John Tomase

[Koma]

Are you seriously thinking that the vicious media storm + extreme negative spotlight on the team/BB/coaches on the eve of the biggest game of the season that already had our reputation smeared as villains for 'stealing' signs didn't impact the concentration and focus of the coaches and players??

I would argue that the smearing of the team (again) based on wild allegations and the harsh negative distraction were the main reasons for our lame play-calling and poor performance.

I don't know if there will ever be a definitive answer on whether or not the story was a distraction. I could see the Patriots coaches and players saying it wasn't a factor and citing the fact that the Giants played a great game. I could also see any coach or player who says it was a distraction getting killed in the media for "whining" and "making excuses."

The track record for teams who had to deal with a major distraction right before the Super Bowl is not good in terms of wins and losses. Off the top of my head, the Bengals (Stanley Wilson [?] going on a coke binge), the Falcons (Eugene Robinson getting arrested for solicitation) and the Raiders (Their starting center flaking out) all lost. For these teams, their problems were, in a sense, self-inflicted. I can't think of another situation where outside forces created a distraction for a team.

 

[Rob0729]

The league knew of this months before and didn't "investigate". Their response was they "looked" but if someone had more info.....OKAYYYYY

If the league office was serious, they would have taken care of this months ago. The possibility of an undefeated season was no suprise so letting this come out the day before would either distract or give cover to strip the Lombardi.

So the league planted the stories in the NY Times, ESPN, and the Boston Herald?!? Is this a vast NFL wing conspiracy. Yes, the NFL was aware of Matt Walsh and also the Rams Walkthrough rumors for a while, but they decided to investigate when they did because the media forced them to investigate. If the Pats were found guilty of the allegations and won the Super Bowl, it would be a major blow to the NFL especially with it becoming news the Firday before the Super Bowl.

Goodell wanted the whole Spygate mess to go away and Specter and Greg Bishop thrusted it into the spotlight. Goodell was forced to act swiftly because of it.

There is a lot to blame Goodell and the league office about with Spygate, but some kind of conspiracy to sink the Patriots Super Bowl hopes isn't one of them. They didn't ask Greg Bishop and the NY Times to publish the Specter/Walsh story when they did which set off all the course of events at the time. I know that Specter was the originator of the magic bullet theory, but there was no shadow conspiracy by the league to sink the Pats in this case. They were blindsided as much as the Patriots were.

 

[Bostonian1962]

Although Tomase deserves his share of the blame, I have never gotten why people direct all their hate towards him yet forget the real villians like Greg Bishop of the NY Times who conspired with Arlene Specter to use the Times as Specter's PR firm in his effort to disqualify the Pats' Super Bowl win over the Eagles and push his Comast agenda vs. the NFL. Or Mike Fish and Greg Easterbrook of ESPN who together wrote a piece of yellow journalism that stated Matt Walsh had evidence to bring down the Patriots eventhough they not only did not know if the evidence was damagaging, but they didn't even know if the evidence even really existed.

I always looked at Tomase's crime as stupid opportunism. The Matt Walsh scandal was already there and he just tied the rumors and inuendos of that nothing scandal to the Rams walkthrough rumor. It was guys like Specter, Easterbrook, and Bishop who had sinister motives and wanted to deal the Pats a deathblow right before the Pats faced the Giants. Without Specter and Bishop (and subsequently the Mike Fish article that Easterbook facilitiated), Tomase would never have written about the Rams walkthrough.

If Tomase didn't write his piece, the Matt Walsh scandal was already an blck cloud hanging over the Pats heads the Friday before the Super Bowl. I still don't get why Tomase gets all the blame for this. His was the third story with allegations of further cheating by the Patriots in a 24 hour period.

VERY well said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

So the league planted the stories in the NY Times, ESPN, and the Boston Herald?!? Is this a vast NFL wing conspiracy. Yes, the NFL was aware of Matt Walsh and also the Rams Walkthrough rumors for a while, but they decided to investigate when they did because the media forced them to investigate. If the Pats were found guilty of the allegations and won the Super Bowl, it would be a major blow to the NFL especially with it becoming news the Firday before the Super Bowl.

Goodell wanted the whole Spygate mess to go away and Specter and Greg Bishop thrusted it into the spotlight. Goodell was forced to act swiftly because of it.

There is a lot to blame Goodell and the league office about with Spygate, but some kind of conspiracy to sink the Patriots Super Bowl hopes isn't one of them. They didn't ask Greg Bishop and the NY Times to publish the Specter/Walsh story when they did which set off all the course of events at the time. I know that Specter was the originator of the magic bullet theory, but there was no shadow conspiracy by the league to sink the Pats in this case. They were blindsided as much as the Patriots were.

Huh?

"Spygate" was the story of 2007 and the Walsh taping would have been even bigger so........the league does nothing until "forced" by Specter and Bishop.

OKAYYYYYYYYY

How about here is the allegation, investigate, and when the story comes out state it was investigated and debunked. End of story.

Also, were you lead investigator on the Warren Commission? Where are you getting all this "insider" perspective?

 

[Rob0729]

Huh?

"Spygate" was the story of 2007 and the Walsh taping would have been even bigger so........the league does nothing until "forced" by Specter and Bishop.

OKAYYYYYYYYY

How about here is the allegation, investigate, and when the story comes out state it was investigated and debunked. End of story.

Also, were you lead investigator on the Warren Commission? Where are you getting all this "insider" perspective?

First, there were tons of rumors of the Patriots cheating from jamming opposing team's QB to sideline communications to miking defensive players to steal QB audibles to bugging opposing lockerrooms to videotaping the Rams' walkthrough. What did you want Goodell to do? Investigate every rumor and do a witchhunt to get Belichick? You would have been happier if Goodell continued a three month investigation during the season after his ruling consistently interviewing Belichick and his staff about every allegation? Goodell did a lot of things wrong during Spygate, but not investigating every allegation of cheating that came across his desk without anyone providing proof was one thing he did right.

Second, if Goodell publically investigated every allegation of cheating by Belichick and the Patriots, it would have only tarnished Belichick's and the Patriots' reputation further. By investigating every little thing no matter how ridiculous the information, only gives the allegation credibility even if there is none.

Third, Goodell probably felt Walsh had nothing, but after Bishop and Specter outed him and made him into this defenseless whistleblower; Goodell had to investigate or make it look like the league was further covering up what Belichick had done (part of what Specter said in the original Times piece was that he alleged the League covered up everything Belichick did). Goodell had no choice but to investigate at that point. You could argue he could have waited until Monday, but he had nothing to do with the timing of Walsh being public.

I know people here hate Goodell and want to blame him for everything, but he had no control over the Matt Walsh situation. He didn't want to talk to the NFL unless his legal bills were paid for in perpetude and Goodell probably felt that was a big enough red flag to not to investigate further. After the Bishop, Fish, and Tomase pieces, Goodell had no other recourse but to investigate. The only place I can blame him about timing on his part is that he probably could have waited until Monday to interview Belichick and his staff.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Goodell is a tool and needs to be removed. Anyone who would take the time to defend the likes of Goodell or Tomase loses any shred of credibility they may have had.

 

[Rob0729]

Goodell is a tool and needs to be removed. Anyone who would take the time to defend the likes of Goodell or Tomase loses any shred of credibility they may have had.

LOL! So trying to be objective loses credibility. Too cute. So blaming Goodell and Tomase for these ridiculous implausible conspiracies would make you more credible? So if I agreed with the post that Goodell conspired with Specter and the NY Times to ruin the Pats' chances for a perfect season, I have more credibility?

I don't like either Goodell or Tomase, but blaming them for things they have no responsibility for is not credible. Pointing it out and being objective is trying to be credible. Sorry, I am not a hypocrite and just blame someone for everything just because I don't like them.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

LOL! So trying to be objective loses credibility. Too cute. So blaming Goodell and Tomase for these ridiculous implausible conspiracies would make you more credible? So if I agreed with the post that Goodell conspired with Specter and the NY Times to ruin the Pats' chances for a perfect season, I have more credibility?

I don't like either Goodell or Tomase, but blaming them for things they have no responsibility for is not credible. Pointing it out and being objective is trying to be credible. Sorry, I am not a hypocrite and just blame someone for everything just because I don't like them.

Show me where I blamed either one of them for something they didn't do. Sure they catch flack for some crap they haven't done, but because of the things they actually have done, they are both low lifes. You are choosing to defend these low lifes. That is why you lost your credibility.

 

[Rob0729]

Show me where I blamed either one of them for something they didn't do. Sure they catch flack for some crap they haven't done, but because of the things they actually have done, they are both low lifes. You are choosing to defend these low lifes. That is why you lost your credibility.

LOL!! Your too cute! Like I really care about your opinion anyway. Just because you are too stupid and close minded for rational thought, doesn't mean anyone with an actual brain feels that way. So I lose credibility with the knuckle draggers. I can live with that. At least then I don't have to worry about keeping my posts to as many one syllable words as possible so you can keep up with what I am posting.

Neither Tomase nor Goodell are bin Laden or Hitler who are pure evil and beyond any redeeming qualities. Personally, I think there are some things that Goodell has done that are good like cleaning up some of the crap in the NFL. I am not a mindless drone or a Jets fan who have to look at the world in black or white. If you are, more power to you.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Just because you are too stupid and close minded for rational thought, doesn't mean anyone with an actual brain feels that way. So I lose credibility with the knuckle draggers. I can live with that. At least then I don't have to worry about keeping my posts to as many one syllable words as possible so you can keep up with what I am posting.

It didn't take long to reduce you to petty insults. It takes an "interesting" person to perceive me as unintelligent or close minded. You proved my point better than I ever could have.

 

[Rob0729]

It didn't take long to reduce you to petty insults. It takes an "interesting" person to perceive me as unintelligent or close minded. You proved my point better than I ever could have.

Nope! It didn't. You started with the petty insults with the first post to me and I responded. I love people who throw around insults and then act high and mighty when someone throws it back at you. If you can't handle being insulted, don't throw insults around. Or maybe you are just too slow to understand you started with the insults.

The only thing I proved is that you lack the mental capacity to think for yourself. Only dimwitted people and small children look at the world as absolutes. Unless, you are a small child, I guess we know where you fit in. It doesn't take an "interesting" person to figure that out. It takes anyone with an IQ over 90.

Sorry, but when someone is classless enough to attack me unprovoked, I will attack back with stronger rhetoric.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Nope! It didn't. You started with the petty insults with the first post to me and I responded. I love people who throw around insults and then act high and mighty when someone throws it back at you. If you can't handle being insulted, don't throw insults around. Or maybe you are just too slow to understand you started with the insults.

The only thing I proved is that you lack the mental capacity to think for yourself. Only dimwitted people and small children look at the world as absolutes. Unless, you are a small child, I guess we know where you fit in. It doesn't take an "interesting" person to figure that out. It takes anyone with an IQ over 90.

Sorry, but when someone is classless enough to attack me unprovoked, I will attack back with stronger rhetoric.

Keep going, you're making my point better than I could ever dream to.

 

[Rob0729]

Keep going, you're making my point better than I could ever dream to.

Nah! I am done. You ain't worth it. Let someone else elighten your closed mind.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Nah! I am done. You ain't worth it. Let someone else elighten your closed mind.

OK. Don't forget your ball.

 

[Deus Irae]

Well, this thread just got amusing

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

First, there were tons of rumors of the Patriots cheating from jamming opposing team's QB to sideline communications to miking defensive players to steal QB audibles to bugging opposing lockerrooms to videotaping the Rams' walkthrough. What did you want Goodell to do? Investigate every rumor and do a witchhunt to get Belichick? You would have been happier if Goodell continued a three month investigation during the season after his ruling consistently interviewing Belichick and his staff about every allegation? Goodell did a lot of things wrong during Spygate, but not investigating every allegation of cheating that came across his desk without anyone providing proof was one thing he did right.

Second, if Goodell publically investigated every allegation of cheating by Belichick and the Patriots, it would have only tarnished Belichick's and the Patriots' reputation further. By investigating every little thing no matter how ridiculous the information, only gives the allegation credibility even if there is none.

Third, Goodell probably felt Walsh had nothing, but after Bishop and Specter outed him and made him into this defenseless whistleblower; Goodell had to investigate or make it look like the league was further covering up what Belichick had done (part of what Specter said in the original Times piece was that he alleged the League covered up everything Belichick did). Goodell had no choice but to investigate at that point. You could argue he could have waited until Monday, but he had nothing to do with the timing of Walsh being public.

I know people here hate Goodell and want to blame him for everything, but he had no control over the Matt Walsh situation. He didn't want to talk to the NFL unless his legal bills were paid for in perpetude and Goodell probably felt that was a big enough red flag to not to investigate further. After the Bishop, Fish, and Tomase pieces, Goodell had no other recourse but to investigate. The only place I can blame him about timing on his part is that he probably could have waited until Monday to interview Belichick and his staff.

Let me translate.

You make many definitive statements without knowing anything.

A specific person specifically taping a specific practice before a specific game isn't the same thing as jamming transmissions. Why do you think "Spygate" became "Spygate"?

Well there was something specific.

You cares if the league "had control" over the Walsh story. Completely idiotic notion.

The league didn't need any control, it needed to review and dispel. Why because the only control over the story was to be sure it wasn't true.

Day before Super Bowl: Bishop and Specter along ESPN/Tomase ect..... land bombshell.

NFL: Hey, we investigated, it's not true, end of story...............
and we are not dragging the Patriots people in all day to interview.

 

[Rob0729]

Let me translate.

You make many definitive statements without knowing anything.

A specific person specifically taping a specific practice before a specific game isn't the same thing as jamming transmissions. Why do you think "Spygate" became "Spygate"?

Well there was something specific.

You cares if the league "had control" over the Walsh story. Completely idiotic notion.

The league didn't need any control, it needed to review and dispel. Why because the only control over the story was to be sure it wasn't true.

Day before Super Bowl: Bishop and Specter along ESPN/Tomase ect..... land bombshell.

NFL: Hey, we investigated, it's not true, end of story...............
and we are not dragging the Patriots people in all day to interview.

You do realize that Specter accused Goodell of covering up Spygate and saying he was going to look into conducting a Congressional investigation on the cover up? If Goodell just came out and said he investigated it and it isn't true especially with Matt Walsh having some unspecified damaging evidence, it would only give more weight to Specter's allegations. Goodell had to investigate. I will give you he probably could have waited until that Monday, but no investigation would have made it look like Goodell swept it under the rug and might have gotten Specter support for Congressional hearings.

There are plenty of things you can slam Goodell about when it relates to Spygate. He handled the whole thing about as bad as he could, but he had

Exactly how could Goodell affected the Walsh thing before it happened. Yes, he heard about Walsh, but Walsh wanted to be paid to show what he had. was Goodell supposed to agree to pay his legal bills in perpetude without knowing what he had. Walsh wasn't speaking to what he had and without that, Goodell did the right thing and ignored it. How was anyone to know that Arlen Specter was going to come out with his agenda to get revenge for the Eagles losing to the Pats and push his Comcast agenda.

Once Walsh was exposed to the public, Goodell had to investigate. Anything else would have been worse for the Patriots and the league. Again, the only place where he was wrong was starting the investigation on Saturday instead of Monday or Tuesday. Forty-eight hours was not going to make a difference in the investigation. If Goodell dismissed Specter's and Walsh's allegations, it would only raise the suspicious that he was hiding something to protect the Patriots. They needed to do a very public investigation.

Even with the league doing a very public investigation, Specter was constantly smearing the Pats in the Times (the Bledsoe getting signals rumor, etc.) and getting funds to do his own investigation. Again, if Goodell stonewalled, it might have gotten other Senators on board Specter's cause.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

To bring it back to topic..

Tomase is like the anti-Bill Buckner. Buckner was in the game (game 6 by the way) with 2 bad ankles and most people knew he was really hurt. Even so, the grounder was fairly routine and most of us sofa-players feel we could have made that play. He basically got blamed for us losing the WS in ’86 even though there was still another game to play.
Basically a great guy who was in a bad (physical situation) doing the best he can. Red Sox fans eventually embraced the man, but it took winning a World Series to do it.

Even Steve Bartman was a fan just acting on instinct (with many other people trying to catch the ball as well) didn’t have time to sit there and think…what would be the effect of me catching the foul ball. It was happening in real time and pretty much every fan goes for a foul ball.
Bartman had to be escorted out of the stadium by security guards and I imagine still gets plenty of slack to this very day.

Tomase wasn’t operating in real-time (though he did have a very limited time frame) and it was his name on the story. Granted there were plenty of other people who could take the hit (editors) or have some of the blame. While we are pretty much left to wonder at his intentions, it does seem likely that he was thinking more of his career rather than the fans who had supported him or the team on the field. He figured he’d be proven right he saw smoke or figured multiple sources would eventually confirm or whatever…he decided to write it and send it out. Would love to hear how it was decided to let the paper run with the story (did it ever happen).
This wasn’t a case of a guy trying to do well (Buckner) or a guy acting on instinct (Bartman). It was a man who took a gamble on a career shot and thought he had a sure-thing or something very close to it. He lost and left plenty of wreckage in his wage (and didn’t help to clean it up.)

The whole Spygate situation doesn’t need to be rehashed, but I recall Belichick having to answer questions to the Commissioner (and others) about the situation on the Saturday before the game. Was the game plan in place, sure was. Did the team know what to do, they sure did. They sure did. Did the story have any effect on the coaches or team…we’ll never know what the net effect was.

But, if any of the above stories have a common denominator it’s that fans are allowed to be irrational and can easily grab on someone or something to blame. The (antagonists) can be forgiven or embraced if they just got a bad break. But we fans need a more powerful memory to replace the feeling. As for some of those others, well to this day I don’t read any piece provided by Tomase or the Herald if I can help it. There’s plenty of other media out there and I can easily cut one out and get my fill of good stories (my choice because I’m a fan first and foremost and I can be irrational if I want  )

 

[DaBruinz]

You do realize that Specter accused Goodell of covering up Spygate and saying he was going to look into conducting a Congressional investigation on the cover up? If Goodell just came out and said he investigated it and it isn't true especially with Matt Walsh having some unspecified damaging evidence, it would only give more weight to Specter's allegations. Goodell had to investigate. I will give you he probably could have waited until that Monday, but no investigation would have made it look like Goodell swept it under the rug and might have gotten Specter support for Congressional hearings.

There are plenty of things you can slam Goodell about when it relates to Spygate. He handled the whole thing about as bad as he could, but he had

Exactly how could Goodell affected the Walsh thing before it happened. Yes, he heard about Walsh, but Walsh wanted to be paid to show what he had. was Goodell supposed to agree to pay his legal bills in perpetude without knowing what he had. Walsh wasn't speaking to what he had and without that, Goodell did the right thing and ignored it. How was anyone to know that Arlen Specter was going to come out with his agenda to get revenge for the Eagles losing to the Pats and push his Comcast agenda.

Once Walsh was exposed to the public, Goodell had to investigate. Anything else would have been worse for the Patriots and the league. Again, the only place where he was wrong was starting the investigation on Saturday instead of Monday or Tuesday. Forty-eight hours was not going to make a difference in the investigation. If Goodell dismissed Specter's and Walsh's allegations, it would only raise the suspicious that he was hiding something to protect the Patriots. They needed to do a very public investigation.

Even with the league doing a very public investigation, Specter was constantly smearing the Pats in the Times (the Bledsoe getting signals rumor, etc.) and getting funds to do his own investigation. Again, if Goodell stonewalled, it might have gotten other Senators on board Specter's cause.

Rob -
As soon as Goodell heard the rumors back in November about Walsh, he should have gotten ahold of Walsh and gotten his story. If Walsh hadn't worked with them then, they could have pursued legal action against Walsh for having stolen tapes from the Patriots. By doing it in November and not right before the SB, it takes away much of the potential impact that it could have had. In fact, doing it in November takes away, pretty much, all the leverage that Walsh might have had. Outing Walsh to the press as a greedy SOB who refused to help the league takes away much, if not all, of the credibility that Walsh might have had at the time..

I blame Goodell for his poor handling of the entire situation.
I blame Tomase for being a horrible journalist.
I blame Fish and the other NY Mediots because of their blind bias against anything Boston.
I blame Walsh for being a lying, theiving scumbag.
I blame Specter for being in Comcast's pocket.
I blame Belichick for playing footsy with the rules when he should have known better.. But he gets the least amount of blame.

 

[Deus Irae]