No announcement yet.

No tape of the Rams Walk through?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • No tape of the Rams Walk through?

    The New York Times > Log In

    Walsh turned over the tapes to the NFL and apparantly there was no tape of the Rams walk-through in his possesion. Interesting..think maybe part of the deal was to destroy it & say it never existed? I dont know it just seems strange, regardless Mr Comish better come down hard & heavy on Belicheat & the Cheatriots, sounds like some of them were sophisticated in the breaking down of coaches signals,down & distance & then the plays ran immediatly afterword, and one tape is of the AFC Championship.

  • #2
    Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

    Heres the article, you have to register with the NY Times to read it on the site. I havent seen this on NFL.Com or any other web sites yet.

    Ex-Patriots Assistant Sends the N.F.L. Eight Tapes
    E-MailPrint Reprints Save Share
    DiggFacebookMixxYahoo! BuzzPermalinkBy GREG BISHOP
    Published: May 8, 2008
    A former New England Patriots employee has sent the N.F.L. eight videotapes showing the team recorded play-calling signals by coaches of five opponents in six games between the 2000 and 2002 seasons, in violation of league rules.

    Skip to next paragraph

    Analysis and discussion of the N.F.L. draft and off-season news from around the league.

    Go to The Fifth Down Blog »
    But the group of tapes does not include video of the St. Louis Rams’ walk-through practice the day before the 2002 Super Bowl. The employee, Matt Walsh, had been linked to such a tape by news media speculation.

    Walsh emerged as a pivotal figure in the spying controversy that enveloped the Patriots last season after they were caught taping Jets defensive signals in the season opener.

    Walsh, who worked for the Patriots from 1997 to 2003, agreed to turn over the tapes and other evidence by Thursday under an agreement reached last month between lawyers for the N.F.L. and Walsh. The agreement indemnifies Walsh from all future legal fees.

    Walsh’s tapes show that the Patriots recorded the signals of offensive and defensive coaches in regular-season games against the Miami Dolphins, the Buffalo Bills, the Cleveland Browns and the San Diego Chargers and against the Pittsburgh Steelers in the 2002 American Football Conference championship game. In that game, the tape has been edited to show Steelers coaches signaling plays, followed by two different camera angles of the actual plays that were called.

    The New York Times obtained a list of the Walsh videotapes. The information was later confirmed by Walsh’s lawyer, Michael Levy, from the Washington offices of McKee Nelson.

    The N.F.L. declined to comment Wednesday night because it did not have the tapes in its possession.

    The Boston Herald reported the day before this year’s Super Bowl that a tape of the Rams existed, citing an anonymous source.

    Walsh does not possess such a tape, Levy said.

    “Mr. Walsh has never claimed to have a tape of the walk-through,” Levy said in a telephone interview. “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.”

    On Tuesday, Walsh is scheduled to speak with Commissioner Roger Goodell and Senator Arlen Specter in separate meetings. Walsh could provide additional information at that time, including how the taping worked, how extensive it was, which Patriots employees were involved and the significance of the evidence he handed over.

    The first tape is dated Sept. 25, 2000, from a game the previous day. The last is from Sept. 29 two years later.

    All the tapes are scheduled to arrive at N.F.L. offices Thursday morning.

    Levy would not say whether Walsh was behind the camera on each tape, but confirmed that Walsh obtained the first seven tapes during his time in the Patriots’ video department, which ended after the 2002 Super Bowl.

    The last tape, in September 2002 against the Chargers, was shot by someone else after Walsh left the video department for a job in the scouting department that ended in early 2003.

    The Chargers tape shows raw footage, Levy said, of the San Diego coaches from the Patriots’ sideline, followed by a shot of the scoreboard showing time, down and distance. The tape contains no footage of actual plays during the game, only the sequence, which the Patriots could match to play tape.

    The other seven tapes are more sophisticated. They show shots of the opposing coaches’ signals, followed immediately by a shot of the play, usually from the end zone camera, Levy said.

    The tape from the A.F.C. championship game is the most extensive, showing two angles of each play.

    Goodell has left open the possibility that additional evidence will lead to additional penalties against Coach Bill Belichick and the Patriots.

    After the Jets game, Goodell levied a total of $750,000 in fines and docked the Patriots a first-round draft pick.

    After this year’s Super Bowl, Goodell met with Specter and revealed for the first time that Belichick’s illegal signal filming dated to the beginning of his tenure with the Patriots, in 2000. Some accounts said Belichick admitted to taping defensive signals, others just signals in general.

    At the Super Bowl, Goodell said of the Patriots’ practice of taping, “I don’t think it taints their accomplishments.”

    Under Belichick, the Patriots rose from one of the league’s middling teams to its best, winning three Super Bowls in four seasons. Last season, they went undefeated until losing to the Giants in the Super Bowl.

    Based on a win-loss tally from games after the ones on tapes provided by Walsh, the Patriots went 9-6 against the Dolphins after the first taping. They also went 12-1 against the Bills, 3-0 against the Browns, 4-1 against the Steelers and 3-1 against the Chargers. This included three victories and no defeats in the playoffs.

    “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.

    Telephone messages to the five teams left Wednesday night were not answered.

    Since Belichick’s first season in New England, when the Patriots finished 5-11, they have gone 86-26 in the regular season, a .768 winning percentage. It remains unclear whether the league will make the tapes public. During the initial investigation into the Patriots, the league accepted seven tapes gathered by the team, dating to 2006, while collecting a written promise that it possessed no more. The N.F.L. destroyed the tapes that the Patriots turned over.

    Under the indemnity agreement, Walsh’s lawyer can keep one copy of each tape, but he cannot release it without the league’s consent.


    • #3
      Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

      So there was somebody else that video tapped as well? What if they had the walkthough and not Walsh?

      "The last tape, in September 2002 against the Chargers, was shot by someone else "

      So who is to say they did not get in some practice, perhaps by taping their biggest game?

      Still, they cheated to get to that Superbowl, doesn't that already mean that if they had lost, it was still tainted?

      I'm afraid we will not see justiced served here.


      • #4
        Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

        Figured it'd turn out that way. I'm more than sure they taped the Philly/Carolina signals and walkthroughs as well. But whatever, the NFL has to save America's team.


        • #5
          Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

          The part about him taping the walkthrough was all fabricated by the media. Walsh nor anyone connected to Walsh has ever said: "We taped the Rams walkthrough". This isn't the NFL protecting anyone. What would you like them to do? Set up a full investigation on a dead end, which is what this is. Let's track down everyone who ever worked for the Pats and see what they know, I sure hope they aren't going to lie about it.

          Time to let it go don't ya think?


          • #6
            Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

            Why would he make statments and not have a tape, what a Joke.


            • #7
              Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

              Originally posted by Rambos View Post
              Why would he make statments and not have a tape, what a Joke.
              I agree. I believe there was a tape and it accidentally disappeared. A big joke! Who didn't see this coming.


              • #8
                Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                They didn't need a walkthrough tape, they had game film of Lovie's "prevent" defense. The only thing that defense prevented was another Super Bowl win.


                • #9
                  Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                  Funny I thought there were 10 tapes?
                  LA RAMMER

                  It's Jim not Chris


                  • #10
                    Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                    I'm pretty sure that even if there was a walkthrough tape, the NFL would never let us know. It would be too big of a scar on the business.
                    As said, it may have just "vanished" before anything else was said about it.

                    All I know now is that I do not trust Roger Goodell or the integrity of the National Football League anymore, and probably never will fully trust it again.


                    • #11
                      Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                      Originally posted by LA Rammer View Post
                      Funny I thought there were 10 tapes?
                      ha there probably was, the two that are mising are probably the Rams Super Bowl walk through & the Rams defensive signals from the 2001 regular season meeting in New England.

                      Heres the story from the St.Louis PD Web site

                      STLtoday - Rams are not part of tapes sent to the NFL


                      • #12
                        Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                        The fact is; no physical evidense, no case. At least where the Rams are concerned.

                        RAM ON!


                        • #13
                          Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                          Maybe I'm just a bitter Rams fan, but something does not seem right here. Why in the world would Matt Walsh put himself on the hot seat with nothing new? Why would he go through all the scorn and scrutiny the last several months if all he had was more of the same tapes that have already been presented and admitted to by New England? It doesn't add up. I'm wondering if there was more than an immunity deal.


                          • #14
                            Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                            Why did Walsh need indemnity if there was nothing on the tapes?

                            It may not be a conspiracy but do I smell collusion?

                            GO RAMS!!


                            • #15
                              Re: No tape of the Rams Walk through?

                              Originally posted by YodaRam View Post
                              The fact is; no physical evidense, no case. At least where the Rams are concerned. RAM ON!
                              Well, I guess you could also say that there was no "physical evidence" in Lovie's Prevent defense at the end of that game either.


                              Related Topics


                              • RamWraith
                                Boston Herald-Possible Rams/Pats Superbowl Spygate?
                                by RamWraith
                                From th3 Boston Herald

                                Source: Pats employee filmed Rams

                                By John Tomase | Saturday, February 2, 2008 |

                                Photo by Nancy Lane
                                PHOENIX - One night before the Patriots face the Giants in Super Bowl XLII, new allegations have emerged about a Patriots employee taping the Rams’ final walkthrough before Super Bowl XXXVI.

                                According to a source, a member of the team’s video department filmed the Rams’ final walkthrough before that 2002 game. The next day, the Patriots upset St. Louis, 20-17, on a last-second field goal by Adam Vinatieri for their first championship.

                                A walkthrough involves practicing plays at reduced speed without contact or pads. It is common for teams to film their own walkthroughs and practices.

                                When contacted last night, Patriots vice president of media relations Stacey James said: “The coaches have no knowledge of it.”

                                Yesterday, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) stated that he plans to summon NFL commissioner Roger Goodell before Congress to explain why he destroyed tapes that showed the Patriots stealing defensive signals over the last two years.

                                After his state of the NFL press conference yesterday, Goodell was asked if the league’s investigation into the Pats included allegations that they recorded the Rams walkthrough in 2002.

                                “I’m not aware of that,” Goodell said.

                                “We have no information on that,” seconded NFL spokesman Greg Aiello.

                                According to a source close to the team during the 2001 season, here’s what happened. On Feb. 2, 2002, one day before the Patriots’ Super Bowl game against heavily favored St. Louis in New Orleans, the Patriots visited the Superdome for their final walkthrough.

                                After completing the walkthrough, they had their team picture taken and the Rams then took the field. According to the source, a member of the team’s video staff stayed behind after attending the team’s walkthrough and filmed St. Louis’ walkthrough.

                                At no point was he asked to identify himself or produce a press pass, the source said. The cameraman rode the media shuttle back to the hotel with news photographers when the Rams walkthrough was completed, the source said.

                                It’s not known what the cameraman did with the tape from there. It’s also not known if he made the recording on his own initiative or if he was instructed to make the recording by someone with the Patriots or anyone else.

                                The next day, the Patriots opened a 14-3 halftime lead on the Rams, who were 14-point favorites and operators of an offense known as “The Greatest Show on Turf.”

                                The Rams didn’t begin moving the ball until the fourth quarter, when their 14-point rally pulled the teams into a 17-17 tie with less than two minutes remaining. Tom Brady then led the most famous drive in Patriots history for the winning field goal.

                                -02-02-2008, 07:28 AM
                              • MauiRam
                                Belichick Denies Taping Rams Before Superbowl ..
                                by MauiRam
                                Updated: February 18, 2008, 12:59 AM EST
                                BOSTON (AP) - Patriots coach Bill Belichick broke his silence on New England's twin taping controversies, denying he told anyone to tape the St. Louis Rams' walkthrough before the 2002 Super Bowl and apologizing for all the attention generated by Spygate. Belichick also told the Boston Globe he "couldn't pick Matt Walsh out of a lineup." Walsh, a former Patriots employee, reportedly taped St. Louis' walkthrough practice the day before the Patriots beat the Rams 20-17 in the championship.

                                "In my entire coaching career, I've never seen another team's practice film prior to playing that team," Belichick said in a story posted on the Globe's Web site Sunday night. "I have never authorized, or heard of, or even seen in any way, shape, or form any other team's walkthrough. We don't even film our own."

                                Patriots vice president of player personnel Scott Pioli also told the newspaper that part of the reason Walsh was fired in January 2003 was because he secretly recorded conversations between himself and Pioli.

                                Michael Levy, Walsh's attorney, said Pioli's account was a "complete fabrication."

                                "This is a predictable and pathetic effort to smear Mr. Walsh's character rather than confront the truth about the Patriots' conduct," Levy said in the Globe story.

                                Levy has said his client is willing to turn over videotapes he made for the team if the NFL guarantees Walsh protection from lawsuits or other legal action.

                                Commissioner Roger Goodell has said he offered Walsh a deal requiring him "to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly" in return for indemnity, but Levy has said the deal doesn't go far enough.

                                Goodell fined Belichick $500,000, the Patriots $250,000 and took away a first-round draft choice after the Patriots were caught taping New York Jets' coaches in last year's season opener, a 38-14 New England victory.

                                Belichick said he misinterpreted the rule, which he felt only prohibited taping that could be used during the same game.

                                He also apologized for the controversy the taping caused.

                                "I respect the integrity of the game and always have and always will," he said in the Globe story. "I regret that any of this, or to whatever extent, it has in any way brought that into question or discussion or debate. The decision was made by the commissioner, the practice was immediately stopped, and we're not doing it.

                                "Just going back over the whole taping incident, if I contacted the league and asked them about the practice, I'm sure they would have told me - as they have done - that it is not permissible. Then I could have avoided all of this.

                                "I take responsibility for it," he said. "Even though I felt there was a gray area...
                                -02-18-2008, 12:13 AM
                              • RamOfDenmark
                                Walsh's lawyer confirms: Walsh has videotapes
                                by RamOfDenmark
                                Matt Walsh's lawyer asks NFL to protect his client on Spygate tapes

                                By DAVE GOLDBERG, AP Football Writer
                                February 15, 2008

                                NEW YORK (AP) -- The lawyer for former New England Patriots employee Matt Walsh said his client is willing to turn over videotapes he made for the team if the NFL guarantees Walsh protection from lawsuits or other legal action.

                                Attorney Michael Levy said that to date, the NFL's initial proposals are not sufficient protection for Walsh, who is said to have taped the St. Louis Rams' walkthrough practice the day before they played the Patriots in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won. 20-17.

                                "The NFL's proposal is not full indemnification," Levy told The Associated Press Friday in a telephone interview from his office at the Washington law firm of McKee Nelson.

                                "It is highly conditional and still leaves Mr. Walsh vulnerable. I have asked the NFL to provide Mr. Walsh with the necessary legal protections so that he can come forward with the truth without fear of retaliation and litigation. To best serve the interest of the public and everyone involved, I am hopeful that the NFL will do so promptly."

                                NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has said he's offered Walsh a deal whereby "he has to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly" in return for indemnity.

                                "No one wants to talk to Matt Walsh more than we do," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Friday.

                                "But his demand to be released from all responsibility even if his comments are not truthful is unprecedented and unreasonable. The NFL and the Patriots have assured Mr. Walsh's lawyer that there will be no adverse consequences for his client if Mr. Walsh truthfully shares what he knows. Why does he need any more protection than that?"

                                Walsh, now a golf pro in Maui, did video work for the Patriots when they won the first of their three Super Bowl after the 2001 season.

                                Goodell said Walsh was not interviewed as part of the NFL's investigation into "Spygate," which involved the NFL confiscating tapes from a Patriots employee who recorded the New York Jets' defensive signals from the sideline during the opening game of the 2007 season.

                                As a result of that investigation, New England coach Bill Belichick was fined $500,000 and the team was fined $250,000 and forfeited its 2008 first-round draft choice.

                                Six confiscated tapes and other documents pertaining to the Patriots' taping were subsequently destroyed by the league. Goodell has defended the destruction of the tapes.

                                Levy, who is continuing to negotiate with the NFL on Walsh's behalf, also objected to NFL security's investigation of his client.

                                "Sending a former FBI agent to investigate his professional and personal life has not left Mr....
                                -02-15-2008, 05:40 PM
                              • ramsanddodgers
                                Walsh Didn’t Film Rams During 2001 Regular Season
                                by ramsanddodgers
                                WALSH DIDN’T FILM RAMS DURING 2001 REGULAR SEASON
                                Posted by Mike Florio on May 26, 2008, 9:29 p.m.
                                Last week, we wrote that someone needs to nail down the question of whether former Pats video employee Matt Walsh taped the defensive coaching signals of the St. Louis Rams during the 2001 regular-season game played between the two teams.

                                If Walsh did, then there would be a real possibility that the tape was used in an effort to crack the Rams’ code for the teams’ Super Bowl XXXVI rematch.

                                Buried in a Q&A session between Walsh and the New York Times is the apparent answer to the question. Asked what his duties were during that regular-season game, Walsh said: “Filmed, to the best of my recollection. I can’t specifically say I remember the details of what I filmed.”

                                So the answer to the key question is “maybe”.

                                We’re concerned, frankly, by the equivocal nature of Walsh’s response. Faced with an opportunity to remove a fairly large cloud of concern from the Pats’ unexpected achievements in 2001, Walsh pulled out the “I don’t remember” card, even though his memory on other topics is as clear and thorough as Rain Man’s knowledge of the phone book from A through half of G.

                                How could Walsh not remember whether the team’s then-fledging taping experiment would return the ultimate payoff by giving the Pats video evidence of the Rams’ defensive coaching signals as the two teams prepared to meet in the Super Bowl?

                                Surely, Walsh didn’t tape the Rams’ defensive coaching signals during that regular season game. Otherwise, he would have said that he did. His failure to say that he didn’t in unmistakable terms is, in our view, disgraceful.

                                Our guess is that Walsh knew that he’d be running afoul of the terms of his indemnity agreement with the NFL if he said he taped the 2001 regular-season game with the Rams, and so he opted to allow the doubt to continue to hover on this specific question. And Greg Bishop of the New York Times, whose puff pieces on folks like Walsh lawyer Michael Levy, former Patriots quarterback Drew Bledsoe, and former NFL exec Charley Casserly possibly were rewarded with scoops such as the submission of tapes from Matt Walsh to the NFL, an off-the-record statement from a former Pats player (Bledsoe?) regarding the cheating scandal, an unnamed quotes from a longtime NFL exec with knowledge of competition committee meetings (Casserly?) regarding the supposed focus of cheating complaints on the Pats, failed in his duty to play both sides of the story evenly by not pressing Walsh as to the ludicrous nature of his supposed failure of recollection.

                                So even though Walsh stopped short of claiming that the Pats engaged in more widespread cheating than previously reported, we believe that part of his plan was to cause as much trouble for the team as he possibly could, while at the same time protecting himself against...
                                -05-26-2008, 10:50 PM
                              • Nick
                                Goodell: Belichick and Patriots have been taping since 2000
                                by Nick
                                Goodell: Pats have taped since 2000
                                Belichick told NFL commish he thought it was OK to do
                                Posted: Wednesday February 13, 2008 6:37PM; Updated: Wednesday February 13, 2008 11:42PM

                                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...
                                -02-13-2008, 11:49 PM