2007 Associated Press Stylebook … 5 things a libel plaintiff must prove (and I would say it does apply to any source, including a confidential one; but that last part is me).

1. A defamatory statement was made (in this case, a damaged reputation; but the key is looking at the definition of libel in the particular state). This is very hard to prove, me thinks.

2. The defamatory statement is a matter of fact, not opinion,

3. The defamatory statement is false. Remember, the plaintiff has the BURDEN of proof, not vice versa.

4. The defamatory statement is about the plaintiff.

5. The defamatory statement was published with the requisite degree of fault (something about New York Times v. Sullivan; hard for me to fully grasp this one).

I’d say the problem could arise in proving (1) and (3) and that the New England Patriots would lose the case against the Boston Herald.

Let’s see what does and what does not come to fruition.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

Fair enough. I also agree that you can’t read TOO much into a single quote like that.

However, one of the underlying contentions of the “it wasn’t a big deal” angle Belichick and others have taken is that it really wasn’t a huge part of their week-to-week operations. That it was a very small operation, with only the video people and some top coaches using the information in studies for future games.

This excuse is already seeming more flimsy as evidence that signals in the 2001 AFC championship game were taped. Why would it be useful for a “future game” to tape defensive signals in the playoffs?

More interestingly here, however, is this new “player involved” angle. I haven’t seen anyone in the media, the NFL itself or elsewhere start asking tough questions of NE players themselves. Everyone seems to have just assumed that they were “kept in the dark” about such activities (mostly because they didn’t fit the “need to know basis” levels of secrecy Belichick keeps within his operation).

Bledsoe’s quote seems to imply otherwise. That NE players were aware of what was going on. That they knew the tapes were being made. Also, as Bledsoe himself says:

“Was it a violation of the spirit of the rules? Absolutely, it was, but I think all of that has been readily acknowledged.”

SO he seems to be not only saying he knew what was going on, but that he also knew it was a violation of what the rules were trying to achieve (though it is indeed unclear if he is saying he thought that at the time).

In any event, it seems significant to me because if Goodell and others REALLY wanted to get to the bottom of how these tapes were being used, it would seem that the players themselves have some potentially useful knowledge.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

I think most people are aware these are rules of a game, not laws, but thanks for clarifying. My comments were related to those who assert that the Patriots should be punished MORE now that stolen tapes going back to 2000 (which Belichick had already admitted to) have surfaced.

Do you think the Commissioner should retroactively penalize teams for breaking rules that didn’t exist? That’d be an odd policy, but is exactly what some are asserting now.

As far as other teams cited in the 1967 article, as well as the admission of Jimmy Johnson that he engaged in the same practices as Belichick, I think everyone can agree that all teams should be treated the same.

If someone asserts the Patriots Super Bowl rings are tainted and deserving of an asterisk, they need to apply the same standard to the Cowboys championship seasons, and all the teams cited in the 1967 article. Specter and the Commissioner should also call in Grosscup to testify what was going on back then and see if they can find anyone else in the Bears organization who can speak to the allegation of cheating going back to 1955.

Or is this issue just a Patriots witch hunt and not about the integrity of the NFL in general?

(report as inappropriate)

If Bledsoe knew or didn’t know the Pats were taping defensive signals, how is significant? First, he might have just mispoken. But even if he didn’t, he may never have used the information.

Based on Bledsoe’s play under Belichick and the Patriots, it is incredible evidence to support the Patriots’ claim that they didn’t claim a competitive advantage if he did study the tapes. Bledsoe had a mediocre year in 2000. He had 3291 yards, 17 TDs, and 13 INTs while completing 58.8% of his passes. The Patriots were 18th overall on offense that season.

(report as inappropriate)

You are well are right. The Pats were well aware that Matt Walsh didn’t tape the Rams walkthrough. They were proven right so far.

Walsh didn’t act alone. There is no tape of the Rams walkthrough. The Pats authorized him to tape opposing teams sidelines. So far, that is all Walsh has seemed to have admitting to do. So yes, the Pats knew and ordered Walsh to tape the opposing sidelines of San Deigo. If you are talking about me talking about the rumor of taping the Chargers’ practice, that was the Broncos.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

oh brotha!

Florio, I agree with you. I’d bet a months lunch money that it was Walsh too. I’d also bet that the Herald was not the only newspaper in town with the story, just the only one that would print it without anything to back it up.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

John Tomase needs to reveal his source. Lets find out why he wrote the story. We need to find out if there was even a source or if he just tried to beat everyone to the story. If there is smoke there is fire and hope they are right.

Dan,

No reporter is going to reveal a source, unless he no longer wants to be a reporter. Once a source is revealed, would anybody confide in that reporter again? I don’t think so.

IMO, there won’t be a law suit. That will just drag this whole story out longer, and if the NFL wants it to go away, it won’t if there is a lawsuit.

If there was a lawsuit, where would it take place? Would they be able to find an impartial jury?

Like I have said umpteen times. IMO, most people have already made up there collective minds on this issue. No one is going to change anyone’s mind. The damage has already been done to the league. It should have never come to this, but it has unfortunately.

Goodell should have kept everything, but that is too late now. It gives the conspiracy theorists something to latch on to.

I am a Charger fan and I haven’t made up my mind on this issue. I don’t know what to think or believe at this point. I just hope the NFL is being straight forward and honest. I have loved this sport since I was a little kid and I don’t want to see it damaged.

(report as inappropriate)

Did you not see the interesting seemingly new information in your own piece?!?? Look at Bledsoe’s quote:

“As a player here, I never did see anything other than what was already reported.”

Am I wrong, or is Bledsoe implying he DID know about the taping while a player in NE?! Doesn’t that contradict everything the players have been saying “I don’t know nothing about that.”

Look at his position. Isn’t it interesting the QB, the guy who would have the most to gain from knowledge of defenses, acknowledge he knew what was going on? Doesn’t this seem to imply that this went beyond mere “coaching studies for future games?”

I don’t know, but that admission seems significant to me.

(report as inappropriate)

Basically, get over yourself.

(report as inappropriate)

While I agree that the “everyone does it too” defense doesn’t fly for the Patriots to avoid punishment. It is valid in the defense that the media and some fans vilify the Patriots and Belichick as some evil group that are cheaters in a league of angels.

The difference between the Pats and a lot of teams are that they got caught and other didn’t. That does not excuse them from punishment, but it doesn’t change the fact that cheating the NFL is far more prevalent than people want to admit.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

Why else has tampering being the league’s dirty little not-so-secret for a number of years?

Considering up to the Patriots cheating or breaking the rules has been nothing more than a slap on the wrist to teams, I am sure many teams were getting very creative in testing the boundaries of breaking the rules. Jim Mora Jr. used a cellphone on the sidelines and only got a $30k fine. The Broncos cheated the cap both their Super Bowl years and only got fined a 3rd round selection and a little under a million dollars. And no matter how people want to spin it, cheating the cap to get a better quality roster is far more of a competitive advantage than videotaping signals (just not as sexy). If the Yahoo Sports rumor is true, they weren’t even punished for videotaping the Chargers’ practice. So what was their to stop teams from cheating?

(report as inappropriate)

Cheaters!!! - walk through tapes or not…the tapes are clearly outside the rules of the game.

Pats will never get any respect from me. C-H-E-A-T-E-R-S

I hope Billy B didn’t fess up to these tapes and said that the previous tapes were the only ones where they taped opponents…if so here comes another fine Kraft.

(report as inappropriate)

There aren’t that many logical explanations as to why they league did that, but just fer shigs & gittles lets list a few…..

a) they dont want to shine a light onto anything that might give the government reason to want to explore lifting the aint-trust exemptions that the league has been awarded
b) the patriots did a lot more cheating than they want anyone to know
c) that several teams were actually taped doing the same things
d) that an inquiry/investigation into the situation would reveal that almost all teams do what was reported about the patsies & more

…..and dont think the NFL didnt know people wouldn’t come to these conclusions, they aren’t worried, because @least now we can’t prove anything b/c all other teams that may or may not have done similar things have already been ordered to expung their own evidence(s) from exsistence. If the Patsies weren’t so cocky/forward in continuing already rumored practices that they were warned not to do anymore/ever again then none of this would have ever become an issue.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

Tomase/Walsh ‘08

(report as inappropriate)

Now the effort is to squash it and move on.
Personally I don’t care what is said on the subject from here on out, my opinion of the Pats has permantly been altered.

I saw all the games and at the time was blown away at how good a playcaller and gameplanner BB was. In hindsight, they must have been able to crack the codes of playcallers or they are just smarter than everyone else in the NFL.

Why else would they continue to do it after 2006 when they had been specificly warned to stop doing it, unless the benifit was great enough to warrant the risk?

(report as inappropriate)

Fact 1 — When the eight Walsh tapes were handed over, Aiello immediately said that the Walsh tapes did not tell the NFL anything new:

“This is consistent with what the Patriots had admitted they had been doing, consistent with what we already knew,” league spokesman Greg Aiello said. (See Rotoworld, May 8, 1:51 a.m.)

Fact 2 — When reports later came out that the Walsh tapes included taping of OFFENSIVE signals, Aiello said he couldn’t comment because the NFL hadn’t looked at the tapes yet:

“We don’t know [about attempts to steal offensive signals] yet because we haven’t looked at the tapes,” NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said. “One of them is labeled ‘OFF signals.’ None of others are listed that way. Let us look at the tapes and we’ll have more to say about that.” (See Rotoworld, May 9, 8:42 a.m.)

HOW CAN YOU FIRST SAY THAT THE TAPES SHOW NOTHING NEW AND THEN LATER SAY THE TAPES HAVEN’T BEEN REVIEWED YET???? Answer — you jumped to the conclusion that you wanted the world to believe, that there was nothing to see here, please please move on and forget about this episode that threatens to undermine the credibility of our game.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

Jeez. Just shut up already, Joe! You seem to forget that these aren’t laws we’re talking about, and you can’t hide behind “technicalities”.

“Everyone also seems to forget that this has been going on for more than 50 years likely by every team”

And “they did it, too!” is not a viable defense, either.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

I’m sure others rather then just Goodell viewed those tapes. I’m sure they can testify that a tape of the Rams walkthrough was not in those tapes. Also, if it is revealed that Walsh was the source, he clearly would not have access to the tapes that the Patriots provided to the NFL. There should be some retribution for Tomase’s erroneous and fictitous account.

(report as inappropriate)

Waterboy. The evidence is written in the Boston Herald. Although Defamation would probably be hard for a Football team to prove.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

I’d like to know why in 103 days Tomase never dropped any hints that walsh wasn’t the source of the walk thru tape rumors. I think that says loudly that Tomase believed he was. Sounds like walsh was simply bragging, but didn’t have the goods to back it up.

(report as inappropriate)

I was under the impression that the Rams walk-through was a short session on plays they may, or may not run in the red zone. If I’m not mistaken the Rams were 1 for 1 in the red zone in that game. Tape, no tape, walk through or no walk through the Patriots certainly didn’t seem to have an advantage on the knowledge of the Rams red zone plays.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

There are too many ways to predict the play out of any team’s formation, a tape of some “walk through” isn’t going to help anyone. Let’s get off of this crap, I’m tired of seeing it, and hearing about it.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

Can someone please finally let this dead horse lie? Everyone wants there to be so much more to this, and it’s just the same thing after the same thing after the same thing. Get over it. It happened. It’s over. Let’s move the F on…

(report as inappropriate)

People also seem to forget that this is about sideline taping only - the NFL condones taping from elsewhere in the stadium with the other team’s permission. Does everyone believe a team wouldn’t turn a telescopic microphone and telephoto lens on the other team’s playcalling?

Everyone also seems to forget that this has been going on for more than 50 years likely by every team - so let’s not get holier than thou over this http://www.thesportgallery.com/sport-stories/1967aug-nflspy.html

Finally, no one still has asked or received an answser to the question of why Levy, a high priced DC attorney found it in his heart to represent Walsh. Is there any connection between him and his previous lawfirm and entities with an interest in the NFL? Hopefully someone in the press knows how to use “Google”.

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)

(report as inappropriate)