I think Walsh's HBO interview kind of helps the Pats

[Patsfanin Philly]

Florio mentions that Walsh claims the Pats used signals from the preseason Tampa game in the regular season game. Really??? They lost the regular season game 21-16 and only scored their only TD with three minutes left. Bledsoe was 26-39 for 216 yds and 6 sacks......Does that sound like a team that knew what was coming???


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/recaps/2000/09/03/patriots_buccaneers/

 

[edzo44]

You are right...but know this: He may be a jerk and even a 'cheater'...but no one can focus on the task at hand like Coach BB. Let the media attack all they want. Once the season starts, it'll be business as usual and the Patriots will go undefeated this year. I feel more confident about a SB victory and even 19-0 this year than I did last year. Keep the faith and know that winning makes everything better. That is all I care about.

I agree that this year's team might be quite entertaining. Seeing them play the bulk of last year with that bunker mentality and nasty chip on their shoulder after the camera crap was great to watch. This year should be even more entertaining with that freaking railroad tie on their shoulder!!!!!!

 

[Fixit]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Walsh tell Goodell that he never met Belichick?

Contrast that with this from the HBO interview:

Kremer asked Walsh about Belichick's comments about his lack of familiarity with Walsh and his actions, referencing a comment that "I couldn't pick Matt Walsh out of a lineup?"

"Um, it's funny. The first time I heard that was when somebody in Hawaii brought the quote to me, too. And my first hand answer to them was, 'Well, I wonder if he can pick me out on one of the three team pictures we're in together.'

"I don't know, if I was just that forgettable and he can't remember me, or if he was just trying to distance himself from this whole situation as best as he could. ... I think Bill's got a pretty good memory."

 

[Mogamedogz]

Mo...why do you always think think the worst buddy? You have written several times that you felt the Walsh non-story would result in something catastrophic and now that it hasn't, you still have the dark cloud overhead.

The rain has stopped & the clouds are thinning, so step out into the sunshine and stop hanging in the shade.

I wish I were a more optimistic fan. I really do. But as a life long Sox/Pats fan, I guess I was just raised with a strong belief in Murphy’s Law.

Like I said, I hope... check that... I PRAY that im wrong, but I can see this thing getting even worse for BB.

 

[bradmahn]

Listening to Sirius Satellite Radio going over the transcripts of the interview, I think this is going to be bad for the Patriots. In fact, it might even turn people in support of Specter. They are ripping Belichick and the Patriots right now for covering up that they were taping and how it lends credence that the benefits of the taping are far greater than we were lead onto.

Walsh talks about the benefit of knowing signals - which, if your opponent never changes theirs, is obviously a big one. There is never a distinction made between the benefits of taping signals and stealing them live, which, by all accounts, can achieve the same thing. If people work off their assumptions (which they will anyway, despite the facts or assertions made that disprove their "concrete" establishments), then they can use this to fit their agenda, but that's happened with all of the facts anyway.

Seeing as how Goodell has already said that Walsh did not provide any new, groundbreaking information, and the NFL made a statement that exclaims their disagreement with Specter, I don't think anything more will come of this. The only power Specter has is if he opens a Congressional investigation, and I find it hard to believe that his Congressional peers see the same threat to national decency in the matter as he. If you believe Specter is doing this because of his affiliation with Comcast, well, that should ease any concerns you have of it moving further along in importance to the government.

Goodell isn't going to make any changes to his ruling unless there is new information; the court of public opinion can make a verdict, but they have no means to execute any sentences.

 

[NEPatriot]

i don't think that Walsh is helping Pats at all when he keeps talking to media about his work at Patriots.

This is the first time I have seen an employee who is enthusiastic about his work and is willing to tell everybody how important his is. He is a loosing cannon.

 

[castlelong1]

Do you honestly believe that the mainstream media (NYT, ESPN, etc) will pick up on these facts? I am sure someone will try to point out that it COULD have been the AFC title game in 2004 (2005, but the 04 season) that was taped, not the regular season game! Such is the twisted mind of the hit and run media today.

Um, that was on the road too. Know what you mean though.

 

[castlelong1]

Listening to Sirius Satellite Radio going over the transcripts of the interview, I think this is going to be bad for the Patriots. In fact, it might even turn people in support of Specter. They are ripping Belichick and the Patriots right now for covering up that they were taping and how it lends credence that the benefits of the taping are far greater than we were lead onto.

I like the riffing on stuff that is obviously wrong - Pittsburgh was on the road in the regular and post-season.

Build real elaborate castles on foundations of sand.

More rope please.

 

[Section103]

I understand the Matt Walsh interview makes for high drama and sells ad space for the Times but really... what did this tell us that changes anything? This tells us HOW they taped and how they used the information. The Pats already got punished for taping and it was severe because the implication is that the tapes were used. Theoretically, if they taped and no one thought they used the tapes, there would be no punishment. So what new light does this shed? None.
Does the relative secrecy and prepared alibi mean that they knew the process was illegal... maybe. That is not conclusive as they seemed to be secret as to not draw the other team's attention, not so much that they thought they 'd be subject to a league imposed penalty. They asked team's for permission to use a 3rd camera guy, if they had said 'so we can tape your signals' would it have been granted. No. This unfortunately can not be proved, however, they were punished under the assumption that they knew and that the rule was clear and they knowingly broke the rule.
Back in September, the fact that they taped the signals and used the information later was known. It was also accepted that they knew better than to tape to begin. They got punished for it. So again, what new information does this provide? What new evidence of further wrong doing does this give us? Zero. This is a non-issue now, nothing has changed since September, this is nothing more than drama in a slow sports month.

 

[SVN]

unfortunately the pats and BB will just have no interviews of their own to tell their story so this thing is going to continue endlessly.

 

[Tunescribe]

Bingo. His accounts are laughable.

"The sign stealer said it was really useful!" That's why the team's 2000 offense was putrid, ranking 25th out of 31 teams, scoring an AVERAGE of 17 points per game. jackass.

"If it wasn't important, why'd they make me do it?" Because they're thorough.

"I have season tickets, so I saw Scarnecchia doing the same thing in Pittsburgh in 2004!" The game was on the road, dipshi#.

"BB knows me! He really, really knows me!" I'm sure he says hello to the janitor, too.

Football was created as a military game. The men who are on the Mount Rushmore of pro football were all military vets. That was why they embraced signals intelligence as part of the game. Nobody ever whined about having their signals cracked to the "authorities". There was too much shame in being a sucker among your peers.

Only today, when the roots of the game have been lost, do we see pansies whining about this crap. Protect your signals, shut up and sit down.

The idea of "fairness" about signals could only have arisen from a "university" perspective. From a military perspective, it's all about cracking codes and thinking out of the box.

There's no doubt in my mind that BB got his method re: offensive signals from his mentor Parcells, who probably got it from the time he worked at West Point. And it's no coincidence that BB embraces the Navy tradition of his father.

Military men laugh at this crap. It just shows how sad and soft segments of civilian society have become, when they get their panties in a twist over this nonsense.

Hey, let's grade football on a curve, too. Let's put an end to excellence.

The problem is that this "scandal" has entered the mainstream where ignorant lay people lack the knowledge or understanding to sift through the misinformation and biased opinions and end of forming naive opinions. Ever try explaining this fiasco to a non-football fan who now believes BB is a criminal? If anything, "cameragate" has served an indictment on the media and shows how something like a minor rules violation can be blown up and perverted to serve hate-mongering agendas.