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

[BigMike]

anyone else here looking for this to be put to bed say on May 14th? Enough already of thiscrap!

Celtics 17th Championship Parade will help - but we need this thing to go away once and for all. Mangini, after you're canned at the end of next season, the State Police will be looking for you to pay the bill for protecting you at each Gilette home game you douchebag.

 

[modman]

He's not terribly adept at managing his media, but I think this is his way of establishing that if the Patriots don't get punished further it's because Walsh had nothing of substance - or else he would have revisited the penalty. And he just wants to make it clear that he is not predisposed to sweeping anything under the rug. He is just such a marble mouth, especially when speaking to media, that people find it easy to create alternate spins than what he intended from most anything he attempts to say...

Either marble mouth really hates the Pats or he is truly the stupidest person to ever hold such a position in a major sport. His power to brain ratio is the highest of anyone I can think of and that includes some of our favorite politicians, so that is saying something.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I guess that's possible I just doub it. The way it is titled leaves the impression that this is just the initial article intended to set the tone for things to come unfortunately. Goodell even if he were a fair man which I don't believe for a second, can't even try to make some kind of on the fence ruling if a tape is provided. If he even tries to say that he can't dole out more punishment because he can't prove Bill knew about it he will be crucified by the media.

I was once hopeful that even if Falsh presents a walkthrough we could escape by claiming it was unauthorized but now I concede that is naive. If there's a tape that's the end for Bill.

You seem to be forgetting that Goodell has already investigated this rumor, and found no credible evidence to support it.

Also, note the way the document is worded--if Walsh presents the tape, the NFL can basically require him to provide evidence (it need not be proof, but his word alone will not suffice) that implicates the FO in some significant way. And given that there's currently no credible evidence that this happened, that's not nearly as likely as it may seem.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

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.

Sorry, I should have been more clear: the story at the time was that the Patriots used the same tapes repeatedly, since, once "processed," the footage served no further purpose.

 

[PatsfanGlo]

Just had a question for folks. Anyone think we wouldn't be getting this much hate if 49ers didn't suck so bad last season(hence no #7 pick)? I guess most haters are ticked that Pats weren't punished severely enough and this feeling seem to mount more and more when 49ers sucked more....

Also, was it true that Jets were caught by Pats taping Patriots' sideline 2 seasons ago? I remember reading about it but that news died out in 2 days.

Thanks in advance.

 

[FootballFanetic]

I disagree. It's possible an unathorized taping, by a NE Patriots employee does exist. If that fact can be verified, we move on. However, if there there exists a tape, or other similar addtl. infractions, that were undertaken on the word of BB etc., then thats when addtl penalties will rack up. If Walsh's potential info proves damaging, correct and centered on 2002 allegations (not on Goodell's watch), IMO it will not be an end game penalty to BB.

One question for folks who want to make this argument. Let's assume for the moment that a tape is produced by Walsh, who claims he made it and on Pats' orders. The Pats deny he made the tape on their orders. Now, unless the Pats argue that Walsh did this strictly for his own personal use and viewing (how credible is that? Even homers need to concede, not very), they still have a problem. That problem is that the only even halfway credible explanation (and I'd personally even call this far less than "half" credible, but for the sake of argument) is that Walsh did this to curry favor with his bosses, i.e., "hey, guys, look what I've got--aren't I great?". For this to be the case, he would have had to at least tell someone in the organization that he did this (if not actually show it to them) and, at best for the Pats, they would have had to say "you're crazy, we don't want that stuff!" and fired him. They certainly did not fire him, as he worked for them for another year. They also certainly did not tell the League about such an approach by Walsh that they rebuffed, since that would have come out in the investigation in the fall, no? At a minimum in such a case, they likely lied to the League last year, which, from Goodell's statements would still be a huge problem for them. Discuss.....

 

[PatsWSB47]

One question for folks who want to make this argument. Let's assume for the moment that a tape is produced by Walsh, who claims he made it and on Pats' orders. The Pats deny he made the tape on their orders. Now, unless the Pats argue that Walsh did this strictly for his own personal use and viewing (how credible is that? Even homers need to concede, not very), they still have a problem. That problem is that the only even halfway credible explanation (and I'd personally even call this far less than "half" credible, but for the sake of argument) is that Walsh did this to curry favor with his bosses, i.e., "hey, guys, look what I've got--aren't I great?". For this to be the case, he would have had to at least tell someone in the organization that he did this (if not actually show it to them) and, at best for the Pats, they would have had to say "you're crazy, we don't want that stuff!" and fired him. They certainly did not fire him, as he worked for them for another year. They also certainly did not tell the League about such an approach by Walsh that they rebuffed, since that would have come out in the investigation in the fall, no? At a minimum in such a case, they likely lied to the League last year, which, from Goodell's statements would still be a huge problem for them. Discuss.....

If there is an unauthorized tape who knows?, he may have chickened out(he has been silent all these years, maybe he was still chicken), he may have wanted to show it off to his friends or just have a souvenier. Maybe he just wanted to make a lot of money with it when the time came. It all doesn't make much sense that so much time has passed. My feeling is there will be no tape produced. And maybe I've missed something along the way but has Walsh ever stated publickly that he has a tape of the walk through?

 

[BSR]

FF,

Answer me this question...if a tape exists of a walkthrough and said tape is so important and controvertial, how would it ever end up in the hands of a low level video department person like Matt Walsh? Its not like a piece of game footage you toss in the film room. If he has a piece of footage of the practice, the logic that he has it because he took it for his own use makes much more sense then the fact that he took it for the coaches, gave it to them to use and was then able to steal it back for them. If you do think he stole it then why would he do such a thing when you think that taking a piece of such fotage for your own personal use is not credible? Your loop of logic is self contradictory.

 

[Bigdogx]

Espn is going to beat this topic to a bloody pulp the next two days!

 

[Tbrady12to88]

You seem to be forgetting that Goodell has already investigated this rumor, and found no credible evidence to support it.

Also, note the way the document is worded--if Walsh presents the tape, the NFL can basically require him to provide evidence (it need not be proof, but his word alone will not suffice) that implicates the FO in some significant way. And given that there's currently no credible evidence that this happened, that's not nearly as likely as it may seem.

But the one person he hasn't been in contact with yet is Matt Falsh and he's the only one that matters now.

No one else connected with the team giving any hint that they have knowledge of such a tape is good because it makes it look more likely that if the tape does exist it's because Falsh made it himself. I'm just afraid that if a tape is produced that the heat will be so intense logic will be tossed. People will just say that of course Pioli and Bill issued defiant statements- you would to if you had one of the best jobs in the world, no one would just come out and fess up to an infraction that would cost you not only your job but both your personal and team legacy.

I've been reading different newspapers this morning and as usual each puts a bit of different spin on this article. Most of them seem to be posturing that more penalties are expected.

Matt Falsh you suck!

 

[BradyManny]

I honestly cannot wait until this **** is over.

What's dangerous here though is that we are dealing with a guy who has shown himself to be a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR and prone to completely irrational decision-making (the razor in the bed, taping Pioli's conversations, etc.).

Walsh can say WHATEVER he wants, and the vast majority of the country will willing accept whatever he says b/c they dislike Belichick and the Patriots. He could say Bill Belichick rounded up innocent puppies and kittens and boiled them into stew, and all the ESPN pundits would agree, and applaud Walsh's courage in coming forward.

My point is, even if Walsh has NO evidence, it's what that comes out of his mouth that is damaging. And unfortunately, even though he may not have the truth on his side, he basically has an agreement in place that gives him an out if he lies.

Bottom line, Patriots are banking on Walsh having the sense to not take this any further than it has to go. But if Walsh wants to continue to be a total d-bag, an attention whore, etc., then this story may continue as long as the media continues to carry out its irrational witch hunt against Bill Belichick.

 

[Tunescribe]

I hate Walsh and don't even know him. What perverse times we live in when we have to wrangle with such utter crap just to enjoy a pastime that, by its very definition, is supposed to allow respite from the utter crap of everyday life. I hope Al Qaeda bombs whatever building Walsh and Goodell are meeting in on the 13th.

 

[FootballFanetic]

FF,

Answer me this question...if a tape exists of a walkthrough and said tape is so important and controvertial, how would it ever end up in the hands of a low level video department person like Matt Walsh? Its not like a piece of game footage you toss in the film room. If he has a piece of footage of the practice, the logic that he has it because he took it for his own use makes much more sense then the fact that he took it for the coaches, gave it to them to use and was then able to steal it back for them. If you do think he stole it then why would he do such a thing when you think that taking a piece of such fotage for your own personal use is not credible? Your loop of logic is self contradictory.

Because he's the person who shot the tape perhaps? See Florio's rumor mill this morning--apparently he has told journalists as much, if Florio's to be believed, but just refused to do so into a microphone or for attribution. Also see Peter King's column a couple of months ago in which he printed a letter from another team's camera guy who said it's not at all unusual for a team video guy to keep copies of just about everything he's done for a team. The last part of what you said I honetly can't get through, so I'll apologize for not responding to it. I stand on the logic in my original post on this, however.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

For this to be the case, he would have had to at least tell someone in the organization that he did this (if not actually show it to them) and, at best for the Pats, they would have had to say "you're crazy, we don't want that stuff!" and fired him.

Except that no one they interviewed knew anything about this tape. If what you say is true, then someone should have heard something.

As others have pointed out before, the Pats' behavior with regard to the Hawaii Hack make no sense if you assume that the HH has a tape *and* the Pats knew about it.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I've been reading different newspapers this morning and as usual each puts a bit of different spin on this article. Most of them seem to be posturing that more penalties are expected.

That's because most newspapers are going with variants of the AP story; they're not going to bother writing their own.

 

[BSR]

Because he's the person who shot the tape perhaps? See Florio's rumor mill this morning--apparently he has told journalists as much, if Florio's to be believed, but just refused to do so into a microphone or for attribution. Also see Peter King's column a couple of months ago in which he printed a letter from another team's camera guy who said it's not at all unusual for a team video guy to keep copies of just about everything he's done for a team. The last part of what you said I honetly can't get through, so I'll apologize for not responding to it. I stand on the logic in my original post on this, however.

I am trying to understand the chain of events that you think happened that allowed Walsh to have a copy of walkthrough tape.

As for the Peter King column, can you link to it? I don't understand why a camera guy would keep just about everything they ever videotaped for a team. Most of it would be useless for any purpose. I would think that many of those copies come from work that they are doing on a computer at home that is just never erased. However, I don't think that if this walkthrough tape exists that it is treated like every other videotape.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

One question for folks who want to make this argument. Let's assume for the moment that a tape is produced by Walsh, who claims he made it and on Pats' orders. The Pats deny he made the tape on their orders. Now, unless the Pats argue that Walsh did this strictly for his own personal use and viewing (how credible is that? Even homers need to concede, not very), they still have a problem. That problem is that the only even halfway credible explanation (and I'd personally even call this far less than "half" credible, but for the sake of argument) is that Walsh did this to curry favor with his bosses, i.e., "hey, guys, look what I've got--aren't I great?". For this to be the case, he would have had to at least tell someone in the organization that he did this (if not actually show it to them) and, at best for the Pats, they would have had to say "you're crazy, we don't want that stuff!" and fired him. They certainly did not fire him, as he worked for them for another year. They also certainly did not tell the League about such an approach by Walsh that they rebuffed, since that would have come out in the investigation in the fall, no? At a minimum in such a case, they likely lied to the League last year, which, from Goodell's statements would still be a huge problem for them. Discuss.....

When you say they likely lied you are presuming he would have told them. They have apparently assured Goodell that no one on the coaching staff had ANY knowledge of even the existence of such a tape. They questioned dozens of past and present employees, none of whom requested indemnity btw, and found no basis of support for Walsh's "reported" allegation. Remember, this is all based on rumored hearsay evidence that he alledged told or "hinted" to several media individuals the walkthrough was taped - he's never made the allegation publicly or under an oath of any sort. Even Tomase's secondary "source" only confirmed that he was aware of the story Walsh had been telling for years, but he had no knowledge of anyone on the team being aware of it let alone having any knowledge of the tape. Apparently Walsh has never said just who if anyone he offered this tape to. Belichick and Co. have publicly denied ever seeing or requesting such a tape be made verbally and in writing in the strongest possible terms to a league commissioner who can take away their livlihoods if they lie to him in the course of an investigation.

There was also strong circumstantial evidence suggesting that it would have been improbable if not impossible for him to have been instructed to tape the walkthrough. The crew that went to our walkthrough to set up the pre set cameras for the following days Superbowl were specifically instructed not to take battery packs with them - the commissioner was likely able to confirm that via Jimmy Dee who heads the department and the OTHER camera operators who were on staff at the time. He then went so far as to ascertain that there was no power source available to those camera positions on Saturday. The teams had until that point been sharing pooled equipment for logistic and security reasons - there was only a 1 week run up to that Superbowl which occurred after 911 which meant there was not sufficient time to use, pack and ship equipment down with the team and the coordinators stayed behind for a day or so to work on prepping scouting tape and game plans before traveling to NO in time for practice. The equipment likely had to be shipped down to follow them or they were still using generic or pooled equipment provided on site.

Walsh was not the only video operator working the event. He would have had counterparts on the team as would the Rams. His counterparts on the NEP have apparently told Goodell they did not ever tape a walkthrough nor were they requested or encouraged to. They apparently confirmed their bosses instruction not to take battery packs with them to the facility on walkthrough day. Not to mention it wasn't really much of a walkthrough for the Rams according to the pooled media member in attendance - lots of functioning cameras though as players and their families and their celebrity guests milled about. It would be pretty easy for a guy who collected any and all memorabelia to acquire some footage second or third hand after the fact that oddly meshed with a story he concocted post game to boost his ego. He exited the facility that day with a co-worker who recalled him commenting on how they could or should have easily taped the walkthrough. The commissioner has also spoken to the Rams likely to ascertain what team filming if any they did that day. Perhaps they ran their cameras and left a tape behind, or even inadvertently used a pre set camera that was not theirs but ours. The kind of charmed existence Walsh has always led it's entirely possible something fell into his lap.

At the end of the day if your ass is on the line who do you rationally/logically think folks should believe - the entire Patriots FO and staff speaking without any indemnity or a guy who has embellished much of his life who got kicked off his college golf team for executing a vindictive and potentially seriously harmful prank on his own roomate, who got fired for illegally audiotaping an apparent evaluation meeting with his boss, who lied to the media who asked him to show them some evidence to back up his allegations by claiming to have been bound by a confidentiality agreement that never existed, and who now admittedly is in posession of quantities of property solen from that organization over the entire term of his employment which necessitated his securing indemnity before he would finally speak to the matter or produce items of potential interest in an investigation that were only in his possession illegally?

I'm sorry, but if this guy were a Bill's employee you'd be here insisting he was some sort of whacko sociopath with a vendetta against your team who has zero credibility on balance. Which is why IF he does have any tape that he continues to alledge is of a walkthough he was instructed to tape by someone on the NEP, he's gonna have to reasonably prove that was the case. The team has already verified that everything else he has is their property that he had stolen - they did that when they admitted to taping prior to 2006 and dating back to 2000 before anyone knew that Walsh claimed to have additional tapes of coaches signals in his possession. He likely has tape of our practices, of players we were scouting, of signals we were taping - why does he have those? Because he collects memorabelia even if he has to steal it. That is who and what Matt Walsh is. He's not some heroic whistle blower, he's an obcessive little whacko.

 

[Tbrady12to88]

That's because most newspapers are going with variants of the AP story; they're not going to bother writing their own.

I understand that my point is most of them are choosing to emphasize the additional penalty possibility as opposed to the fact that the penalties only happen IF Falsh has a walk through tape and IF Roger believes the tape was authorized by the team.

This whole thing stinks like 10 day old garbage in the sun. Me thinks we're about to get screwed a 2nd time for nothing of any significance.

 

[NE39]

The paranoia is running rampant here. Nobody knows what Walsh is going to say or have, so people are conjecturing based on quotes from the Commissioner or hypothetical scenarios. Why worry? The Pats seem pretty certain they will be OK, and an agreement in in place. Let's wait to see what happens.

As for the tapes, Goodell said there were only 6 tapes because they were taped over. That is why none of the tapes covered anything prior to 2006, despite Belichick admitting the practice went back to 2000. It really wasn't useful to keep the stuff long-term. They would make a tape, review it and take notes, and then move on. It is like stuff on your DVR, you only keep it too watch it and then you move on to the next show.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Here's how I see it:

A. Walsh has a tape of the Walkthrough.
Probability: less than one percent
Impact if true: disaster. Specter holds hearings. The Pats SB era and Dynasty is discredited across the board. Goodell is pressured to ask for a return of the XXXVI Lombardi. Belichick is finished.

B. Walsh has written or taped evidence, other than of the Walkthrough, that Belichick and the Patriots have not been truthful with the NFL or media about the extent of their taping or other rules violations.
Probability: less than five percent
Impact if true: really bad. Probably the end of his career for Belichick. Big fines for the franchise. Survivable for the team, but the story will linger for years. Specter holds hearings.

C. Walsh has written or taped evidence of activities that the Patriots have already admitted.
Probability: around 25 percent
Impact if True: A long wave of embarassing and biased media reports followed by a sensational book, but no further fines or penalties. Fans and objective media members say "it's over," Haters say, "I told you so." Specter holds a press conference with Walsh, threatens to hold hearings, but then moves on to other topics.

D. Walsh has no written or taped evidence of anything, but tells unsubstantiatable stories of alleged misdeeds by the Patriots.
Probability: around 70 percent
Impact if true: Haters will believe him. Fans will want to sue him. Objective observers will say, "Spygate is over." No hearings by Specter.

E. Walsh steps up and says the whole thing was a big misunderstanding and that he has no proof or allegations to provide, "Sorry, my bad."
Probability: less than one percent
Impact if true: if you believe this scenario, please see me about a Bridge in Brooklyn that I can sell you real cheap if you act right away!