat]

down comes the mighty empire.............


its a damn shame what this will do to Brady's legacy as one of the greats ......or will it have any effect? he is no doubt one of the best ever...right?

 

[CM Duck]

We really don't know what he destroyed. There are conflicting reports.
I've seen one story that says the only tapes destroyed were from games late in the 2006 and preseason of 2007.
I haven't heard any other tapes he ordered destroyed, have you? Or maybe you can link to a story that tells which tapes were destroyed from what games.

Like I have said in this forum before, I am sure Goodell destroyed all the video tapes he was given by the patties. Which I honestly believe were all the tapes they had in their posession....because they were the only tapes that the patties didn't get to throw into the wood chipper before the NFL showed up at their door step....

At least we know how billy boy went from a crappy head coach in Cleveland, prior to the year 2000, to a "super genius" once landing in New England

 

[theebs]

Hmm, I wonder if Belichik was taping his buddy Jimmy in the 1991 season opener?

I wonder if belichick taped parcells in the 94 playoffs?

one thing is for sure, he put all those tapes to work from 2000 and 01 to help that team dominate in 02....wait didnt they finish...oh never mind.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Unreal.....hard to believe.......Carma for losing the SB to the Giants.

 

[thewireman]

who is in your av?

Its from the movie Kill Bill Vol 2

 

[vta]

Its from the movie Kill Bill Vol 2

Pablo Escobar...

How likely is it that Bill gets booted from the league over this?

 

[CATCH17]

I really dont consider it cheating if they are recording a teams signals DURING THE GAME.

If they are spying in a teams practice or walkthrough then thats definetely cheating.

 

[tomson75]

I really dont consider it cheating if they are recording a teams signals DURING THE GAME.

If they are spying in a teams practice or walkthrough then thats definetely cheating.

Not that I really care, but if the league creates a rule saying that one team can't videotape another's signals before or during a game, and a team does so anyway....by definition, that's cheating.

 

[CATCH17]

Not that I really care, but if the league creates a rule saying that one team can't videotape another's signals before or during a game, and a team does so anyway....by definition, that's cheating.

Thats true... I just scanned through this thread and if the league has a rule against it during the game then yes its cheating.

I just wonder how many of the 32 teams video tape other teams signals? Like 31?

I remember hearing when all of this stuff broke the Patriots had a guy with a photographic memory that could see the other teams signs and personell packages and know the exact play they were going to run.

Oh well. 18-1... pwned

 

[tomson75]

Thats true... I just scanned through this thread and if the league has a rule against it during the game then yes its cheating.

I just wonder how many of the 32 teams video tape other teams signals? Like 31?

I remember hearing when all of this stuff broke the Patriots had a guy with a photographic memory that could see the other teams signs and personell packages and know the exact play they were going to run.

Oh well. 18-1... pwned

Lmao...yeah.

Actually, I regress. I'm not entirely sure when the league instituted the rule. It may have been after that game. If so, then you're right IMO. Either way, they got what they deserved in Arizona.