Goodell cites "evidence to the contrary" on walk-through taping allegation

[BPF]

There are also conflicting reports regarding when Walsh was fired. One report said January of 2002 which obviously would be prior to the when the Super Bowl 36 (Feb 2002).

Or if he wasn't fired, it might have been that he was reassigned and no longer worked in the video department at that time. I believe they may have moved him to a scouting position for a short time.

He started out as a public relations intern, then went on to become a video assistant and in his last year he was a college scout. So he was not in the video dept during the SB season vs Rams.

 

[Chuck.U.Farley]

Well check this out: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3234049

 

[upstater1]

The fact that an NFL official noticed it is so eye-opening to me. My guess is the reason they blew it off was probably because the official league stance at the time was "that's football". I mean, wasn't that what John Clayton wisely told us when the Pats complained that the Dolphins stole our signals last year?

It's amazing how quickly that stance turned into pearl clutching when the motive is to dismantle an organization no one could seem to beat on the field.

It was actually Steve Alic, an NFL guy that said that.

 

[upstater1]

Yep. Fans, other owners, GMs, they all want to bring us down. Unfortunately they did. Again. But we still have about 6 more tries with Brady.

Well, they did bring us down this year. It worked!

 

[pats1]

He started out as a public relations intern, then went on to become a video assistant and in his last year he was a college scout. So he was not in the video dept during the SB season vs Rams.

Incorrect. He was a video assistant in 2001. In 2002 he was a scouting assistant, defended by the Pats' 2002 yearbook.

His marriage announcement was wrong. It says he left in January 2002, which is debunked by A) The 2002 yearbook and B) It says he went to the Cologne Centurions a year later, but the Centurions didn't start until 2004. The Fish article was correct.

 

[BPF]

From Florio:
http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm

POSTED 9:13 p.m. EST, February 6, 2008

GOODELL SPEAKS ON SPYGATE II

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell spoke with Adam Schefter of NFL Network regarding the new Spygate controversy, which engulfed the league in the days prior to the Super Bowl.

The allegation? According to the Boston Herald, the Patriots taped the Rams' final walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.

The response? Goodell told Schefter that the league had no evidence to support the contention and that, in reality, the league has evidence to the contrary.

Meanwhile, Jay Glazer of FOXSports.com reports that Goodell will come down hard on Belichick, if the NFL gets information that the allegations are true. The punishment would be harsh because, as Glazer explains, Belichick signed paperwork last year stating that he had come clean regarding any and all cheating.

 

[pats1]

E-mailed and got Florio to post this:

GOODELL SPEAKS ON SPYGATE II
Posted by Mike Florio on February 6, 2008, 9:13 p.m.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell spoke with Adam Schefter of NFL Network regarding the new Spygate controversy, which engulfed the league in the days prior to the Super Bowl.

​

The allegation? According to the Boston Herald, the Patriots taped the Rams’ final walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.​

The response? Goodell told Schefter that the league had no evidence to support the contention and that, in reality, the league has evidence to the contrary.​

​

 

[BPF]

Incorrect. He was a video assistant in 2001. In 2002 he was a scouting assistant, defended by the Pats' 2002 yearbook.

His marriage announcement was wrong. It says he left in January 2002, which is debunked by A) The 2002 yearbook and B) It says he went to the Cologne Centurions a year later, but the Centurions didn't start until 2004. The Fish article was correct.

Isn't that what I said, that in his last year he was a scouting assistant.

 

[NoCal Patriot]

Evidence to the contrary is BS. It's damned hard to prove a negative.

Wouldn't "Evidence to the Contrary " be if Matt Walsh could be verified to be somewhere else at the time of the Rams Walk Through? I think if He wasn't there how did He know that it happened?

 

[pats1]

Isn't that what I said, that in his last year he was a scouting assistant.

You said he wasn't a video assistant in the SB year. He was. That was 2001. He was a scouting assistant in 2002.

 

[Watson's IQ]

Well check this out: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3234049

Gee, never suspected that ESPN would take that spin on it..

Bury the part of the story that indicates the Rams story is likely not credible? Check.

Continue to drum up momentum for the Matt Walsh idiocy? Check.

Sensationalize the trivial and marginalize the facts? Check.

All in a day's work.

 

[Keegs]

I believe that "evidence of the contrary" means that somehow the Rams would have had to have taped a Matt Walsh walk through.

This just keeps getting more and more interesting.

 

[PromisedLand]

So, why is all of the BS falling on the Pats if every team does this?

Are the Pats simply the punching bag because they were so good for so long?

This is fair I guess.

No, not really...

Yes, that and the way BB treats the media. They don't like the way he stonewalls them and so they play up the negative. Most fans (unlike most of us here) don't spend hours a day reading and watching all they can about the NFL so they tend to believe the shallow and sensationalistic reporting that passes for journalism these days. Then the media polls the fans and reports that outside of NE, fans don't like the Pats. It's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Dojo Chargerfan]

Adam Schefter just interviewed Commissioner Goodell on NFLN at the Pro Bowl and asked him about the Matt Walsh story. He said the league had nothing to support the allegation and, in fact, had "evidence to the contrary." He didn't explain what that evidence might be, but this looks like a non-matter. Of course, Marshall "F*ckhead" Faulk said how "troubling" it is that a former Patriots employee would make such an allegation.

I swear, if I was in the mafia I'd put out a hit list on some of these morons.

And this is why the TRUTH is so hard to get out.

 

[SVN]

Yes, that and the way BB treats the media. They don't like the way he stonewalls them and so they play up the negative. Most fans (unlike most of us here) don't spend hours a day reading and watching all they can about the NFL so they tend to believe the shallow and sensationalistic reporting that passes for journalism these days. Then the media polls the fans and reports that outside of NE, fans don't like the Pats. It's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

the worst part about the media is that they claim to represent the fans and ask questions as if we want to know those answers.

 

[fitch]

Adam Schefter just interviewed Commissioner Goodell on NFLN at the Pro Bowl and asked him about the Matt Walsh story. He said the league had nothing to support the allegation and, in fact, had "evidence to the contrary." He didn't explain what that evidence might be, but this looks like a non-matter. Of course, Marshall "F*ckhead" Faulk said how "troubling" it is that a former Patriots employee would make such an allegation.

I swear, if I was in the mafia I'd put out a hit list on some of these morons.

I could not agree more with you. I just hope that in 3 to five years we finally get some former Pats players in these networks that will stand up for the organization.

 

[pats1]

http://www.nfl.com/videos;jsessionid=46BD1F0A1265CB7BE4B25900F0F7ECE0?videoId=09000d5d8068d1ad

 

[DarrylS]

Here is my .02 on this whole thing, when the Pats provided he videotapes they also showed other teams doing the same thing they were doing, thus the rush to destroy the tapes to preserve the "integrity" of the game.. I suspect that this type of chicanery was prevalent throughout seasons past, and the tapes in question may have already been provided to Goodell and showed a comparable Rams transgression.

Unfortunately, or furntunately BB has chosen the high road and has not implicated everyone else..