- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 49,631
- Reaction score
- 28,352
This guy is such a complete and utter arse, it is isn't funny. In his latest column, he is basically lobbying Goodell to suspend Belichick for stuff he has already been punished for if the new rule of him lower standard of evidence to punish teams for cheating goes through.
From his column:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=3320938
You can almost see this goober drolling at his keyboard at Goodell suspending Belichick.
I am sorry. But if Walsh produces tapes of the Pats videotaping opposing defensive signals, that will not trigger more actions against Belichick no matter what the standard of evidence Goodell has. Walsh testifying of other allegations of cheating without evidence to support it won't either.
Goodell isn't going to suspend a coach even with a lower standard of burden of proof without him having some proof the allegations are true. It may not be the smoking gun, but he is going to want to make sure that it is more likely than not that the allegations are true.
From his column:
"The analogy is in the criminal world," said Ray Anderson, the NFL's vice president of football operations. "It's the proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In the civil world, it's preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not that something occurred. So we are looking to enforce a standard of proof that would be more in line with preponderance of the evidence."
In other words, given the preponderance of evidence standard, Goodell can take the appearance of spying and level harsh penalties. This could have an impact on Spygate.
Unless new evidence turns up, Spygate is over as far as Goodell and the NFL are concerned. The Patriots lost a first-round choice and $250,000. Belichick was fined $500,000. After a quick investigation, it was determined Belichick had ordered the taping of other teams' signals. He handed over those tapes. Although he didn't think he was doing anything against the rules, Belichick -- according to Goodell -- admitted he had been taping signals for years. The six tapes were destroyed. In Goodell's eyes, the case was closed.
Matt Walsh, a former Patriots videographer who may have more evidence of the team's covert taping, has been negotiating with league lawyers before he discusses Spygate. Goodell has always said he would reopen Spygate if there is new evidence.
That's where the "preponderance of evidence" discussion could produce an interesting twist to the Spygate case. If Walsh testifies after the owners meeting and has new evidence, the standard of proof against Belichick might be less, and the coach could face a possible suspension based on a lower standard of proof. There isn't a double jeopardy provision in Goodell's original decision on taping signals.
Goodell said at the Pro Bowl that Belichick had signed a document that he turned over all evidence involving spying. If there is another level of spying and evidence Belichick hasn't presented or knew of and didn't fess up to, Goodell has the authority to act again. After all, he would have caught Belichick in a lie and the coach would have to pay for that lie.
It's pretty obvious from Goodell's actions that he believes Belichick has given him everything in regards to Spygate. The commissioner has said on numerous occasions that he has seen no additional evidence against Belichick that would merit further penalties.
Nevertheless, Walsh isn't going away. Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter isn't going to stop ripping Goodell for not interviewing Walsh. Specter, currently on a book tour, wants to know whether all information regarding Spygate has been released. A smart politician, he knows mentioning Walsh in any national forum will draw headlines.
I think Goodell must clear the air about Walsh, who will determine whether Spygate lives or dies. If Walsh has evidence to implicate Belichick for doing more spying, it must be aired. If he has nothing, we need to know that, too. The integrity of the sport must be the highest concern.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=3320938
You can almost see this goober drolling at his keyboard at Goodell suspending Belichick.
I am sorry. But if Walsh produces tapes of the Pats videotaping opposing defensive signals, that will not trigger more actions against Belichick no matter what the standard of evidence Goodell has. Walsh testifying of other allegations of cheating without evidence to support it won't either.
Goodell isn't going to suspend a coach even with a lower standard of burden of proof without him having some proof the allegations are true. It may not be the smoking gun, but he is going to want to make sure that it is more likely than not that the allegations are true.
Last edited: