John Tomase

[Rob0729]

Rob -
As soon as Goodell heard the rumors back in November about Walsh, he should have gotten ahold of Walsh and gotten his story. If Walsh hadn't worked with them then, they could have pursued legal action against Walsh for having stolen tapes from the Patriots. By doing it in November and not right before the SB, it takes away much of the potential impact that it could have had. In fact, doing it in November takes away, pretty much, all the leverage that Walsh might have had. Outing Walsh to the press as a greedy SOB who refused to help the league takes away much, if not all, of the credibility that Walsh might have had at the time..

I blame Goodell for his poor handling of the entire situation.
I blame Tomase for being a horrible journalist.
I blame Fish and the other NY Mediots because of their blind bias against anything Boston.
I blame Walsh for being a lying, theiving scumbag.
I blame Specter for being in Comcast's pocket.
I blame Belichick for playing footsy with the rules when he should have known better.. But he gets the least amount of blame.

I disagree. If Walsh is claiming he has evidence and isn't even willing to show he has anything unless he gets money, you ignore it as someone with a grudge or a crackpot. Walsh was fired for cause by the Patriots. I think it is too much to ask that Goodell sues what looks to be a disgruntled former Patriots employee to give up evidence that he claims to have although offers no proof when no one is running the story. Any board attorney can correct me if I am wrong, but Goodell has no reason to sue unless either he can prove that Walsh has NFL property without permission or he sues for libel or slander which at that point his allegations were not public. Until Walsh's allegations were in print or on TV, there was no libel or slander case. Without knowing what Walsh had, Goodell couldn't argue that he had NFL property without permission.

There is a whole host of things that Goodell royally f***ed up in the whole thing, but I don't see the Walsh thing as one of them. I just don't know how you take allegations seriously of a fired employee of the Patriots claiming to have evidence he won't produce or even prove he has going around with his hand out for money. Most corporations dismiss those people. Unfortunately, he did underestimate the lengths Arlen Specter would go to get deals brokered for his largest campaign contributor.

Everything else, I agree with. I am not defending Tomase or Goodell for what they did. They deserve their share of the blame pie and both deserve a big one. As well as many other people you mentioned.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

Had to jump in on this one. You really think a tabloid like the Herald has more credibility than ESPN and the NY Times nationally even on Patriots related issues? Really?!? Eventhough both the Times and ESPN named Matt Walsh, stated his relations to the team, and had direct quotes from him stating he had information on the Patriots cheating while Tomase used the infamous "unnamed source close to the team" route? And you think a U.S. Senator claiming he was going to launch a Congressional investigation against the Patriots and two nationally renowed sources having what many considered was the NFL version of Deep Throat 72 hours before that team was going to play a historic game for the perfect season wasn't big news until Tomase? C'mon!

As for it being a distraction, who knows if it was going to be a distraction with or without Tomase. Contrary to your inacurrate rememberance of the event, both the Times and ESPN pieces sent out big shockwaves prior to the Tomase piece and the NFL was probably on a fact finding mission to find out what Matt Walsh had even before most assumed it was the Rams' walkthrough. In fact, the Rams' walkthrough thing was kind of irrelevant because if Walsh had any new proof of cheating that Belichick didn't disclose to Goodell, Belichick was going to be in huge trouble whether it was a walkthrough being taped or micing the defensive line men or bugging opposing lockerrooms or proof of jaming opposing sidelines communications or any other baseless accusations thrown at the Pats during Spygate.

BTW, if Tomase's piece is what sparked everything and the other two articles were irrelevant, why was Matt Walsh thrusted into the national spotlight. Nowhere in Tomase's piece did he state Walsh was the one who videotaped the walkthrough or that the evidence Walsh had was tape of the walkthrough.

No, your recollection is wrong. In the week leading up to the game, nobody was talking much about Spygate or Pats cheating. It was all about the game, Brady's walking boot, the great game the Giants & Pats had just had, etc. It was basically all about football.

The Herald isn't a rag to the rest of the world, who wouldn't know the diff between the Globe and Herald. They had credibility as the home town paper

 

[40yrpatsfan]

Also, I never heard ANY story prior to Tomase's that specifically talked about taping of the Rams-Pats SuperBowl walkthrough, and I consumed every bit of media those weeks leading up to that game. Only vague rumors about taping, which everyone interpreted to be more about the sideline taping. People were largely over the original Spygate by January, and more about that was not news. Taping a SB walkthru, however, was one of the biggest blockbuster stories in sports history, a Chicago Black Sox level story. That story was NOT out there prior to Tomase - what are you thinking about?

The more I recall about all this, the more I'm wondering what has clouded your memory of it. You're way off base saying that all Tomase did was corroborate what all the trusted NY sources had already reported. Not true. Tomase broke this story in detail, and its impact was COLOSSAL. He deserves every bit of scorn he has received, and more.

 

[Rob0729]

No, your recollection is wrong. In the week leading up to the game, nobody was talking much about Spygate or Pats cheating. It was all about the game, Brady's walking boot, the great game the Giants & Pats had just had, etc. It was basically all about football.

The Herald isn't a rag to the rest of the world, who wouldn't know the diff between the Globe and Herald. They had credibility as the home town paper

My recollection is perfect. Everything exploded Friday morning when the Times article came out with Greg Bishop's article came out and Arlen Specter talked about launching a Congressional investigation and

Here is the article that was published February 1, 2008 (a day before Tomase's and three days before the Super Bowl):

Matt Walsh, a Patriots employee from 1996 through 2003 who spent much of that time in the video department, said he would like to see the issue resolved.

“Was it a surprise that they were doing it or a surprise that they got caught?” Mr. Walsh said of the videotaping incident. “I guess that if you’re doing something that people suspect you of, and then you start doing it to your former assistant coaches, then you’re pushing your luck.”

Mr. Walsh declined to say whether he would be willing to testify before a Congressional committee. He also said he had not been contacted by the N.F.L. about the Patriots or about videotaping.

“I’d like to see a resolution to the situation, so I don’t have to have field media calls, especially after being out of the league for more than four years,” he said.

Mr. Walsh, an assistant golf pro at the Ka’anapali Golf Resort in Lahaina, Hawaii, declined to get into specifics of what he did while with the Patriots’ video department, citing confidentiality agreements he signed with the team. Greg Aiello, an N.F.L. spokesman, said the league did not have confidentiality agreements, but teams were free to make their own with their employees.

“After speaking to my lawyers and whatnot, I can’t really talk to you about anything,” Mr. Walsh said. “And I can’t show you anything.” Mr. Walsh said he had been approached by two news organizations, a “sports network” and “another media outlet that doesn’t even specialize in sports.” He said he would talk about his experiences only on his terms.

“If someone wanted me to talk and tell them things, I would craft an agreement where they would agree from now until the end of my existence to pay for any legal fees that came up in regards to this, whether I’m sued by the Patriots, the N.F.L., anybody else,” he said. He also said he would want an indemnification agreement, with the news media company paying any fines or damages found against him in court. (It is against the policy of The New York Times to be part of such an agreement.) Mr. Walsh said he sought the legal advice after receiving telephone calls from the news media soon after the taping incident. He said he did so to protect himself and his family.

Senator Wants N.F.L. Spying Case Explained - New York Times

A few hourse later, Mike Fish and ESPN.com released this story:

And now, Walsh, 31, an assistant golf pro on Maui, might be positioned to further pull back the curtain on the Patriots' taping history, expose where and how they gained advantages and, perhaps even, turn over video proof.

If Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, is serious about calling a hearing to delve into the issue -- particularly the questions of why the NFL hastily destroyed all evidence, including tapes handed over by the Patriots, and what other as-yet-undisclosed material might be out there -- perhaps one of his first calls should be to Walsh, who in conversations with ESPN.com suggested he has information that could be damaging to both the league and the Patriots.

Asked Friday at his Super Bowl news conference about the New York Times story that indicated Specter's interest and identified Walsh as a person who might have inside knowledge about the Patriots' operations, Belichick said, "It's a league matter. I don't know anything about it."

Despite suggestions that he could be a player in expanding the Spygate probe, Walsh repeatedly has refused to provide ESPN.com with any evidence of wrongdoing by the Patriots. He also has refused to confirm that he has tapes in his possession.


Walsh said he is fearful of possible legal action against him by either the league or Patriots if he details what he knows. He refused to provide evidence of potential wrongdoing unless ESPN agreed to pay his legal fees related to his involvement in the story, as well as an indemnification agreement that would cover any damages found against him in court. ESPN denied his requests.


On Friday, Walsh told ESPN he is uncertain whether he would voluntarily meet with a Senate committee, if asked. Previously, however, he expressed a willingness to tell league officials what he knows if they should call.

Former Patriots video assistant hints at team's spying history - NFL - ESPN

Tomase's piece came out February 2nd.

Source: Pats employee filmed Rams - BostonHerald.com

Sure, Tuesday and Wednesday people weren't talking about Spygate and Matt Walsh because they didn't know Matt Walsh existed. Why would anyone be talking about this before the Times piece.

My recollection of events are clearly far better than yours and the above evidence backs up my account. It was the Times' article which started this and brought Matt Walsh into the public eye. The ESPN article says that Walsh had evidence to sink the Pats. All Tomase's piece just gave the world was speculation to what evidence Walsh had.

And since Belichick and staff ended up meeting with the NFL on Saturday, thie meets could have been scheduled even before Tomase's piece came out. The scandal was already out there 24 hours before Tomase's article.

 

[Rob0729]

Also, I never heard ANY story prior to Tomase's that specifically talked about taping of the Rams-Pats SuperBowl walkthrough, and I consumed every bit of media those weeks leading up to that game. Only vague rumors about taping, which everyone interpreted to be more about the sideline taping. People were largely over the original Spygate by January, and more about that was not news. Taping a SB walkthru, however, was one of the biggest blockbuster stories in sports history, a Chicago Black Sox level story. That story was NOT out there prior to Tomase - what are you thinking about?

The more I recall about all this, the more I'm wondering what has clouded your memory of it. You're way off base saying that all Tomase did was corroborate what all the trusted NY sources had already reported. Not true. Tomase broke this story in detail, and its impact was COLOSSAL. He deserves every bit of scorn he has received, and more.

Again, your recollection is wrong. I think Tom Curran wrote about the Rams walthrough rumor back in September and Michael Holley talked about it on WEEI, but no one batted an eye (Mike Florio might have wrote about it on his site). Besides, I never said Tomase confirmed the Times report about the Rams' walkthrough. I said that Tomase "confirmed" the report by the Times and ESPN that Matt Walsh had evidence that Belichick and the Patriots cheated further than what was reported.

All Tomase did was give an event for people to speculate on an existing story that already exploded. I don't think Tomase's piece even mentions Matt Walsh by name. This was already a huge story before Tomase's piece.

The Rams walkthrough rumor was well known by the local media long before Tomase's piece. I knew about it before then and so did anyone who read Curran's blog back then or listened to Dale and Holley on WEEI. But even so, that wasn't what I was talking about.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

No sir. You just posted 2 articles, which I recall now that I see them again, which say NOTHING about a Rams walkthrough. It was just circumstantial BS which nobody was paying attention to because eveyone assumed it was more about the sideline taping.

It was Tomase that broke the Rams SB part, which was the blockbuster part of the story. I recall nothing about that prior, so if anyone mentioned it earlier it had no legs at all.

 

[Rob0729]

No sir. You just posted 2 articles, which I recall now that I see them again, which say NOTHING about a Rams walkthrough. It was just circumstantial BS which nobody was paying attention to because eveyone assumed it was more about the sideline taping.

It was Tomase that broke the Rams SB part, which was the blockbuster part of the story. I recall nothing about that prior, so if anyone mentioned it earlier it had no legs at all.

When did I ever sayt those articles said anything about the Ram's walkthrough? I said that Tomase's piece just gave the world the inference of what Matt Walsh had. This was a big story already. Tomase's piece feuled the fire of an already stoked flame.

It was just BS stuff no one was paying attention to?!? A U.S. Senator accuses the NFL of a cover up and says that he is going to call Congressional hearings to potentially revoke the NFL's antitrust exemption and two nationally recognized sources says they have found someone with potential evidence of further cheating by the Pats and no one was talking about it? It was all ESPN and the rest of the country (at least in the sports world) were talking about. It was all I heard on WEEI on that Friday. Maybe if Tomase didn't publish his story we would have woken up one day and found the NFL disbanded because the Senate revoked the league antitrust exemption while no one was paying attention to the story.

Seriously, I know you hate Tomase, but don't rewrite history here. This was a big story with or without Tomase. The fact that you didn't even remember either the Times or ESPN piece just shows how little you remember about the incident because virtually every Patriots fan remember both those stories.

 

[Ring 6]

When did I ever sayt those articles said anything about the Ram's walkthrough? I said that Tomase's piece just gave the world the inference of what Matt Walsh had. This was a big story already. Tomase's piece feuled the fire of an already stoked flame.

It was just BS stuff no one was paying attention to?!? A U.S. Senator accuses the NFL of a cover up and says that he is going to call Congressional hearings to potentially revoke the NFL's antitrust exemption and two nationally recognized sources says they have found someone with potential evidence of further cheating by the Pats and no one was talking about it? It was all ESPN and the rest of the country (at least in the sports world) were talking about. It was all I heard on WEEI on that Friday. Maybe if Tomase didn't publish his story we would have woken up one day and found the NFL disbanded because the Senate revoked the league antitrust exemption while no one was paying attention to the story.

Seriously, I know you hate Tomase, but don't rewrite history here. This was a big story with or without Tomase. The fact that you didn't even remember either the Times or ESPN piece just shows how little you remember about the incident because virtually every Patriots fan remember both those stories.

I dont really want to get into this, but if you cant see the difference between writers saying 'there may be more to the story' and a LOCAL writer saying he has a source that says they filmed the walk though before the SB win, you just aren't trying to understand.

 

[Rob0729]

I dont really want to get into this, but if you cant see the difference between writers saying 'there may be more to the story' and a LOCAL writer saying he has a source that says they filmed the walk though before the SB win, you just aren't trying to understand.

I understand the difference, but let's not pretend this wasn't a huge deal before Tomase's piece. I never said that Tomase's piece without the other two stories wouldn't have been a huge deal. I am saying that the other two stories along with Specter's hearing threats of Congressional hearings still was a huge story even if Tomase didn't publish his story.

Why can't people get this? It wasn't which story was more damaging, but that most of the damage was already done before Tomase's piece and without the Times and ESPN pieces there would never have been the Tomase piece.

 

[Joker]

I understand the difference, but let's not pretend this wasn't a huge deal before Tomase's piece. I never said that Tomase's piece without the other two stories wouldn't have been a huge deal. I am saying that the other two stories along with Specter's hearing threats of Congressional hearings still was a huge story even if Tomase didn't publish his story.

Why can't people get this? It wasn't which story was more damaging, but that most of the damage was already done before Tomase's piece and without the Times and ESPN pieces there would never have been the Tomase piece.

hidden agenda much?

The Patriots GOT to the Super Bowl, despite this damage you claim was already done...Tomase broke his piece of libel the EVE of the damn game...THERE is REAL DAMAGE...why can't YOU see this?

 

[RayClay]

He was one of two team beat writers in Boston.

*kicks in the head while down...OK, one more*

 

[Ring 6]

I understand the difference, but let's not pretend this wasn't a huge deal before Tomase's piece. I never said that Tomase's piece without the other two stories wouldn't have been a huge deal. I am saying that the other two stories along with Specter's hearing threats of Congressional hearings still was a huge story even if Tomase didn't publish his story.

Why can't people get this? It wasn't which story was more damaging, but that most of the damage was already done before Tomase's piece and without the Times and ESPN pieces there would never have been the Tomase piece.

The other stories were rehashing Spygate. Spector was saying Goodell didnt handle it right, that he wanted Goodell to explain and defend his investigation.
Tomase invented a story that said there was evidence that the Patriots illegally watched and taped the Rams game preparations before winning the SB.
Spygate was abot taping defensive signals. Tomase story said the Patriots snuck in and spied on the Rams practice in order to know what plays they would run. Taping signals from the wrong place on the field and espionage of practice purportedly tainting the SB win are both negative issues, but they are not even in the same stratosphere of damaging.

 

[Ring 6]

I understand the difference, but let's not pretend this wasn't a huge deal before Tomase's piece. I never said that Tomase's piece without the other two stories wouldn't have been a huge deal. I am saying that the other two stories along with Specter's hearing threats of Congressional hearings still was a huge story even if Tomase didn't publish his story.

Why can't people get this? It wasn't which story was more damaging, but that most of the damage was already done before Tomase's piece and without the Times and ESPN pieces there would never have been the Tomase piece.

Congressional hearings about an event that the league had already passed judgment on and NEW accusations of much, much more serious and indefensible behavior are very different things. Making it up just adds fuel to the fire.
I seriously cannot believe you are defending this guys scumbag actions by saying someone else was criticizing the team too.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

it was because he released his article right before the super bowl without checking his facts. He was greedy and wanted to be the first journalist to make the "story" public. He could have waited until after the super bowl to do it, but he didn't and that article took a lot of wind from the team as they were getting set to play the most important game in team history.

That about sums it up. Thanks.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I guess it comes down to whether you believe Tomase made a mistake or was trying to be malicious.

I think he made a mistake. I'm not in the mood to forgive him, and I'm not apologizing for him. But lots of local writers make up all sorts of nonsense all the time, yet don't generate anywhere near the hatred that Tomase gets.

In any event, his stupid non-story wasn't why we lost that game. Hacks like Tomase, or any of the local clowns like Borges or Felger, have NO impact on anything the Patriots do on or off the field.

There's a big bright line between innocent mistake and culpable negligence; as a reporter Tomass didn't check his sources or validate his story and crossed that line.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Sorry, he is a reporter. If his story was true, he shouldn't have sat on it because he covers the Patriots. That is wrong. Borges was wrong to do it back in 1986 when he sat on the drug scandal story so it wouldn't be a distraction for the Super Bowl.

If Tomase felt he had a real story, he shouldn't defend the Pats against other reporters.

I know the news has become slanted based on the sources' view points, but that doesn't make it right. I don't want the guys to cover my team to be mindless cheerleaders for the team. I want them to be objective and that includes warts and all.

Tomase's crime was running with the story without properly verifying the story, but it certainly wasn't to play Belichick's or Kraft's PR firm and counter national and NY reports which at that point no one knew what was true or not.

I agree, but with the emphasis that a reporter's obligation to check his sources and verify his story, at all times but especially when reputations and a season are on the line, is not just a nicety. It is his failure to do so in this case that took Tomass' conduct out of the realm of "error" and put it into the realm of "culpable."

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I still don't think it was malicious. He didn't do it to sink the team he was covering or hurt Belichick or ruin the Pats chances to win the Super Bowl. It was a stupid mistake.

He was wrong, but he didn't do what he did to hurt anyone. He did it because he wanted the story first and jumped the gun. It was no worse than Mike Fish who was sitting on the Walsh story for months because he couldn't verify that Walsh had any evidence of cheating by Belichick or the Pats, but then decided to release the story anyway after Greg Bishop mentioned Walsh in his article. Fish knew what he did didn't meet proper journalistic standards, but released the article anyway because he didn't want to get scooped.

Disagree here. Intentions matter when you're standing before God and not in the realm of reputations and consequences. I have no idea what intentions Tomass had, since I've never met the guy and never talked to him.

The facts are indisputable. He was a "journalist." He broke a major and damaging story without any fact-checking. Not only did he break the story, but he broke it at the worst possible time (or the best possible time if your "intention" was to get as much publicity for yourself as possible, which certainly happened).

Even though I'm very suspicious of his intentions, I don't know what they were and I don't care what he intended. The only thing that matters is that the damage he did was significant and long lasting. The damage occurred in the real world and it is that damage, resulting from journalistic malpractice, on which I and others judge him.

 

[Rob0729]

The other stories were rehashing Spygate. Spector was saying Goodell didnt handle it right, that he wanted Goodell to explain and defend his investigation.
Tomase invented a story that said there was evidence that the Patriots illegally watched and taped the Rams game preparations before winning the SB.
Spygate was abot taping defensive signals. Tomase story said the Patriots snuck in and spied on the Rams practice in order to know what plays they would run. Taping signals from the wrong place on the field and espionage of practice purportedly tainting the SB win are both negative issues, but they are not even in the same stratosphere of damaging.

No they weren't. Matt Walsh was fired four years before Spygate. Both stories introduce Matt Walsh to the sports world. Both stories said Matt Walsh had evidence that would sink the Pats and the NFL. As far as the world knew, Walsh could have had stuff even more damaging than a videotape of a walkthrough.

And Tomase didn't invent the Rams' walkthrough story. Tom Curran and Michael Holley both reported that rumor back in September of 2007. All Tomase did was take that rumor and assume that Matt Walsh had the proof it was true.

 

[Rob0729]

Congressional hearings about an event that the league had already passed judgment on and NEW accusations of much, much more serious and indefensible behavior are very different things. Making it up just adds fuel to the fire.
I seriously cannot believe you are defending this guys scumbag actions by saying someone else was criticizing the team too.

First, Tomase did not make up the Rams' Walkthrough story. The rumor was around long before Tomase was covering the team.

Second, I am not defending him. I am just pointing out people's irrational hate of the guy should be directed at the people who deserve it more like Arlen Specter, Greg Bishop, and Mike Fish. Without those three, Tomase would have never ran with the story. And at least Specter's and Bishop's intentions were to sink the Pats' Super Bowl hopes. Tomase deserves most of the crap he gets, but people act like the Pats weren't already under the microscope because of Matt Walsh's allegations before Tomase's story. If it wasn't so dead on this board, I probably wouldn't have even cared.

 

[Rob0729]

hidden agenda much?

The Patriots GOT to the Super Bowl, despite this damage you claim was already done...Tomase broke his piece of libel the EVE of the damn game...THERE is REAL DAMAGE...why can't YOU see this?

Huh?!? What the hell are you talking about hidden agenda? Please explain this supposive agenda you think I have. Considering I have been called one of the biggest board homers by many people, I would love to hear your theory.

And yes, the Patriots got the Super Bowl despite the damge of stories written two day before the Super Bowl. Neither Bishop's nor Fish's piece affected the team's bus from getting from the hotel to the stadium.

You do realize I am talking about two stories that were written 24 hours before Tomase's piece and were the reason Tomase wrote his piece at all. You need some reading comprehension skills. I am talking about stories written 2/1/07 and Tomase's piece was written 2/2/07.

Seriously, has people's hatred of Tomase completely clouded the events of those three days that people forget how this all happened. The biggest villians of those events were clearly Specter and Bishop.... and Matt Walsh.