My Last CameraGate Question

If one of my facts is incorrect please let me know.

- Patriots told Jolly Roger they gave him all their tapes.
- All turned over tapes were from 2006 or later as they taped over old games.
- Some "Walsh tapes" had good editing of signal followed by two angles of play.

My question is - the raw tapes being of 2006 or later makes sense as they'd tape over them. But if they edited them into much higher quality, although that proves they didn't use them in the game in question, wouldn't they keep those tapes for whatever historical use ? If so should they have been turned it to ? Or do I misunderstand a little something ?

BelichickFan said:

If one of my facts is incorrect please let me know.

- Patriots told Jolly Roger they gave him all their tapes.
- All turned over tapes were from 2006 or later as they taped over old games.
- Some "Walsh tapes" had good editing of signal followed by two angles of play.

My question is - the raw tapes being of 2006 or later makes sense as they'd tape over them. But if they edited them into much higher quality, although that proves they didn't use them in the game in question, wouldn't they keep those tapes for whatever historical use ? If so should they have been turned it to ? Or do I misunderstand a little something ?

Click to expand...

Once they had mined the tapes for whatever useful information they kept in their notes, the tapes were of no further use.

BelichickFan said:

If one of my facts is incorrect please let me know.

- Patriots told Jolly Roger they gave him all their tapes.
- All turned over tapes were from 2006 or later as they taped over old games.
- Some "Walsh tapes" had good editing of signal followed by two angles of play.

My question is - the raw tapes being of 2006 or later makes sense as they'd tape over them. But if they edited them into much higher quality, although that proves they didn't use them in the game in question, wouldn't they keep those tapes for whatever historical use ? If so should they have been turned it to ? Or do I misunderstand a little something ?

Click to expand...

Personally, the idea that they taped over stuff always bothered/confused me. I work in the video/media world, and the idea that we'd ever tape over something is absurd. We shoot onto drives and to tape simultaneously, we still archive every tape, and why not, a 60 minute DVCAM tape is about $20 bucks, which is about as cheap as you can professionally shoot something. If they were shooting these on handycams, well, then the tape was probably about $5 bucks.

But that might be just the thing - this isn't professional video we're talking about, they basically have interns taping this stuff, and ultimately, they may value it very little, which would explain the taping over. I have a ton of tapes of material I edited for a previous job, technically they don't belong to me, these things happen. You just end up with them and nobody cares to have them back.

If Walsh has the tape, he has to prove he made a copy and gave it to the Patriots, otherwise, I think we can assume he just took them.

BelichickFan said:

If one of my facts is incorrect please let me know.

- Patriots told Jolly Roger they gave him all their tapes.
- All turned over tapes were from 2006 or later as they taped over old games.
- Some "Walsh tapes" had good editing of signal followed by two angles of play.

My question is - the raw tapes being of 2006 or later makes sense as they'd tape over them. But if they edited them into much higher quality, although that proves they didn't use them in the game in question, wouldn't they keep those tapes for whatever historical use ? If so should they have been turned it to ? Or do I misunderstand a little something ?

Click to expand...

you are trying to make sense out of this story. Winning the War in IRAQ is an easier task.

BelichickFan said:

If one of my facts is incorrect please let me know.

- Patriots told Jolly Roger they gave him all their tapes.
- All turned over tapes were from 2006 or later as they taped over old games.
- Some "Walsh tapes" had good editing of signal followed by two angles of play.

My question is - the raw tapes being of 2006 or later makes sense as they'd tape over them. But if they edited them into much higher quality, although that proves they didn't use them in the game in question, wouldn't they keep those tapes for whatever historical use ? If so should they have been turned it to ? Or do I misunderstand a little something ?

Click to expand...

Just a few other points as well

1. Walsh clearly stole the tapes... hence his indemnity for being prosecuted for stolen goods.

2. The Patriots could not have turned over tapes that they did not have if they were stolen and Goodell can't prove they had anything else... though he might suspect as you do

3. Yes - the nature of the tapes actually confirms that Belichick was honest when he said they were for future use.

I can see where one would want to review plays and see the tendencies of coaches to call specific plays in specific situations. And I can see how that would have some benefit YEARS after a team changed their signals (which they likely do each week) and even after they've moved on to another team. So I agree with you - I see value in holding onto them.

Hey - who knows, maybe Goodell only asked for "tapes" and Belichick gave him "tapes" - not DVDs and electronic files! That would be fitting seeing as its the NFL's unclear policy that allowed him to tape for non-game day use in the first place.

Who hired Levy?? How did alsh from hawaii connect with this powerful Washington attorney?? THIS has not been answered...the Spector connection??

Personally, the idea that they taped over stuff always bothered/confused me. I work in the video/media world, and the idea that we'd ever tape over something is absurd. We shoot onto drives and to tape simultaneously, we still archive every tape, and why not, a 60 minute DVCAM tape is about $20 bucks, which is about as cheap as you can professionally shoot something. If they were shooting these on handycams, well, then the tape was probably about $5 buck

Click to expand...

agreed - the concept that they would ever get rid of information is silly imo. If they have a game against a coordinator 5 years later it could be helpful to see how he used to do it.

Who hired Levy?? How did alsh from hawaii connect with this powerful Washington attorney?? THIS has not been answered...the Spector connection??

Click to expand...

I think he did get him through spector and this hasn't been a secret.

Guys, they also surrendered notes. After you have gotten the notes the tapes have no value.

Heck, the notes could be of value to a new co-ordinator, but the tapes would be a nuisance. They hire assistants to view the tapes to get the notes. Why would you give a new co-ordinator the tapes?

bpeter17 said:

I think he did get him through spector and this hasn't been a secret.

Click to expand...

I think HE MIGHT HAVE..but if it is so..why isn't it NOTED?? Truth needed here..as that brings Spector into it a LOT more..

Pats726 said:

Who hired Levy?? How did alsh from hawaii connect with this powerful Washington attorney?? THIS has not been answered...the Spector connection??

Click to expand...

Look up Walsh's bio from his lawfirm

You'll see that his previous lawfirm is listed.

Google the partners of that firm and you'll see that they've done work for Comcast and if you put any of those lawfirms in OpenSecrets.com - which documents campaign donations, you'll see they've contributed something like a $500,000 in the last few election cycles alone.

A good amount - and a ton of money from Comcast - has gone to Specter.

BelichickFan said:

If one of my facts is incorrect please let me know.

- Patriots told Jolly Roger they gave him all their tapes.
- All turned over tapes were from 2006 or later as they taped over old games.
- Some "Walsh tapes" had good editing of signal followed by two angles of play.

My question is - the raw tapes being of 2006 or later makes sense as they'd tape over them. But if they edited them into much higher quality, although that proves they didn't use them in the game in question, wouldn't they keep those tapes for whatever historical use ? If so should they have been turned it to ? Or do I misunderstand a little something ?

Click to expand...

What ... you never saw Belichick's home theatre room at his house ...

JoeSixPat said:

Hey - who knows, maybe Goodell only asked for "tapes" and Belichick gave him "tapes" - not DVDs and electronic files! That would be fitting seeing as its the NFL's unclear policy that allowed him to tape for non-game day use in the first place.

Click to expand...

I believe Goodell asked for all related materials, including notes.

JoeSixPat said:

I can see where one would want to review plays and see the tendencies of coaches to call specific plays in specific situations.

Click to expand...

I am sure you are aware of software which no less than 32 NFL team use software which tabulates every play digitally by every team in every game and allows coaches to sort by almost any thinkable sort function to determine tendencies of their opponents?

If somehow anyone thinks a VHS tape could be useful for this I can't agree.

I'd also mention that signals are changed less often than many have assumed. As unbelievable as it sounds, when pretty boy Gruden as Tampa's HC faced Oakland in the SB, Oakland was still using some of the line calls that he had installed the year before......and Rob Johnson as a Falcons backup was able to help his defense against the Redskins because Steve Spurrior was using the same terminology and/or signals as he did at Florida when Johnson was his QB.