As you do sort of acknowledge, this is the NFL's fault. They were so secretive back in September and unwilling to divulge what they apparently knew back then, that everyone basically assumed that this wasn't as widespread as it really was.

The fact that a three-time Super Bowl champion was essentially cheating--or at least what appears to be an illegal advantage--all throughout their championship years should be seen as a tremendous blow to the credibility and image of the NFL. But it seems there are too many NFL apologists out there in the media to really grapple with the implications of this scandal.

Gotta wonder why so much was made of Walsh's tapes if they're "nothing new". Why would Walsh put himself through all this if there's basically no effect from his turning the tapes over?

And where did the Boston Herald get the story from regarding the Patriots' taping of the Rams' walkthrough? Who's their source? Or was it just made up out of thin air?

The reason so much is being made of the tapes is that finally after 3 months of BS he's turned over "everything".

The spin has begun.

Mark Salinas, MN

folks the problem is that even if Walsh has a damaging tape against the pats and he gave that tape to the league the league is gonna be secretive and keep the media in the dark for this reason alone if it's something embarassing and the media find out about it especially from the league itself the league not only opens up new can of warms but loses credibility along with it.

Casual, part-time observer of this issue and not an intense, thorough, examine-each-grain-of-sand kind of person here, but isn't it true that taping is permitted from anywhere else other than on the field? For example, taping from the coaches' box or at other points in the stadium? Many moons ago I thought I had read something similar. If true, then wouldn't higher-powered camera/video equipment provided the same information that is deemed illegal to obtain from a field-level vantage point?

The NFL, the only league where people caught cheating don't have their titles taken away.

Goodell has as much incentive to downplay the cheating as the Pats do.

I love the NFL, but this has been a fiasco.

"It's reasonable to assume that the Patriots and almost every other NFL team taped their opponents' play signals in every game......."

Fixed that for ya!

"The NFL, the only league where people caught cheating don't have their titles taken away."

The incident in which they are charged has no relevance to the titles that they won.

ROFLMAO....here's a mirror, speaking of fiasco!

My question is: Why would Walsh hire a lawyer and seek protection for (information)tapes that are not damaging to his former employers? There is something fishy here. I may understand the NFL not wanting to make this situation any worse than it already is, but at the same time they are losing credibility, at least with me and I reckon with other fans. I will still watch the games, but there will still be that dark cloud. It is so obvious the NFL is trying to sweep this under the rug.

My problem with Belichick's explanation (that he misinterpreted the rule and didn't know he was technically cheating) is that it is obvious that, at the very least, his staff knew the tapes were prohibited. If that weren't true, then Mangini would have had no motivation to turn him in. Belichick and his staff clearly knew they were violating the league's rules, and Walsh's tapes show the practice was so extensive that we can reasonably assume they were taping every game. So for me, the value of Walsh's tapes is not that they disclose any new violations, but rather they make it impossible for me to believe Belichick's explanation.

Henry71 - the reason Walsh wanted immunity and indemnity was because he admitted to stealing in a certified statement. In addition to the tapes (arguably Patriot property if he was taping at the Patriots request), he turned over boxes of stolen Patriot memorabilia as part of the deal he signed.

"As part of the agreement, the Patriots agreed not to pursue legal action against Walsh as long as he returned the stolen tapes and boxes of stolen memorabilia, and speaks truthfully with commissioner Roger Goodell Tuesday in New York." A tiny url link to the Boston Globe website discussing the terms of the deal:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/5g6hhb

The incident in which they are charged has no relevance to the titles that they won.

simply not true.

years of cheating and all that happens is one lost draft pick.

Goodell is a joke.

Guys,

Just a few points of fact here.

According to an interview Belichick and Scott Pioli gave after the season, Belichick knew he was making an aggressive interpretation of the rules, just the way that a millionaire might claim an aggressive tax shelter, knowing that it might later be denied. He wasn't unaware of the rule -- he just believed he had found a loophole, since he was recording this for posterity, rather than using the information to gain an in-game advantage.

From the NFL's Constitution & Bylaws (article 9): "Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of
any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other
than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape
machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team
during the playing of a game."

Note that final clause, which casts the rest of the previous paragraph in a very interesting light. BB's position was that as long as he wasn't using the information "during the playing of the game," the rule did not prohibit him from taping for posterity. Now this is obviously an aggressive interpretation, and when push came to shove, Goodell didn't accept that interpretation, and since the decisions of the Commissioner can't be appealed, that was that.

Whatever you think of Bill Belichick, he is not a fool, but even he didn't forsee the witch hunt which would come out of this, courtesty of a nation of Patriots-haters and senators representing districts which contain Comcast's headquarters.

Secondly, this whole drama is about Matt the Ratt saving himself from a lawsuit. Before the Super Bowl, he popped off to a Herald reporter with the (now proven false) allegation that he had a tape of the St. Louis Rams walkthrough before the Pats won their 1st Super Bowl. This was a much more serious accusation, since this REALLY would be cheating, as opposed to the tempest-in-a-teapot we call "spygate." As soon as this accusation came out, the Patriots immediately made an absolute denial of having EVER taped another team's practice. If a tape ever had surfaced after these denials, that would have been the end of Bill Belichick's NFL career. However, no tape existed -- the Ratt had just bitten off a larger piece of cheese than he could swallow.

So here's Matt the Ratt, thinking, "OK, I'm gonna get sued by the Patriots because of this bald-faced lie I just told the Herald, and in $$$ signs, I sure did a lot of damage to my former employer. Let's go see a lawyer!" His lawyer does his job and works out a trade of the stolen videotapes in exchange for a grant of immunity. It took three months -- and the Patriots' consent - to grant a free pass to the Ratt so he could walk tall as a true American hero -- the man who gave a bunch of bitter and jealous football fans a reason to heap slime on a truly great football team...

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.