Specter says Patriots "stonewalling" Spygate probe

[Lady Jet]

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/sports&id=5975937

Specter says Patriots 'stonewalling' Spygate probeFriday, February 22, 2008 | 7:48 PM02/22/2008 16:46 PM -- Sen. Arlen Specter said Friday that the Patriots have stonewalled his requests to interview team employees about Spygate.

Frustrated at the obstacles confronting his investigation of "Spygate," Sen. Arlen Specter accused the New England Patriots of "stonewalling" on Friday and suggested the NFL might never get around to questioning key witness Matt Walsh, a former New England Patriots video assistant.

Specter's comments are in stark contrast to remarks on Wednesday from NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, who told reporters that the NFL was moving toward an agreement that would allow Walsh to tell what he knows about the Patriots' spying practices without fear of being sued.

"My suspicion is that they're going to put enough conditions on it so that he won't talk," Specter, a Republican from Pennsylvania, told ESPN.com. "If they had wanted Walsh to talk, it would have been done a long time ago. They are not helped by keeping him on ice, unless they intend to [permanently] keep him on ice."

If the league gains Walsh's cooperation, Specter said he wants to be present when Walsh is questioned "because a witness' testimony can be shaded or molded by who questions him first."

Walsh, employed by the Patriots from 1996 to 2003, has suggested that he has information, perhaps even materials, about the Patriots' video practices that could be potentially damaging.

His attorney, Michael Levy, forwarded a proposal to the NFL's outside counsel seeking full indemnification for Walsh on Feb. 14. Levy, as well as Specter, maintained that the league's initial proposal failed to protect Walsh against the possibility of being sued, and said it also required that he turn over any materials or evidence.

"They haven't taken the steps to get Walsh to come forward," Specter said. "They have the key."

Late Friday afternoon, NFL spokesperson Greg Aiello said the league respectfully disagrees with Specter.

"We have offered Mr. Walsh's attorney assurances that are fully responsive to his concerns," Aiello said. "And we have not heard back from him. ... We very much want to speak to [Walsh]."

As of Friday night, however, the league and Walsh's attorney had not reached an agreement.

An attorney for the Patriots told ESPN.com that Walsh did not have a confidentiality agreement with the franchise or anything else that might prevent his cooperation.

Specter painted a much starker, more contentious picture than the one presented by the league and the Patriots. He said both the Patriots and New York Jets have refused to cooperate with his investigation.

Specter told ESPN.com that his staff has been rebuffed in its efforts to interview Patriots personnel about the team's videotaping practices. The Republican leader on the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to say who, specifically, he wanted to talk to, but the list presumably includes head coach Bill Belichick, his longtime assistant Ernie Adams and members of the team's video department.

"My staff has been stonewalled on that," Specter said.

After his staff made phone contact with some individuals connected to the team, Specter said they were referred to the Patriots' outside legal counsel, who rejected a request for cooperation. Daniel L. Goldberg, who represents the Patriots and also the Boston Red Sox, said that in all cases, the individuals had been previously interviewed at least once - and in some instances twice -- by the league.

Goldberg refused to identify those individuals.

"Sen. Specter's office had called me as counsel to the Patriots to ask to interview several Patriots employees," said Goldberg, attorney with the Boston firm of Bingham and McCutchen. "I was told that the inquiry was with respect to signal-taping. And as I explained to the Senator's office, we regard this as a league matter. As such, we have fully cooperated with the league's investigation."

Asked to respond to Specter's accusation that the Patriots have stonewalled his requests for information, Goldberg said, "You look at it from our perspective. Who is the right forum for an inquiry into a matter like this? We regard this as a league matter. It deals with league rules, league enforcement."

But Specter, a onetime district attorney in Philadelphia, didn't react favorably to the Patriots' responses to his investigators.

"Well, I think that it is somewhere between absurd to insulting that they won't let us talk to the witnesses," Specter said. "Whoever heard of not being able to talk to someone because it is hearsay back from somebody else who talked to them. You have to question hearsay and reliability. I'm not prepared to accept what somebody else says these key witnesses say. What kind of an inquiry would it be if we accepted what somebody else tells us what was said?"

Specter's investigators also have been rebuffed in their efforts to seek access to members of the New York Jets' coaching staff. During the season-opening game last September at New York, the Patriots were caught taping defensive signals being sent in from the Jets' sideline. The Jets' staff is of key interest in the Spygate affair because several members, including Jets head coach Eric Mangini, worked under Belichick in New England.

"Our firm was engaged to represent certain employees of the New York Jets in connection with a request for information from Sen. Specter," Jets outside legal counsel Scott Michel said in an e-mail to ESPN.com on Friday night. "Our clients have not spoken to the Senator or his staff and at this time have no plans to do so."

Specter said Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Damon Huard, a one-time backup to Tom Brady with the Patriots, refused to speak with him, too, during a personal phone call the Senator placed to Huard last Friday.

"I talked to him, and he wouldn't talk," Specter said. "I didn't go through a secretary, and he doubted that it was Arlen Specter. Maybe that is why he wouldn't talk. I don't sound much like Arlen Specter."

Specter said it is only because of outside pressure that the NFL has offered up additional information related to the Patriots' taping history. Specter explained: "To get a concession from the commissioner that it goes back to the year 2000. To get a concession that they had notes. Originally, we were only told about videos, and they only went back a half-dozen games in '06. Originally, we weren't told that the notes included the [Pittsburgh] Steelers."

Specter said he is aware of what appears to be a united league-wide front supporting Goodell's handling of the taping controversy. That support was echoed Thursday at the NFL scouting combine in Indianapolis by members of the league's powerful Competition Committee, who told reporters they believe the issue should be put to rest.

"Well, I don't want to pick a fight with everybody in the world, like all the owners," Specter said. "But they are functioning from talking points -- 'We're satisfied with the investigation.' 'Oh yes, the penalty was sufficient.' 'Oh, let's put this behind us.' 'Let's move on.'

"You have heard everyone say the same thing."

Mike Fish is an investigative reporter for ESPN.com. He can be reached at michaeljfish@gmail.com.

[Gainzo]

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/sports&id=5975937

Specter says Patriots 'stonewalling' Spygate probeFriday, February 22, 2008 | 7:48 PM02/22/2008 16:46 PM -- Sen. Arlen Specter said Friday that the Patriots have stonewalled his requests to interview team employees about Spygate.

Frustrated at the obstacles confronting his investigation of "Spygate," Sen. Arlen Specter accused the New England Patriots of "stonewalling" on Friday and suggested the NFL might never get around to questioning key witness Matt Walsh, a former New England Patriots video assistant.

Specter's comments are in stark contrast to remarks on Wednesday from NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, who told reporters that the NFL was moving toward an agreement that would allow Walsh to tell what he knows about the Patriots' spying practices without fear of being sued.

"My suspicion is that they're going to put enough conditions on it so that he won't talk," Specter, a Republican from Pennsylvania, told ESPN.com. "If they had wanted Walsh to talk, it would have been done a long time ago. They are not helped by keeping him on ice, unless they intend to [permanently] keep him on ice."

If the league gains Walsh's cooperation, Specter said he wants to be present when Walsh is questioned "because a witness' testimony can be shaded or molded by who questions him first."

Walsh, employed by the Patriots from 1996 to 2003, has suggested that he has information, perhaps even materials, about the Patriots' video practices that could be potentially damaging.

His attorney, Michael Levy, forwarded a proposal to the NFL's outside counsel seeking full indemnification for Walsh on Feb. 14. Levy, as well as Specter, maintained that the league's initial proposal failed to protect Walsh against the possibility of being sued, and said it also required that he turn over any materials or evidence.

"They haven't taken the steps to get Walsh to come forward," Specter said. "They have the key."

Late Friday afternoon, NFL spokesperson Greg Aiello said the league respectfully disagrees with Specter.

"We have offered Mr. Walsh's attorney assurances that are fully responsive to his concerns," Aiello said. "And we have not heard back from him. ... We very much want to speak to [Walsh]."

As of Friday night, however, the league and Walsh's attorney had not reached an agreement.

An attorney for the Patriots told ESPN.com that Walsh did not have a confidentiality agreement with the franchise or anything else that might prevent his cooperation.

Specter painted a much starker, more contentious picture than the one presented by the league and the Patriots. He said both the Patriots and New York Jets have refused to cooperate with his investigation.

Specter told ESPN.com that his staff has been rebuffed in its efforts to interview Patriots personnel about the team's videotaping practices. The Republican leader on the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to say who, specifically, he wanted to talk to, but the list presumably includes head coach Bill Belichick, his longtime assistant Ernie Adams and members of the team's video department.

"My staff has been stonewalled on that," Specter said.

After his staff made phone contact with some individuals connected to the team, Specter said they were referred to the Patriots' outside legal counsel, who rejected a request for cooperation. Daniel L. Goldberg, who represents the Patriots and also the Boston Red Sox, said that in all cases, the individuals had been previously interviewed at least once - and in some instances twice -- by the league.

Goldberg refused to identify those individuals.

"Sen. Specter's office had called me as counsel to the Patriots to ask to interview several Patriots employees," said Goldberg, attorney with the Boston firm of Bingham and McCutchen. "I was told that the inquiry was with respect to signal-taping. And as I explained to the Senator's office, we regard this as a league matter. As such, we have fully cooperated with the league's investigation."

Asked to respond to Specter's accusation that the Patriots have stonewalled his requests for information, Goldberg said, "You look at it from our perspective. Who is the right forum for an inquiry into a matter like this? We regard this as a league matter. It deals with league rules, league enforcement."

But Specter, a onetime district attorney in Philadelphia, didn't react favorably to the Patriots' responses to his investigators.

"Well, I think that it is somewhere between absurd to insulting that they won't let us talk to the witnesses," Specter said. "Whoever heard of not being able to talk to someone because it is hearsay back from somebody else who talked to them. You have to question hearsay and reliability. I'm not prepared to accept what somebody else says these key witnesses say. What kind of an inquiry would it be if we accepted what somebody else tells us what was said?"

Specter's investigators also have been rebuffed in their efforts to seek access to members of the New York Jets' coaching staff. During the season-opening game last September at New York, the Patriots were caught taping defensive signals being sent in from the Jets' sideline. The Jets' staff is of key interest in the Spygate affair because several members, including Jets head coach Eric Mangini, worked under Belichick in New England.

"Our firm was engaged to represent certain employees of the New York Jets in connection with a request for information from Sen. Specter," Jets outside legal counsel Scott Michel said in an e-mail to ESPN.com on Friday night. "Our clients have not spoken to the Senator or his staff and at this time have no plans to do so."

Specter said Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Damon Huard, a one-time backup to Tom Brady with the Patriots, refused to speak with him, too, during a personal phone call the Senator placed to Huard last Friday.

"I talked to him, and he wouldn't talk," Specter said. "I didn't go through a secretary, and he doubted that it was Arlen Specter. Maybe that is why he wouldn't talk. I don't sound much like Arlen Specter."

Specter said it is only because of outside pressure that the NFL has offered up additional information related to the Patriots' taping history. Specter explained: "To get a concession from the commissioner that it goes back to the year 2000. To get a concession that they had notes. Originally, we were only told about videos, and they only went back a half-dozen games in '06. Originally, we weren't told that the notes included the [Pittsburgh] Steelers."

Specter said he is aware of what appears to be a united league-wide front supporting Goodell's handling of the taping controversy. That support was echoed Thursday at the NFL scouting combine in Indianapolis by members of the league's powerful Competition Committee, who told reporters they believe the issue should be put to rest.

"Well, I don't want to pick a fight with everybody in the world, like all the owners," Specter said. "But they are functioning from talking points -- 'We're satisfied with the investigation.' 'Oh yes, the penalty was sufficient.' 'Oh, let's put this behind us.' 'Let's move on.'

"You have heard everyone say the same thing."

Mike Fish is an investigative reporter for ESPN.com. He can be reached at michaeljfish@gmail.com.

I will sum this crap up with a quote from Specter "My suspicion is".....

BTW: "Specter's investigators also have been rebuffed in their efforts to seek access to members of the New York Jets' coaching staff."

[Lady Jet]

I thought it was funny that Damon Huard didn't believe it was the Senator on the phone, and wouldn't talk to him.

Anyways, they can't continue to blow off Specter though. No monopoly is that powerful.

[Arsis]

I will sum this crap up with a quote from Specter "My suspicion is".....

BTW: "Specter's investigators also have been rebuffed in their efforts to seek access to members of the New York Jets' coaching staff."

Stop making this a Jets vs Pats thing, it isn't. It is about the integrity of the sport. It's about breaking rules and cheating. You can avoid the issue all you want, you can try to divert the attention but the bottom line is the pats were the ones caught and are the ones being investigated. Just like Clemens is the one who got caught and is the one being investigated when I'm sure he isn't the only one to do roids.

[Gainzo]

Stop making this a Jets vs Pats thing, it isn't. It is about the integrity of the sport. It's about breaking rules and cheating. You can avoid the issue all you want, you can try to divert the attention but the bottom line is the pats were the ones caught and are the ones being investigated. Just like Clemens is the one who got caught and is the one being investigated when I'm sure he isn't the only one to do roids.

How did I make this a Jets/Pats thing? Specter brought that crap up.

[tparich]

This is a strange situation as there are a lot of teams that would love the antitrust exemption to be lifted so they can make more money working their own TV deals.

It seems like a win/win for teams like the Jets and Pats to resist the Senator in hopes to add another log to his fire.

I'm would think Dolan more then most would be estatic to see the exemption lifted as i'm sure he could find a way to profit on both ends.

[PFSIKH]

Stop making this a Jets vs Pats thing, it isn't. It is about the integrity of the sport. It's about breaking rules and cheating. You can avoid the issue all you want, you can try to divert the attention but the bottom line is the pats were the ones caught and are the ones being investigated. Just like Clemens is the one who got caught and is the one being investigated when I'm sure he isn't the only one to do roids.

Specter's investigators also have been rebuffed in their efforts to seek access to members of the New York Jets' coaching staff.

Apparently, it is a Pats and Jets thing.

[Arsis]

Apparently, it is a Pats and Jets thing.

No it's not, it's an nfl and integrity and cheating thing.

[Lady Jet]

This is a strange situation as there are a lot of teams that would love the antitrust exemption to be lifted so they can make more money working their own TV deals.

It seems like a win/win for teams like the Jets and Pats to resist the Senator in hopes to add another log to his fire.

I'm would think Dolan more then most would be estatic to see the exemption lifted as i'm sure he could find a way to profit on both ends.

Small market teams would not be too happy.

I'm pretty sure the NFL would not be too pleased to lose the NFL Network and Sunday Ticket revenue all because the "genius" in New England had trouble interpreting the rules.

[Lil Bit Special]

If the league gains Walsh's cooperation, Specter said he wants to be present when Walsh is questioned "because a witness' testimony can be shaded or molded by who questions him first."

And Specter wants to make sure he molds Walsh his way...

An attorney for the Patriots told ESPN.com that Walsh did not have a confidentiality agreement with the franchise or anything else that might prevent his cooperation.

If this is true, then he cant be sued by the Pats if he blabs about what he knows. That is huge.

He said both the Patriots and New York Jets have refused to cooperate with his investigation.

This is hurtful to Jets fans since we want the Pats to face justice. Our own organization is going against what their fans want- A real investigation.

Specter's investigators also have been rebuffed in their efforts to seek access to members of the New York Jets' coaching staff. The Jets' staff is of key interest in the Spygate affair because several members, including Jets head coach Eric Mangini, worked under Belichick in New England.

Because they were involved with the cheating in New England!! Why would Mangini open his mouth and possibly get himself in trouble and look like an ass-hole for "snitchin' on Belly...

Specter said Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Damon Huard, a one-time backup to Tom Brady with the Patriots, refused to speak with him, too, during a personal phone call the Senator placed to Huard last Friday.

"I talked to him, and he wouldn't talk," Specter said. "I didn't go through a secretary, and he doubted that it was Arlen Specter. Maybe that is why he wouldn't talk. I don't sound much like Arlen Specter."

And what does an Arlen Specter sound like? I wouldnt talk to Arlen Specter on the phone either. Especially if it could get me in trouble. Guess Arlen doesnt know much about "shock jocks" and the phone scams they pull on famous people....

Specter said he is aware of what appears to be a united league-wide front supporting Goodell's handling of the taping controversy.

"You have heard everyone say the same thing."

Of course they are united. They are all there to do the same thing- protect their cash cow. If they dont form a united front and give in to the pressure of Specter the league could be in for serious damage.

And when is Arlen finally going to admit he is pursuing this, not because he cares, but because of the cable companies/NFL network fight? He doesnt care if the league is fair. He doesnt care about the fans. He cares about Comcast. Guess that $100,000 he got in 2004 from Comcast goes a long way in protecting Comcast's best interests.

[Lil Bit Special]

http://www.attytood.com/2008/02/arlens_tangled_comcastic_mess_1.html

Arlen's tangled Comcastic mess: It's worse than you think

When Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter went more public last week with his increasingly strange and quixotic battle against the National Football League -- supposedly over the New England "Spygate" scandal -- some politically savvy wags raised an interesting point.

They noted that the longtime GOP stalwart's No. 2 source of campaign funds in recent years has been none other than employees of Comcast Corp. and their families, linked to at least $153,600 in donations going back to 1989. That's significant because Philadelphia-based Comcast has been engaged in a protracted war with the NFL over an issue that has nothing to do with New England and spying but is worth millions of dollars: Whether the cable giant can and should charge its consumers extra money to view the NFL Network.

Good find, but if you dig a little deeper...it's even worse than that.

Look again at the list, and see who Specter's No. 1 source of campaign contributions has been -- by far. That would the law firm -- also based here in Philly but with a large D.C. presence -- of Blank Rome LLC, now a growing lobbying powerhouse. Since 1989, partner and employees and family members from Blank Rome have donated $358, 483 to Specter's political kitty, dwarfing all others.

And who is one of Blank Rome's largest lobbying clients? That would be Comcast Corp., which according to publicly available U.S. Senate disclosure records has paid some $600,000 in fees to Blank Rome since 2004 to lobby Congress on a variety of issues. The first issue that's listed is "a la carte pricing" for cable channels -- linked to the very issues that Comcast and the NFL Network are fighting over. A well-known Republican insider, former Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, has been one of Blank Rome's lobbyists on the Comcast account.

So let's review. Last week, Specter announced on radio and then in print that he may hold public hearings -- on the taxpayer's dime -- to find out why the NFL destroyed the videotapes at the center of the so-called "Spygate" scandal, in which the Patriots were fined and stripped of their No. 1 draft pick for breaking league rules about videotaping the New York Jets' sidelines and signals during a game. His announcement stirred up an embarassing story line for the NFL at the peak of its premier week, the Super Bowl where New England tried unsuccessfully to complete an unprecedented 19-0 season.

But what is the point, other than the above-mentioned embarassment of the NFL and its commissioner Roger Goodell? True, destroying the tape wasn't the smartest PR move by the PR-savvy NFL, but the tape would show...what? That the Pats spied on the Jets?...that's already been acknowledged by everyone involved, which is why New England was hit with a fairly severe punishment by league standards.

Meanwhile, Specter's No. 2 donor and the lobbying client of his No. 1 donor, Comcast, is still at odd with the NFL, as Goodell acknowledged in his Super Bowl news conference last week. Asked specifically about Comcast, the NFL commissioner said:

"They

[Thai Jet]

IMO If the Jets are not co-operating with Sen. Specter I think they were TOLD not to by very top of the NFL offices. I think ALL the teams were told this. The NFL just wants this to go away as quickly as possible. They are NOT interested in justice or getting to the bottom of this . If they were they would have questioned Matt Walsh by now. Christ how long does it take to reach an agreement with Walsh's lawyer? The NFL is embarressed by this whole episode and just want to "move on" as the owners said yesterday. I bet Goodall wishes now he has suspended Beliprick during this past season.

[Lady Jet]

I am calling for Mr. Specter to recuse himself from this investigation since he is obviously not an impartial party. Let another senator take center stage. Then lets see if there is something behind this.

Mr. Specter, you are as big of a scumbag as the commissioner and the NFL owners.

Nah, I want to see what Matt Walsh has first.

Seriously, Specter can't recuse himself, it's his job to look into this.

I am an NFL fan, you too, and obviously everyone else reading this. But the NFL is a monopoly. A multi-billion dollar one at that. They have no competition. They can set ticket, merchandise, etc. prices and we as fans have to pay, since they are the only ones who provide it. I'm fine with that, as an NFL fan.

The problem is, taxpayers (many of whom are not NFL fans) are now helping to finance the NFL's stadiums. They (the non-fans) have a problem with it, so Arlen Specter and Congress have a problem with it.

The NFL now is putting more and more games exclusively on it's own Network. A network only carried by cable (pay-TV). Non-fans have a problem with that, heck even NFL fans do. Now we have to pay for games we used to watch for free? So yeah, Arlen Specter and Congress have a problem with that as well.

Just to be clear here, yeah, Specter is using the "Spygate" situation to control the NFL and perhaps rid them of their anti-trust exemptions status granted in the Sports Broadcasting Act, but the NFL's reputation is clearly being cast in a bad light regardless. Integrity is very important. If the public has doubts as to the legitimacy of the game, that is never, ever a good thing. Belicheat brought all of this on. He has a very big problem with interpreting rules, apparently.

[SpacemanSpiff_NF]

Its all about the benjamins....League doesn't want the networks to pull out, and Specter wants comcast to get a hand into the football money pit. If the Jets aren't talking because their protecting Mangini and any other former Pats employees, thats bull. If they had any part in it they should be suspended right along side Billy and Kraft. If the league told them to keep quiet, then they don't have much of a choice. The way this is shaping up, I doubt the fans will ever see any justice....Just too much money involved....

[Gainzo]

IMO If the Jets are not co-operating with Sen. Specter I think they were TOLD not to by very top of the NFL offices. I think ALL the teams were told this. The NFL just wants this to go away as quickly as possible. They are NOT interested in justice or getting to the bottom of this . If they were they would have questioned Matt Walsh by now. Christ how long does it take to reach an agreement with Walsh's lawyer? The NFL is embarressed by this whole episode and just want to "move on" as the owners said yesterday. I bet Goodall wishes now he has suspended Beliprick during this past season.

Are you serious? The Jets started this whole thing.

[Thai Jet]

Are you serious?

TOTALLY . They are embarressed by the Cheaters conduct in this whole affair and Beliprick BS reasoning of "I thought it was OK". They just want it to go away. It's been 5 months now. Goodall thought when he fined Beliprick and the Cheaters that it was over. Guess again Rodger. Specter is a politician so he can easily spot BS a mile away. That's what he's getting from the NFL now and I think he's gettin pissed. Stay tuned.

[Thai Jet]

Are you serious? The Jets started this whole thing.

Apparently the Cheaters "started this whole thing" the moment Beliprick became HC.

[Lil Bit Special]

Nah, I want to see what Matt Walsh has first.

Seriously, Specter can't recuse himself, it's his job to look into this.

I am an NFL fan, you too, and obviously everyone else reading this. But the NFL is a monopoly. A multi-billion dollar one at that. They have no competition. They can set ticket, merchandise, etc. prices and we as fans have to pay, since they are the only ones who provide it. I'm fine with that, as an NFL fan.

The problem is, taxpayers (many of whom are not NFL fans) are now helping to finance the NFL's stadiums. They (the non-fans) have a problem with it, so Arlen Specter and Congress have a problem with it.

The NFL now is putting more and more games exclusively on it's own Network. A network only carried by cable (pay-TV). Non-fans have a problem with that, heck even NFL fans do. Now we have to pay for games we used to watch for free? So yeah, Arlen Specter and Congress have a problem with that as well.

Just to be clear here, yeah, Specter is using the "Spygate" situation to control the NFL and perhaps rid them of their anti-trust exemptions status granted in the Sports Broadcasting Act, but the NFL's reputation is clearly being cast in a bad light regardless. Integrity is very important. If the public has doubts as to the legitimacy of the game, that is never, ever a good thing. Belicheat brought all of this on. He has a very big problem with interpreting rules, apparently.

Arlen Specter only has a problem because of his connections to Comcast.

As long as he is in charge, his inquiry is tainted. If the government really cares about Spygate, have another senator take over this investigation so it doesnt smell like dirty politics.

Until then, this is a waste of time. And politics as usual.

[EM31]

So the league is stonewalling. Once they started down the road of the cover up they were essentially doing the poker equivalent of going "all in" on this hand.

The question now is does Arlen Specter have enough support amongst his colleagues to convice enough of them that holding hearings make sense? The obvious counter-lobby would be that this is all a waste of taxpayers time and money. Of course such a lobby would be fully funded by the parties most interested in making the cover up stick. Does Specter have support for hearing? This much is far from clear and the NFL I think is rolling the dice that he cannot muster enough interest to make that happen. Absent congressional hearings with testimany under oath then the chances are that a league-wide strategy of stonewalling the investigation might actually prevail.

Either way, Bob Kraft is likely a pariah in league owners circles at this point.

[EM31]

Are you serious? The Jets started this whole thing.

Who started the "Enron thing", the corrupt management or the whistle blower?

[PFSIKH]

Nah, I want to see what Matt Walsh has first.

Seriously, Specter can't recuse himself, it's his job to look into this.

I am an NFL fan, you too, and obviously everyone else reading this. But the NFL is a monopoly. A multi-billion dollar one at that. They have no competition. They can set ticket, merchandise, etc. prices and we as fans have to pay, since they are the only ones who provide it. I'm fine with that, as an NFL fan.

The problem is, taxpayers (many of whom are not NFL fans) are now helping to finance the NFL's stadiums. They (the non-fans) have a problem with it, so Arlen Specter and Congress have a problem with it.

The NFL now is putting more and more games exclusively on it's own Network. A network only carried by cable (pay-TV). Non-fans have a problem with that, heck even NFL fans do. Now we have to pay for games we used to watch for free? So yeah, Arlen Specter and Congress have a problem with that as well.

Just to be clear here, yeah, Specter is using the "Spygate" situation to control the NFL and perhaps rid them of their anti-trust exemptions status granted in the Sports Broadcasting Act, but the NFL's reputation is clearly being cast in a bad light regardless. Integrity is very important. If the public has doubts as to the legitimacy of the game, that is never, ever a good thing. Belicheat brought all of this on. He has a very big problem with interpreting rules, apparently.

Sepcter is using the Spygate situation to drive COMCAST's agenda. COMCAST who is in a fight w/the NFL was the second largest contributor to Specter. Specter's top contributor is a law firm that lobbies on the behalf of COMCAST. Specter is bought and paid for by COMCAST.

LBS is right. Specter is not the one that should be driving this investigation. The cable companies cry that the .70 cent fee the cable company is charged by the NFL is excessive, but like COMCAST, they have no problem charging $5-6 and incoroporating it into their sports tier or making available on Pay-per view basis which probably requires a box like Charter does for my area.

Within a year, you will no longer be able to use an antenna anyways.

EM31

He might be a pariah for showing up owners by turning a joke of a franchise into a billion dollar property, but not for this.

Specfter is a joke. His inquiry and lack of congressional support shows he has an agenda. He can rah rah all he wants about his home state teams, but the truth is he is COMCAST's bbbiiiaaatttcccchhh.

[EM31]

EM31

He might be a pariah for showing up owners by turning a joke of a franchise into a billion dollar property, but not for this.

Specfter is a joke. His inquiry and lack of congressional support shows he has an agenda. He can rah rah all he wants about his home state teams, but the truth is he is COMCAST's bbbiiiaaatttcccchhh.

If not for the actions of the Patriots then Arlen Specter would have no pretext to go sniffing around to begin with. THAT is what threatens the cozy little billionaires club, not the fact that the Pats won three out of four at one point and were this close to four out of six. Once Senator Specter gets his foot in the door, my god, some of the Billionaires may actually be called before a congressional comittee to give evidence under oath about they way they have run that little business. The whole idea of that would be demeaning to them.

Bob Kraft may be a big cheese up in New England but his total net worth is a rounding error compared to some of these other guys. He is small fry in the NFL owners pantheon. The reason they would be p1ssed at Kraft is that his actions have led rather directly to a situation over which they do not have complete control. A state of affairs that compromises ALL of their investments and not just the 1/32nd that belongs to the Pats. THAT is what would be pissing them off, not a matter of who has been winning the little game of "trophies" that these guys play with each other year in and year out.

[Lady Jet]

Sepcter is using the Spygate situation to drive COMCAST's agenda. COMCAST who is in a fight w/the NFL was the second largest contributor to Specter. Specter's top contributor is a law firm that lobbies on the behalf of COMCAST. Specter is bought and paid for by COMCAST.

LBS is right. Specter is not the one that should be driving this investigation. The cable companies cry that the .70 cent fee the cable company is charged by the NFL is excessive, but like COMCAST, they have no problem charging $5-6 and incoroporating it into their sports tier or making available on Pay-per view basis which probably requires a box like Charter does for my area.

Within a year, you will no longer be able to use an antenna anyways.

PFSIKH, I'm very well aware of the fact that Specter has received contributions from COMCAST and that COMCAST is fighting with the NFL. I'm also certain that he's using the recent spying and Matt Walsh angle in his fight with the NFL. But he's on the subcommittee that handles Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights. This is his job. But fine, have one of the other 10 Senators on the committee start asking the questions. It doesn't matter, the questions will still come. This is what they do.

Personally, I've called Time Warner several times and asked them to carry the NFL network in my area. I'd like to have it. I'd be willing to pay for it. I've told them this. But it's not about me, , of course.

The NFL is is crossing into territory that some feel does not fit the intention of their antitrust exemption. Having Sunday ticket only available to consumers who own a dish. and airing games only available on their network, which is only available to consumers who buy from certain businesses that the NFL contracts with, is potentially breaking the original intention. This is their job to look into this.

The whole "stealing signals" and potentially filming walkthroughs is also of concern to this committee. It potentially affects the integrity of the game. It is their job to look into this, as well.

[EM31]

PFSIKH, I'm very well aware of the fact that Specter has received contributions from COMCAST and that COMCAST is fighting with the NFL. I'm also certain that he's using the recent spying and Matt Walsh angle in his fight with the NFL. But he's on the subcommittee that handles Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights. This is his job. But fine, have one of the other 10 Senators on the committee start asking the questions. It doesn't matter, the questions will still come. This is what they do.

Personally, I've called Time Warner several times and asked them to carry the NFL network in my area. I'd like to have it. I'd be willing to pay for it. I've told them this. But it's not about me, , of course.

The NFL is is crossing into territory that some feel does not fit the intention of their antitrust exemption. Having Sunday ticket only available to consumers who own a dish. and airing games only available on their network, which is only available to consumers who buy from certain businesses that the NFL contracts with, is potentially breaking the original intention. This is their job to look into this.

The whole "stealing signals" and potentially filming walkthroughs is also of concern to this committee. It potentially affects the integrity of the game. It is their job to look into this, as well.

Good post Lady Jet.

Sorry you can't get NFL network it is a really good channel.

[EM31]

Another point that has been consistently misstated on Patriots fan sites is the idea that revenue sharing is somehow welded at the hip to the (non-competetive) single TV contracts permitted under the antitrust exemption. The idea floating around is that somehow if the antitrust exemption were to suddenly go away, then a free-for-all would ensue where the big market teams would benefit greatly at the expense of the small market teams.

The Patriots, so the "thinking" goes woud be a winner in such a free-for-all. In other words, the NFL needs them more than they need the NFL, so the NFL better watch out (or some such). Classic stuff, you can't make it up.

The NFL is a club that has agreed to share all TV reneues equally between the partners in that club. This is an agreement between the 32 franchises and it is either true or not true regardless of whether the source of those revenues is 3 or 4 nationally crafted TV packages or if the revenues came from 32 seperate regional TV deals.

More Patriots fans muddy thinking.

If the Patriots thought they could suddenly make a TV deal on their own and keep all the revenues, then the NFL could create two new franchises in the Boston area overnight. I think our dopey friends at patsfans.com would find out pretty quickly who needs who more. If Bob Kraft doesn't like it then the NFL can MAKE HIM SELL HIS FRANCHISE. Just like they did with Eddie Debartolo.

[PFSIKH]

If not for the actions of the Patriots then Arlen Specter would have no pretext to go sniffing around to begin with. THAT is what threatens the cozy little billionaires club, not the fact that the Pats won three out of four at one point and were this close to four out of six. Once Senator Specter gets his foot in the door, my god, some of the Billionaires may actually be called before a congressional comittee to give evidence under oath about they way they have run that little business. The whole idea of that would be demeaning to them.

Bob Kraft may be a big cheese up in New England but his total net worth is a rounding error compared to some of these other guys. He is small fry in the NFL owners pantheon. The reason they would be p1ssed at Kraft is that his actions have led rather directly to a situation over which they do not have complete control. A state of affairs that compromises ALL of their investments and not just the 1/32nd that belongs to the Pats. THAT is what would be pissing them off, not a matter of who has been winning the little game of "trophies" that these guys play with each other year in and year out.

He might not be the richest owner, but he is one of the most influential. You cannot deny that.

If he was not one of the most influential owners, then why would the NFL try to CYA Kraft's ass? And risk their billion dollar business for a 1/32nd? You know the answer they would not.

PFSIKH, I'm very well aware of the fact that Specter has received contributions from COMCAST and that COMCAST is fighting with the NFL. I'm also certain that he's using the recent spying and Matt Walsh angle in his fight with the NFL. But he's on the subcommittee that handles Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights. This is his job. But fine, have one of the other 10 Senators on the committee start asking the questions. It doesn't matter, the questions will still come. This is what they do.

Personally, I've called Time Warner several times and asked them to carry the NFL network in my area. I'd like to have it. I'd be willing to pay for it. I've told them this. But it's not about me, , of course.

The NFL is is crossing into territory that some feel does not fit the intention of their antitrust exemption. Having Sunday ticket only available to consumers who own a dish. and airing games only available on their network, which is only available to consumers who buy from certain businesses that the NFL contracts with, is potentially breaking the original intention. This is their job to look into this.

The whole "stealing signals" and potentially filming walkthroughs is also of concern to this committee. It potentially affects the integrity of the game. It is their job to look into this, as well.

LJ - Great points. I to would pay for it, but that is not the point.

Yes, but "stealing signals" is alright to do. Shannhan said they use binoculars. Fisher said it is ok to use binoculars. Again, it is not what the Patriots did, but how they did it. You are not talking about correcting/violating some core principle because it is a common practice. You are talking about the method.

Specter motives hardly seem pure. If it was that much of a problem, he would not have waited two months between mailing Goodell the first time. Or the second time.

[EM31]

He might not be the richest owner, but he is one of the most influential. You cannot deny that.

If he was not one of the most influential owners, then why would the NFL try to CYA Kraft's ass? And risk their billion dollar business for a 1/32nd? You know the answer they would not.

This question has already been answered numerous times. It is a false dichotomy. A false choice. If the NFL were truly faced with EITHER risking the Patriots OR exposing the entire NFL then I would not doubt for a second that they would let the Patriots go to the wall. The problem with all of that is that the NFL was always at risk. Always.

If you allow information to come to light that there has been systematic cheating in your privately run, government-favored enterprise then congress is certainly going to take an interest, and that interest is not going to be primarily with the Patriots. I don't know how to make this more clear. At the point where congress becomes involved they are not dealing with this franchise or that franchise, the entire enterprise is going to be scutinized and called to account.

"How is it Mr. Goodell that your organization failed to police it's own internal rules such that a particular franchise could conduct a multi-year cheating operation and not get found out?"....

"In the light of the evidence that we have heard here today Commissioner Goodell, how would you responds to Football fans who might feel that the NFL has perpetrated a fraud on the American public? If they want a refund on their season tickets, are you prepared to give them their money back?"

"Is it possible Commissioner Goodell that Advertizers having paid millions of dollars to associate their products with your sport, may now consider that they have spent extremely large sums of money under false pretenses?"

"Wouldn't it have made more sense Mr Goodell that if these advertizers, some of the most pretigious companies in this nation, that if they had wished to associate themsleves with professional wrestling that they would have been better off actually associating themselves with profssional wrestling to begin with?"

"Your witness..."

Once the cat is out of the bag the Patsies become bit players in all of this. The fact the the Patriots might get hit first and hardest is like saying that person x or person y was the first to die in a Tsunami.

[jetophile]

Once the cat is out of the bag the Patsies become bit players in all of this. The fact the the Patriots might get hit first and hardest is like saying that person x or person y was the first to die in a Tsunami.

I just knew you had panache.

[PFSIKH]

This question has already been answered numerous times. It is a false dichotomy. A false choice. If the NFL were truly faced with EITHER risking the Patriots OR exposing the entire NFL then I would not doubt for a second that they would let the Patriots go to the wall. The problem with all of that is that the NFL was always at risk. Always.

Only because Specter is bought and paid for by COMCAST.

I understand LJ's and your points. They are both valid.

What sport is not rife with cheating on a daily basis?

What sport do they not try to steal another team's signals?

This is not Enron where they systematically defrauded people. This is not about the integrity of the NFL.

This is solely about the NFL trying to force the Pennsylvania based COMCAST into an arbitration hearing. The FCC forced COMCAST previously into an arbitration hearing to accept another regional sports network.

COMCAST whose protest for the NFL is the unfair .70 cent rate fee increase the NFL has proposed, passed that cost off to the customer by raising prices $2.

In December, the NFL using that as a precedent goes to someone on the FCC board to try to force COMCAST to arbitration. In January, Specter all of a sudden has an issue.

Specter does not give two $hits about cheating. He is protecting a contributor.

[Gainzo]

An attorney for the Patriots told ESPN.com that Walsh did not have a confidentiality agreement with the franchise or anything else that might prevent his cooperation

Why does Walsh need protection if there was no agreement between him and the Pats?

Specter is what he is. A guy looking to drum up votes from delusional Eagles and Steelers fans who can't accept they were beaten by the better team.

As PFSIKH said. Comcast has a lot to do with Arlen speaking out.

[Lady Jet]

LJ - Great points. I to would pay for it, but that is not the point.

Yes, but "stealing signals" is alright to do. Shannhan said they use binoculars. Fisher said it is ok to use binoculars. Again, it is not what the Patriots did, but how they did it. You are not talking about correcting/violating some core principle because it is a common practice. You are talking about the method.

Specter motives hardly seem pure. If it was that much of a problem, he would not have waited two months between mailing Goodell the first time. Or the second time.

Yes, I should have worded that differently. We are still in agreement that it was the method of using a video camera to "steal" the signals, and not the "stealing" of signals.

I'm very surprised Goodell didn't pick up the phone and call Specter personally, after he sent the first letter. I'm sure Specter took advantage of the Superbowl to come public with this, but Goodell should not have ignored him, not once, but twice.

[Gainzo]

Yes, I should have worded that differently. We are still in agreement that it was the method of using a video camera to "steal" the signals, and not the "stealing" of signals.

I'm very surprised Goodell didn't pick up the phone and call Specter personally, after he sent the first letter. I'm sure Specter took advantage of the Superbowl to come public with this, but Goodell should not have ignored him, not once, but twice.

Specter faxed his objections to NFL HQ. Has he ever heard of picking up the phone or sending an email?

[Lady Jet]

Specter faxed his objections to NFL HQ. Has he ever heard of picking up the phone or sending an email?

Ok, he faxed his letters to Goodell.

I'm just sayin', Goodell should have responded to them. Sheesh!

[madmike1]

Watching these patsy fans try to spin this is bordering on absurd.

[PFSIKH]

Yes, I should have worded that differently. We are still in agreement that it was the method of using a video camera to "steal" the signals, and not the "stealing" of signals.

I'm very surprised Goodell didn't pick up the phone and call Specter personally, after he sent the first letter. I'm sure Specter took advantage of the Superbowl to come public with this, but Goodell should not have ignored him, not once, but twice.

No doubt,

Especially, a notorious ass like sPECTER.