Can Goodell trust Walsh to tell him the truth?

[JoeSixPat]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=paolantonio_sal&id=3391620

Sal Paolantonio asserts that if Goodell asks the "right" questions of Walsh, Spygate could linger.

Unfortunately, while I see nothing wrong with the questions Sal suggests, he doesn't give anywhere near enough attention to the fact that Walsh has little or no credibility at this point.

Even aside from the fact that Walsh obviously has a grudge for being fired for engaging in illegal taping practices himself, he's also made it clear that he has a personal agenda to gain media attention himself... otherwise there would be no reason not to admit months ago that he had no tape of a Patriots walk through.

Paolantonio at least gives this notion lip service, but his statement that "...Walsh is the first person currently with no ties to the Patriots organization with direct knowledge of Belichick's videotaping shenanigans who will be answering the commissioner's questions, and Walsh can provide some much-needed context, background and intent." is completely erroneous.

He has a strong connection - he was fired for unethical conduct, lied in conveying his personal background in his own bio, and stole property from the Patriots.

And THIS is someone Paolantonio views as an independent and trusted source to clarify on Spygate?

So what's the point in asking questions if it's been proven you can't trust the source?

Goodell would be better off inquiring into the taping practices of other teams than wasting his time with Walsh.

When the Dolphins were caught using "purchased" tapes of the Patriots signal calling, why was the NFL not interested in determining whether the Dolphins were in compliance with the rules?

Why did they not ask to review those tapes to determine whether the entity who taped them and then SOLD them to the Dolphins were in compliance with the newly clarified taping rule. Is buying taped playcalling from a third party a way to circumvent NFL rules prohibiting teams from engaging in prohibited practices?

And when the Jets were caught taping without permission, why didn't the Commissioner's office look into that instance?

The media can ask these questions of Goodell themselves - but most importantly they should make him clarify, for the record, the fact that taping playcalling is LEGAL under the NFL rules.

 

[bakes781]

Whatever Walsh says regarding the Pats has to be backed up with physical evidence, otherwise he'll be held responsible for proving it in court.

If not than any Joe off the street can claim to have done such & such while working as a Gilette stadium janitor without having to bare evidence. The national media is like a hungry shark tank with this story & Matt Walsh holds the bait.

 

[BadMoFo]

One way to show that Goodell asked the right questions is to make Matt Walsh available to the media afterward? That way they can ask questions of their own. I can guarantee that all he will say is that the the videotaped signals and the tapes were broken down at some point. Nothing new.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

If Walsh is found to be less than truthful, he loses his indemnification and the Pats can put his ass in a sling.

 

[Rob0729]

Matt Walsh was fired by the Patriots for, what the Pats assert, conducting criminal activities. Without evidence, how can anyone believe what Walsh says? Granted what ever negative he says about the Patriots will be taken as gospel from a large portion of the media.

 

[tuckeverlasting]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=paolantonio_sal&id=3391620

Sal Paolantonio asserts that if Goodell asks the "right" questions of Walsh, Spygate could linger.

Unfortunately, while I see nothing wrong with the questions Sal suggests, he doesn't give anywhere near enough attention to the fact that Walsh has little or no credibility at this point.

Even aside from the fact that Walsh obviously has a grudge for being fired for engaging in illegal taping practices himself, he's also made it clear that he has a personal agenda to gain media attention himself... otherwise there would be no reason not to admit months ago that he had no tape of a Patriots walk through.

Paolantonio at least gives this notion lip service, but his statement that "...Walsh is the first person currently with no ties to the Patriots organization with direct knowledge of Belichick's videotaping shenanigans who will be answering the commissioner's questions, and Walsh can provide some much-needed context, background and intent." is completely erroneous.

He has a strong connection - he was fired for unethical conduct, lied in conveying his personal background in his own bio, and stole property from the Patriots.

And THIS is someone Paolantonio views as an independent and trusted source to clarify on Spygate?

So what's the point in asking questions if it's been proven you can't trust the source?

Goodell would be better off inquiring into the taping practices of other teams than wasting his time with Walsh.

When the Dolphins were caught using "purchased" tapes of the Patriots signal calling, why was the NFL not interested in determining whether the Dolphins were in compliance with the rules?

Why did they not ask to review those tapes to determine whether the entity who taped them and then SOLD them to the Dolphins were in compliance with the newly clarified taping rule. Is buying taped playcalling from a third party a way to circumvent NFL rules prohibiting teams from engaging in prohibited practices?

And when the Jets were caught taping without permission, why didn't the Commissioner's office look into that instance?

The media can ask these questions of Goodell themselves - but most importantly they should make him clarify, for the record, the fact that taping playcalling is LEGAL under the NFL rules.

i love it. they are grasping at straws trying to bring bb down. my hatred for them grows.

 

[Jimke]

Of course, Goodell can't trust Walsh to tell the truth. He is

a confirmed liar (his resume) and thief (the tapes). However,

Goodell damned well better listen to Walsh or end up being crucified

by Specter and most members of the media. I hope that the Patriots

held on to the tape Walsh made when he was having his job

evaluation discussion with Pioli. Bill Belichick might need it to

protect himself from a possible suspension. The tape would

further lessen Walsh's credibility.

 

[Zeke_Mowatt]

Paolantonio at least gives this notion lip service, but his statement that "...Walsh is the first person currently with no ties to the Patriots organization with direct knowledge of Belichick's videotaping shenanigans who will be answering the commissioner's questions, and Walsh can provide some much-needed context, background and intent." is completely erroneous.

Points for use of shenanigans in any context, extra points for using it to describe cameragate since it downplays the significance. If he could have worked shellaillagh in, I'd have moved him to the top of my list of media idiots I don't completely hate!