Reiss: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

[Hardboiled]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

In Patriots Reign, Weis refers to Patrick Pass and says something to the effect of "I hate that ************."

I think it was Brad Seeley.

Outside of the Walsh aspect. I think BB could have done more talking specifically about his interptretation last September and then closed the door with the "my last statement" business.

Interpretaton - Right or wrong it would have educated medidiots and had a discussion about what is allowed and what isn't. People on this board seems to be the only one asking those questions. It then would prompted people to question the penalty.

All we heard about was P 105 of the Operations manual and Anderson's memo.

I think last September BB could have changed the discussion instead of letting the nation conjure up wild theories.

 

[upstater1]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

I think it was Brad Seeley.

Outside of the Walsh aspect. I think BB could have done more talking specifically about his interptretation last September and then closed the door with the "my last statement" business.

Interpretaton - Right or wrong it would have educated medidiots and had a discussion about what is allowed and what isn't. People on this board seems to be the only one asking those questions. It then would prompted people to question the penalty.

All we heard about was P 105 of the Operations manual and Anderson's memo.

I think last September BB could have changed the discussion instead of letting the nation conjure up wild theories.

Belichick did say that.

 

[upstater1]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Here's a question for Patriots' fans:

What would you rather have, our first round pick returned to us, or the immediate cessation of all Spygate controversy?

ME, I'd rather have our 1st rounder back. I can really give a fig what people think of the Patriots!!

 

[sebman2112]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Walsh is completely discredited if the above is true.

Kudos to Reiss for getting the sitdown interviews on the taboo subject with some of the most secretive men in sports. I bet Tomase is drowning in a tub full of rocky road ice cream right now.

Remember a little while back the rumor floating around about Walsh getting fired, and how NE could have pressed charges against him? Yea, I think those rumors just might have been true...

Things are getting interesting folks.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Here's a question for Patriots' fans:

What would you rather have, our first round pick returned to us, or the immediate cessation of all Spygate controversy?

ME, I'd rather have our 1st rounder back. I can really give a fig what people think of the Patriots!!

I'd like to see us fight to get it back ... the timing is perfect.

All we have to do is say we're going full bore on all we know.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

He definitely has something. The central question that nobody in the media is asking is why he wanted to get involved. He could have answered "I can't legally comment on any of your questions." and been completely left out of this. He chose to inject himself into a difficult situation that is likely to be draining on him in many ways. What are his motivations? Let's run through the options:

Nobility? Doesn't fit his profile. He hasn't worked in the NFL for a while, why put himself on the line to preserve league integrity now?

Revenge? The Pats did fire him...but that was so long ago that it is unlikely he has kept the means for revenge under wraps for 4 years. He could have leaked his info to the media at any time and gotten back at the Pats.

Envy? The Pats have gone dynastic since he was let go and it is likely a few of his former "peers" have reaped the benefits of that success. But tearing the Pats down doesn't help him in this regard, which leads us to...



Money! This one fits on every level:

• Walsh is an ambulance chaser. He needed a scandal before his information (however limited) became valuable. Check.
• But there is that pesky confidentiality agreement. The NFL/Pats would never let him sell his story. He needed an outlet to paint him as a significant player in the scandal to up his visibility. Enter Mike Fish. Check.
• Still not enough to get over the agreement. He now needed a heavyweight with an ax to grind that could strong-arm the NFL into letting him talk. Enter Sen. Specter. Check.
• So far, so good. But the NFL indemnity agreement only lets him talk to Goodell and Specter and he has to give up all his materials. That and $1.18 gets him a coffee at McDonalds.

That puts him in an interesting situation. If he has a bombshell in his possession, he could give it up to Specter under the current NFL agreement and Specter would blab it all over national TV. Now that it is public knowledge, he can cash in as the guy who took down the Patriots. But that isn't happening. Why not?

Because Walsh doesn't have a bombshell. In fact, it is unlikely he has anything that Belichick hasn't already admitted to. Walsh needs a blanket immunity agreement so that he can write his "I, Spy" book (with nothing new or interesting) and make his rounds on the news programs. Scandal sells and he needs to cash in before ADD sets in and the public moves on.

Walsh's lawyer and Specter are out there crying about the provision in the NFL indemnity agreement that states Walsh must tell the truth. That is a red herring. His evidence would speak for itself and the Pats would bear the burden of proving any testimony was a lie...which would be difficult to do unless he WAS lying. The real issue is that Walsh wouldn't be free to talk to everybody and that is what will stop him from getting his money.

Again, astute...and most likely accurate!

 

[Crazyeechrispats1]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

We should not only be given our pick back but also compensation picks for the next 10 years!

 

[#12]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

That puts him in an interesting situation. If he has a bombshell in his possession, he could give it up to Specter under the current NFL agreement and Specter would blab it all over national TV. Now that it is public knowledge, he can cash in as the guy who took down the Patriots. But that isn't happening. Why not?

Because Walsh doesn't have a bombshell. In fact, it is unlikely he has anything that Belichick hasn't already admitted to. Walsh needs a blanket immunity agreement so that he can write his "I, Spy" book (with nothing new or interesting) and make his rounds on the news programs. Scandal sells and he needs to cash in before ADD sets in and the public moves on.

Walsh's lawyer and Specter are out there crying about the provision in the NFL indemnity agreement that states Walsh must tell the truth. That is a red herring. His evidence would speak for itself and the Pats would bear the burden of proving any testimony was a lie...which would be difficult to do unless he WAS lying. The real issue is that Walsh wouldn't be free to talk to everybody and that is what will stop him from getting his money.

Great points.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

We should not only be given our pick back but also compensation picks for the next 10 years!

Hear, hear!!!!!!

 

[Hardboiled]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Belichick did say that.

I think he only mentioned the Constitution and by-laws in his written statement.

I guess I'm also thinking of the pre-emptive stike companies/politicians do to cut off frenzies like we saw. The Patriots lost the PR war and are still losing it. I don't think they ever fought it. Did they do anything off-the-record - background? The discussion was framed by others. The frenzy built. With no response or explanation beyond "misinterpreted" which led people to dream up their own scenarios. People still think it helped the Patriots beat the Jets!

Anyway, I'm glad more is happening now.

 

[SVN]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

iam wondering why goodell didnt mention BB's interpretation in week 2 ? he says it now in this daily news article but if he had mentioned it then maybe there might have been some balance(although its tough to expect that from the media)

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...ter_should_leave_spygate_issue.html?page=full

 

[reflexblue]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

iam wondering why goodell didnt mention BB's interpretation in week 2 ? he says it now in this daily news article but if he had mentioned it then maybe there might have been some balance(although its tough to expect that from the media)

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...ter_should_leave_spygate_issue.html?page=full

Its not worth reading all the full blown Bull Sh!t to get to it.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

iam wondering why goodell didnt mention BB's interpretation in week 2 ? he says it now in this daily news article but if he had mentioned it then maybe there might have been some balance(although its tough to expect that from the media)

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...ter_should_leave_spygate_issue.html?page=full

Goodell was more concerned about putting his stamp on the Commissioner's office as a tough guy than about putting out a common sense document and coming out with a common sense resolution.

 

[Hardboiled]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

iam wondering why goodell didnt mention BB's interpretation in week 2 ? he says it now in this daily news article but if he had mentioned it then maybe there might have been some balance(although its tough to expect that from the media)

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...ter_should_leave_spygate_issue.html?page=full

"Goodell said last week that Belichick "had a different interpretation of the rule, which I don't accept. He thought that it was permissible to use electronic equipment as long as the information wasn't used in the same game. That's not my reading of the rules and that is why I disciplined him so aggressively."

How long had Belichick been doing this?

"He said that has always been his interpretation, therefore the assumption is as long as he has been head coach," Goodell said."


Again, Goodell backtracks and forwardtracks. He can't decide if he did it to send a message to the other teams or
"That's not my reading of the rules and that is why I disciplined him so aggressively."

 

[jetophile]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Belichick will step down or get canned. Mark it down.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Belichick will step down or get canned. Mark it down.

and could you give an explanation to your theory on this?

this statement sounds like he's fighting back

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

and could you give an explanation to your theory on this?

this statement sounds like he's fighting back

He's a Jets fan. Do you expect logic or reason?

 

[PatsFanJess]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Here's a question for Patriots' fans:

What would you rather have, our first round pick returned to us, or the immediate cessation of all Spygate controversy?

ME, I'd rather have our 1st rounder back. I can really give a fig what people think of the Patriots!!

Absolutely...of course, I believe we really should get our 1st round pick back. All the offense warranted was a fine, if that.

 

[JJGomez]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

About time!

 

[mb6592]

Re: BB and Pioli break silence over Walsh

Metaphors - Excellent, excellent post. The only thing I'd disagree with would be that he might have a "bombshell" aka walk through tape (too much chatter about for there not to be?)

Peter the ****, stop being a kissass while disregarding his "excellent post." Remeber when he wrote, "he could give it up to Specter under the current NFL agreement and Specter would blab it all over national TV." If he had a "bombshell," he could turn it over to Specter then make his millions as the whistleblower. Now scram you little prick.