Hoffman: Suit against Patriots only reaffirms the obvious
Date:Tuesday 19 February 2008 05:14 am
Author:mikemcd
By Rich Hoffman
The Philadelphia Daily News

Watching in amazement as Sen. Arlen Specter and some attorneys from the
Cincinnati area attempt to turn Bill Belichick and his video camera into a
federal case, literally, the following is offered for perspective:
"We know that (stealing signs) became an area of concentration for a lot of
teams," the coach said. "I think that crossed the line of ethics; to have
teams videotaping me on the sideline, then learning our plays."
The coach in question was Sam Wyche, then of the Tampa Bay Bucs. The quote
comes from a St. Petersburg Times story published in 1994.
Then, this:
"We don't do it," another coach said. "There are other clubs that do and are
really good at it. There are even two or three teams that videotape the
other team's signals and study them ... I don't know if it's legal, but I'm
pretty sure it's not kosher."
That coach was Jimmy Johnson, then of the Miami Dolphins. The quote comes
from a Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel story published in 1997.
It has been against the rules forever, according to an NFL spokesman
contacted the other day, but it seems that at least several teams were
undeterred about sideline taping over the years - and, amazingly enough,
both the sport and the republic survived. Yet here we all are, in a
desperate race to get somebody named Matt Walsh in front of a legal
stenographer so that he can tell us what he says he knows about the
Patriots and whether they taped the St. Louis Rams at their pre-Super Bowl
walkthrough in 2002.
Belichick is on record now, in a Boston Globe story published Monday. He
denies everything, up, down and sideways. He says he didn't order
videotaping of the walkthrough; he didn't see any tape; he has never seen a
tape of any opponent's practice; and he "couldn't pick Matt Walsh out of a
lineup."
It was all pretty emphatic - Clemensesque, in fact.
Hugh K. Campbell Jr., one of the attorneys who filed the class-action
lawsuit against the Pats and Belichick, said that, like the rest of us, he
read the coach's extensive denials Monday morning.
"We're curious to find out what Matt Walsh has to say," he said.
The $100 million lawsuit - which claims to represent the interests of Rams
players and ticketholders defrauded by the dastardly Belichick - totals 25
pages. It is a colossal bore, as are most lawsuits. Having subjected it to
a thorough and professional review - that is, as thorough and professional
a review as can be performed by a layman who is semi-sprawled on a couch
and flipping through it during commercials - this seems to be the entire
basis of the suit:
"An unidentified source, but one the Boston Herald relied upon enough to
publicize the allegation, told the Boston Herald a member of the Patriots
video staff taped the St. Louis Rams last 'walk-through' before they played
in the 2002 Super Bowl."
That's it. Really.
No?
"I don't think it's only based on a newspaper report," said Campbell, on the
phone Monday from his office in Cincinnati.
"Bill Belichick has been fined $500,000 by the league," he said. "Obviously,
I think they had proof that he did illegal taping since at least 2000, and
I think Sen. Specter would agree with that. The filming didn't just start
in 2006."
But videotaping sideline signals is completely different from videotaping a
team's walkthrough on the day before the Super Bowl. The former is illegal,
but more in the realm of digital gamesmanship, and it has been going on
with other NFL teams, or at least alleged, for years; no, decades. The
latter is much worse, a whole 'nother kettle of pixels and would almost
certainly result in Belichick's being kicked out of the league (for lying
to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, if nothing else).
Anyway, the race now is to get Walsh, the former Pats video/lackey guy,
under oath. The problem is that Walsh is seeking immunity from a lawsuit
regarding anything he says or anything he swiped from the Pats after he was
fired.
Campbell said he and one of his co-counsels, Eric C. Deters, were working
Monday on finding a way to craft an immunity deal. Campbell said that he
was contacting Specter and trying to coordinate their efforts somehow - "It
seems to make sense, in that we're all trying to get the same information,"
he said - and that Deters was contacting Walsh's attorney and working that
angle.
"It's up to the court to allow discovery," Campbell said, meaning he can't
get Walsh in front of the stenographer until the court says so. "It would
be nice if Matt Walsh would come forward."
He will at some point, with some kind of immunity - that seems certain now.
At which point, this great governmental intrusion into the unsportsmanlike
conduct that has existed in the NFL forever will begin in earnest. Walsh
will allege, Belichick will deny, and a grand national search will begin
for an NFL version of Andy Pettitte. Hilarity will ensue.
--
Only a FOOL would believe in the FOLLY of Global Warming
Al Gore's movie IS an opinion (or more accurately a political device), and
there's very little 'scientific evidence' in it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/us/07stormcnd.html?ei=5065&en=1bb1732aba749ac9&ex=1200286800&adxnnl=1&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1199718180-11vT1Os9DH52pB43B/S+vg
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/01/06/br_r_r_where_did_global_warming_go/
http://www.newstatesman.com/200712190004
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19619301/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=485336&in_page_id=1811
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/04/eaclimate104.xml

Archived from group: alt>sports>football>pro>ne-patriots