Phillips disputes Belicheat-bashin' HBO report

[MrTibbs]

http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/


Peter King dropped a pretty big bomb on HBO's Inside the NFL last night, mentioning that Wade Phillips wonders how much Bill Belichick's cheating aided the Patriots' dynasty.

"You know, 5 and 0 New England against 5 and 0 Dallas. The league, the Patriots, everybody, they just want this Spygate thing to go away. But Wade Phillips this week told me something that I think a lot of coaches around the league and a lot of people around the league are still thinking and that is, 'Hey, New England was caught cheating and it is a black mark on their success.'
"There is no doubt in my mind that it is and more and more people around the league are starting to say, "Why did this thing just go away? Why didn't it get more traction?'"


Phillips, however, accused King of putting words in his mouth.

"I didn't say that at all," Phillips said during today's press conference. "I think they would have won no matter what. I have no idea that it even helped them. They were a great football team, well coached. I don't see any way they wouldn't have won what they did.

"I don't think that at all, and I don't know why Peter would say that. Maybe he thinks that."

UPDATE: An HBO spokesman said King stands by his report.

Posted by Tim MacMahon at 4:38 PM (E-mail this entry) | Comments (13)

 

[fair catch fryar]

http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/


Peter King dropped a pretty big bomb on HBO's Inside the NFL last night, mentioning that Wade Phillips wonders how much Bill Belichick's cheating aided the Patriots' dynasty.

"You know, 5 and 0 New England against 5 and 0 Dallas. The league, the Patriots, everybody, they just want this Spygate thing to go away. But Wade Phillips this week told me something that I think a lot of coaches around the league and a lot of people around the league are still thinking and that is, 'Hey, New England was caught cheating and it is a black mark on their success.'
"There is no doubt in my mind that it is and more and more people around the league are starting to say, "Why did this thing just go away? Why didn't it get more traction?'"


Phillips, however, accused King of putting words in his mouth.

"I didn't say that at all," Phillips said during today's press conference. "I think they would have won no matter what. I have no idea that it even helped them. They were a great football team, well coached. I don't see any way they wouldn't have won what they did.

"I don't think that at all, and I don't know why Peter would say that. Maybe he thinks that."

UPDATE: An HBO spokesman said King stands by his report.

Posted by Tim MacMahon at 4:38 PM (E-mail this entry) | Comments (13)

This whole thing has gone from being largely over-blown to a f'kn joke!

 

[psychoPat]

I've added and attributed this lead post to the pre-existing thread.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=63564

 

[BradyManny]

Peter King should be fired. The guy has gone completely mental....

And for argument's sake, let's say Peter King was telling the truth, well, good luck getting exclusives now....Peter King the rat.

 

[Seymour93]

My guess is that Phillips actually said those things to King - but he thought that King wasn't going to disclose to the audience that those comments were actually Phillips' thoughts, instead Phillips assumed King would say something to the effect of, "A head coach told me that he felt... :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: ." Now Phillips looks like Mangina-esque babbling fool, so he's backtracking. Just a theory.

 

[MrTibbs]

You can't tell King anything these days. I wonder how it will be for him getting info now.

 

[Rob0729]

I agree that Phillips probably said something to that effect off the record. It doesn't change the fact that this whole thing is starting to eat away at King's journalist integrity and his image. He is starting to come off as a guy with an agenda. I know two teams that won't be giving him any quotes at least of the rest of the year now (Pats and Cowboys).

He and Collinsworth came off like little babies on Inside the NFL. First they were upset that no one in the league would explain what was on the tapes or why they were destroyed and now they are upset that no one has explained it until now and never told everyone in the league or told the fans directly. Get over it.

You know there is a small segment of the public who still cares about this story, but most have moved on. His obsession with it is going to be his downfall if he doesn't gain some objectivity and make sure he gets his quotes correct and the people he is quoting have said what they said on the record.

 

[PromisedLand]

You can't tell King anything these days. I wonder how it will be for him getting info now.

I think he is channeling Ron Borges.

 

[N.Eman]

Peter King should be fired. The guy has gone completely mental....

And for argument's sake, let's say Peter King was telling the truth, well, good luck getting exclusives now....Peter King the rat.

Peter king is the Jay Leno of the NFL. He's mangini's best friend for sure! F**K HIM!

 

[PYPER]

I always liked King. It's really hard to understand where he's coming from.

Prior to the Jets game when Cimini misquoted that article of his, he made some kind of comment to the effect of...."It's no wonder Belichick treats the media like Vermin".

You'd think that with an insight like that he'd understand why Belichick and the Patriots would prefer to handle the situation privately with the league and avoid empowering the media's desire to play judge, jury, and executioner.

King's behavior just doesn't make sense.

He's probably just got a grudge now b/c Belichick and the Patriots have completely shut him out. He's just another one of these media hacks who believe they're entitled to the inside scoop and since the Patriots are blocking his efforts, he's decided to make it personal. In other words, he's just like every one of the local hacks who ***** and moan b/c they can't get the juicy stories out of the team.

My other theory is that King is a very good networker and that he's befriended known Patriots haters from around the league or from within the media. His access to these Patriots haters have influenced him for the worse.
I guess he's just not wise enough to decipher between reality and the nonsense. It's disappointing actually. I was always happy for him after he started receiving increased airtime.

The disappointing part is that he hasn't strived to bring a fair and balanced angle to the subject. He's become another hack spouting nothing but speculation and assumption.

Where oh where did all the good sportswriters go???

 

[patsox23]

I think King's wrong, totally misguided, about this Spygate thing. I don't think he actually understands what could possibly have happened, the machinations of it all. HOWEVER....

Until Spygate there was no bigger Patriots ball-washer than Peter King, so it's pretty short-sighted to assume he isn't sincere here. I think he IS sincere, but just ridiculously off-track.

 

[SVN]

one of the big reasons BB hasnt said a word about this because he knows these same writers will write out their own interpretations of what he says. If BB doesnt say anything there is no record of what was said or interpreted.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

I agree that Phillips probably said something to that effect off the record.

I doubt it. I believe he said these things and wishes they were off the record.

King's obsession with sticking on this story strikes me as both befuddling and clearly agenda-driven. But he knows the difference between on the record and off the record. As do the people at HBO who surely grilled him before refusing a retraction and standing by the story.

For his part, Phillips' denial sounds more like a guy with regrets than a guy calling a reporter a liar.

 

[khayos]

I think all sportswriters want to be Woodward and Bernstein and thus... they are sportswriters.

 

[Fencer]

If one's an experienced, knowledgeable, well-connected commentator, one has lots of conversations in which people first say what they think, and then take it back off the record, or even put it on background.

Sometimes I even prompt them to do that. Sometimes I negotiate with them as to what they'll leave on the record (or even leave off the record rather than on background).

There's simply a trust relationship that you won't burn them (and also that they won't go overboard with spinning or deceiving you).

If you quote somebody on something truthful they didn't want to be quoted on, you're almost always in the wrong.

EDIT: Perhaps I should clarify by saying that I annoy people all the time by what I report and comment on, and I think I'm right to do so. What's more, I hit companies pretty hard if I think they stonewall, or comment on less than they should. But despite all that, if they want to remain officially silent, they have the right to do so.

 

[PatsWorldChamps]

Peter king is the Jay Leno of the NFL. He's mangini's best friend for sure! F**K HIM!

King ran out of original material once his daughter stopped playing field hockey

 

[PatsWorldChamps]

If one's an experienced, knowledgeable, well-connected commentator, one has lots of conversations in which people first say what they think, and then take it back off the record, or even put it on background.

Sometimes I even prompt them to do that. Sometimes I negotiate with them as to what they'll leave on the record (or even leave off the record rather than on background).

There's simply a trust relationship that you won't burn them (and also that they won't go overboard with spinning or deceiving you).

If you quote somebody on something truthful they didn't want to be quoted on, you're almost always in the wrong.

EDIT: Perhaps I should clarify by saying that I annoy people all the time by what I report and comment on, and I think I'm right to do so. What's more, I hit companies pretty hard if I think they stonewall, or comment on less than they should. But despite all that, if they want to remain officially silent, they have the right to do so.

lol... who the h3ll are you?

 

[PatriotsReign]

I've added and attributed this lead post to the pre-existing thread.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=63564

Peter King said, "...but the fact that Bill Belichick has never been left to explain the fact that the Patriots won three Super Bowls by a field goal each..."

Doesn't he realize that if video taping really provided an competitive advantage, they wouldn't have let the games get so close? Does he actually think the Pats played it that close on purpose to make it look good?

I wish these people would read that article by Green on ESPN.com that explains EXACTLY what the potential advantage could be...NONE! Green is the only person with NFL experience who has written an article on the videogate issue. everyone else just writes innuendo's and speculation and THAT is what Costas, King and Collinsworth should be angry about!

Think about it. Videogate has been the most innaccurately reported sports issue ever and no one seems to be upset over that. They just say "If the tapes weren't destroyed, then we'd report it accurately". But what they don't get is the media and the public are not CAPABLE of interprating the tapes & notes...unbelieveable!

 

[PatriotsReign]

If one's an experienced, knowledgeable, well-connected commentator, one has lots of conversations in which people first say what they think, and then take it back off the record, or even put it on background.

Sometimes I even prompt them to do that. Sometimes I negotiate with them as to what they'll leave on the record (or even leave off the record rather than on background).

There's simply a trust relationship that you won't burn them (and also that they won't go overboard with spinning or deceiving you).

If you quote somebody on something truthful they didn't want to be quoted on, you're almost always in the wrong.

EDIT: Perhaps I should clarify by saying that I annoy people all the time by what I report and comment on, and I think I'm right to do so. What's more, I hit companies pretty hard if I think they stonewall, or comment on less than they should. But despite all that, if they want to remain officially silent, they have the right to do so.

Is it possible Phillips was told his comments were off-the-record and King made them public anyway? If so, can't he be sued for that?

And if King did do that, shouldn't he be fired never to be hired again?

 

[PatriotsReign]

This is my interpretation of the whole videogate issue.

If my company catches me breaking a rule which could hurt their image, should they try to prosecute me on legal grounds and make the whole issue public EVEN IF THEY DON'T WANT TO?

Think about that last part. Given the choice, which the NFL and the Patriots have, who wouldn't refuse to make the records public? To me, it's like there are hourds of hungry media wanna-be's and angry (opposing) fans just waiting to get their hands on information & they would not have a clue what to do with it.

So, yes, the NFL is doing the right thing here.