• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Belichick has been taping since 2000, Goodell tells Specter

xshixy

Truth, Honor, and Loyalty
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Location
San Jose
Moto(s)
All Kawi's
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Bill Belichick has been illegally taping opponents' defensive signals since he became the New England Patriots' coach in 2000, according to Sen. Arlen Specter, who said NFL commissioner Roger Goodell told him that during a meeting Wednesday.

"There was confirmation that there has been taping since 2000, when Coach Belichick took over," Specter said.

Specter said Goodell gave him that information during the 1-hour, 40-minute meeting, which was requested by Specter so the commissioner could explain his reasons for destroying the Spygate tapes and notes.


"There were a great many questions answered by Commissioner Goodell," Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters after the meeting. "I found a lot of questions unanswerable because of the tapes and notes had been destroyed."

Goodell said Belichick told him he believed the taping was legal; Goodell said he did not concur.

"He said that's always been his interpretation since he's been the head coach," the commissioner said. "We are going to agree to disagree on the facts."

Specter, from Pennsylvania, wants to talk to other league officials about what exactly was taped and which games may have been compromised.

"We have a right to have honest football games," he said.

Goodell noted that "we were the ones that disclosed" the Patriots' illegal taping of the New York Jets' defensive signals in Week 1 of last season. Further, Goodell said, they had an admission by Belichick.

"I have nothing to hide," Goodell said.

Goodell also told Specter that that he doesn't regret destroying the Spygate tapes or the notes.

"I think it was the right thing to do," Goodell said.

Still, Specter wants to know why penalties were imposed on Belichick before the full extent of the wrongdoing was known and the tapes destroyed in a two-week span. Asked if he thinks there was a coverup, Specter demurred.

"There was an enormous amount of haste," Specter said.

He scoffed at the reasons Goodell gave for destroying the tapes and notes, particularly about trying to keep them out of competitors' hands and because Belichick had admitted to the taping.

"What's that got to do with it? There's an admission of guilt, you preserve the evidence," Specter said. As for keeping the tapes out of the hands of others: "All you have to do is lock up the tapes."

Belichick was fined $500,000 and the team was fined $250,000 because of the Spygate incident. The Patriots also forfeited a first-round draft pick.

Specter has questioned the quality of the NFL's investigation into the matter and raised the possibility of congressional hearings if he wasn't satisfied with Goodell's answers. Specter also raised the threat of Congress canceling the league's antitrust exemption and reiterated that in the meeting with Goodell.

Goodell also said he has not heard from Matt Walsh, the former Patriots employee who performed some videotaping duties for the team.

Walsh told The Associated Press last week during the Pro Bowl in Hawaii that he couldn't talk about allegations that he taped a walkthrough practice by the St. Louis Rams before the 2002 Super Bowl. New England, a two-touchdown underdog, won that game 20-17.

Goodell said he has offered Walsh a deal whereby "he has to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly" in return for indemnity. Specter said he, too, wanted to talk to Walsh and perhaps offer a different deal.

Goodell also said he reserves the right to reopen the investigation if more information is uncovered.
 
I've never understood why Congress gets involved in stuff like this. It seems like there are bigger fish to fry out there...
 
PERFECT!
 

Attachments

  • MerMorrisHelmet.jpg
    MerMorrisHelmet.jpg
    15.5 KB · Views: 26
I've never understood why Congress gets involved in stuff like this. It seems like there are bigger fish to fry out there...

when you think of it in terms of what the public's attention is being diverted from, it becomes pretty clear to me why congress gets involed. BTW...the US is still in Iraq right? I just ask, because the news really hasn't reported much on it lately. all I see is Roger Clemens, the HIllary/Obama sausage fest, and deadly popcorn.
 
200px-ErnstStavroBlofeld.jpg


I shall look forward personally to exterminating you, Mr. Beichick.

Steve
 
In all I really think they got off Light... Loss of 1 pick and chump change for them. On an extreme if they had one of there Super Bowls It would send a BIG msg. Not to say I think that it's that big but still the punishment should reflect the crime.:cool
 
Dear Congress,

Concern yourselves with shit that actually matters and let entertainment "scandals" be worked out by the people in charge of them.

Thanks,
The People.
 
I don't really see what the big deal is. I didn't follow the story that much but isn't all they did observe signals people were giving during the game? Couldn't anybody do that? Why is it against the rules?
 
Owe don’t get us started on the Steroid issue, OMG it is so much a bunch of crap. Baseball had no rules against using it, so what they did back then does not matter. Now I'm not saying it was the rite thing to do but they only broke the law if they got it illegally. Hell 99% of them got a prescription for it. That’s not breaking any law back then in fact only in the last 2 years was it put in the rule books for baseball. I don’t care about use of it in the past if they broke no rules or laws. Let stop wasting time and worry about keeping it clean for the future.
 
I don't really see what the big deal is. I didn't follow the story that much but isn't all they did observe signals people were giving during the game? Couldn't anybody do that? Why is it against the rules?

. To say that yes that was and is still ok stealing signals, but it’s when you use a foreign or recording device to steal and study keep record of. That’s when it becomes illegal, they took both offence and defense signals and studied them. What this story does not tell is that they developed plays to exploit this knowledge.
 
. To say that yes that was and is still ok stealing signals, but it’s when you use a foreign or recording device to steal and study keep record of. That’s when it becomes illegal, they took both offence and defense signals and studied them. What this story does not tell is that they developed plays to exploit this knowledge.

I guess I don't see what the big deal is. If they were stealing the plays out of the other teams playbook that would be one thing but they just watched their signals during the game and studied them. And recorded them to study them as well. I don't see how it is cheating. If it is cheating, it shouldn't be. Studying the opposing teams plays, by observation or from a recording is a means to create your strategy, IMO. I don't really care either way, but it seems stupid that such a big deal is being made out of it.
 
I don't really see what the big deal is. I didn't follow the story that much but isn't all they did observe signals people were giving during the game? Couldn't anybody do that? Why is it against the rules?
from what i understood they were mostly taping the defensive signals of teams that they play regularly so they could use the film to figure out what the signals meant. that would allow them to catch the signals during the next game against that opponent and know which defense was being run. with the in-helmet communication between the coaching staff and the qb that would allow them to change the play if it was a bad one for that defense. guess it would work if football teams (unlike baseball teams) never changed their signals.
 
from what i understood they were mostly taping the defensive signals of teams that they play regularly so they could use the film to figure out what the signals meant. that would allow them to catch the signals during the next game against that opponent and know which defense was being run. with the in-helmet communication between the coaching staff and the qb that would allow them to change the play if it was a bad one for that defense. guess it would work if football teams (unlike baseball teams) never changed their signals.

Ooohh I can design something to intercept the signals between the QB and the coaching staff. Of course, this won't work if the QB goes for an audible :(
 
Back
Top