Specter: Goodell's explanations don't pass scrutiny

[stcjones]

Re: Breaking "Spygate" news

Sure the tax-payers are thrilled to hear this!

Help fix roads and the schools? No. I will spend your money on investigating NFL rule infractions!

Yeah...THIS is a great point......ARLENE Spector is a sore a##ed loser that is a fan of the Philly Eagles.....FIRST AND FOREMOST in this issue.......So, He is using the power of his office, and spending millions of tax payers dollars......because he is a sore a##ed loser and can't GET OVER the fact that his team LOST to the Patriots. What does ARLENE hope to accomplish by this personal witch hunt at the expense of the tax payers here? Does he think that if he can find the shadow behind the grassy knoll.....He can get the SB title released from NE and given to his beloved Eagles?

In all seriousness, who the heck is ARLENE spector to be DEMANDING meetings with an NFL commissioner on an issue that HAS NO BUSINESS being investigated by the US government?? The NFL Commissioner has evaluated the situation that happened with the Pats/BB THIS SEASON and has punished BB/Pats ACCORDINGLY, and very strongly. The tapes were destroyed, so that NO FURTHER LEAKS would find their way out.....during SB WEEK 2008 to keep the Pats from winning the SB again

But seriously, should Ted Kennedy start demanding to see the tapes that Miami had BOUGHT from the Jests in 2006? Should he also demand the audio tapes in Indy be turned over to him to see if indeed Polian had piped in fake crowd noise? Should we dig into the apparent video taping of the Jets against us in 2006 (believe it was 2006) which again, they had our audibles on it.....and used it to beat us? I mean, do WE WANT TO OPEN UP THIS CAN OF WORMS HERE ARLENE??

I certainly hope that BB has kept records OF EVERY FREAKING TIME another team has done the SAME DARNED THING against us........As Pittsburgh has said and countless others......WE ARE ALL DOING THIS........If ARLENE Thinks that BB is the only coach in the whole league doing THIS OR ANYTHING else to steal signals.....then he is even more IGNORANT than I already think he is........

But first and foremost, to let some random congressman who has his OWN PERSONAL AGENDA against the Patriots for keeping his Eagles from winning a SB........get away with running his own INDIVIDUAL witch hunt at the tax payers expense is absolutely LUDICROUS!!!!! If NOTHING comes of this Matt Walsh thing, and nothing else is proven against the Patriots/BB....I would like to see Kraft pursue a lawsuit against this scumbag.....If not for his DISGUSTING TIMING of bringing the supposed "story" out DURING SB WEEK....The Pats may have won their 4th SB in 7 years....Seriously, this weighed heavily on their minds.......along with all the other pressure.....Shame on you ARLENE!!!!

 

[stcjones]

Re: Breaking "Spygate" news

Can someone please tell me why Goddell had to answer to Spector? Did the Patriots commit a crime? If I were Goddell I would tell Spector to **** off and worry about more important issues in politics! Just another example why are goverment is a joke!

Agreed.....I wish Goodell had told him to stick it where the sun don't shine as well....

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

Re: Breaking "Spygate" news

Agreed.....I wish Goodell had told him to stick it where the sun don't shine as well....

Again Spector is a ass, and he is just saving face for the eagle and stiller fans, its a shame he had to bring this crap up before the super bowl..

 

[stcjones]

Re: Breaking "Spygate" news

No, the largest fine because a brand new NFL Commissioner came in with a "new Sheriff in town" mentality and got media kudos for his harsh response to the Pacman and Vick situations. He figured he would be a hero on this one too, but something tells me when he dug a bit further he found the real truth. Many, many teams do it and he got dragged into a border war between BB/Mangini. Nothing more.

If you knew the slightest thing about football, you would know that Defensive signal stealing goes on at every level. Hell, I coach in HS and my HC/DC has another guy give dummy signals because he knows the OC is looking right at him and trying to grab his calls. IN HIGH SCHOOL. Do you really think that in the NFL, with a coach's existance and millions at stake, no one is doing that now? And the bottom line is WHO CARES. Change your signals. It's a non-issue.

I remember a game years ago when the Pats played Miami (I believe) and Todd Collins picked off a pass and went yard. It came out later that the Pats LB's(under Carroll?) had figured out the other team's audibles. There are backup QB's in this league that are only still in football because they are good at picking off signals. You are naive if you deny it.

Go back and watch the Raiders/Bucs Super Bowl. I have no doubt that the Bucs were jumping routes and scoring on the strength of Gruden picking off the audibles.

Your holier than thou attitude betrays your ignorance.

great post man...great post.....All these guys are doing it.....So if one congressman is caught screwing his secretary,.....should we start investigating the phone records OF ALL THE OTHER CONGRESSMEN??? Is that what you want Mrs Spector.....??? EVERYONE IS GUILTY in one form or another ....of stealing signals.....It has gone on AS LONG AS THE GAME has been here, ....and at ALL LEVELS (including HS).....

Because the Pats are the greatest team and dynasty of all time.....everyone wants to take it all away from them.....No one has ever been as dominating and successful as this team....NO ONE......and if they can't beat them on the field.....Can't find the "blueprint" consistently to stop us......They will try to find anything they can to try to ruin WHAT WE ALL HAVE BEEN A PART OF.....and what this Legacy is all about......I say F them all......and can't wait to see the bulletin board material for next year....should be interesting......

 

[stcjones]

Re: Breaking "Spygate" news

how funny is that spector started all this with concerns over the eagles and steelers games and now the steelers say they had no impact on those games.
my respect for that organization for swiftly releasing that statement grew up a notch.

I agree with that,.....what a kick to the nuts that must be for Arlene Sphincter......I give the Steelers organization alot of credit for having the stones to ADMIT THE TRUTH on this issue and give the high hard one.....to Arlene...............stay classy Pittsburgh!

 

[stcjones]

Re: Breaking "Spygate" news

On WEEI's Big Show they are discussing the different angles on this case right now. Mostly they are focusing on the Comcast angle.

Ordway made the point of saying this is a non-issue because no law was broken and the NFL rule that was violated was that the camera was in the wrong spot, because you can tape defensive signals just not from the field. So of course other teams are spying but just not spying and taping from the sideline. Specter saw how much attention the other Senators received the other day on the steroid scandal and knows the attention this will receive. He is trying to hold the NFL's feet to the fire so they bend on his real issues, Comcast and anti-trust exemption.

They are wondering out loud if your going to look into this why not then look into subpoening each coach on how they run their operations (salary cap mgmt, injury reports, talking to FA's early, etc.) If the point is to uncover wrong doing and ensure competitive balance then why not. Why not subpoena the Colts sound guy?? etc, etc.

So it is OK to tape signals from the stands just not from the field? And....they are right.....Every team is doing SOMETHING to STEAL signals from each other........UN-friggin real.....

 

[stcjones]

You know I hope Specter does hold Congressional hearings and I hopes he calls BB and I hope BB drops a nuclear bomb on these azzholes and exposes the entire league. That is the only way this POS story will ever end.

Yeah...and after that bomb is dropped...the Krafts should sue Sphincter.....what a horse's a## this guy is.....

 

[DropKick Flutie]

You are further proving your own ignorance. HAVE YOU READ THE FREAKIN' RULE? I have, and BB's interpretation is entirely plausible. In the league's Constitution & Bylaws, it reads: "Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Now, don't sit there and try to tell me that the rule is not open to being interpreted as: prohibiting videotaping applied to use during the game in which the video is shot.

You have to be kidding me if you think this is completely innocent misinterpretation. We will have to agree to disagree, then. Besides, it doesn't matter what you, I, or BB thinks. The rules are interpreted by the highest authority... and when that highest authority tells a US senator this "infraction" has been going on since 2000, I have a right to be PO'ed. Every team you played has a right to ask questions, and we played you 16 times.

Like I said before, I don't want to take away your Lombardi's, I don't want an asterisk, and I don't want my 16 games back. I'm moving on... looking forward. I want it to stop. The senators investigation is the only way that it's going to stop, because it's clear the NFL tried to bury this story, and we aren't going to get any answers willingly from the NFL. It doesn't even matter to me if Walsh has the goods or not, I want to know what happened... but more importantly I want to be assured that it's not going to happen anymore.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

With all due respect Senator Spector, please retire and go home and enjoy the rest of your life.

 

[Lichtenstein]

The NFL wants these teams to steal signals. Teams that don't know what the other team is doing are in last place.

 

[Deus Irae]

You have to be kidding me if you think this is completely innocent misinterpretation. We will have to agree to disagree, then. Besides, it doesn't matter what you, I, or BB thinks. The rules are interpreted by the highest authority... and when that highest authority tells a US senator this "infraction" has been going on since 2000, I have a right to be PO'ed. Every team you played has a right to ask questions, and we played you 16 times.

Let's break this down:

- There is a rule regarding filming in place.

- Prior to Goodell's elevation to Commissioner, the Patriots filmed from the sidelines, in plain view. There are no reports (that I know of) of the team being spoken to by the league specifically about the filming they were doing on those sidelines.

- After Goodell's elevation to commissioner, the Patriots filmed from the sidelines, in plain view. There are no reports (that I know of) of the team being spoken to by the league specifically about the filming they were doing on those sidelines.

- Goodell's office sends out a memo regarding teams filming games.

- The Patriots continued to film games, from the sidelines, in plain view.

- The wording of the memo CAN be interpreted in more than one way, whether you like to admit it or not.

- After a tape was confiscated, Goodell ruled on the situation, interpreting the rule in a particular way.

- The Patriots defense was simply the differing interpretation of the rule.

- Goodell, the new Commissioner, made a pair of stupid statements in his memo, the first one being: “This episode represents a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid longstanding rules designed to encourage fair play and promote honest competition on the playing field,” Commissioner Goodell wrote in a letter to the Patriots. This was stupid because he was doing 2 things he should not have done: he was claiming to know the intent of BB, despite BB's defense and the obviousness of the filming, and he made the comment without showing how the filming resulted in a loss of 'honest competition on the playing field'.

- Goodell's second stupid statement was "NFL policy states that “no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches’ booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game” and that all video shooting locations for club coaching purposes “must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead.” This statement was stupid because, in fact, this is not the policy that the NFL actually enforces, as has been shown by the subsequent Jets filming incident.

- Goodell's punishment was far in excess of the punishments handed down to the Broncos for their salary cap shenanigans, despite the clear advantage to be gained by violating the salary cap.

So, what does this all tell us?

1.) Your comment about "The rules are interpreted by the highest authority" is meaningless, because there had been no precedent to guide the Patriots.

2.) Goodell screwed the pooch (something I've said from day one) in several different ways.

3.) Had Belichick simply called for a clarification before the start of the season, this likely would all have been avoided

 

[DropKick Flutie]

Deus, great post, one of the first to perfectly explain the Patriots side of things. And you did it without name calling... worth noting because your fellow posters cannot seem to explain their side of things without calling me an idiot or ignorant or both.

I still disagree on a few things, but I have a question first: Does anyone actually know what the September memo actually said, word for word?

I disagree about Goodell not knowing the Pats intent. Everyone knows what the intent was... to gain competitive advantage. The problem I have is that he destroyed the notes and tapes without explaining exactly what BB was trying to accomplish. That's shady, but that's not the Patriots fault.

1.) Your comment about "The rules are interpreted by the highest authority" is meaningless, because there had been no precedent to guide the Patriots.

2.) Goodell screwed the pooch (something I've said from day one) in several different ways.

3.) Had Belichick simply called for a clarification before the start of the season, this likely would all have been avoided

1. The commissioner has the right to interpret the rule as he sees fit, precedent or not.

2. I agree here... RG screwed the pooch big time.

3. Again, I would like to know if there is a copy of the memo that the teams received prior to the Jets game around anywhere (link?) I wish this could have been avoided, not for the sake of the Pats but for the sake of the league.

 

[Deus Irae]

I still disagree on a few things, but I have a question first: Does anyone actually know what the September memo actually said, word for word?

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1635

I disagree about Goodell not knowing the Pats intent. Everyone knows what the intent was... to gain competitive advantage. The problem I have is that he destroyed the notes and tapes without explaining exactly what BB was trying to accomplish. That's shady, but that's not the Patriots fault.

The Commissioner claimed it was "a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid longstanding rules". That's the intent I'm referring to.

1. The commissioner has the right to interpret the rule as he sees fit, precedent or not.

1.) That's not completely true, but it's irrelevant.

2.) It was still without precedent. Just as in a courtroom, it takes test cases to make determinations about actions which occur on the margins.

2. I agree here... RG screwed the pooch big time.

I don't defend the Patriots actions in totality, I criticize the actions of the Commissioner. It was within his authority to dismiss the Patriots' interpretation and, as I noted before, BB could have made a phone call to clarify before the year began. However, Goodell's memo was ill-thought out and badly worded, the punishment was far too severe (as most of his punishments have been) and destroying the tapes was just moronic. Short of corruption, I've never seen a worse commissioner in my life, and that includes Bud Selig. Goodell is a clown, and it's not just the 'spygate' issue that he's been an idiot about. He should resign but, sadly, he won't.

Lastly, here's a little something to look at regarding the 'interpretation' aspect:

http://thesportslawprofessor.blogspot.com/2007/09/bill-belichicks-interpretation.html

 

[PatsFanInVa]

One point regarding precedent in this event is that in attempting to set a firm precedent, Goodell gilded the lily in his statement this year implicating the Pats.

In order to make it stick, and make it apparent to other owners that he would gladly sweep aside objections and enforce high-profile punishments, Goodell made the points regarding:

1) Willful and calculated disregard of rules and
2) emphasis on aspects of league policy, meant to be understood as policy going forward

Well, if the "longstaning policy" about a roof and four walls is true, you only have to look at tapes of games prior to, and probably after the memo, to see team cameramen roving the sidelines.

You would think Goodell emphasized this point to make his case against the Pats a slam-dunk, and possibly to warn other teams to get the gear off the sidelines.

Just a general agreement with Irae here. I wonder how (2), especially, plays, if we get beyond the "coverup" accusation and into the facts of the matter?

But at the same time, Specter, fortunately, does not have to address the facts of the matter. He has only to say "well, you know that they are big fat cheaters, why did you cover it up by burning the tapes?"

He'll sidestep exculpatory opportunities for Goodell, and Goodell is unlikely to say, "Look, I was just being a hard-a s s," unless left with no other option.

Eh well, interesting as always

PFnV

 

[DropKick Flutie]

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1635

Thank you for this.

The Commissioner claimed it was "a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid longstanding rules". That's the intent I'm referring to.



1.) That's not completely true, but it's irrelevant.

2.) It was still without precedent. Just as in a courtroom, it takes test cases to make determinations about actions which occur on the margins.



I don't defend the Patriots actions in totality, I criticize the actions of the Commissioner. It was within his authority to dismiss the Patriots' interpretation and, as I noted before, BB could have made a phone call to clarify before the year began. However, Goodell's memo was ill-thought out and badly worded, the punishment was far too severe (as most of his punishments have been) and destroying the tapes was just moronic. Short of corruption, I've never seen a worse commissioner in my life, and that includes Bud Selig. Goodell is a clown, and it's not just the 'spygate' issue that he's been an idiot about. He should resign but, sadly, he won't.

Goodell should resign, no argument here. I see and respect your point about intent, I just don't agree. To me, it's just bad sportsmanship.

Lastly, here's a little something to look at regarding the 'interpretation' aspect:

http://thesportslawprofessor.blogspot.com/2007/09/bill-belichicks-interpretation.html

This guy makes some great arguments, especially ,"This is what happens when people practice law without a license". I guess you are correct in that aspect. But I still believe that BB knew what he was doing was wrong, but he could get away with it due to the wording in the memo. I don't know if that makes him a cheater or not, but IMO it looks shady. Again, sportsmanship isn't easily defined, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

 

[JJC]

The question raised by the sportslawprofessor is a good one - does a memo from a league VP have more force of effect than an actual league rule? If the memo's interpretation is more strict than the rule, why was the rule not changed?

Belichick seems to have had a reasonable, if strained, interpretation of the rule and a basis for adhering to it. He probably accepted the punishment from the league with a promise that it would all be over and done with. Now that it isn't the case, and we seem to be going down the litigious path - I would not be surprised to hear Patriots' attorneys start arguing that the interpretation was valid and the punishment was too severe. Goodell doesn't want more drama - but it looks like he's going to get it if the media pummelling doesn't abate.

 

[Bella*chick]

I know this has been stated over and over again, but Goodell really messed this up. Really. I just hate it when he is asked if he thought he did the right thing and he answers yes, he wouldn't change a thing. He MUST regret what this has turned into thanks to his New Sheriff In Town approach. It's a disaster, and it could easily get worse for the League if names like Parcells are dragged into the fray.

I hope Mangini is pleased with himself.

 

[NEPatriot]

Re: Breaking "Spygate" news

Goodell has 2 weeks to end this incident before it's too late.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Great stuff on the interpretations. Sadly, in their rush to judgement no one in the league offices or the media was listening.

It's ludicrous to even contend that teams don't video tape during games from other than enclosed locations. The JETS admit they taped from our un-roofed end zones, claiming they had permission to. Whether they did or not should be immaterial since the permission was not ours to grant. The Packers supposedly granted us permission to film from their stands, again an unroofed location, and only rescinded that permission when they decided the didn't like what they later realized we might be filming... So obviously there are at least a couple of other franchises who have no clear grasp of what the league rules on in game video taping entail.

Unfortunate thing in all this is while BB and the team could have easily beat the rap on the ambiguity of the language alone, they never dreamt of doing so because they are team players within the collective of 32. Others aren't. When Polian was faced with the inability to amortize bonus money for Harrison and Manning on the eve of the CBA expiring, his FIRST reaction on being informed that his (and Tom Condon's) mis-interpretation of the effect of that long standing rule was to threaten to sue the league. The Al Davis approach to anything that presently doesn't suit or accommodate you. As Mike Perriera pointed out Superbowl week, he seldom hears from this team publicly or privately because they just don't ascribe to the culture of complainers and excuse makers. The Patriots and their HC took the fall probably in part because they were assured it would mark the end of all ambiguity as well as the end to in game use of tapes that they probably knew as Clayton later discovered was occurring with at least 3 current teams.

Bill basically got penalized for refusing to play on an unlevel field, and the tradeoff in accepting Goodell's penalty was to include leveling that field once and for all by making clear the risk/reward ratio had been rendered far too costly penalty wise to support future attempts at gamesmanship intrigue by anyone.

Only Bill's and probably even Bob's enemies saw instead an opening to make it something else entirely. A single minded opportunistic assault on the most successful franchise in salary capped NFL history. Goodell erred when he crafted his penalty memo, and his comments in subsequent interviews in the immediate aftermath, to instill fear of and respect for his office rather than placing emphasis on the actual context of the offense. Of course, given who had his ear initially, as opposed to whom he heard much later actually put the offense in it's proper context which he now attempts to convey in a totally half assed manner (I stand by my decisions but let's face it, this was really nothing...), his real error in judgement was deciding that a swift response was preferable to a well thought out and thoroughly researched/reasoned one.

It's not surprising it took 5 ballots for this guy to be elevated from COO of the league to it's Commissioner. And what really hurt him in this first year plus chapter of his hopefully limited tenure was his longstanding administrative background tenured in the league offices. What you want in a commissioner is one of two things - either someone with an unsurpassed depth and breath of experience in the trenches of the business (in this case football operations) who still somehow managed to maintain unimpeachable ingegrity or someone posessing a commanding presence combined with absolutely impeccable business management credentials and no apparent alliegance to anyone whatsoever. Roger was unfortunately neither - just a journeyman league office employee who climbed the ranks as they all unfortunately do in the NFL (much like in the US Congress where Roger's dad spent his career). He allowed the friends and members of the Competition Committee to unduly influence his decisions on this matter apparently oblivious to the fact that they had one objective in mind - to severely damage or remove entirely what they perceived to be the biggest single obstacle to their own success. They never gave a thought to potential long term ramifications of such an objective. And they pushed for swift judgement before dissenting voices had an opportunity to be heard.

Roger is now living through those ramifications. If we weren't too, I'd say it couldn't have happened to a more deserving career climber. This clowns legacy however shortlived will be of suspensions, scandals and strikes. Tagliabue managed to avoid all of the above for almost 17 years. His successor is screwed less than 1-1/2 years in.

 

[Pats726]

Great stuff on the interpretations. Sadly, in their rush to judgement no one in the league offices or the media was listening.

It's ludicrous to even contend that teams don't video tape during games from other than enclosed locations. The JETS admit they taped from our un-roofed end zones, claiming they had permission to. Whether they did or not should be immaterial since the permission was not ours to grant. The Packers supposedly granted us permission to film from their stands, again an unroofed location, and only rescinded that permission when they decided the didn't like what they later realized we might be filming... So obviously there are at least a couple of other franchises who have no clear grasp of what the league rules on in game video taping entail.

Unfortunate thing in all this is while BB and the team could have easily beat the rap on the ambiguity of the language alone, they never dreamt of doing so because they are team players within the collective of 32. Others aren't. When Polian was faced with the inability to amortize bonus money for Harrison and Manning on the eve of the CBA expiring, his FIRST reaction on being informed that his (and Tom Condon's) mis-interpretation of the effect of that long standing rule was to threaten to sue the league. The Al Davis approach to anything that presently doesn't suit or accommodate you. As Mike Perriera pointed out Superbowl week, he seldom hears from this team publicly or privately because they just don't ascribe to the culture of complainers and excuse makers. The Patriots and their HC took the fall probably in part because they were assured it would mark the end of all ambiguity as well as the end to in game use of tapes that they probably knew as Clayton later discovered was occurring with at least 3 current teams.

Bill basically got penalized for refusing to play on an unlevel field, and the tradeoff in accepting Goodell's penalty was to include leveling that field once and for all by making clear the risk/reward ratio had been rendered far too costly penalty wise to support future attempts at gamesmanship intrigue by anyone.

Only Bill's and probably even Bob's enemies saw instead an opening to make it something else entirely. A single minded opportunistic assault on the most successful franchise in salary capped NFL history. Goodell erred when he crafted his penalty memo, and his comments in subsequent interviews in the immediate aftermath, to instill fear of and respect for his office rather than placing emphasis on the actual context of the offense. Of course, given who had his ear initially, as opposed to whom he heard much later actually put the offense in it's proper context which he now attempts to convey in a totally half assed manner (I stand by my decisions but let's face it, this was really nothing...), his real error in judgement was deciding that a swift response was preferable to a well thought out and thoroughly researched/reasoned one.

It's not surprising it took 5 ballots for this guy to be elevated from COO of the league to it's Commissioner. And what really hurt him in this first year plus chapter of his hopefully limited tenure was his longstanding administrative background tenured in the league offices. What you want in a commissioner is one of two things - either someone with an unsurpassed depth and breath of experience in the trenches of the business (in this case football operations) who still somehow managed to maintain unimpeachable ingegrity or someone posessing a commanding presence combined with absolutely impeccable business management credentials and no apparent alliegance to anyone whatsoever. Roger was unfortunately neither - just a journeyman league office employee who climbed the ranks as they all unfortunately do in the NFL (much like in the US Congress where Roger's dad spent his career). He allowed the friends and members of the Competition Committee to unduly influence his decisions on this matter apparently oblivious to the fact that they had one objective in mind - to severely damage or remove entirely what they perceived to be the biggest single obstacle to their own success. They never gave a thought to potential long term ramifications of such an objective. And they pushed for swift judgement before dissenting voices had an opportunity to be heard.

Roger is now living through those ramifications. If we weren't too, I'd say it couldn't have happened to a more deserving career climber. This clowns legacy however shortlived will be of suspensions, scandals and strikes. Tagliabue managed to avoid all of the above for almost 17 years. His successor is screwed less than 1-1/2 years in.

I am wondering if because of this Goodell might be the sacrificial lamb and gone OR is that thinking too optimistically?