Welcome to PatsFans.com

Can Goodell Ban Jay Glazer From NFL facilities Until he Confesses?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by WTE, Sep 19, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. WTE

    WTE Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I'm not sure if Goodell has legal authority to ban Jay Glazer from NFL facilities until he tells him who leaked him the tape, but if he can, he should.

    I think the person who leaked him the tape ~cough Polian~ wouldn't want to hurt Glazer's livlihood so he would likely own up for Glazer.

    Anybody know if Goodell can legally prevent Glazer from entering all NFL facilities?
  2. Grizzafted

    Grizzafted Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Absolutely not. We shouldn't punish journalists for not revealing their sources.
  3. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +836 / 5 / -3

    I don't think it will need to get that far. Found this in Tom Curran's current article:

    http://www.nbcsports.com/portal/sit...0VgnVCM2000006fc3d240RCRD&cpsextcurrchannel=1
  4. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

  5. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    Um, that's a noble idea, but a private entity can do whatever it wants in relation to reporters. It's not citing him for contempt in a court of law. He's protected. But there's nothing that says he should retain his access. They can easily pull his credentials if they want to.

    That being said, if Glazer is worth his salt as a reporter, he would never agree to reveal his sources.
  6. SVN

    SVN Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    22,572
    Likes Received:
    37
    Ratings:
    +68 / 0 / -0

    two more interesting quotes

  7. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,562
    Likes Received:
    182
    Ratings:
    +434 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    On the practice taping thing - first, the Rams got a FG fairly quickly, it was the 2nd and 3rd qtr when they really bogged down. But second, the Broncos were accused (or caught, not sure) of taping Chargers practices and barely a word was mentioned.
  8. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    they should be punished because of it's possession of confidential league material and they are the ones who spin stories out of control.

    the media shoould be held accountable to give accurate information than rushing to beat fellow media people which then provides inaccurate information and defames people beyond a reasonable degree they should be.
  9. LA Pats Fan

    LA Pats Fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Yes Glazer can be barred from NFL stadiums - at least he can be barred from the special privilages given to reports (press credentials).

    However, Glazer has the right to and is professionally bound to protect his source.

    To ban him would hurt the NFL more than help

    2) If the NFL guaranteed the tape would not be public and the NFL failed to do so, then could the Patriots seek to return some if not all the penalties.

    The NFL did violate it's agreement - if not a rule.

    If this were a court wouldn't the evidance be thrown out of court because of improper handling?
  10. PromisedLand

    PromisedLand Virtual Internet Person

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,372
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    You neglected to mention that your excerpt was found under the heading, "Two more videogate rumors are zipping around". Let's try to hold ourselves to higher standards of integrity than the people who are vilifying us.
  11. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +836 / 5 / -3

    What did I do wrong? The Rams Super Bowl rumor has no relevance to this thread. I provided a link so I was not hiding the rumor. This thread is about finding out who leaked the tape, not further allegations against the Patriots.
  12. primetime

    primetime Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Messages:
    5,082
    Likes Received:
    62
    Ratings:
    +217 / 22 / -10

    #18 Jersey

    The real question in that Curran article is why were the Guardsmen toting AK-47s, a Russian assault rifle?

    The answer, of course, is those weren't Guardsmen. Belichick hired a militia to make sure things didn't, cough, get out of hand.

    (He probably meant M-16, but still... pretty big mistake to make)
  13. Grizzafted

    Grizzafted Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    The National Guard doesn't carry AK47s.

    Whoops beat me to it Prime.
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2007
  14. Grizzafted

    Grizzafted Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    This wasn't an inaccurate article with false sources. It was a scoop. A tape. No ambiguity. This is the NFL's fault.

    Greg Easterbrook, however, is blackballed from here on out in my book.
  15. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    It's only confidential once it's in the league's hands. The media owes nothing to the league at all. It's their job to get documents out to the public. In short, this videotape has no copyright hold on it or expectation of privacy. Once Goodell went on his rampage, the whole story became newsworthy, and so the tape became fair game for any media source. Glazer did absolutely nothing wrong.
  16. WTE

    WTE Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    True, but if Goodell is serious about finding the source he should use all the resources available to him. Plus, as I mentioned, Glazer wouldn't have to come forward and admit anything. If the person who leaked the tape has any amount of decency they would fess up once they hear Glazer's been banned.

    The Patriots need to ensure Goodell's office has tight controls over security before they release the rest of the tapes and notes the Commish has demanded.
  17. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    Excellent point about the leak having a responsibility to protect Glazer. Somehow, if it truly is Polian, then I think Glazer is sunk.
  18. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    how is glazer sunk?
  19. PatsFaninAZ

    PatsFaninAZ Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,097
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    You'e have a really complicated law-school question here for municipally owned stadiums, as well as nasty state action questions depending on how the NFL chose to enforce it as a tresspass under state law if the guy actually showed up and was denied admission. One they use the police it gets difficult.

    NFL can deny him a credential. What can they do if he buys a ticket to a municipal stadium?
  20. dryheat44

    dryheat44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,369
    Likes Received:
    33
    Ratings:
    +78 / 2 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    I don't see what difference it would make. Glazer would say fcuk off, and Fox would put him on the baseball beat and shift someone else to football. With all the hundreds of millions Fox is paying the NFL for broadcast rights, do you think the Commish would seriously sanction Fox?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>