Roger Goodell Press Conf [mergedx2]

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

Tommysgirl said:

The way ESPN is spinning it, look out for Matt Walsh. They're saying the NFL did not complete and investigation because they did not contact him. He's definitely looking for 15 minutes, this could get interesting.

Click to expand...

Why would we expect anything less of ESPN than to completely ignore what Goodell said in his presser to chase the allure of further scandal, a "secret witness" and more dirt?

The next time ESPN chooses to forsake the sexy story in favor of the sensible and responsible one will be the first.

Where there's smoke, there's.. idiocy.

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

Herm. I think the week of all this crap going on Herm said that he remembers waving at one of the cameras.

Click to expand...

Herm! That makes sense, not hard to picture him playing to the camera instead of keeping track of his timeouts or something.

The way ESPN is spinning it, look out for Matt Walsh. They're saying the NFL did not complete and investigation because they did not contact him. He's definitely looking for 15 minutes, this could get interesting.

Click to expand...

What's that I smell? Is it....could it be...a book deal!

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

Tommysgirl said:

The way ESPN is spinning it, look out for Matt Walsh. They're saying the NFL did not complete and investigation because they did not contact him. He's definitely looking for 15 minutes, this could get interesting.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I mean, what investigation is complete without making sure you include all former employees with possible axes to grind and taking their story as gospel?

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

NEPat said:

What's that I smell? Is it....could it be...a book deal!

Click to expand...

That was my very first thought as well.. Reminded me of one of my favorite lines from the West Wing, when two staffers get tossed out for harassment: "It's time for you both to write your book now".

Who's Matt Walsh? Exactly.

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

Bella*chick said:

Yeah, I mean, what investigation is complete without making sure you include all former employees with possible axes to grind and taking their story as gospel?

Click to expand...

Haha. Good line.

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

What the media will fail to report is that Matt Walsh left his employment with the Patriots in January 2002, before even THE FIRST Patriot Sb victory (on Feb 3, 2002). He wasn't even employed by the team during their run of Sb success.

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

PonyExpress said:

What the media will fail to report is that Matt Walsh left his employment with the Patriots in January 2002, before even THE FIRST Patriot Sb victory (on Feb 3, 2002). He wasn't even employed by the team during their run of Sb success.

Click to expand...

Come on, how could that possibly be relevant to the matter at hand? :bricks:

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

cincipatsfan said:

Yes he said that specifically and was asked did they benefit any superbowl games and he said no they didn't

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Makes it pretty much a No-op.

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

If the Patriots didn't benefit from videotaping, then why were they punished so harshly? It's the equivalent of punitive damages in a court of law. What does that mean?

Here from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages:
"...damages not awarded in order to compensate the plaintiff, but in order to reform or deter the defendant and similar persons from pursuing a course of action such as that which damaged the plaintiff."

That's it, plain and simple.

So for those who still can't understand, I hope you do now.

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

As someone predicted earlier, Florio pretty much ignored all the aspects of Goodell's PC which seemed to make it quite clear that too big a deal was made out it.

He seems to have hitched his wagon firmly to the Matt Walsh, Senator Specter gravy train, and I expect that to be the tone of the media in general. The media has far too much invested in this story now to just drop it here, it seems that no matter what anyone says there are some who will chase it to the end of time.

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

PonyExpress said:

What the media will fail to report is that Matt Walsh left his employment with the Patriots in January 2002, before even THE FIRST Patriot Sb victory (on Feb 3, 2002). He wasn't even employed by the team during their run of Sb success.

Click to expand...

But this is what BSPN is slinging.....

Walsh, who worked for the Patriots from 1996 to 2003,

Click to expand...

Goodell said the SB's weren't tainted, right?

Because every news outlet outside of the Herald is not even acknowledging this tiny, insignificant little admission. Anyone else think the media refuses to admit defeat on this one?

Re: Goodell said the SB's weren't tainted, right?

Right.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h7yKaQMY8n6epm1OyQ_9a_k9rvig

"I don't think it taints their accomplishments," Goodell said.

[...]

"There is no indication that (taping) benefitted them in any of the Super Bowl victories."

Click to expand...

Goodell on NFLN talking about Pats

Goodell on NFLN:

This is all paraphrasing

On why he destroyed tapes:

“This is an issue that occurred almost 6 months ago. We have been forthright with all the facts. Destroyed the tapes because it was enforcing the instructions- This way, he knows that any more copies that show up would be further illegal copies.”

For those who wonder why the tapes weren't released:

“Because there was nothing wrong. They're not exciting tapes. It's just coaches, down, distance, the coaches were even waving (He EXPLICITY says that it just wasn't a big deal here). Teams know that signals are being stolen, and have complex safeguards.”

In hindsight, was the punishment appropriate?

“Yes, it was sound. It sent a message not just to the Patriots, but to everyone. That message was sent very clearly.”

Is there any reason to believe that stuff like this was going on elsewhere?

“We've heard rumors, etc etc. No hard evidence. The ironic thing is that everyone who is accusing us of covering up ignores that we were the ones who caught and disciplined the Patriots in the first place.”

Should this taint the Patriots' legacy?

“I don't think so. I think that there are people that are disappointed that they violated a rule, but their performance is in no way tainted. Everyone played by the rules for the rest of the 2007 season, and they deserve all of the recognition that they're getting.”


Now they're moving on to Gene Upshaw...

Re: Goodell on NFLN talking about Pats

Oldest saying in sports

"If your not cheating, your not trying."

In almost any sport, signal stealing, while technically cheating, happens. I remember in September, Jimmy Johnson on Fox said when he coached in Dallas, he would send people after the game to the visiting coaching box to get any left behind notes, papers, etc. The evidence was destroyed because it showed probably other teams did it, henceforth the waving by other coaches, since they might be doing something similar as well.

Re: Goodell said the SB's weren't tainted, right?

Thanks, every other article skims over the topic. And the mediots over at ESPN are going ga-ga over Matt Walsh, who apparently was pulled out from under a rock TODAY.

Re: Goodell said the SB's weren't tainted, right?

Apparantly taping was widespread throughout the NFL and it wasn't banned until the letter went out in Sept 2006 - so in no way can they be "tainted".

Re: Roger Goodell Press Conf

BelichickFan said:

If everything posted here is true (thanks cincipatsfan, btw) then Goodall should have looked at the tapes, taken away a #3 or #4 pick for being bad boys for disobeying him and moved along. Again, assuming he's telling the truth the #1 pick seems more unfair than ever.

Click to expand...

Saved me a post, Bfan. a slap on the wrist was called for.

It's an embarrassment of riches, though. we probably have more high picks than places to put them, especially if we trade down.

If we had ended up with 2 or 3 (trade down) 1st rounders and a high third in addition to our regular picks, they might have had to disband the league.

Re: Goodell on NFLN talking about Pats

Aldogg said:

Oldest saying in sports

"If your not cheating, your not trying."

In almost any sport, signal stealing, while technically cheating, happens. I remember in September, Jimmy Johnson on Fox said when he coached in Dallas, he would send people after the game to the visiting coaching box to get any left behind notes, papers, etc. The evidence was destroyed because it showed probably other teams did it, henceforth the waving by other coaches, since they might be doing something similar as well.

Click to expand...

LOL, this is what Tomlinson said and the media and pats fans flamed him for it. Now they are agreeing with it.

Re: Goodell said the SB's weren't tainted, right?

IndyKen said:

Apparantly taping was widespread throughout the NFL and it wasn't banned until the letter went out in Sept 2006 - so in no way can they be "tainted".

Click to expand...

Which would also explain why the confiscated and destroyed footage was all from 2006 and 2007.