Because he lied to a reporter.
Then he tried to avoid the NFL to save face.
Now the truth has come out and he denies ever making the statement to the reporter of having a Rams walkthrough.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.


There was never said tape. Belichick was adamant about it.
Belichick never denied taping signals. He thought he found a "loophole" in the rule. "for use during that game".
Belichick wouldn't have a leg to stand on if he authorized taping of a teams practice / walkthrough.
He may be dumb but he's not an idiot.

A chisled 68!!!

How long till Arlen Specter croaks? What a douche bag.

Isn't stealing offensive signals the same as stealing defensive signals?
The only difference is that usually an offense uses electronics to send in signals.
(I'm not sure why offensive hand signals would be necessary)
The Patriots already paid the price for that non-loophole of Belichicks.
The only thing that changes anything here would be a tape of another teams practice.

Depends on how they want to look at it.

Sorry, but Mike Fish is an idiot with an ax to grind. When Belicheat met with Goodall, he told him of the practice of taping since 2000 of defensive and offensive signals. Fish apparently missed this part and is now is trying to make a big deal about taping offensive signals. Yeah, thanks for the breaking news Fish

Idiot

Obviously a lot of fans around the NFL feel cheated by Spygate (as they should). And I think most agree that there had to have been some benefit to the Pats or else why continue to do it. The glaring question is how much of a benefit and I don't think that we'll ever know the answer to that (* my opinion below).

But one glaring omission from all the news coverage is what other players and coaches have to say. Sure there were a few tidbits here and there of Warner and others from Phili who felt they possibly got cheated in the SB, but why no coverage of Rooney saying that what the Pats taped of the Steelers (2x, regular season and playoffs) was no big deal, that they wouldn't have learned anything from doing so. Obviously the media wants to keep this story going, but why no outrage from MIA, BUF, PIT, etc? I know the tin-foil hat wearers are going to say Goodell told them to stand down, but that's crap IMO. Up until Spygate everyone loved how Goodell was running the ship with an iron fist, now because of the questionable destruction of the tapes (more iron fist action) he's a master puppeteer working behind the scenes. Nope, not buying it.

IMO the reason other teams aren't making a stink about it is because no one wants the light shined on them. A lot of former players and coaches have all said each team tries to find an advantage and some bend the rules (Note: I'm not saying other teams cheat, like the Pats did) and they all know this practice is going on. Why else would you have 2 coaches send in dummy defensive hand signals, why else would coaches cover their mouths with their play sheet. Now I don't know how much Rooney would actually know about how valuable or not the taping of the Steelers would be, but he certainly has a better idea than the rest of us. So as I said at the beginning we'll never know for sure how much of a benefit the taping was, but based on what Rooney said, it doesn't seem like much.

And just to be clear, yes the Patriots cheated. Belicheat crossed the line. They were punished. This is not a post excusing that. I'm just wonde ring out loud why other teams aren't as outraged over this as the fans are.

Remote "Scoop" Controller - I want a full page spread on this by the end of the week to run in the Sunday SO Times.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

* My take is this. Belicheat is a film junky. And he would film and dissect two years of tape if it would find him one trend/tendency from another team. So I don't think that each necessarily gave him a benefit. But it's like playing scratch lottery tickets, you keep playing and playing until one finally pays off. The Pats recorded and recorded until one finally paid off. Just my take :

I can agree with the film junkie thing, and I know where you stand on this. I think you know where I stand. This was basically posted as a joke on myself, and an attempt to keep my pic on the first page. This post was a non-story, and just the first thing I could find to antagonize the hardcore denyers. In this whole spygate thing, I always felt the two teams that had the biggest reason to raise a stink were the Steelers and the Eagles, and they have just gnawed on the edges of the whole controversy.

Did Matt Walsh ever claim to have the Rams walk through? I have yet to see any evidence of this - perhaps you could provide a link?

The sports media did not do a good job of covering this obviously, and when the rumors were swirling that the Pats taped the walk through they assumed Matt Walsh (who claimed he had more spygate material) must be the guy that has it. But when did Walsh ever say he had the Rams walk through in HIS possession? I'm curious to find out if / when that ever happened.

This is one of the best articles i have read about this.

FOX Sports on MSN - NFL -

Agreed.

You've got to love the smoke gun turning out to be softcore of the SD cheerleaders. Way to demand the truth Arlin... lol.

I like the take that everyone lost in this, and I believe MOJO's take that this was totally mishandled by Goodell. I think that BB should have been handled much rougher, and would have been if it wasn't for Goodell's relationship with Kraft. Alot of losers in this but the NFL was the biggest!

I agree about the everyone lost part of it, but I strongly disagree that Goodell totally mishandled this. Ask yourself this, if Goodell released the tapes turned over by the Pats to the media and therefore to the fans and then destroyed them, would there be such an outcry. No. Why do fans feel entitled to see the tapes? Hypothetically assume he did, would that now have been handled appropriately? If yes, what's the difference if the fans see the tapes or not. Why is that the difference between handled and mishandled? Again, I go back to entitlement. If no, what else could/should Goodell have done differently? As I posted before, everyone loved Goodell's iron fist approach up until Spygate, but just because he didn't release the tapes to the public now he's a bumbling douche.

As far as the conspiracy with Goodell/Kraft... do you think Goodell would risk alienating the other 31 owners by showing favoritism with one. Sorry, that makes no sense.

Face it the only ones crying foul in this whole thing now are the fans of the other 31 teams, the media still to some extent and one senator, who happens to be an Eagle fan. Are ANY of the other 31 teams making a stink? No. And that speaks volumes right there.

I never thought they should have been turned over to be viewed by the fans, but to hurry up and destroy them was a mistake that still wreaks of cover up. It was a total fuck up on his part. Why not let the group of coaches and owners that form the rules committee see them? I never thought the punishment fit the crime, and it under cut everything Goodell has tried to accomplishment. I honestly feel he should be fired, and BB suspended for this current year on top of the other fines........minimum. I also feel that Kraft should still fire him, for he continues to taint a great organization. BB badly damaged this franchise in the public eye, and in all future HOF considerations for all the players involved in his era. They will get in, and likely deserve it on merit, but everyone of them, along with the Coach, and this current dynasty, will be marked with the spygate brand. That is what is sad.

Face it, they really didn't have to say a thing to this point as it was being looked at and said for them. Also realize that it is awful hard to speak up against your employer, and if you don't think the NFL wanted teams to fall in line ,I don't think you get the nature of Pro Sports. They are a dictatorship. Look what happens when you where the wrong label, or break any rule. Like they really have the ability to bitch. Goodell botched this and it will stain him as well. He will never escape this.

I actually do like discussing this topic with you and I do agree about the black mark on the Pats players/coaches/owner. You also make a good point about having the rules committee review the tapes before he destroyed them (honestly I hadn't thought about that angle). I also agree, though not to the level you believe, that the NFL wants everyone to tow the company line. But you have to agree that there are maverick owners (Al Davis for example) who will always speak their mind, and none have on this topic. My belief is that they don't want to open a can of worms. Better to have the light on the Pats and not themselves.

You and I know where we each stand and I don't think we'll change each others minds anytime soon, but I just don't understand why you want BB punished so much more than he was. You'd agree that the punishment should fit the crime. And we know BB cheated; thought he found a loophole and got caught. But surely there are different punishments based not on the cheating itself but based on the level/extent of cheating or based on the benefit of the results of cheating. We can all speculate how much the taping helped the Pats (I posted my views on this already) but what you have in mind for BB's suspension is as if he fixed the outcome of games. Sure the taping must have helped at some point, or why do it, but I don't think anyone is saying it guaranteed the outcome of a game. And I think you stated before (correct me if I'm wrong) it wasn't just the cheating, but that you felt he snubbed his nose at the NFL and commish by continuing the practice after the memo, hence the desire for a stiffer penalty.

So what about all the others in the NFL that are bending the rules. Surely Andy Reid doesn't just cover his mouth with his play sheet only when he plays the Pats. Is every coach in the NFL just paranoid or do they all know what's going on. It certainly doesn't excuse what the Pats did nor am I accusing any other team/coach of what the Pats did. But for all those that want to string up BB, why no outcry for cleaning up the NFL as a whole? Because there are certainly other things going on that would test the integrity of the game. Why else would there be coaches sending in dummy hand signals and such.

There was no way the NFL should have made the tapes public.
Wouldn't that be ironic... they penalize the Patriots for having tapes of other teams signals...
then show those same "secret" signals (that they didn't want taped) to the whole world, including the other 31 teams... to view... and disect... and decipher.
Obviously the commishioner destroyed the tapes to protect the teams that had been filmed.

The story has been archived. This is all that is left: Source: Pats employee filmed Rams - BostonHerald.com
I can tell you that it was in the Boston Herald, written by John Tomase.

The story broke 2 days before the SB and Goodell and your beloved Eagles loving senator have been trying to hook up with "hey, look at ME!" Walsh ever since. If Walsh wasn't the guy then I'm not sure why they wanted him so bad.
Did you think they were after more tapes of the same stuff?

And lastly, most importantly, why in hell would "they never should have fired me" Walsh wait so long to deny that he had tape of the Rams walkthrough. He knew that's what Goodell was after.
If he didn't have it then why not say so and put this whole thing to bed as soon as the story broke?
Walsh is nothing more than a disgruntled ex-employee looking for attention, money (book deal?), and / or payback.