Gainzo Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Where is this guy? He supposedly has video tapes to bury the Pats but the only time I hear his name is when Arlen "Comcast" Specter brings it up. I'm 100% sure that Specter will bring the spygate thing up again on April 25th. You know, the day before the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardJetsFan Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 This is annoying, we already have a thread on this crap NFL Stonewalling with Walsh and Specter claims super bowl filming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 This is annoying, we already have a thread on this crap NFL Stonewalling with Walsh and Specter claims super bowl filming It's crap right? That was the reason I started this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 It's crap right? That was the reason I started this thread. I think Max did that thing where instead of baning Gainzo he let DWC take over his account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 I think Max did that thing where instead of baning Gainzo he let DWC take over his account. I'm no DWC! I know that you and I don't see eye to eye on this matter but the Matt Walsh thing is ridiculous. What does he have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I'm no DWC! I know that you and I don't see eye to eye on this matter but the Matt Walsh thing is ridiculous. What does he have? He has a video of the Rams walkthrough before the Super Bowl. The NFL is making it hard to release because they helped cover it up. If fully expect Capers to do a credible job coaching the squad next season though. No worries mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 This is annoying, we already have a thread on this crap NFL Stonewalling with Walsh and Specter claims super bowl filming Your unreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardJetsFan Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Your unreal. I am? Gainzo knows I like to mess with him,thats all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 The NFL have been covering this up since the cheaters were first caught. Why should that change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 The NFL have been covering this up since the cheaters were first caught. Why should that change? Cover up? How so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 The NFL have been covering this up since the cheaters were first caught. Why should that change? I'm not that big on conspiracy theories, but any cover-up would have had to come from well before they were caught against the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alk Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Cover up? How so? You know. Like the part where they took New England's first round pick and fined them $500,000. That kind of cover up. They wanted to keep it on the down low so they figured a hefty find would do the trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 You know. Like the part where they took New England's first round pick and fined them $500,000. That kind of cover up. They wanted to keep it on the down low so they figured a hefty find would do the trick. Pats suck. Just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonCorleone Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 You know. Like the part where they took New England's first round pick and fined them $500,000. That kind of cover up. They wanted to keep it on the down low so they figured a hefty find would do the trick. Alk, There have been plenty of threads on this... It's called destroying the evidence. The NFL is no small thrift store are they have teams of lawyers at their disposal. No evidence which proved that the cheating had no effect on the outcome of a game or that would have cleared the Pats or the NFL would ever have been destroyed. After all the uproar about the destruction of tapes, the NFL claimed that if Walsh agrees to turn over everything he has in his possession, the NFL will once again destroy the evidence. You must face it, when the Pats don't cheat...they are a very good team, not a great one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Cover up? How so? Burning evidence wasn't a clue to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Jets fans......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Jets fans......... Way to make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Way to make a point. Do you get my point, or do you just like to post for count? Jets fans...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Do you get my point, or do you just like to post for count? Jets fans...... Bit of both really. LOL I'm just saying you could have added a little more structure to that statement, like maybe another rolleye smiley for good measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Bit of both really. LOL I'm just saying you could have added a little more structure to that statement, like maybe another rolleye smiley for good measure. You have a point, but I've been here long enough to know that many of the folks here "read" pictures better than words. I'm pandering to the JN audience here. LOL! I'm kidding. Mostly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LionelRichie Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Cover up? How so? walsh has at least the walk-through tape if not more. why else would pioli release a pathetic statement about walsh being fired for "taping conversations without permission". the pats know he has the tapes and are already making the case for plausible deniability. the nfl doesn't want to deal with the scandal that comes from these tapes being made public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonCorleone Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 walsh has at least the walk-through tape if not more. why else would pioli release a pathetic statement about walsh being fired for "taping conversations without permission". the pats know he has the tapes and are already making the case for plausible deniability. the nfl doesn't want to deal with the scandal that comes from these tapes being made public. You are excellent at breaking things down to their simplest, most basic form. However, I think that we are wasting our time with posters that wouldn't see white for white and black for black if it hit them in the face. It is one thing to be a devoted fan (Man oh man do we know about devotion or what?) however, this goes beyond plausible deniability and not a simple difference of opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 3, 2008 Author Share Posted April 3, 2008 You are excellent at breaking things down to their simplest, most basic form. However, I think that we are wasting our time with posters that wouldn't see white for white and black for black if it hit them in the face. It is one thing to be a devoted fan (Man oh man do we know about devotion or what?) however, this goes beyond plausible deniability and not a simple difference of opinions. What does Matt Walsh have? Please tell me. I'm sorry the team you cheer for sucks. I've gone down that road with my team in Australia. Believe it or not they are worse than the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 3, 2008 Author Share Posted April 3, 2008 walsh has at least the walk-through tape Really? Goodell on Walsh issue Posted by Mike Reiss, Globe Staff April 2, 2008 12:07 PM PALM BEACH, Fla., -- The NFL’s annual meeting concluded this morning with commissioner Roger Goodell holding a press conference, where he addressed the latest on the Matt Walsh issue. Here is some of the Q&A: If you can’t come to a resolution that leads to Matt Walsh speaking, are you comfortable moving on from it? “No, I don’t like anybody putting out accusations against the league or any of our clubs, which he certainly implied, if he hadn’t said. I’ve said from the beginning of this incident that if something new or additional that comes to public or to me, that I reserve the right to reopen this issue, and I will. But the reality of it, we haven’t had any, for seven months. If it’s just taping of defensive signals, we know that. The Patriots admitted to that. He seems to imply that he has something different and certainly something that I would be concerned with if it’s true. So I’d like to see the evidence.” If it gets to the point where nothing is happening, would you be the one to say ‘that’s enough’ and perhaps explore some legal options -- if there are any? “I believe I would be, yes, and at some point I will run out of patience, because I think it’s unfortunate. I think the last time he was a Patriots employee was back in the early 2000s, so we’re talking about six, seven or eight years since he left the league. I would like to have that information. He’s certainly made it known publicly that he has something. I’d like to see him present that.” So you’re committed to getting this information? “I believe it’s important when somebody has made an accusation like this, I think it’s important for us to get to the bottom of it. We’re going to aggressively pursue that as long as I think there is some information there, or I believe I can get to the bottom of it, and that’s what I’m going to do.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 Really? Goodell on Walsh issue Posted by Mike Reiss, Globe Staff April 2, 2008 12:07 PM PALM BEACH, Fla., -- The NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberjet Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 Two main mistakes by the NFL: 1. The destruction of the evidence. It creates an IMPRESSION of covering up sensitive and serious violations. 2. Goodell stated it was the destruction tapes dating back to 2006. What about before? It gives the impression that the NFL was not very thorough in their investigation and did not want to dig too deep in order to open another can of worms (i.e., questioning the integrity of the Pats during their superbowl runs). Also, any previous evidence of tampering via video if it did exist has now been destroyed by the Pats. In addition, they didn't question or investigate the videographers of the PATs - very strange. The fine and loss of draft pick was an attempt by the NFL to send a message and appear tough, but the reality was they did a very poor and not very thorough investigation of the Pats' unethical practices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GandWFan Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 Goodell said "No, I don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rillo Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 Goodell said "No, I don’t like anybody putting out accusations against the league or any of our clubs..." Does that sound like the statement of a fair and impartial arbitrator? It sounds adverserial to me. And it sounds like the NFL would love to discredit Walsh and squash this whole thing. Of course....way too much money at stake here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterNorth09 Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 The NFL have been covering this up since the cheaters were first caught. Why should that change? Because Roger Goodell wants to find out the truth. In other news, the Easter Bunny exists and Britney Spears doesn't do drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonCorleone Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 Because Roger Goodell wants to find out the truth. In other news, the Easter Bunny exists and Britney Spears doesn't do drugs. :bwahaharoll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.