I knew it.. I have said it many times, and today just confirms what i already knew. I was at the game, and i knew somthing was really wrong.
I knew it.. I have said it many times, and today just confirms what i already knew. I was at the game, and i knew somthing was really wrong.
Of course there are no tapes or notes NOW from 2001 or 02, 03 etc. Obviously the Pats destroyed these things as they went along when they knew the info would be of no use to them and it also covered their butts. That's why there were only 6 tapes and some notes when the commish said turn over the evidence. I would be willing to bet there was enough info on those 6 tapes and notes to bury the Pats and embarrass the NFL so good old Commish Rog destroyed the evidence.
This is going to seem crazy and I know it sounds very conspiracy-theoryish, but--that was the 1st SB after 9/11. It worked out almost too well that a team called the "Patriots" won. Were the refs. encouraged to help them win for that reason? Probably not, but at least that's I'm sticking with and what I've told myself for the past 6 years; helps ease the pain a little. (And I do not mean this in any disrespectful or unpatriotic way to anyone anywhere.) It is just my little conspiracy theory.
like i said before, who wants to join "HROSB36OP"
Paul Tagliabue was supposedly the one that was the master mined behind that game.
On top of everything that's been mentioned, I'd like to add the fairly obvious helmet-to-helmet hit Warner took from McGinest (I think) on Ty Law's pick-6 play. It was even pictured on the cover of Sports Illustrated! Baffling. :x
Belichick is a genius, but only in the sense that he knows exactly what his team can get away with and when they can get away with it. And I don't wanna hear that seemingly miniscule things such as filming defensive signals and a single walk-through barely have an impact on the game. They wouldn't be going through all that trouble to do it if it didn't help them in some way.
I try not to be a homer and am the last one to ever blame the refs for a loss or complain about suspected cheating, as I believe there are bigger factors (which our players can control) that affect the outcome of a game, but the Patriots have taken the "if you're not cheating, you're not trying" mantra to a whole new level.
Warner is calling for an investigation now.
Don't know if I can post the ESPN link or not, but it's on profootballtalk.com, and it has a link there.
Warner has too much class to come out and say they "probably cheated," though.
Ex-Ram Warner wants NFL to expand probe of Patriots
By Mike Fish
Looking back, quarterback Kurt Warner says Super Bowl XXXVI in New Orleans is a blur. The underdog New England Patriots simply outschemed Warner's St. Louis Rams, parading out six and at times seven defensive backs and roughing up the Rams' sleek receivers to slow down an offense then dubbed "The Greatest Show on Turf." St. Louis, Warner says, just got beat. The final score read 20-17. That result can't be changed.
But for peace of mind, the two-time MVP wants the league to investigate reports that the Patriots might have benefited from a videotape of the Rams' final practice before that Super Bowl six years ago.
In the latest flurry of news surrounding the Patriots' videotaping activities, a report in Saturday's Boston Herald indicated that a member of the Patriots' video staff might have filmed the Rams' final walk-through in the Superdome the day before the game. The story cited a lone source, described as someone close to the New England team that season.
Rumors of the Super Bowl videotaping incident first circulated shortly after the "Spygate" affair this past September, in which a Patriots employee was caught taping the New York Jets' signals from the sideline, although ESPN.com has been unable to confirm the rumors. Matt Walsh, a former Patriots video assistant who has suggested he has information potentially embarrassing to the team and the league, has refused comment on whether he played a part in the alleged Super Bowl taping in February 2002.
"Really, it is nothing that I care to go on the record about or talk about," Walsh recently told ESPN.com.
Warner, who since has moved on to the Arizona Cardinals, was surprised to learn the league didn't speak to Walsh during its investigation of Spygate.
"It is obvious that it wasn't as thorough as it could have been," Warner says of the league's probe. "I don't have any information on why they didn't talk to him or how far back they went, but just knowing that there was somebody that was involved in that , and he wasn't talked to or they didn't go back that far -- I guess it is disappointing. You would think that if they do an investigation for the integrity of the game, that they would try to do everything possible. And maybe they did, and they just missed it. But as a purist and someone who wants to see the integrity of the game stay where it is, it is a little disappointing that they didn't under every rock to figure this out and to do something to make sure it doesn't happen again."
Warner spoke to ESPN.com about the rumors of Super Bowl spying before the Herald's story appeared. He did not return calls Saturday. Neither did former Rams coach Mike Martz.
According to the Rams' itinerary from Super Bowl XXXVI, the team took the Superdome turf at 12:45 p.m. Saturday, Feb. 2, 2002, for its final practice, which came after the Patriots had completed their walk-through. The Rams were scheduled to take a team picture at 1:30, eat a box lunch at the stadium at 2 and catch buses back to the team hotel at 2:15.
Warner says he remembers little from the walk-through, other than that the offense ran some of its red zone plays.
Even if that practice had been taped and was available to the Patriots, the advantage might not have been significant, as the Rams weren't in position to use their red zone offense until the fourth quarter.
St. Louis had seven plays inside the Patriots' 30-yard line in the final quarter. At one point, New England stopped the Rams on four successive plays inside the 3-yard line. A holding penalty gave the Rams another play, and, after a timeout, they scored on a quarterback sneak by Warner -- a play that had not been part of Saturday's walk-through but was called by Martz on the sideline.
Former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh has refused to address the question of his possible role in alleged surreptitious taping.
"It was really just us having some troubles putting the ball in the end zone," Warner says. "We stuck this play in because we had success with it before."
Warner says his suspicions about the Patriots surfaced only after they were busted for cheating this past September.
"Again, they had a great game plan," Warner says of the Patriots' performance in Super Bowl XXXVI. "Coach Belichick has been known for that. They executed it very well. And I think you look back from our side and say, 'Well, we had played them once year. They had a good feel for what we were doing and how to stop us. I go back and look at that game and say, 'The approach they took with us is that we're going to beat them up and beat them up and beat them up until the officials make a call.' And I think they went in with a premise that in a Super Bowl, the officials don't want to dictate the course of action. So they're going to be slow to throw flags, especially a bunch of flags.
"At the same time, I think everybody wonders to what extent did they ? Was this something that was just done on game day, or was it something they did throughout the week? they go to practice facilities? And I think that is the question. And I think that is the unfortunate question, because New England has done a tremendous job. They have been very good for a long time.
"But anytime you have something like this go on, and you get caught doing that, it raises questions. And I think rightfully so. I mean, to what degree did this go on? To what degree did this help them? For how long did it help them? Those are natural questions that you ask when somebody gets caught doing something like this. It does go through your mind. And then, at the same time, as a player, you say, 'OK, even if they had our signals, how much would it help?'"
Warner suggests New England would tape opponents' defensive signals from the sidelines, as it was caught doing against the Jets this season, to decode the communications and file them away for a future game against the same team. If the coaches know the defensive signals, he says, they can filter information to the quarterback through the headset in his helmet, which shuts off with 15 seconds left on the play clock.
"If teams kept their signals the same, then you could get a bead on them and be able to have that information," Warner says. "It would be a distinct advantage."
Drew Bledsoe, the backup to Patriots quarterback Tom Brady in that Super Bowl, told ESPN.com he does not know if the Patriots stole signals or taped the walk-through for that title game.
"No, I don't recall anything that would be suspicious for that game," Bledsoe says. "If that happened during that game, I didn't know about it."
Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady's backup in Super Bowl XXXVI, says he isn't aware of any foul play.
Bledsoe also says a coach -- typically the offensive coordinator -- communicating with the quarterback doesn't have time to offer much more than the play call.
"If there is something that they saw that they can give me, give the quarterback, in two words, they'll do it," Bledsoe says.
As for the possibility of determining in advance the defense the quarterback is about to see at the line of scrimmage, Bledsoe says, "Generally, no. Now, if that is what the Patriots were able to accomplish, if they were able to tell Tom what defense is coming, obviously that would be a huge advantage. But whether they were able to do that, I don't know."
Bledsoe suggests that the scandal has been overplayed and that stealing signals always will be part of the game. As a freshman at Washington State, he received an award from his coaches after he stole offensive calls from the sideline in a win over California; he had been able to figure out when Cal was going to run, pass or screen pass.
"Listen, that kind of stuff has been going on for as long as there have been video cameras," Bledsoe says of the accusations against the Patriots. "I know people are trying to make this out like this is some huge scandal, but it is at every level. You talk about college, you talk about high school -- people are taping stuff, and that is what they do. And they try and gain an advantage that way. And that is what the Patriots were doing."
As for where teams cross the line of fair play, he says, "It is a pretty fuzzy line. Like in other realms in the world, in the business world, when you get into a highly competitive environment, people are going to try and do what they can get away with. That is not unique to football."
Another former Patriots quarterback, who spoke to ESPN.com on condition of anonymity, says that New England pushes the envelope further than most teams and that the Patriots were doing so long before they were caught in September.
Warner says he has no insight into the Patriots' methods, although he has heard from quarterbacks who gained an advantage because their teams stole signals.
"I've actually talked to people this year that said they played on teams that had the other team's signals," Warner says. "So as the quarterback, you go up to the line of scrimmage, and they're telling you in your helmet what coverage you are going to see, what play to check to. And those are obviously distinct advantages -- when you know what a team is going to do before you run a play and you have an idea as the quarterback where they are going to go, where you should go with the football. Now, bottom line: You still have to execute. You still have to react. You still have to block, throw and catch it. But it is a huge advantage."
The question is, did the Patriots enjoy that kind of advantage in Super Bowl XXXVI? Did they pick things up during the Rams' walk-through, during the practices in New Orleans leading up to the game or in a game St. Louis played in Foxborough earlier in the 2001 season?
As Warner paints the picture, that Super Bowl wasn't like any other loss. It derailed a franchise and damaged careers and reputations.
"Let's just say, for instance, that what they did had an effect on the second Super Bowl that I played in," Warner says. "And then to see the course of my career from that point forward -- there was some dramatic changes. Had I won two Super Bowls, some of the things may not have happened through the course of my career. Now, obviously, I put my faith and trust in a much higher source than any cheating that is going on, and believe that God has a distinct purpose in what goes on. But I'm just one example of how our situation in St. Louis deteriorated after the loss of that Super Bowl.
"After we lost the Super Bowl, the organization went into a little bit of a downward spiral, as you see with a lot of teams that lose the Super Bowl. You see how career situations were altered after losing that game. You look at Mike Martz. If he is a Super Bowl winner, that is a whole different thing. Or just maybe guys, that was their only chance to be in a Super Bowl. And to go away losing it instead of winning it, that is a huge deal.
"So if did something that affected that game, I would hope that all the parties involved would do everything they could to make sure that it doesn't happen again. And to make sure that something that somebody earned wasn't taken away from them in any way, shape or form by somebody not doing or abiding by the league rules."
Let it go guys.
i wish this story never came out. A lot of us as fans already have a foul taste in our mouths concerning that Super Bowl. And finding out this info only makes the loss sting that much worse.
With that being said, I don't agree with those of you who want the game to be ruled in our favor. I do not want the title going to our RAMS.
Why? Because I don't want to win a title that way. I do not want us to be some 3-13 team who is begging for a championship to be turned our way 6 years later. I don't want to go down in the record books as being the only championship team in history to have a super bowl victory without ever winning the super bowl.
Do we deserve the championship? It seems we could certainly make a claim to it. But let sleeping dogs lie. We got screwed. Happens all the time in sports. Lets build a great team and WIN a super bowl title outright, with no questions asked. Instead of being handed one years and years after it barely even matters anymore.
It's not that I want us to be given the title, but for the Pats to be punished or at LEAST get an * on their records for "tainting" it.
And oh, it still does matter. As with the Warner article above, who knows where ol Kurt would be now if we had won that game? Maybe still here, maybe having thrown for 53 TDs and 5,340 yards in one year? Maybe winning more games?
We'll never know, and it could all be because one team decided to cheat their way to a Championship.
And that sickens me.
If (of course they did) the Pats cheated I want them exposed and this whole BS dynasty thing to go down the drain. That's what it's about, exposing cheaters and seeing the Pats for what they really are.
So if you want to let it go feel free, but I for one won't let it go because I want the truth. Like I said it's not about the title, the trophy, or hats etc. It's about the truth and exposing a fraud.