Ex-Pats employee Walsh sends NFL video of Pats' taping

[pakowitz]

After brokering a deal to protect himself, former New England Patriots employee Matt Walsh has finally turned over his evidence in the videotaping controversy.

The New York Times reported and the NFL confirmed on Wednesday that Walsh sent eight tapes to the league that show the Patriots recording the play-calling signals of five opponents in six games between 2000 and 2002.

Taping the signals of opposing teams is prohibited by league rules, and the Patriots were already fined $750,000 and docked a first-round draft choice in September for taping the New York Jets. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell left open the possibility that more penalties could be levied.

A Patriots employee from 1997-2003, Walsh reached an agreement to turn over the tapes in exchange for being indemnified from all future legal fees.

The New York Times obtained a list of the Walsh tapes, and the league confirmed that list, which says that the Patriots taped offensive and defensive coaches in regular-season games against the Miami Dolphins, Buffalo Bills, Cleveland Browns and San Diego Chargers. The team also made video of the Pittsburgh Steelers in the 2002 AFC Championship Game.

Walsh's tapes do not include the video of the St. Louis Rams' walkthrough before the 2002 Super Bowl, as reported by the Boston Herald.

"Mr. Walsh has never claimed to have a tape of the walk-through," said Walsh's lawyer Michael Levy, according to the Times. "Mr. Walsh has never been the source of any of the media speculation about such a tape. Mr. Walsh was not the source for the Feb. 2 Boston Herald article."

Walsh has separate meetings scheduled on Tuesday with the commissioner and Senator Arlen Specter in which he is expected to provide additional details about the taping process.

Under his agreement with the league, Walsh can retain copies of his videotapes, but he cannot use them without the consent of the NFL.

[ssmitty]

The New York Times > Log In

[hagan714]

The problem is this

“We consider the tapes of our coaching staff during our games against the New England Patriots to be a nonissue,” the Steelers chairman, Dan Rooney, said in a statement released in February.

Rooney is not the only owner to come out and say this is a non issue. Thats the problem. The wagons are circled and the owners are together on this. The Jets love affair has been a bitter one for a long time. Stealing players and coaches for years from one another. But 1 team does not make this a gigantic issue at the round table.

[LordOfEntropy]

League rules are league rules - whether some of the owners don't care much about it is irrelevant.

I ask the NFL this question.... If you can't follow your own rules, then what's the point of having any rules at all?

[CantonLegend]

i think that it is more widespread....i think every team has a few tapes of signals...am i alone in this assessment?....i am not sure how to look at this however....is this something we will look back on in the next dozen years as something ground breaking..or will it just fade away...is this a big deal if every team is doing it?....while the calls may be taped its still up to the players to get the job done on the field....r tapes really that vital to the success of the patriots dynasty?....if so...what is to be said of the 3 championships?

[hagan714]

LEAGUE SAYS WALSH TAPES PROVIDE NO NEW EVIDENCE OF CHEATING
Posted by Mike Florio on May 8, 2008, 8:21 a.m.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello suggested to the Boston Globe on Wednesday night that the Patriots will face no new discipline because of the tapes that former Pats video employee Matt Walsh has surrendered to the league.

“This is consistent with what the Patriots had admitted they had been doing, consistent with what we already knew,” Aiello said.

That said, we’re curious about why Walsh would have deemed it appropriate to keep tapes of defensive coaching signals for years after his departure, if (as coach Bill Belichick explained after the poo hit the propeller) Belihick had merely misinterpreted the rules. In other words, Walsh would have had no reason to retain evidence of wrongdoing, if the official position in the organization was that the practice did not violate the rules. Unless, of course, Belichick knew that they might at some point get in trouble for this, and thus he had his “I didn’t understand the rules” excuse ready in the event that this happened.

Of course, it’s also possible that Walsh simply kept anything and everything on which he could lay his hands, without regard to whether the materials was or wasn’t evidence of cheating.

With Walsh’s meeting with the Commissioner only five days away, the question now becomes whether Walsh will provide a verbal account that sweeps more broadly than the content of the tapes. As Walsh told the New York Times back on February 1, “There would be things I’d be forced to answer that some people haven’t taken responsibility for.”

This would suggest one of two things — either Walsh is full of crap (which is entirely possible) or his comments to Goodell will reach more broadly than the contents of the tapes.

Regardless, it’s impossible to move forward until we know what Walsh tells Goodell on May 13.

Walsh has tapes, but not of walkthrough - The Boston Globe

[LordOfEntropy]

My opinion, which I admit is pure speculation, is that Walsh kept them for two purposes:

1) to cover his butt in case any pointed the finger at him later
2) to use as muscle in case the Pats tried to screw him at any point

But, I do find it quite the coincidence that the unbeatable Patriots suddenly became beatable not long too long after the allegations came up. My personal opinion, which I again admit is pure speculation, is that they lost that extra edge after they were caught.

[LordOfEntropy]

Interesting.... I believe them.

Has Spygate tainted previous Patriots titles? - NFL - Yahoo! Sports


Here's what we do know about the past: After New England was caught in September, stories emerged of at least four previous spying incidents from seasons past being brought to the league's attention. That likely played a part in commissioner Roger Goddell sending out a summer memo specifically reminding teams of the filming rule.

Included was a reported charge that the Patriots filmed the sideline of the Detroit Lions during a regular-season game in 2006. That begs the common sense question: If Belichick would employ such tactics to beat a pathetic Lions team that finished the season 3-13, then why wouldn't he use it in a Super Bowl?

The Patriots beat the Philadelphia Eagles 24-21 in Super Bowl XXXIX and Eagles players have now expressed questions about how that game played out. Cornerback Sheldon Brown specifically wondered if it was just a coincidence that every time the Eagles blitzed Tom Brady on the decisive fourth-quarter drive, New England called the perfect antidote, a screen pass. Or did the Patriots, indeed, know the Eagles' defensive signals?

"I was like, 'Man, I never saw that many screens,' " Brown told the Associated Press. "Something's not right about that."

Said safety Brian Dawkins, "Now there's always going to be questions about the situation; was it great adjustments at halftime or what?"

Pittsburgh's Hines Ward brought up questions about the Patriots' two AFC championship game victories over the Steelers this decade. Others have complained about other games.

[ssmitty]

but, make no mistake about it............
the commish has said, and i take my hat off to him, that he did not believe bb when he said he mis-interpreted the rules..........
i still believe more will become of this, but for now, i put it in pause motion, not to sleep......if this is what nfl football is all about, you can have it.............smitty...............

[Touchdown]

Sounds like hypocrisy to me.

Players must be "high character" but cheating by coaches to win is viewed as "savvy"