Kentucky attorney sues NFL over Spygate

[RashanGary]

They got caught on play 5 of game one versus the Jets, how did they gain an advantage THIS season?

Are you really this stupid or have you just not read anything about how this illegal taping was used.

They would take tape of teams, study their hand signals and then the next time they played, they would use their own signals against them. If they had Jimmy Johnsons signals from Philly, they would keep that in their bank for years as DC's don't typically change their language. Do you change your language? No, people use what they know.

NE will still be able to use the info that Brady has in his head for years. Just by knowing the signal for MLB blitz in the A gap, Brady can pick that up from several defenses for the rest of his career.

And yes, they probably changed many signals after busting NE, but it's very hard to change the whole way defense is conveyed from the coach to the field in a short amount of time. Some signals have always been used and probably still will be used by many.

And even when teams got to NE, there is probably some priority to trying to win week to week instead of changing the entire way you communicate all season for your week 7 matchup against shady Brady and bellicheat.

Talking to you is like watching someone try to clap one hand or sitting in a car while someone takes 4 left turns to go straight. Funny, sad and frustrating all at the same time.

[Bretsky]

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?

Marketing propaganda for free agents explaining how their goal is to kick the creap out of every team and this is how it's done ?

[packinpatland]

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?

Marketing propaganda for free agents explaining how their goal is to kick the creap out of every team and this is how it's done ?

That's as good a reason as any.

[packinpatland]

I love it......
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ets/index.html

• "If the Patriots routinely video-taped their opponents' signals dating from the start of New England's Bill Belichick era in 2000, with Belichick maintaining to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell that he thought such practices were legal, what, pray tell, did the Pats head coach think that memo the league sent out Sept. 6, 2006, was all about?

You know the one I'm talking about. In it, the NFL's executive vice president of football operations, Ray Anderson, stated rather flatly that "Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.''

Not a lot of wiggle room there, is there? If Belichick read that and still thought he could make his case for the legality of his team's taping, he probably thought Roger Clemens came off as utterly convincing in this week's congressional hearing."

[vince]

There is always a greasy lawyer/extortionist who will shameleesly pounce on any situation for money and publicity. They are disgusting parasites.

Fraud, racketeering, breach of contract, violation of Louisiana’s unfair trade practices and consumer protection act...

I'm pretty sure I know which side I'd label as greasy and disgusting, and it ain't the group of fans - or their representatives - who paid $30 million for something about which it now appears they were duped.

[vince]

This is getting more interesting by the minute.
*

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d806b4ea7&template=without-video&confirm=true

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 immunity

Here's the counter to the nfl spun article above...

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

WALSH HAS TAPES

For the first time since the football world was introduced to the name Matt Walsh, it is now obvious that Walsh has something that has made him sufficiently scared to get lawyered up -- and then to clam up.

His lawyer, Michael Levy, told Dave Goldberg of the Associated Press that Walsh has videotapes. Tapes that he made.

And we assume that they aren't bootleg copies of Death Blow and Cry, Cry Again.

Levy told Goldberg that Walsh will turn over the tapes if he receives sufficient protection from potential lawsuits or other legal actions.

"The NFL's proposal is not full indemnification," Levy said. "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."

The deal offered by the league requires Walsh to "tell the truth" and surrender anything that he took "improperly."

"No one wants to talk to Matt Walsh more than we do," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told the AP on 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?"

Here's why. Because if Walsh says, for example, that he personally taped the Rams' final walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI, the league and/or the Patriots will claim that he hasn't told the truth. And thus he'll be exposed to litigation for violating his confidentiality agreement.

So Walsh's reasonable concern is that he'll be protected only if he says what the league and/or the Patriots want to hear him say.

Complicating Walsh's ability to achieve a sense of comfort in this regard is the news that the league has been doing some digging about him. "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 told the AP.

In our view, Walsh needs to have an opportunity to say what he knows without fear that he'll be immediately called a liar -- and then sued.

Finally, and as we've noted a couple of times in the past, why don't the Patriots merely release Walsh from his confidentiality agreement? If the team is confident in its position and secure in the notion that it has done nothing wrong (other than, you know, the stuff to which it already has admitted), then there should be no issue. By not providing Walsh with a vehicle for speaking absent fear of litigation against the blue-suited sharks from Covington & Burling, the league and the Patriots risk creating the perception that they're trying to keep the truth from coming out.

[twoseven]

They got caught on play 5 of game one versus the Jets, how did they gain an advantage THIS season?

Are you really this stupid or have you just not read anything about how this illegal taping was used.

They would take tape of teams, study their hand signals and then the next time they played, they would use their own signals against them. If they had Jimmy Johnsons signals from Philly, they would keep that in their bank for years as DC's don't typically change their language. Do you change your language? No, people use what they know.

NE will still be able to use the info that Brady has in his head for years. Just by knowing the signal for MLB blitz in the A gap, Brady can pick that up from several defenses for the rest of his career.

And yes, they probably changed many signals after busting NE, but it's very hard to change the whole way defense is conveyed from the coach to the field in a short amount of time. Some signals have always been used and probably still will be used by many.

And even when teams got to NE, there is probably some priority to trying to win week to week instead of changing the entire way you communicate all season for your week 7 matchup against shady Brady and bellicheat.

Talking to you is like watching someone try to clap one hand or sitting in a car while someone takes 4 left turns to go straight. Funny, sad and frustrating all at the same time.

..guilty, you got me. (and I also don't spell opportunistic with an E)

First of all, at this point why don't we lose the namecalling and gradeschool banter, eh Justin? You are obviously a passionate fan, as am I, but this little thing you are seeming to intensify with me the last few days is starting to get on my fucking nerves. If I wanted cowardly namecalling from behind the annonimity of a nickname and a computer screen I would go back to the JSO forum. I do expect a little more over here, and I apologize if I am not keeping up my end of it. I really don't see a reason why you can't make your point without calling me 'stupid.' Clean it up. Make your point without attempting to belittle me personally. Lose the insults, as will I in regards to the insulting things I have said to you. Consider that an Olive branch.

Every team in the NFL knew exactly what had been going on with BB after the first game of the 2007 season. ESPN and every other sports media detailed in depth how their video could be used. The next team on their schedule had at least a full week to make necessary changes knowing full well their signals may have been compromised. The team after that had two weeks to prepare, and so on. But, you insist that none of them would actually do anything about it? That refusal to act is knowingly lowers your chance to succeed. No team would ever make themselves so vulnerable as to not be able to change something if it was being recognized, and IT WAS RECOGNIZED BY THE ENTIRE NFL! You call me 'stupid' for not understanding how the tapes were used. What are you calling the defensive coordinators that had the Pats on their schedule AFTER the Jets game that knew exactly what the Pats were doing and still did nothing about it?

Sure, DCs could keep the same signals sometimes for years and might not change them BECAUSE THE OTHER TEAMS DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE. Players also change teams all the time. Why wouldn't it be so simple as to just get all the signals THAT NEVER CHANGE from them?

It seems the ONE thing that the sportsmedia, the entire NFL, and it's personnel seemed to agree on AFTER THE PATS WERE CAUGHT during game one, was the remainder of 2007 would be LEGIT because everyone knew their secret and could adjust. I already conceded that every game from 2000-2006 is fair game for the cheating, BECAUSE THEY HADN'T BEEN CAUGHT YET. I absolutely will not subscribe to this theory for 2007.

[Bretsky]

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?

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/...0-of-super-bo/

Ah, just saw this; to be honest I use to eyeroll before the obsession began but now I just stop reading some threads unless I'm really bored (which now would be that time). Not sure about Bull. Bull is a Tom Brady Fan; not sure how much he liked NE the team. I've listed NE as one of my 5 favorite teams but I'm not a fanatic about them like I am Green Bay.

[packinpatland]

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?

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/...0-of-super-bo/

Ah, just saw this; to be honest I use to eyeroll before the obsession began but now I just stop reading some threads unless I'm really bored (which now would be that time). Not sure about Bull. Bull is a Tom Brady Fan; not sure how much he liked NE the team. I've listed NE as one of my 5 favorite teams but I'm not a fanatic about them like I am Green Bay.

So we can safely assume your name isn't on the petition?

[Bretsky]

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?

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/...0-of-super-bo/

Ah, just saw this; to be honest I use to eyeroll before the obsession began but now I just stop reading some threads unless I'm really bored (which now would be that time). Not sure about Bull. Bull is a Tom Brady Fan; not sure how much he liked NE the team. I've listed NE as one of my 5 favorite teams but I'm not a fanatic about them like I am Green Bay.

So we can safely assume your name isn't on the petition?

You can safely assume I didn't take the time to know what it was

[RashanGary]

Advice for you..instead of taking three left turns, just drive straight, it's faster and doesn't drive everyone in your car insane.

Talking to you is like clapping with one hand..

twoseven, I repeated the insults you tossed at me in another thread to show you how it feels to have someone take a disagreement and turn it into a personal attack. I hoped you would realize it's not worth the fight, but obviously I was wrong. It seems pretty clear that you want to play this game of distortion the same way you've been playing it since our last disagreement.

As far as the rest of your post, I'll just take that olive branch and agree to disagree with you on whatever opinions you have. Well, that and I got tired of reading it so I just stopped.

[twoseven]

twoseven, I repeated the insults you tossed at me in another thread to show you how it feels to have someone take a disagreement and turn it into a personal attack. I hoped you would realize it's not worth the fight, but obviously I was wrong. It seems pretty clear that you want to play this game of distortion the same way you've been playing it since our last disagreement.

And you added one of your own..

Are you really this stupid or have you just not read anything about how this illegal taping was used.

We've both contributed to this waste of space, I have had my fill, and I wanted to squash this thing with you. I made a point to apologize if I am not acting appropriate here at the Rats Forum, asked that we could focus on making our points without the uneeded insults, and told you I will stop throwing insults at you. Your interpretation of what I said and your response seems to suggest that I am still messing with you in some way? I don't get it. You're giving me the impression that you enjoy arguing. No thanks. As simply as I can type it, JH, I am sorry for anything I have said to offend you. I am not sure how that can be misunderstood. If you don't want accept it for what it is, an apology, that's not my problem.

[packinpatland]

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?

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/...0-of-super-bo/

Ah, just saw this; to be honest I use to eyeroll before the obsession began but now I just stop reading some threads unless I'm really bored (which now would be that time). Not sure about Bull. Bull is a Tom Brady Fan; not sure how much he liked NE the team. I've listed NE as one of my 5 favorite teams but I'm not a fanatic about them like I am Green Bay.

I understand your pain B.........(tee hee). It's hard when the 'gods' fall.

[the_idle_threat]

Now come the frivolous lawsuits. If this doesn't underscore how overblown and stupid this whole "scandal" is, then there's no hope for you.

From comments on this thread and others, I can see that some fall into that category. Carry on with your lynch mob.

[packinpatland]

Now come the frivolous lawsuits. If this doesn't underscore how overblown and stupid this whole "scandal" is, then there's no hope for you.

From comments on this thread and others, I can see that some fall into that category. Carry on with your lynch mob.

I'll kick the horse, or chair, or........