Tweet
There's SOMETHING here, that can not be denied.
No one has yet to answer my question......why were they taping at the Packer game Nov. 2006?
No one has yet to answer my question......why were they taping at the Packer game Nov. 2006?
-
-
It's feasible to believe that every game from 2000 through 2006 they could have pulled this taping technique. However, this cannot be the case for this 2007 season, they were busted immediately during the first game, we all know the rest.Originally posted by packinpatlandComment
-
Because if they never gave up ALL of the information on ALL of the games that they taped last season (6 tapes? For 8 years of taping? Come ON) then they would still have an advantage especially if they had already started learning the signals for the following weeks (you know, the ones with the blowouts) My bet is they gave up a few of the tapes from the teams they thought they could blow out anyway and the rest are in Tom Brady's basement or something. It's not like the FBI came in and took evidence out, they ASKED for the tapes and trusted (Originally posted by twoseven
) Belichick to hand over all he had. You can't say it's not possible...
"Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
And we're supposed to believe they only had one copy of each team they taped, and they turned them all into Goodell...........all six of them.
Odd math.Comment
-
After illegally taping opponents over an 8 year period, the way that would have been put into effect would be that the information gleaned from tape would have been transcribed to a "cheat sheet" for the booth coaches to refer to during games. To my knowledge, these weren't turned in, nor were the Patriots' IT systems wiped clean that such information would have been undoubtedly stored on.... The fact taht they turned in a few tapes means nothing to their ability to use the information they gleaned from them over the years.Originally posted by twosevenComment
-
All I know is the entire world saw them get busted in game one. Everybody knew what they were doing with the tapes at that point and they were being watched like hawks. Are you telling me the teams they played from then on after realizing signals were stolen WOULD NOT change their signals? How smart is that? Any team that uses signals, codes, etc. can change them in a heartbeat if they feel they have been compromised, how is this situation any different?Originally posted by MJZiggyBecause if they never gave up ALL of the information on ALL of the games that they taped last season (6 tapes? For 8 years of taping? Come ON) then they would still have an advantage especially if they had already started learning the signals for the following weeks (you know, the ones with the blowouts) My bet is they gave up a few of the tapes from the teams they thought they could blow out anyway and the rest are in Tom Brady's basement or something. It's not like the FBI came in and took evidence out, they ASKED for the tapes and trusted (Originally posted by twoseven ) Belichick to hand over all he had. You can't say it's not possible...Comment
-
I can just see Bretsky and Bulldog (and possibly a few others) rolling their eyes......'Leave it alone, drop it!' they're saying...
Well you know, how many other fans, in recent history, go this far to 'bi*tch about their loss?
Comment
-
That's why I'm saying that their advantage seemed to suffer as the season went on. I mean look at the massive "FU" blowouts they had at the beginning of the season and then by the end, they were barely winning games. Maybe some of the teams had assumed that Goodell had handled it and we heard that tapes were confiscated with notes, but I don't recall when we found out that there were only 6 of them.Originally posted by twosevenAll I know is the entire world saw them get busted in game one. Everybody knew what they were doing with the tapes at that point and they were being watched like hawks. Are you telling me the teams they played from then on after realizing signals were stolen WOULD NOT change their signals? How smart is that? Any team that uses signals, codes, etc. can change them in a heartbeat if they feel they have been compromised, how is this situation any different?Originally posted by MJZiggyBecause if they never gave up ALL of the information on ALL of the games that they taped last season (6 tapes? For 8 years of taping? Come ON) then they would still have an advantage especially if they had already started learning the signals for the following weeks (you know, the ones with the blowouts) My bet is they gave up a few of the tapes from the teams they thought they could blow out anyway and the rest are in Tom Brady's basement or something. It's not like the FBI came in and took evidence out, they ASKED for the tapes and trusted (Originally posted by twoseven ) Belichick to hand over all he had. You can't say it's not possible..."Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
Huh? If what they got were signals, which team that they played after they were busted didn't change their signals????Originally posted by MJZiggyThat's why I'm saying that their advantage seemed to suffer as the season went on. I mean look at the massive "FU" blowouts they had at the beginning of the season and then by the end, they were barely winning games. Maybe some of the teams had assumed that Goodell had handled it and we heard that tapes were confiscated with notes, but I don't recall when we found out that there were only 6 of them.Originally posted by twosevenAll I know is the entire world saw them get busted in game one. Everybody knew what they were doing with the tapes at that point and they were being watched like hawks. Are you telling me the teams they played from then on after realizing signals were stolen WOULD NOT change their signals? How smart is that? Any team that uses signals, codes, etc. can change them in a heartbeat if they feel they have been compromised, how is this situation any different?Originally posted by MJZiggyBecause if they never gave up ALL of the information on ALL of the games that they taped last season (6 tapes? For 8 years of taping? Come ON) then they would still have an advantage especially if they had already started learning the signals for the following weeks (you know, the ones with the blowouts) My bet is they gave up a few of the tapes from the teams they thought they could blow out anyway and the rest are in Tom Brady's basement or something. It's not like the FBI came in and took evidence out, they ASKED for the tapes and trusted (Originally posted by twoseven ) Belichick to hand over all he had. You can't say it's not possible...
Are you suggesting the blowouts were because the teams they played didn't change their signals? Why wouldn't they?
Here's an idea, they blew teams out because they were a very good team and then they added Moss, Welker, Stallworth, and Adaelius Thomas. Then they were an amazing lineup playing not such good teams for a lot of 07'. Which Juggurnauts did they destroy early on? Teams tend to slow at the end of the year because the teams they play have 10-15 different game films from the same year to analyze and prepare from. The Giants got to study 15 games before they lined up against the Pats and kept it close, then they got two more from the playoffs to work from for the SB. The conspiracy theory for 2007 is getting silly.Comment
-
This is getting more interesting by the minute.
*
Matt Walsh's lawyer asks NFL to protect his client on Spygate tapesAssociated Press
NEW YORK -- The lawyer for former New England Patriots employee Matt Walsh said his client is willing to turn over videotapes he made for the team if the NFL guarantees Walsh protection from lawsuits or other legal action.
Attorney Michael Levy said that to date, the NFL's initial proposals are not sufficient protection for Walsh, who is said to have taped the St. Louis Rams' walkthrough practice the day before they played the Patriots in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won. 20-17.
Rooney: Pats' taping vs. Steelers a 'non-issue'
The New England Patriots' taping of opposing coaches' signals did not affect the outcome of games against the Steelers, including two AFC Championship games, Steelers chairman Dan Rooney said.
"We consider the tapes of our coaching staff during our games against the New England Patriots to be a non-issue," Rooney said in a statement. "In our opinion, they had no impact on the results of those games."
Rooney's comments were fueled by remarks Thursday by U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who has questioned whether the NFL has properly handled allegations that Patriots coach Bill Belichick had assistants videotape opponents' signals. More ... "The NFL's proposal is not full indemnification," Levy told The Associated Press Friday in a telephone interview from his office at the Washington law firm of McKee Nelson.
"It is highly conditional and still leaves Mr. Walsh vulnerable. I have asked the NFL to provide Mr. Walsh with the necessary legal protections so that he can come forward with the truth without fear of retaliation and litigation. To best serve the interest of the public and everyone involved, I am hopeful that the NFL will do so promptly."
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has said he's offered Walsh a deal whereby "he has to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly" in return for indemnity.
"No one wants to talk to Matt Walsh more than we do," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Friday.
"But his demand to be released from all responsibility even if his comments are not truthful is unprecedented and unreasonable. The NFL and the Patriots have assured Mr. Walsh's lawyer that there will be no adverse consequences for his client if Mr. Walsh truthfully shares what he knows. Why does he need any more protection than that?"
Walsh, now a golf pro in Maui, did video work for the Patriots when they won the first of their three Super Bowl after the 2001 season.
Goodell said Walsh was not interviewed as part of the NFL's investigation into "Spygate," which involved the NFL confiscating tapes from a Patriots employee who recorded the New York Jets' defensive signals from the sideline during the opening game of the 2007 season.
As a result of that investigation, New England coach Bill Belichick was fined $500,000 and the team was fined $250,000 and forfeited its 2008 first-round draft choice.
Six confiscated tapes and other documents pertaining to the Patriots' taping were subsequently destroyed by the league. Goodell has defended the destruction of the tapes.
Levy, who is continuing to negotiate with the NFL on Walsh's behalf, also objected to NFL security's investigation of his client.
"Sending a former FBI agent to investigate his professional and personal life has not left Mr. Walsh feeling confident that the National Football League simply wants to encourage him to come forward with whatever information he has," Levy said.
Goodell met this week with Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter and disclosed for the first time that the taping may have gone back to 2000, when Belichick first became coach of the Patriots. The commissioner said Belichick told him in their meeting last September that he believed the taping was legal. "We agreed to disagree," the commissioner said.
Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary committee, said after the meeting that he would continue to investigate the taping episodes. He has said he also would like to speak with Walsh.
Goodell said he could reopen the investigation.
"If there is new information that is credible, new material that could be credible that would help us, yes, we'll look at it," he said.
But Eric Holder, a partner in Covington & Burling, the NFL's outside law firm, suggested the NFL might remain reluctant to meet Walsh's current terms.
"No responsible investigator would offer blanket immunity to a potential witness without a commitment that the witness will be truthful," Holder said. "Any witness who refuses to make that commitment doesn't deserve immunityComment
-
And this:
Lawsuit seeks compensation for Super Bowl loss
Associated Press
NEW ORLEANS -- A lawsuit filed Friday by a former St. Louis Rams player and others seeks millions of dollars in damages from the alleged taping of Rams practices by the New England Patriots before the 2002 Super Bowl.
The Patriots won the game 20-17 in the Superdome.
The $100 million suit, filed on behalf of former Rams player Willie Gary in U.S. District Court in New Orleans, names the Patriots, team owner Robert Kraft and head coach Bill Belichick.
Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights ReservedComment
-
If they were so damn good, why did they feel they needed to cheat?Originally posted by twosevenHuh? If what they got were signals, which team that they played after they were busted didn't change their signals????Originally posted by MJZiggyThat's why I'm saying that their advantage seemed to suffer as the season went on. I mean look at the massive "FU" blowouts they had at the beginning of the season and then by the end, they were barely winning games. Maybe some of the teams had assumed that Goodell had handled it and we heard that tapes were confiscated with notes, but I don't recall when we found out that there were only 6 of them.Originally posted by twosevenAll I know is the entire world saw them get busted in game one. Everybody knew what they were doing with the tapes at that point and they were being watched like hawks. Are you telling me the teams they played from then on after realizing signals were stolen WOULD NOT change their signals? How smart is that? Any team that uses signals, codes, etc. can change them in a heartbeat if they feel they have been compromised, how is this situation any different?Originally posted by MJZiggyBecause if they never gave up ALL of the information on ALL of the games that they taped last season (6 tapes? For 8 years of taping? Come ON) then they would still have an advantage especially if they had already started learning the signals for the following weeks (you know, the ones with the blowouts) My bet is they gave up a few of the tapes from the teams they thought they could blow out anyway and the rest are in Tom Brady's basement or something. It's not like the FBI came in and took evidence out, they ASKED for the tapes and trusted (Originally posted by twoseven ) Belichick to hand over all he had. You can't say it's not possible...
Are you suggesting the blowouts were because the teams they played didn't change their signals? Why wouldn't they?
Here's an idea, they blew teams out because they were a very good team and then they added Moss, Welker, Stallworth, and Adaelius Thomas. Then they were an amazing lineup playing not such good teams for a lot of 07'. Which Juggurnauts did they destroy early on? Teams tend to slow at the end of the year because the teams they play have 10-15 different game films from the same year to analyze and prepare from. The Giants got to study 15 games before they lined up against the Pats and kept it close, then they got two more from the playoffs to work from for the SB. The conspiracy theory for 2007 is getting silly."Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
"If they were so damn good, why did they feel they needed to cheat?"
MJ, I'm starting to think we may be the only ones on this site thinking along these lines.............
Comment
-
Could be. I just saw an interesting pattern and wondered about it. How long have I been pondering things this way? Maybe I need to wonder in a different colored font or something...
"Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
He didn't do anything wrong, it was just mistake.....a simple mistake.
Belichick accepts punishment, responsibility
Associated Press
Updated: September 14, 2007, 12:16 AM ET
Text of the statement from New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick after he was fined $500,000 for stealing an opponent's signals:
"I accept full responsibility for the actions that led to tonight's ruling. Once again, I apologize to the Kraft family and every person directly or indirectly associated with the New England Patriots for the embarrassment, distraction and penalty my mistake caused. I also apologize to Patriots fans and would like to thank them for their support during the past few days and throughout my career.
As the commissioner acknowledged, our use of sideline video had no impact on the outcome of last week's game. We have never used sideline video to obtain a competitive advantage while the game was in progress.
Part of my job as head coach is to ensure that our football operations are conducted in compliance of the league rules and all accepted interpretations of them. My interpretation of a rule in the Constitution and Bylaws was incorrect.
With tonight's resolution, I will not be offering any further comments on this matter. We are moving on with our preparations for Sunday's game."
Copyright 2007 by The Associated PressComment
Comment