PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

PATRIOTS NEWS NFL announces deal with Walsh; Goodell meeting set for May 13

Breaking New England Patriots Team News
Status
Not open for further replies.
If that tape existed, some reporter would have seen it by now or heavily confirmed its existence. The fact that NO ONE since the Herald's alleged report has reported anything more speaks volumes.

Don't you think that now that the meeting & agreement is in place Walsh couldn't help himself to give a call to Tomase or whoever and say "Oh man, just wait, this walkthrough tape is going public it's gonna be huge!" now that he is in the clear? He would have done that before the ink even dried on the agreement.
 
I think what the agreement was crafted to deal with is the possibility that Matt still isn't willing to admit he flat out concocted a story, that he will continue to alledge a tape exists or once existed only he no longer has it in his possession, therefore he will be required to either retrieve and produce it or provide credible evidence of it's previous existence AND evidence that someone on the staff either saw it or requested it be made or it becomes a he said they said where he loses the credibility battle. They won't say he's lying (unless they also have compelling evidence that proves he is doing so knowingly), but they also won't accept his allegations merely at face value.

Of course he may also come clean and admit the walkthrough story was a creation of fancy born of opportunity but I'm not holding my breath.

BTW knowledge of the walkthrough tape story's existence predated knowledge of the signal taping (because nobody anticipated the value of the signal taping revelation until after it occurred...who'd a thunk it'd be illegal to tape something in plain sight...). Felger has stated that employees of both the Herald and Globe had been in contact with Walsh over a couple of years - contact he initiated sometime after he was fired. If that is true then he only always wanted to get even and make it look as if he was fired because he knew too much... He likely wasn't looking for money which would have necessitated producing the tape, he was just looking to get even by giving an already distrustful local media (in what remained his family home town) a little something to fuel that distrust.

I don't doubt that when the video taping controversy erupted in September, his name wasn't passed on to some 4 letter turds so they could do the dirty work and connect the dots if possible. It was too volitile a connection for the locals to run with and they don't have the resources of the 4 letter network to camp on Walsh's door 6000 miles away. Even for them it was still a stretch even after Specter poked his stick into the nest. But that was reason enough for the NYT and ESPN to take Matt Walsh's existence public as well as his insinuations that he had more damaging evidence he might be persuaded to share (the old signal tapes).

I believe that in turn spooked Tomase, who I believe decided to mischaracterize a source into confirmation. I've heard that source was the lone employee who had remained in contact with Walsh after he was fired. He could confirm for John that Walsh in fact was alleging he taped the walkthrough, although he had no direct knowledge beyond what Walsh had told him, had never seen a tape nor did he know if anyone else on the team ever had. Under pressure and at risk of losing the real potential smoking gun story, and one most of the locals probably in fact believed was true just because it played to the cut throat image they held of Bill, John and his tabloid bosses who already had an exe to grind with Bill over access ran with the story before someone else decided to.

I don't think Walsh believed he would ever have to produce the tape. Pathological liars, including some I've known, never seem to consider someone will make the effort to disprove them. Even after the story broke, I think he believed he had enough other tape that he could somehow explain away an inability to produce that particular tape while still retaining credibility because he had so many others. Once he and his newfound handlers realized that the older signal tapes were of no use because the team had already copped to them and that was included in the penalty, he was effectively screwed. And now there was a friggin' senator involved.

This agreement is all about covering his ass and paying his formerly pro bono lawyer for nothing but this agreement. If he's smart he will tell the truth. If his ego won't allow that, he will tell his story absent any tangible proof and hope that they haven't already found a way to not only disprove it but to prove he knows he's lying. And that is likely what Spector and the mediots who got played by him are certainly hoping. They can live with lets all just walk away because of how they could then spin that, what would really harm them is if he admits the truth is there never was a walkthrough taped.


You could be right on this--there is some logic to it. I'm personally just glad that it looks like we'll we'll finally see shortly one way or another.
 
Here is my two cents (and then some) on all of this:

I personally do think that Walsh does have something - which could be the SB36 walkthrough. However my theory is that he did it on his own accord without consent/approval/direction of anyone within the Patriots (including Bill himself). I can't see the Pats being punished for something done in via Lone Gunman with no consent so obviously everyone except for Walsh (and Levy, Spector, and Tomasse) will be laughing.

Obviously if the Patriots had done this I don't think that Bill would be that foolish to act like they have done no wrong. Come May 13th this will be all said and done with. And come Super Bowl 43 what should of been the outcome of Super Bowl 42 will come to pass.....

PATRIOTS 19-0!
PATRIOTS SUPER BOWL CHAMPS!
 
So the league is saying here that if a tape of another teams practice exists the team is denying that was ever within the scope of his employment and it would be up to him to prove that it was. Unless someone overheard him being instructed to tape a practice, or someone else stated that they too were requested to tape in similar circumstances, then the presumption will be that anything like that he did was done on his own volition without the knowledge or at the behest of his employer.

Of course, E*PN is now trying to spin this the other way: "Goodell to punish Patriots, depending on evidence", says one of the links on the Spygate pages, nevermind the fact that it's still up to Walsh to provide evidence that he was told to do it.
 
Of course, E*PN is now trying to spin this the other way: "Goodell to punish Patriots, depending on evidence", says one of the links on the Spygate pages, nevermind the fact that it's still up to Walsh to provide evidence that he was told to do it.

Let's not forget those clowns Mike & Mike who slam the Pats at any given chance.
 
Here is my two cents (and then some) on all of this:

I personally do think that Walsh does have something - which could be the SB36 walkthrough. However my theory is that he did it on his own accord without consent/approval/direction of anyone within the Patriots (including Bill himself). I can't see the Pats being punished for something done in via Lone Gunman with no consent so obviously everyone except for Walsh (and Levy, Spector, and Tomasse) will be laughing.

Obviously if the Patriots had done this I don't think that Bill would be that foolish to act like they have done no wrong. Come May 13th this will be all said and done with. And come Super Bowl 43 what should of been the outcome of Super Bowl 42 will come to pass.....

PATRIOTS 19-0!
PATRIOTS SUPER BOWL CHAMPS!

You're expecting BB to just say, "yep, you caught us. We cheated"?
 
I would put this in a new thread if I could,

but I was wondering if anyone else has read the agreement.

As I understand it it seems to allow Walsh to knowingly lie, and still be indemnified from any resulting lawsuits.

This is because the agreement indemnifies him from any "alledged untruthfulness" unless its intentionally untruthful. But then it says he will nonetheless be indemnified even if he breaches the agreement. Thus, as the agreement requires him to provide information "in good faith," presumably he could provide info in bad faith and be indemnified

Obviously, this bothers me. Did anyone else read the agreement the same way? Maybe my reading of it is incorrect

Matt Walsh - X!
Anyone - no you are wrong, here's why (shows proof).

Either MW admits he's wrong or gets sued for being intentionally lying.
 
You're expecting BB to just say, "yep, you caught us. We cheated"?

You would however think that if the Pats are guilty that they wouldn't be all gung-ho on wanting to see whatever Walsh has. Then again I have seen stranger things in my life.
 
You would however think that if the Pats are guilty that they wouldn't be all gung-ho on wanting to see whatever Walsh has. Then again I have seen stranger things in my life.

I've already read on other boards that it's because they're paying Walsh off. Trust me, we're in a no win situation as far as the public perception goes.
 
The news I received the other week was a bit strange in what I was told and the timing of it. I had a source who used to give me great Patriots news. I lost touch with him this past year because I have been way too busy with work.

Anyways ... he calls me to tell me that the Walsh story was going to be in the news again. He tells me that Goodell only destroyed the tapes made after 2003 and not the tapes made before 2003 because he was legally blocked from destroying them.

So I ask him if he is sure of this and he says he's not 100% sure but is pretty sure to say it. I remind him that Goodell says he destroyed all tapes and notes. So my friend says yeah ... how many did Goodell say he destroyed? I replied I think like 6 or something ... I wasn't quite sure but that 6 seemed like how many I read somewhere. So my friend says don't you think that's a rather small number and I replied yeah ... seemed small but DVD's hold alot of info...perhaps they were DVD's and not tapes I said.

So anyways ... he says Specter knows they were not all destroyed and some others know this but nobody can say anything because it's all speculation and the legal maneuver was done secretly by Walsh's people. I asked if it was Estrella who blocked it and he said he did npt think so ... pretty sure it was Walsh. that's why I posted to ask if Estrella still worked for the Patriots.

So ... there's more he told me but I don't want to get bogged down with that in this thread. If what my friend says is true then this Walsh stuff is all window dressing so that Goodell can destroy the rest of the tapes. Walsh wants $$$ or he won't allow them to be destroyed. I'm no legal expert but it was explained to me that with the indemnification Walsh no longer has to fear retribution ... not that he ever did mind you.

But he used the excuse that someone could sue him or call him to testify so he legally bound the tapes to be held from disposal. Walsh wants $$$ to release the pre 2003 tapes and Goodell wants the tapes gone because they are a nuisance to the league and he has to cover his butt because he said he destroyed them all.

Goodell does have an out here I am told because he can say he had to say he destroyed them all because legally he could not say anything different from that anyways ... legal speak :blahblah: crap.

That's what i wanted to post the other day but because I didn't have all of the story I decided I made a mistake asking about Estrella. I still don't have the entire story ...perhaps not even the correct story. So now that Walsh is in the news I'm telling what I know because I don't need the entire story anyways ... nothing new on those tapes is what I'm told. But, it's a story from someone who was great at news before so I mostly believe him.
 
Honestly, I'm prepared for anything. Dom Capers as HC on May 14th, anything.

When you think about it, the NFL has put so much time and energy into this guy to NOT come away with something to pin on the Patriots.
 
Will you people just stop with the lame criminal crap. The courts are clogged up enough as it is. Kraft wants closure. Which is why he won't sue the Herald as things stand either since all any of that will ever accomplish is keeping this crap alive and generating more negative publicity and exposing his business and his employees to discovery.

Why would a D.A. looking for publicity ask Kraft's permission.
 
The news I received the other week was a bit strange in what I was told and the timing of it. I had a source who used to give me great Patriots news. I lost touch with him this past year because I have been way too busy with work.

Anyways ... he calls me to tell me that the Walsh story was going to be in the news again. He tells me that Goodell only destroyed the tapes made after 2003 and not the tapes made before 2003 because he was legally blocked from destroying them.

So I ask him if he is sure of this and he says he's not 100% sure but is pretty sure to say it. I remind him that Goodell says he destroyed all tapes and notes. So my friend says yeah ... how many did Goodell say he destroyed? I replied I think like 6 or something ... I wasn't quite sure but that 6 seemed like how many I read somewhere. So my friend says don't you think that's a rather small number and I replied yeah ... seemed small but DVD's hold alot of info...perhaps they were DVD's and not tapes I said.

So anyways ... he says Specter knows they were not all destroyed and some others know this but nobody can say anything because it's all speculation and the legal maneuver was done secretly by Walsh's people. I asked if it was Estrella who blocked it and he said he did npt think so ... pretty sure it was Walsh. that's why I posted to ask if Estrella still worked for the Patriots.

So ... there's more he told me but I don't want to get bogged down with that in this thread. If what my friend says is true then this Walsh stuff is all window dressing so that Goodell can destroy the rest of the tapes. Walsh wants $$$ or he won't allow them to be destroyed. I'm no legal expert but it was explained to me that with the indemnification Walsh no longer has to fear retribution ... not that he ever did mind you.

But he used the excuse that someone could sue him or call him to testify so he legally bound the tapes to be held from disposal. Walsh wants $$$ to release the pre 2003 tapes and Goodell wants the tapes gone because they are a nuisance to the league and he has to cover his butt because he said he destroyed them all.

Goodell does have an out here I am told because he can say he had to say he destroyed them all because legally he could not say anything different from that anyways ... legal speak :blahblah: crap.

That's what i wanted to post the other day but because I didn't have all of the story I decided I made a mistake asking about Estrella. I still don't have the entire story ...perhaps not even the correct story. So now that Walsh is in the news I'm telling what I know because I don't need the entire story anyways ... nothing new on those tapes is what I'm told. But, it's a story from someone who was great at news before so I mostly believe him.

It's about freakin' time.
 
The news I received the other week was a bit strange in what I was told and the timing of it. I had a source who used to give me great Patriots news. I lost touch with him this past year because I have been way too busy with work.

Anyways ... he calls me to tell me that the Walsh story was going to be in the news again. He tells me that Goodell only destroyed the tapes made after 2003 and not the tapes made before 2003 because he was legally blocked from destroying them.

One problem with this story: from what was reported, the tapes themselves only dated to 2005 or 2006. In other words, there wasn't even anything from 2004, let alone the time that the Hawaii Hack was an employee.
 
Last edited:
One problem with this story: from what was reported, the tapes themselves only dated to 2005 or 2006. In other words, there wasn't even anything from 2004, let alone the time that the Hawaii Hack was an employee.

It's what I'm told ... you know how the grapevine can be
But I did ask another friend who knows some stuff who said the Patriots were taping all the way since Belichick came here. He reminded me of the GreenBay game in 2003 when the Patriots were asked to stop filming that day and they stopped.
 
It's what I'm told ... you know how the grapevine can be
But I did ask another friend who knows some stuff who said the Patriots were taping all the way since Belichick came here. He reminded me of the GreenBay game in 2003 when the Patriots were asked to stop filming that day and they stopped.

We played GB in 2002, not 2003 and I thought that allegation was from 2006 when we played them again?
 
Man is this thread funny. The tireless attempt to draw meaning and inference from fairly boilerplate provisions is staggering. Lots of great imagination here.

What I don't understand is that everyone says they hate us lawyers. Why is it such an obsession to act like us?
 
That's admittedly an interesting point that perhaps the League (and the Pats) have inserted this here so that they can argue that Walsh did this on his own. I was more focused on it as a implying that such a tape does indeed exist, which has been the subject of a lot of conjecture. They can put the burden on Walsh, but the League will almost certainly lose the public relations battle on this point, although you may be right that they put it in there so the Pats don't need to get punished for it. Wow, the League may have taken steps yet again to protect the Pats--who'd have thunk it.....

Wow, spinning it already.
 
I've already read on other boards that it's because they're paying Walsh off. Trust me, we're in a no win situation as far as the public perception goes.

I hear ya. No matter what happens on May 13th the damage has already been done. The best thing going forward for our Pats to do is to prove all the haters wrong by having another amazing season. Only this time do the one thing we missed last time... win the freakin Super Bowl.

I honestly at this point just want to be done with all this "spygate" non-sense. Yes I can see how Bill misinterpreted the rules on video taping. Does not make an wrong suddenly right but I can see from his point of view how he misread it (nothing about using said footage after said game for later use - at least from my understanding of how the rule was written). And my hopes are that whatever Walsh has about SB36 was done on his own period. We'll see on that however.
 
Man is this thread funny. The tireless attempt to draw meaning and inference from fairly boilerplate provisions is staggering. Lots of great imagination here.

What I don't understand is that everyone says they hate us lawyers. Why is it such an obsession to act like us?

Mechanics are scumbags as well. But when you need one, you need one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
TRANSCRIPT: Caleb Lomu’s Interview with New England media 4/23
MORSE: Patriots Make a Questionable Selection of Caleb Lomu in the First Round
Patriots Trade Up, Take Utah Tackle in Round 1 of the NFL Draft
TRANSCRIPT: Mike Vrabel Press Conference 4/23
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Press Conference 4/23
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/23: Vrabel Set to Miss Day 3 of Draft ‘Seeking Counseling’
MORSE: Final Patriots Mock Draft
Former Patriots Super Bowl MVP Set to Announce Pick During Draft
TRANSCRIPT: Mike Vrabel’s Media Statement on Tuesday 4/21
MORSE: What Will the Patriots Do in the Draft?
Back
Top