Great article on the Pats Cover Up (1 Viewer)

[greenline]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

I thought the NFL said there was nothing the Pats could have gained from these tape... No extra punishment...but yet the tapes had something on them that needed to be destroyed.Also why is a signed letter from the Pats good enough for the NFL to ensure there are no more tapes? Isnt that like a judge saying if a criminal promises not to do it again, he can go free?

I think you are confused.

I might be, but feel free to clear this up for me. Did any of the additional tapes have anything on them that would give the Pats an advantage? If Yes, why didnt the NFL punish them further, like the Commish said he would? If No, why were they destroyed?

I don't work for the NFL. It's hard for me to give you answers on internal investigations. I just was referring to you saying the NFL said there was nothing to gain from the tapes. When did they say that?They said there was nothing to gain for the Jets game.

 

[Max Power]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

I thought the NFL said there was nothing the Pats could have gained from these tape... No extra punishment...but yet the tapes had something on them that needed to be destroyed.Also why is a signed letter from the Pats good enough for the NFL to ensure there are no more tapes? Isnt that like a judge saying if a criminal promises not to do it again, he can go free?

I think you are confused.

I might be, but feel free to clear this up for me. Did any of the additional tapes have anything on them that would give the Pats an advantage? If Yes, why didnt the NFL punish them further, like the Commish said he would? If No, why were they destroyed?

I don't work for the NFL. It's hard for me to give you answers on internal investigations. I just was referring to you saying the NFL said there was nothing to gain from the tapes. When did they say that?They said there was nothing to gain for the Jets game.

Yeah, I guess I just jumped to that conclusion based on the Commish remarks of further punishment if these new tapes did show something. The Lack of additional punishment lead me to believe that there was nothing to gain from the tapes...and therefore I dont understand why they needed to be destroyed...

 

[protoslacker]

It turns out that a guy named Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy, and we actually DID send men to the moon.

P.S. - OJ is not innocent.....

 

[greenline]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

I thought the NFL said there was nothing the Pats could have gained from these tape... No extra punishment...but yet the tapes had something on them that needed to be destroyed.Also why is a signed letter from the Pats good enough for the NFL to ensure there are no more tapes? Isnt that like a judge saying if a criminal promises not to do it again, he can go free?

I think you are confused.

I might be, but feel free to clear this up for me. Did any of the additional tapes have anything on them that would give the Pats an advantage? If Yes, why didnt the NFL punish them further, like the Commish said he would? If No, why were they destroyed?

I don't work for the NFL. It's hard for me to give you answers on internal investigations. I just was referring to you saying the NFL said there was nothing to gain from the tapes. When did they say that?They said there was nothing to gain for the Jets game.

Yeah, I guess I just jumped to that conclusion based on the Commish remarks of further punishment if these new tapes did show something. The Lack of additional punishment lead me to believe that there was nothing to gain from the tapes...and therefore I dont understand why they needed to be destroyed...

No idea. Maybe the league couldnt see any value in what they had but suspected NE knew how or what to do with the footage so it was destroyed?

 

[fatness]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

I agree it's disappointing, but the 48-hour attention span has already been exceeded on this one for a fair number of people, and I'm reasonably sure there will be continuing interest in this. It's not a "homer or hater" issue, since most NFL fans are neither. Not enough has come out in the open to deal with the appearance (or reality) of sneaky things being hidden for unexplained reasons, and it all feels unsettled. In addition, there's already one lawsuit connected with this (the lawyer who's a Jets fan I believe) and perhaps there will be others. The NFL will have a hard time keeping information from judicial proceedings. I think this issue will be alive for awhile, and unfortunately the NFL seems to have left themselves no way to do anything further to restore faith.

 

[switz]

I agree the way the whole thing was handled inclines me to believe there was much more to the cheating than the NFL has let on. However, what if they did cheat in the Super Bowls? Now what? Do you put an asterisk next to them? Do you replay them - that'd be kinda hilarious.

I honestly always thought it a bit strange that the year nationalism in the U.S. hits a new peak, all of the sudden the PATRIOTS win the Super Bowl? Not only that, but it was very very very clear in the playoff run that the refs favored that Pats. Too much coincidence?

Interestingly, the Pats have soundly beaten their opponents this season, as if to eliminate any doubt that the reason they were winning was due to the cheating. Yet go back and look at the film... the refs again are clearly favoring NE.

Maybe it's all a big conspiracy. Maybe not. One thing is certain, Goodell would definitely NOT release ANYTHING that would tarnish the image of the NFL. And so, if those tapes did provide clear evidence the PAts cheated to win - Goodell would be conspirator #1 in a cover up.

Jeebus, this is silly.

Hey, by the way, where were the Twin Towers located or the Pentagon? Boston? Gee, you would think if the NFL would have helped the NEW YORK Jets win. You do realize that the Jets finished 10-6 to the Patriots 11-5 and both teams made the playoffs. What better story after 9-11 for a New York team to win it all conjuring up the magical Joe Namath (pre-drunken stooper about kissing Suzy Kolber, , still makes me laugh) Super Bowl win.

I love a conspiracy that needs 2 game winning FGs from 40+ yards. Thank goodness Vinatieri was in on it.

Yeah, because NY winning it would have stirred up the WHOLE country? Bash it if you want, but our "entertainment" is also a huge propaganda machine for the U.S. government. And I'm not saying that to be negative, it's pretty much the same in every country. But to deny that is ludicrous.

 

[Ralphie]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

I thought the NFL said there was nothing the Pats could have gained from these tape... No extra punishment...but yet the tapes had something on them that needed to be destroyed.Also why is a signed letter from the Pats good enough for the NFL to ensure there are no more tapes? Isnt that like a judge saying if a criminal promises not to do it again, he can go free?

I think you are confused.

I might be, but feel free to clear this up for me. Did any of the additional tapes have anything on them that would give the Pats an advantage? If Yes, why didnt the NFL punish them further, like the Commish said he would? If No, why were they destroyed?

I don't work for the NFL. It's hard for me to give you answers on internal investigations. I just was referring to you saying the NFL said there was nothing to gain from the tapes. When did they say that?They said there was nothing to gain for the Jets game.

Yeah, I guess I just jumped to that conclusion based on the Commish remarks of further punishment if these new tapes did show something. The Lack of additional punishment lead me to believe that there was nothing to gain from the tapes...and therefore I dont understand why they needed to be destroyed...

No idea. Maybe the league couldnt see any value in what they had but suspected NE knew how or what to do with the footage so it was destroyed?

This has to do with them being aware that the NFL and/or the Patriots would likely be sued. As long as there was no suit filed or imminent, they were free to destroy any documents or evidence. Once a suit is filed, the league is under an obligation to take reasonable steps to preserve relevant evidence. I think they wanted to quickly get rid of it because they thought a suit was likely, and they were ultimately right - the first suit was filed only a week later by a Jets fan who purported to represent all people who bought tickets to the NYJ - N.E. games.I'm assuming the tapes would have shown the Patriots engaged in the same conduct in their other games, opening the door for suits by other fans of other teams.I'm not commenting on the merits of the suit - I'm just suggesting that this was the league's motive to quickly destroy the evidence. There was certainly no risk that someone could use them for competitive advantage.

 

[mad sweeney]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

I thought the NFL said there was nothing the Pats could have gained from these tape... No extra punishment...but yet the tapes had something on them that needed to be destroyed.Also why is a signed letter from the Pats good enough for the NFL to ensure there are no more tapes? Isnt that like a judge saying if a criminal promises not to do it again, he can go free?

I think you are confused.

I might be, but feel free to clear this up for me. Did any of the additional tapes have anything on them that would give the Pats an advantage? If Yes, why didnt the NFL punish them further, like the Commish said he would? If No, why were they destroyed?

I don't work for the NFL. It's hard for me to give you answers on internal investigations. I just was referring to you saying the NFL said there was nothing to gain from the tapes. When did they say that?They said there was nothing to gain for the Jets game.

Yeah, I guess I just jumped to that conclusion based on the Commish remarks of further punishment if these new tapes did show something. The Lack of additional punishment lead me to believe that there was nothing to gain from the tapes...and therefore I dont understand why they needed to be destroyed...

Aiello said the punishment was for the totality of the infractions, yet they had not viewed the tapes before serving it. At that time, the Jets tape was the only proof they had of the Pats cheating. So Goodell says IF there's something new, we'll act accordingly. Yet, retroactively, Aiello is saying we already punished them for it, before we got the tapes (which have nothing useful on them) and even though that's not what Goodell said on MNF. And so, even though there was nothing on the tapes useful, even though we retroactively punished them for it, and these are the only copies (we have a SIGNED statement, that's REAL good proof), we had to destroy them to prevent anyone else from getting their hands on these useless tapes that we are in safe possession of. And unfortunately for the at least 1 upcoming lawsuit we cannot present our findings in court. It's very clear, I don't know why people just don't consider the matter closed...

 

[greenline]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

I thought the NFL said there was nothing the Pats could have gained from these tape... No extra punishment...but yet the tapes had something on them that needed to be destroyed.Also why is a signed letter from the Pats good enough for the NFL to ensure there are no more tapes? Isnt that like a judge saying if a criminal promises not to do it again, he can go free?

I think you are confused.

I might be, but feel free to clear this up for me. Did any of the additional tapes have anything on them that would give the Pats an advantage? If Yes, why didnt the NFL punish them further, like the Commish said he would? If No, why were they destroyed?

I don't work for the NFL. It's hard for me to give you answers on internal investigations. I just was referring to you saying the NFL said there was nothing to gain from the tapes. When did they say that?They said there was nothing to gain for the Jets game.

Yeah, I guess I just jumped to that conclusion based on the Commish remarks of further punishment if these new tapes did show something. The Lack of additional punishment lead me to believe that there was nothing to gain from the tapes...and therefore I dont understand why they needed to be destroyed...

Aiello said the punishment was for the totality of the infractions, yet they had not viewed the tapes before serving it. At that time, the Jets tape was the only proof they had of the Pats cheating. So Goodell says IF there's something new, we'll act accordingly. Yet, retroactively, Aiello is saying we already punished them for it, before we got the tapes and even though that's not what Goodell said on MNF. And so, even though there was nothing on the tapes useful, even though we retroactively punished them for it, and these are the only copies (we have a SIGNED statement, that's REAL good proof), we had to destroy them to prevent anyone else from getting their hands on these useless tapes that we are in safe possession of. And unfortunately for the at least 1 upcoming lawsuit we cannot present our findings in court. It's very clear, I don't know why people just don't consider the matter closed...

Yeah good point.

 

[TheFanatic]

I agree the way the whole thing was handled inclines me to believe there was much more to the cheating than the NFL has let on. However, what if they did cheat in the Super Bowls? Now what? Do you put an asterisk next to them? Do you replay them - that'd be kinda hilarious.

And it wouldn't just be the SB. Can you honestly award the trophy to say the Rams if the Pats were cheating? What about the teams they cheated to get to the Rams? Don't they have some factor in all this.

Maybe it's all a big conspiracy. Maybe not. One thing is certain, Goodell would definitely NOT release ANYTHING that would tarnish the image of the NFL. And so, if those tapes did provide clear evidence the PAts cheated to win - Goodell would be conspirator #1 in a cover up.

I think they wanted the materials destroyed so quickly because they knew that the media would sooner or later talk someone into turning over evidence that showed more wide spread cheating. And if there was cheating in the SB, the outcry would be huge. It would shake the very foundation of the NFL. And the notion that there was nothing gained by stealing the signs is insulting to me. Do they really think the American Public is that stupid? OK, so stealing signs doesn't give anyone an advantage? Then why ban the practice? Why not let everyone do it? Obviously there is an advantage gained or they wouldn't have banned it.

 

[redman]

Where is that great article your title describes?

My apologies......I thought it was thought provoking.Some seem to agree and some do not, which is fine.I just have some doubts that the whole story is known and the NFL imo.......has not acted 100% appropriately.

I completely agree with you. The NFL, which made such a big deal of its grandiose gesture of punishing the Pats and Belichick during the first week of this scandal, suddenly switched course and hurriedly swept this under the rug. This article does a good job of chronicling that and asking why that is happening.

 

[Dave Stauff]

I believe the speed with which the NFL "destroyed" whatever evidence the Pats provided was based on a decision that the negative press they'd receive for the destruction of said evidence was more appealing than the possibility of the evidence ever seeing the light of day. So color me a conspiracy theorist on this one.

I also have to wonder how/why the NFL felt destruction of all the evidence was prudent if their punishment was later appealed and taken to arbitration - in fact if I were Bill, I might be talking to my attorneys right now . . .

 

[Max Power]

It think one of the real big issues here that is fueling the fire in some people is the whole Roger Goodell angle.

He becomes commish and gives every indication that he will be a no-nonsense guy and will rule with an Iron Fist. Handing down huge suspensions and lecturing on player conduct. Basically gives every indication he is here to clean up the NFL.

Then something like these tapes come along and in the eyes of a majority of people, he drops the ball big time. Comes on SNF/MNF (I forget) and talks a big game. The next thing we hear is that all the tapes are destroyed and It is a dead issue. Really makes us fans feel betrayed in a way. He has seemed to show the fans that is more important for the NFL to save face rather than clean it up like he set out to do. I understand the decision he made, but I am very disapointed in him.

In my opinion he underminded the integrety of the game to save the NFL a major scandal. I seem to be losing more respect for him everytime his name pops up.

I am very interested to see how the Ricky Williams reinstatement goes. See if he still trys to portray that he is tough on crime...

 

[jpfreeman6272]

Everything below is just my opinion and we probably will never know the extent of the cheating.

I doubt the Patriots are the only NFL team to cheat. But if more teams do cheat - it still doesn't excuse the cheating. I also doubt very much that a team would cheat in a regular season game vs the Jets and not cheat in a more meaningful game - like say a Super Bowl. And I don't feel a team that cheated should be trusted to voluntarily hand over years of tapes that would incriminate them. So if those tapes the NFL finally got three days later showed no evidence of cheating in the Super Bowls - I would not be surprised. But I would be surpirsed if the Patriots didn't cheat in their Super Bowls.

 

[redman]

I believe the speed with which the NFL "destroyed" whatever evidence the Pats provided was based on a decision that the negative press they'd receive for the destruction of said evidence was more appealing than the possibility of the evidence ever seeing the light of day. So color me a conspiracy theorist on this one.



I also have to wonder how/why the NFL felt destruction of all the evidence was prudent if their punishment was later appealed and taken to arbitration - in fact if I were Bill, I might be talking to my attorneys right now . . .

I'm glad you brought this up, because it occurred to me that it was probably part of a private agreement among the parties, the terms of which included confidentiality on the content of those tapes and waiving the right to appeal/lawsuit. Otherwise it makes no sense for the reasons you stated.

 

[Longshot88]

There is no doubt in my mind the pats have cheated for years...The Teams that have come forth claiming the radio comunications were tamperd with in many games has also been quitely swept under the rug . I am not sure what it would take to do this, But I would say tampering with incripted radio signals ..is not a easy task.

For the Good Of the NFL i can understand why the Comish has acted in the way he has, But if any of this actually comes to light..the NFL may be in trouble...

 

[DropKick]

The NFL fined the head coach, the organization and took away a (likely) first round draft pick. They took tapes obtained in a manner that was against the rules and destroyed them once they were satisfied with their content. This seems like the sensible thing to do to me. No more questionable than a business shredding documents as standard operating procedure.

Why would they return them to the Patriots if they were obtained in this manner? Why would they keep them? Where would they keep them? In the super-secret vault of incriminating evidence?

 

[Bad_Mo]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.

Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

 

[redman]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

And all non-"Patsie" fans can waste their time on topics of this nature hoping that something, somewhere will be uncovered that tarnishes the image of the best team of this decade. Belichick was in the wrong. Check. Belichick got fined. Check. The Krafts got fined. Check. Anything else worthy of discussion relative to this closed matter? I mean other than the typical "back and to the left" talk.

 

[redman]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.

Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

And all non-"Patsie" fans can waste their time on topics of this nature hoping that something, somewhere will be uncovered that tarnishes the image of the best team of this decade. Belichick was in the wrong. Check. Belichick got fined. Check. The Krafts got fined. Check. Anything else worthy of discussion relative to this closed matter? I mean other than the typical "back and to the left" talk.

You sound like the athlete caught dead to rights who "just wants to get past this". Is it or is it not significant if there was evidence of systematic cheating on those tapes that did in fact give the Pats an advantage, and that the league simply decided to sweep it under the rug to avoid the bad publicity? Yes or no.

 

[PMENFAN]

Did anyone see the Parcells/Steve Young back and forth during the pre-game last night?Young accused Parcells of opening the end zone doors at the Meadowlands whenever the 49ers were attempting FGs - Using the wind to throw off kicks. And then closing them when the Giants were kicking.Parcells shot back that it was common 49er tactics to script the first 15 plays of a game, then have SF falsely claim that their communications system was faulty so that both teams didn't have headsets for much of the first quarter. Maybe we should just call it the *NFL from now on...

I think Parcells took the tact, because he used it, and it's where Belichick used it. Do we go back and take away all SF points from tthe areas where the headsets were not used? What about field goals during Parcells time in NY? Do we take those away that were kicked w/ the doors closed? If they weren't getting them w/ a camera, they were getting them visually across the field. If you use the same defensive signals in the 2nd half of a game, you're a fool. Rephrase that. Same signals, different trigger for the real signal. I go back to the reality that it was so prevalent, and just accepted that they didn't even try to hide it. Dude is on the sideline, with a camcorder, taping the other side. Quite obviously there wasn't a huge effort to hide what they were doing. Why? Because everybody is doing the same thing!!!

 

[Christo]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

The fact they destroyed them so quickly makes everyone think they contained incredibly damning evidence. There is a HUGE negative to giving the "sweep it under the rug" impression of destroying quickly and then clamming up and not talking about. The only reason most people think you do that is if letting a 3rd party see the tapes is a worse situation.J

How long were they supposed to wait to destroy them?Or is it just that you wouldn't be satisfied unless and until someone outside the NFL had seen them and reported on it?

 

[S.K.A.]

Color me suspicious.

Good article, but I doubt anything will ever come of it. Back to blissful ignorance for me. Like I needed anymore reason to hate the Patriots.

F'n tuck rule.

 

[S.K.A.]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

The fact they destroyed them so quickly makes everyone think they contained incredibly damning evidence. There is a HUGE negative to giving the "sweep it under the rug" impression of destroying quickly and then clamming up and not talking about. The only reason most people think you do that is if letting a 3rd party see the tapes is a worse situation.J

How long were they supposed to wait to destroy them?Or is it just that you wouldn't be satisfied unless and until someone outside the NFL had seen them and reported on it?

Christo,Why destroy them at all?

 

[Christo]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

Why do you need to keep evidence around when there's been an accusation of wrongdoing and an admission of guilt?

 

[Christo]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

The fact they destroyed them so quickly makes everyone think they contained incredibly damning evidence. There is a HUGE negative to giving the "sweep it under the rug" impression of destroying quickly and then clamming up and not talking about. The only reason most people think you do that is if letting a 3rd party see the tapes is a worse situation.J

How long were they supposed to wait to destroy them?Or is it just that you wouldn't be satisfied unless and until someone outside the NFL had seen them and reported on it?

Christo,Why destroy them at all?

Because of what they do contain.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.

Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

And all non-"Patsie" fans can waste their time on topics of this nature hoping that something, somewhere will be uncovered that tarnishes the image of the best team of this decade. Belichick was in the wrong. Check. Belichick got fined. Check. The Krafts got fined. Check. Anything else worthy of discussion relative to this closed matter? I mean other than the typical "back and to the left" talk.

You sound like the athlete caught dead to rights who "just wants to get past this". Is it or is it not significant if there was evidence of systematic cheating on those tapes that did in fact give the Pats an advantage, and that the league simply decided to sweep it under the rug to avoid the bad publicity? Yes or no.

Fact is that the league took action, and the NE haters can't let it go. Its a tired act. There is NO other damning evidence. To suggest there is, and that the league is covering it up, is downright ludicrous.

 

[redman]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

Why do you need to keep evidence around when there's been an accusation of wrongdoing and an admission of guilt?

You would do it if you were trying to maintain a transparent punishment process to engender confidence in your league. I would also think that the league, if it thought that this sort of thing might reemerge in the future, would like to have such records around for comparison and/or to prevent it. It's also part of league history. There's any number of other reasons to keep it. It's far more difficult to come up with good reasons why the league would destroy such evidence, much less with the haste that they did.

 

[redman]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.

Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

And all non-"Patsie" fans can waste their time on topics of this nature hoping that something, somewhere will be uncovered that tarnishes the image of the best team of this decade. Belichick was in the wrong. Check. Belichick got fined. Check. The Krafts got fined. Check. Anything else worthy of discussion relative to this closed matter? I mean other than the typical "back and to the left" talk.

You sound like the athlete caught dead to rights who "just wants to get past this". Is it or is it not significant if there was evidence of systematic cheating on those tapes that did in fact give the Pats an advantage, and that the league simply decided to sweep it under the rug to avoid the bad publicity? Yes or no.

Fact is that the league took action, and the NE haters can't let it go. Its a tired act. There is NO other damning evidence. To suggest there is, and that the league is covering it up, is downright ludicrous.

Your attempts at deflection are actually amusing. Now you're resorting to name-calling, inaccurately in my case. So be it. Only a blind homer would express no interest in why this happened the way it did.

 

[Newslang]

Isnt it obvious that the (new) NFL will do anything to make itself look professional. They come down hard on Pacman and others but sweep this under the rug. Its likly they taped every week, hopefully its dealt with, it shouldnt be done, espessially now that its CLEAR you CANT. Taping had potential to turn a chess match into a game of Tic Tac Toe.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

This thread isn't illiciting as much activity as the original 3 or 4 threads that came out right after the Jets game.

We all know BB encurred the wrath of Zod by ignoring the guidance memo which was intended to squelch what was rapidly becoming out of hand (video technology plus the common practice of signal stealing).

We all know that Zod took a very predictable path in dealing with this situation; namely that the preservation of the brand value of a 7 billion dollar industry outweighs any moral imperatives to "get to the root of things", particularly against a backdrop of the "baseline" level of inappropriate activty around the league from a rear view mirror perspective (signal stealing, salary cap manipulation, systematic chop blocking, systematic illegal picks, rampant steroids use in dynasties past, etc.).

Zod simply cannot afford to open Pandora's box.

Most of us who have more than a passing interest in this story, either as homers or haters or neutral parties, are now aware that Jimmy Johnson and Barry Switzer both admitted to videotaping opposing coaches, and described that activity as commonplace.

On the other hand, we all know that the prevalence of such activity is not a valid excuse. Finding of guilt, levying of penalties, closing of case.

In the end, we all gravitate to the version of reality we like best. Steve Young's reality, or Coach Parcells'. You get to choose.

I perceive that there is a group of people, hopefully small, that are growing increasingly agitated over the fact that cameragate is losing it's inertia, and their petty vindictive desires for an asterisk are slowly slipping through their fingers. I feel sorry for them.

I wonder how the Pats will do against Cleveland this weekend?

 

[duaneok66]

geesh, did they really gain a big advantage???

last time I checked, the Pats are beating down teams on a regular basis . . . and this is without "help" . . .

why are we still talking about it???

 

[Workhorse]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

The fact they destroyed them so quickly makes everyone think they contained incredibly damning evidence. There is a HUGE negative to giving the "sweep it under the rug" impression of destroying quickly and then clamming up and not talking about. The only reason most people think you do that is if letting a 3rd party see the tapes is a worse situation.J

How long were they supposed to wait to destroy them?Or is it just that you wouldn't be satisfied unless and until someone outside the NFL had seen them and reported on it?

Christo,Why destroy them at all?

I'll tell you why: The information that was destroyed included all of the Patriots notes concerning all of the info they gathered including (presumably) their game plans and strategies that they would emply to defeat certain defenses. That part of the information, if somehow "leaked" could be VERY damaging to the Patriots in terms of giving other teams a distinct competitive advantage. The tapes themslves aren't the most important part of the evidence turned over to the league, from the Patriots perspective. The notes, in the wrong hands, would give other teams insight into Pats game planning.I think its 100% appropriate to destroy that material.

 

[ChromeWeasel]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.

Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

Why do you need to keep evidence around when there's been an accusation of wrongdoing and an admission of guilt?

You would do it if you were trying to maintain a transparent punishment process to engender confidence in your league. I would also think that the league, if it thought that this sort of thing might reemerge in the future, would like to have such records around for comparison and/or to prevent it. It's also part of league history. There's any number of other reasons to keep it. It's far more difficult to come up with good reasons why the league would destroy such evidence, much less with the haste that they did.

I'm a backup/storage engineer. We routinely destroy old media. Any removable media that's left around has costs associated with it. If its destroyed, theres zero cost. You also eliminate any unknown risk. No matter how low the risk is while the old media is around, it's greater than zero. So we ship all old media out, have it incinerated, and keep the records of the media's destruction for our records. This is standard business practice for any expired media.If we look back at this case again, we need to remember exactly what rules were broken. It's not against the rules to steal signals. It's only against the rules to film it. The punishments were already levied for FILMING signals, a technical violation of the existing rules. It looks to me like the league is satisfied that's all that happened. At that point you destroy the old media and move along and eliminate the cost of storing the media.

It makes perfect sense to me. Of course, I'm not a conspiracy nut or a Pats-hater. I'm just a professional guy who sees this as a logical course of action.

 

[Tanner9919]

Pats' Tapes Are Gone, But Questions Remain

By Gregg Easterbrook

Special to Page 2

Updated: September 27, 2007, 9:27 AM ET

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...5&sportCat=nfl

Reader Abhijit Kumbare of San Jose, Calif., writes, "It is very fishy that the NFL immediately destroyed all the evidence submitted by the Patriots." Steve Libenson of New York writes, "Consider what the press reaction would have been if David Stern had collected all the evidence about the ref altering games, then immediately destroyed that evidence without saying what it showed, and did so four days after going on national television and promising to get to the bottom of things."

I cut the rest off to spare the masses..hey, you're entitled to your opinion..but, Jimmy Johnson ( former Dallas HC who,coincidentally won 3 SB's just like NE has), was on Mike and the Dog last week, he was asked point blank, did you ever have someone on your payroll who was paid to watch/video tape the opponents signal caller? Johnson's replied was 'oh, yeah we sure did!' he went on to say if there wasn't enough room in the pressbox for the camera guy or of the singal caller was on the same sideline as the opposing team, then they'd just plant the 'spy' on his own sideline with his camera trained on the siglnal caller standing on the other sidelines..

he said the press box booths usually would fit 2-3 people (press boxes provided at opposing team's stadiums), one guy was assigned to be the camera guy..he said it was almost comical the amount of espionage that went on between teams, the point/counter point cloak and dagger stuff...

He also said he's only disappointed in BB for one reason: after the NFL told him ( and everyone else) to stop filming opposing teams, BB continued to do so..

bottom line: EVERYONE was stealing signs, even Mike Martz agrees, BB is no different than Jimmy Johnson..doesn't make either one,less of a coach than the other....BB crossed the line only in that he continued,after the league said no. and, its hypocritical of Mangini to be a whisleblower , when you KNOW he was involved in helping bellichick and the patriots spy on the opposition..

one interesting thing, to fit in your consipiracy theory, is that Ne had two first round picks this season,and have two next season...did they KNOW that the penalty for filming opposing signal callers , was a first round pick?!?! maybe! it explains why they'd continue to film, even after the league's mandate to stop filming was handed down to every team during this past offseason....

 

[Sheriff66]

Good post. I'd agree with Easterbrook here. It's pretty disappointing to me how the league handled this. Rushing to destroy tapes like this looks like a clear "sweep it under the rug" deal. But it'll work for the league. Because people have an attention span of about 48 hours. So in the end, it works for the them. But it's disappointing to see them do this.J

Maybe it's the homer in me but from what I understand they reviewed the tapes and destroyed them after NE signed a statement confirming there were no other copies. It seems smart to destroy the tapes to ensure the footage never lands in the hands of anyone who could use it again. I don't understand why its perceived as an assist in covering anything up.

The fact they destroyed them so quickly makes everyone think they contained incredibly damning evidence. There is a HUGE negative to giving the "sweep it under the rug" impression of destroying quickly and then clamming up and not talking about. The only reason most people think you do that is if letting a 3rd party see the tapes is a worse situation.J

 

[fatness]

I believe the speed with which the NFL "destroyed" whatever evidence the Pats provided was based on a decision that the negative press they'd receive for the destruction of said evidence was more appealing than the possibility of the evidence ever seeing the light of day. So color me a conspiracy theorist on this one.



I also have to wonder how/why the NFL felt destruction of all the evidence was prudent if their punishment was later appealed and taken to arbitration - in fact if I were Bill, I might be talking to my attorneys right now . . .

I'm glad you brought this up, because it occurred to me that it was probably part of a private agreement among the parties, the terms of which included confidentiality on the content of those tapes and waiving the right to appeal/lawsuit. Otherwise it makes no sense for the reasons you stated.

Another possibility is that the NFL got some whispered warning about the then-upcoming lawsuit by the lawyer who's a Jets fan, and destroyed the evidence before it could be sought in that proceeding.

 

[Jercules]

So the NFL was interested in getting past this asap, that much is obvious. Why is it that this automatically means there's some grand conspiracy about Belichick and the Pats "cheating" for years upon years, winning SB after SB when they otherwise had no right to?

People are so thrilled to throw around the word "cheating" without pointing out what that "cheating" actually was in this instance, which is especially egregious since we know exactly what Belichick is guilty of.

Here's what happened; teams are permitted to watch defensive signals, study them, and even make written records of what they are for different teams/coaches. The Pats didn't want to go through all this trouble, and so they used a videocamera to record those signals.

Personnel men and coaches within the NFL have said that if anything, it's the arrogance of Belichick to think he could get away with it that is far more distasteful than the act itself. Coaches change their signals all the time anyway as a matter of prudence, the fact that vidotape was being used by the Pats would present a miniscule advantage (if any - think about how dangerous it would be in a game to be absolutely sure of what the defense is doing, and then be wrong). If anything, the rule is part of the NFL's general aversion to allowing technology to take over coaching (for instance, allowing coaches to use computers that could instantaneously give them a breakdown of what their opponent's tendencies are for any given situation, right on the field between downs - thus taking the art of decision-making completely out of coaching). It took them years to allow the headset in the QB's helmet. It's also why players are only allowed to see still photos of game action on the sidelines instead of video, even though nowadays showing replays on sidelines would be easily feasible.

There was an AFC coach disgusted by Mangini's actions, ratting out the man responsible for making his career (it was in a Len Pasquarelli article way back when this whole issue was relevant). In fact, if there wasn't so much bad blood between the Pats and the Jets this issue would've never surfaced anyway. Brian Billick, a week after this whole thing broke, exposed the Jets as cheaters for simulating snap counts against the Ravens offense (which, strictly on a logical basis, seems far more likely to impact the outcome of a game than videotaping). Maybe people will disagree with this, but I'll bet that was a backlash from the NFL coaching community for making public something that should never have seen the light of day.

And why should it be kept from the public? Simple. Because it was a transgression on par with speeding or J-walking in the real world, and yet the media and, by extention, fans have jumped all over it and blown it out of proportion to the point where 3 Super Bowl wins are being called into question.

Seriously, no one is defending Belichick or saying he didn't "cheat," but for the love of God people, keep things in perspective.

 

[Swamprat]

It turns out that a guy named Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy, and we actually DID send men to the moon.

P.S. - OJ is not innocent.....

Are you saying that the NFL destroyed these tapes because they clearly showed the shooter on the grassy knoll?

 

[shakeybarn]

Mere Speculation....move along, nothing to see here.

Why destroy the tapes... i'm sure someone.... NFL Films etc... has access and can look back at the SB.. maybe they are doing it now... and have lawyers and are working on a book deal (see Balco episode).Destroy the tapes??? Why.. why not hold on to them, but keep them under control.

 

[shakeybarn]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.

Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

And all non-"Patsie" fans can waste their time on topics of this nature hoping that something, somewhere will be uncovered that tarnishes the image of the best team of this decade. Belichick was in the wrong. Check. Belichick got fined. Check. The Krafts got fined. Check. Anything else worthy of discussion relative to this closed matter? I mean other than the typical "back and to the left" talk.

You sound like the athlete caught dead to rights who "just wants to get past this". Is it or is it not significant if there was evidence of systematic cheating on those tapes that did in fact give the Pats an advantage, and that the league simply decided to sweep it under the rug to avoid the bad publicity? Yes or no.

Fact is that the league took action, and the NE haters can't let it go. Its a tired act. There is NO other damning evidence. To suggest there is, and that the league is covering it up, is downright ludicrous.

Once again... then why destroy the tapes, or make a comment thereof.... why not say...."look for yourself!!! tell us what we missed"???

 

[Pound]

What if the tapes showed evidence of point shaving? Thats the only reason I think they destroyed them. Yeah I know nobody can think NFL games are fixed (and nobody wants to) but destroying evidence witout any legit reason will make any conspiracy theorists wondering.

Will add the tinfoil hat smiley here to save others the trouble:

 

[GregR_2]

Didn't they say in the MNF game that the league found that the materials did not give the Pats an advantage and that the matter was closed?

The two ways I think everyone would agree the tape would be the most useful, would be 1) to look at it during half-time and match it up to the plays that were called so it could be used in the second half, and 2) file it away so the next time you play that same defensive staff you can break the tape out again and use it to your advantage if they haven't changed their signs.Since the reports said the tape was confiscated before the cameraman could take it into the locker room at halftime, the Patriots probably wouldn't have (yet) had much opportunity to get an advantage IN THAT GAME. So the NFL's statement is probably 100% factual in regards to just that one game, because of when the Pats were caught.While there have been some methods put forward, including by former Patriots employees, of how such taping could be used in real time, I think it's much more likely that the team benefited from the illegal tapes by using past tapes of a defensive coordinator's signs in their future games with against that DC.So when the league says they didn't give the Pats an advantage, I think we can all completely believe it, because the tape was confiscated before it could have been used to give them an advantage. But I think it's naive to think it wouldn't have been used to try to get an advantage in the 2nd half and/or in a future game, and I think given the news reports about the Pats building up a database of tapes on different DC's, it's naive to think their past tapings weren't used to gain similar advantage.

 

[mad sweeney]

There was an AFC coach disgusted by Mangini's actions, ratting out the man responsible for making his career (it was in a Len Pasquarelli article way back when this whole issue was relevant). In fact, if there wasn't so much bad blood between the Pats and the Jets this issue would've never surfaced anyway. Brian Billick, a week after this whole thing broke, exposed the Jets as cheaters for simulating snap counts against the Ravens offense (which, strictly on a logical basis, seems far more likely to impact the outcome of a game than videotaping). Maybe people will disagree with this, but I'll bet that was a backlash from the NFL coaching community for making public something that should never have seen the light of day.

Billick might have been taking a poke at Mangini but what he was really doing there was sandbagging the refs for not calling it, and doing it in a way he doesn't get fined. It's a flag that should get thrown, not anywhere near the espionage category

 

[jade]

There is a lot of wrong information in this thread. Not suprising it is being led by an Easterbrook article.

First of all the biggest infraction of conspiritors is that the Pats were caught cheating and repremanded for cheating. Yes they were caught cheating (if you want to call it that) but that is not why they were punished. Every team 'cheats'. I don't get why this is so hard to understand. It is not illegal to sit there and study the defensive calls (what Most people are calling cheating). With pen and paper one could legally get away with it. The Patriots punishment was for using a video camera. All recording devices are illegal on the sidelines.

As for the advantage. Do you honestly think that in the 20 minutes at halftime they could learn all the defensive signals to use in the game. It is illogical to think so. Not to mention that they have 2-3 coaches on the sidelines throwing signals out there for this very reason, so you won't know which signal is the right one. So not only would you have to learn the signals but you'd have to learn 3 different coaches signals and figure out which is the right one. There is no way they could have had an advantage during the game. The tapes were for future purposes though still useless for cheating since teams change their signals frequently.

Reason for destroying the tapes. Becasue no one needs them. Why would they keep the tapes? They took them for the sole purpose of leveling the playing field for everyone. In case you missed it (or forgot) some moron leaked the Jets tape to Fox and they showed part of it on the air. Likely a total embarassment for them. It would seem like a logical move to destroy the tapes, since there was a leak in the head office, so no one else could possibly gain from them (the reason they were taken in the first place).

The punishment was for the totality of the infractions in that Goodell knew that the Pats had been taping signals for a while. Once agian it was for taping NOT stealing signals. So what was on the tapes didn't matter. Someone mentions that NE knew it was a first round pick and that is why they continued to do it. Not possible because it was the first time EVER that a team was denied their first round pick. Bellichick broke the rules on purpose but I doubt the thought the penalty would be so lofty.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Yes they were caught cheating (if you want to call it that)

Had to stop reading right there.

 

[pizzatyme]

I swear this whole thing gives me deja vu!

Oh yeah, I remember now. Anyone lese see 'A Few Good Men'?

This reporter (Caffey)- if the tapes were in your possession and no one, I mean NO ONE breaks a direct order of yours, then how could there be a threat of other teams using these tapes to gain an advantage? Did you issue a Code Red?

Goodell- (looking dazed) I did not

This reporter (Lieutenant Caffey)- Commissioner Goodell, did you issue an order (Code Red) to have the tapes destroyed?

Goodell ( General ____)- We watch over the greatest professional sports franchise in all the land. Millions and even billions of people depend on us for entertainment. Bookies need us to keep the money flowing. There are lives at stake!

Caffey- General, you did not answer the question.

General- What do you want?

Caffey- I want the truth!

General- You can't handle the truth! I did issue the Code Red, those tapes were made by the latest dynasty in our beloved sport. To reveal these tapes to a third party would damage reputations of the parties involved. And son, you want us on TV on Sundays, you need us on TV on Sundays!

The end.

My question is, is the security in the Commissioner's office so poor that these tapes were in jeopardy of making it into someone elses hands? That is damn scary to me!

 

[pizzatyme]

Having 3 coaches on the sidelines giving signals would be a challenge unless you were monitoring their radio frequency to know which one was the right one each time!

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Crazy talk. Pure and simple.

Lemme get this straight...the fact that they destroyed the tapes quickly means the NFL found damning evidence? Yeah, ok. So, if they took 6 weeks to destroy them....maybe burn one every 10 hours or something....then people wouldn't jump to conclusions? Crazy.

You keep evidence of wrongdoing around, especially when it's easily stored. This fits both criteria. Goodell's an attorney by training, so it smells especially fishy. You Patsies can deconstruct this all day long, but something doesn't add up here.

And all non-"Patsie" fans can waste their time on topics of this nature hoping that something, somewhere will be uncovered that tarnishes the image of the best team of this decade. Belichick was in the wrong. Check. Belichick got fined. Check. The Krafts got fined. Check. Anything else worthy of discussion relative to this closed matter? I mean other than the typical "back and to the left" talk.

You sound like the athlete caught dead to rights who "just wants to get past this". Is it or is it not significant if there was evidence of systematic cheating on those tapes that did in fact give the Pats an advantage, and that the league simply decided to sweep it under the rug to avoid the bad publicity? Yes or no.

Fact is that the league took action, and the NE haters can't let it go. Its a tired act. There is NO other damning evidence. To suggest there is, and that the league is covering it up, is downright ludicrous.

Your attempts at deflection are actually amusing. Now you're resorting to name-calling, inaccurately in my case. So be it. Only a blind homer would express no interest in why this happened the way it did.

I think when people start these threads there should be a disclaimer that myopic homers like Fanoholic, [icon], and Bad Mo can't post inside, and known haters of the Patriots can stay out also.

Since Redman is a Redskins fan I'm not sure he has any reason to hate the Patriots and he probably doesn't. I have no reason to hate them and even after hearing about this scandal it didn't change my mind. However I think reading the various homer posts from Patriots fans over the past few weeks is enough to change my mind.

As far as destroying the tapes the NFL did not look at all these tapes. Are you kidding me? I'm sure everyone here has looked through video to find something specific before and knows it takes several minutes sometimes. I look at news stories for a living and I'll spend an hour looking and re-looking at a 4 minute story. The shear volume of tapes that must have been delivered to the NFL makes me believe the NFL simply didn't care and wanted to get rid of the story before something more damming was released (i.e. cheating in a Super Bowl). If the Patriots delivered 8 tapes, it would take at least 12 hours just to view those tapes and that’s considering the Patriots did not tape both offensive and defensive signals. I’ll bet the Pats had more than 8, I’d bet they at the very least saved them from all 13 teams they play this year and I would imagine they had compilations. They also could have easily loaded the media into a laptop computer, and only kept the most recent of tapes. That would probably make more sense and also allow them to take the tapes “off the street.”

It’s also fairly unreasonable to believe that since the Patriots had admitted guilt and a punishment handed down that the NFL would not want to view the tapes in detail to see what to look for next time to prevent this type of behavior. They didn’t because sooner or later those tapes would have ended up with someone who would have leaked them to the press. Then what? What if the Pats cheated in any of their playoff games or even the Super Bowl? That would be a bomb dropped on the NFL, one that would hurt it’s credibility for years and remembered for as long as the league exists. The NFL wasn’t going to let that happen especially if any of the evidence showed that the Patriots cheated in any of their championship years which a normal person with some logic would have to believe to be the case here. If I was suspicious before, I’m closer to being sure now.

In the end the Patriots cheated and were caught and to those of you who want to say “everyone does it,” well not everyone wins three Super Bowls in four years.