Somethign doesnt add up...

[ALP]

So, Roger goes to DC, and tells that BB has been taping since '00....

he KNEW taht would get out...

and then he mentions SPECIFICALLY the steeler reg season game and the steelers AFCCG in 04...to a senator from....pennsylvania?


something is not right...and i doubt this is over....and you knwo waht, now i dont want it to be over, now i want to know everything....

b4 roger had said that the taping began in 07 or 06....now he says '00????

 

[BelichickFan]

Did he say before that the taping began in '06 or that what was on the tapes was from no earlier than '06 ? My impression is Belichick has been doing this all along but only had 6 or so tapes that he would re-use after he was done with whatever analysis was done on them.

 

[signbabybrady]

Did he say before that the taping began in '06 or that what was on the tapes was from no earlier than '06 ? My impression is Belichick has been doing this all along but only had 6 or so tapes that he would re-use after he was done with whatever analysis was done on them.

why he can't afford new tapes or something?

 

[Clonamery]

why he can't afford new tapes or something?

Probably a manner of control....

 

[upstater1]

why he can't afford new tapes or something?

No. It's more likely that he assumed people changed their signals, so that anything taped two years ago or last year is essentially worthless. In other words, why not tape over the signals?

Plus, if you've already transcribed what's on the tape, why would you ever bother to view it again? The notes are 100x more valuable than the tape.

That's what's weird about all this. Anyone could make those notes without use of tape.

 

[upstater1]

Specter said a league lawyer had told him about the Steelers game, not Goodell.

I'm not sure this makes any difference.

 

[dhamz]

and then he mentions SPECIFICALLY the steeler reg season game and the steelers AFCCG in 04...to a senator from....pennsylvania?

It adds up very easily Senator from Pennsylvania asks about Pennslyvania teams so he answers.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

All that lawyer could have told him is that notes existed on defensive signals from that game, and creating or posessing those in and of themselves is not in any way prohibited.

Goodell was pretty clear that the team turned over all notes related to defensive signal interception regardless of how that information was intercepted. He destroyed all the notes because absent tape prior to 2006 he had no way to know with certainty how it was collected. And it's really immaterial since he levied punishment for the totality of the offense dating back to however long the team produced documentation for or Belichick admitted to having used any taping. It's like double jeopardy at this juncture, which is what Specter seems incapable of grasping. Another offense would be another offense, but absent it this one was dealt with in it's entirety in the NFL equivalent of a plea bargain. Give us everything you have and tell us everything you know, and achieve collective sentencing and closure.

For what this gained us PR wise, guess we should have just said F off, see you all in court. :violent:

 

[MoLewisrocks]

It adds up very easily Senator from Pennsylvania asks about Pennslyvania teams so he answers.

And Specter feels he has covered his tracks intent wise because people will be so shocked to learn a detail that doesn't substantively change anything we already knew that they will forget to ask him about his other Pennsylvania constituent and hefty campaign contributor, Comcast.

 

[Ring 6]

What I read was that BB told Goddell he felt it was legal, IMPLYING HE HAD DONE IT ALL ALONG. Big difference.

 

[BelichickFan]

What I read was that BB told Goddell he felt it was legal, IMPLYING HE HAD DONE IT ALL ALONG. Big difference.

The misunderstanding is because the rule says taping is illegal for use in the game. Belichick interpreted that as meaning a videotape is illegal to be used in the game currently being played. A reasonable interpretation to me.