Warner still wonders about those destroyed Spygate tapes

[News Bot]

Mike Freeman
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/mike-freeman/22051527/kurt-warner-talks-destroyed-spygate-tapes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/mike- ... gate-tapes</a>

Kurt Warner is making the rounds for his new reality TV show. He's Hollywood now. Good for him. Of course, no interview of Warner is complete without Warner giving his take on Spygate. There's no question that he still feels something was amiss about that Super Bowl between his Rams and the New England Patriots.

Warner has expressed interesting feelings before, but his comments to Al Norton of 411Mania.com might be his most interesting.

Warner went off when asked if the Patriots' win over the Rams in Super Bowl XXXVI was tainted.

"I don't look at it as tainted at all, that's not the perspective that I choose to take. But with that being said, I will say that I don't know how you can't wonder, how you can't wonder if something did happen, if there was an advantage," he said. "I simply say that because to know that there was evidence out there, that there were tapes out there, but no one ever got to see the tapes -- the commissioner or whoever decided they were going to destroy them from what I understand -- and so it continually leaves the question.

"Being that it was a part of the history of our game and it was directly part of my history, part of the history of my organization and my teammates, and possibly could have affected my career long-term, you have a question: Did something go on? But I don't allow that to taint or affect the way I look at it. The Patriots beat us in that game -- they outplayed us, they deserved to win, but it's hard to just let it go by saying, 'Oh, I don't know if anything happened.'

"I still have a question on what exactly when down in that whole time period; did they get some kind of advantage? Maybe it wasn't in our game but did they get some kind of advantage in any game? I think it's unfortunate for us and the people involved and for the people that are football fans that we have to even wonder: What if? But I'm not going to take that credit away from them and those players because I have really no idea what happened, if anything. I'm not going to automatically chalk it up as they cheated or they did do something or did have something because I don't know. It's unfortunate that I have to sit back and other players and fans have to sit back and wonder if."

Warner actually makes a very legitimate point regarding the destruction of the tapes. I thought destroying them was one of the few mistakes Roger Goodell has made as commissioner. Eradicating the tapes gave them a sort of Area 51 quality and did exactly what Warner claims -- leaves their content open to the imagination.

But it's clear Warner hasn't let this go. He's not alone. History hasn't, either.

 

[nighttrain]

neither have i and and lots of Rams fans. The Commish destroying those tapes is all the evidence i need that they did contain incriminating evidence, why else do it?
train

 

[Stranger]

But Kurt, the tapes still exist!
<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_National_Football_League_videotaping_controversy#NFL.2FWalsh_indemnity_agreement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Natio ... _agreement</a>

On April 23, 2008, the NFL announced they had reached an indemnity agreement with Walsh and had arranged a May 13, 2008 meeting between Walsh and Goodell.[11] Under the terms of the deal, Walsh was required to share any information he may have in regards to the Patriots' activities during Walsh's employment with the team from 1997 until 2003,[11] and also to turn over any tapes and other items in his possession to the NFL by a May 8, 2008 deadline.[50] The Patriots and the NFL promised not to sue Walsh and also agreed to indemnify Walsh for any legal expenses involved with the interview process, so long as he complied with the terms of the agreement.[11] Moreover, the agreement stipulated that the NFL would preserve the evidence turned over by Walsh, and that Walsh could retain copies, but could not release those copies to third parties without NFL permission.

Also, I never recall Kurt speaking-out at all about Spygate. Does anyone else remember him saying anything like this before? As far as I can recall, Marshall has really been the only one to say anything publicly.

 

[-X-]

But Kurt, the tapes still exist!
<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_National_Football_League_videotaping_controversy#NFL.2FWalsh_indemnity_agreement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Natio ... _agreement</a>

On April 23, 2008, the NFL announced they had reached an indemnity agreement with Walsh and had arranged a May 13, 2008 meeting between Walsh and Goodell.[11] Under the terms of the deal, Walsh was required to share any information he may have in regards to the Patriots' activities during Walsh's employment with the team from 1997 until 2003,[11] and also to turn over any tapes and other items in his possession to the NFL by a May 8, 2008 deadline.[50] The Patriots and the NFL promised not to sue Walsh and also agreed to indemnify Walsh for any legal expenses involved with the interview process, so long as he complied with the terms of the agreement.[11] Moreover, the agreement stipulated that the NFL would preserve the evidence turned over by Walsh, and that Walsh could retain copies, but could not release those copies to third parties without NFL permission.

Also, I never recall Kurt speaking-out at all about Spygate. Does anyone else remember him saying anything like this before? As far as I can recall, Marshall has really been the only one to say anything publicly.

No, I don't recall it. He was usually pretty PC about the whole thing prior to this latest interview.

 

[-X-]

FULL INTERVIEW HERE
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.411mania.com/movies/columns/280225/411mania-Interviews:-Two-Time-NFL-MVP-Kurt-Warner.htm#OVwQza0fwI6QGGtB.99" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.411mania.com/movies/columns/ ... I6QGGtB.99</a>

(Part relative to this thread)

Al Norton: I apologize for baiting you a bit with this next question but since the 2002 Super Bowl there's been a lot of information and allegations that have come out involving the Patriots, with some of your former teammates being very outspoken on the subject, so I am wondering if you look at their victory in that game as in any way tainted?

Kurt Warner: I don't look at it as tainted at all, that's not the perspective that I choose to take. But with that being said, I will say that I don't know how you can't wonder, how you can't wonder if something did happen, if there was an advantage. I simply say that because to know that there was evidence out there, that there were tapes out there, but no one ever got to see the tapes - the commissioner or whoever decided they were going to destroy them from what I understand - and so it continually leaves the question. Being that it was a part of the history of our game and it was directly part of my history, part of the history of my organization and my teammates, and possibly could have affected my career long term, you have a question; did something go on? But I don't allow that to taint or affect the way I look at it. The Patriots beat us in that game – they outplayed us, they deserved to win – but it's hard to just let it go by saying, "Oh, I don't know if anything happened." I still have a question on what exactly when down in that whole time period; did they get some kind of advantage? Maybe it wasn't in our game but did they get some kind of advantage in any game? I think it's unfortunate for us and the people involved and for the people that are football fans that we have to even wonder "what if?" but I'm not going to take that credit away from them and those players because I have really no idea what happened, if anything. I'm not going to automatically chalk it up as they cheated or they did do something or did have something because I don't know. It's unfortunate that I have to sit back and other players and fans have to sit back and wonder if.

 

[ramsince62]

But Kurt, the tapes still exist!
<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_National_Football_League_videotaping_controversy#NFL.2FWalsh_indemnity_agreement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Natio ... _agreement</a>

On April 23, 2008, the NFL announced they had reached an indemnity agreement with Walsh and had arranged a May 13, 2008 meeting between Walsh and Goodell.[11] Under the terms of the deal, Walsh was required to share any information he may have in regards to the Patriots' activities during Walsh's employment with the team from 1997 until 2003,[11] and also to turn over any tapes and other items in his possession to the NFL by a May 8, 2008 deadline.[50] The Patriots and the NFL promised not to sue Walsh and also agreed to indemnify Walsh for any legal expenses involved with the interview process, so long as he complied with the terms of the agreement.[11] Moreover, the agreement stipulated that the NFL would preserve the evidence turned over by Walsh, and that Walsh could retain copies, but could not release those copies to third parties without NFL permission.

Also, I never recall Kurt speaking-out at all about Spygate. Does anyone else remember him saying anything like this before? As far as I can recall, Marshall has really been the only one to say anything publicly.

Martz has had plenty to say about the game and NE's earily accurate adjustments to the new plays (he) put into that game. :twisted:

 

[ramsince62]

Anyone can say what they like about that 2001 SB, but as long as I live, I will believe without a doubt that the Rams were the best team in the league that year........without ANY doubt. Certainly statistics aren't the be all some try to make them, but by ANY measure the 2001 Ram version was the best out there and that includes the 99 championship team. Basically, they'd retained the offensive power of the 99 team and significantly improved the defense (thank you Lovie).

So they can speculate all they like about those sorry bastards in N.E., but anyone with a modicum of sense well knows that without an edge, there was no way they could have beaten the Rams.....not even close.

 

[ramsince62]

BTW Paul, that new member picture looks just like me. :ayup:

 

[HE WITH HORNS]

I know for a fact that the NFL wanted the Cheatriots to win that game after 9/11, to make everyone feel so good about it. It makes such a great story, just like pro wrestling.

 

[CGI_Ram]

neither have i and and lots of Rams fans. The Commish destroying those tapes is all the evidence i need that they did contain incriminating evidence, why else do it?
train

I'm with you on this one, train.

 

[CGI_Ram]

I know for a fact that the NFL wanted the Cheatriots to win that game after 9/11, to make everyone feel so good about it. It makes such a great story, just like pro wrestling.

As much as I am convinced the Patriots cheated, I do not think the NFL was a part of a conspiracy for any linkage to 911. I just don't think it's a sure-thing objective and makes little sense to subject the golden goose for some symbolism toward Patriots and the USA. Does having the Patriots win do that much toward national pride, really? No.

But I DO buy the theory; the game was tainted. The tapes proved it. And other games were effected.

If the truth came out... the NFL and the Commissioner would have seasons of bullshit on their record books. How do you deal with that? The fans? The go-forward credibility of the game?

Goodell destroyed the tapes just like a crook tries to cover up murder.

 

[Stranger]

I know for a fact that the NFL wanted the Cheatriots to win that game after 9/11, to make everyone feel so good about it. It makes such a great story, just like pro wrestling.

As much as I am convinced the Patriots cheated, I do not think the NFL was a part of a conspiracy for any linkage to 911. I just don't think it's a sure-thing objective and makes little sense to subject the golden goose for some symbolism toward Patriots and the USA. Does having the Patriots win do that much toward national pride, really? No.

But I DO buy the theory; the game was tainted. The tapes proved it. And other games were effected.

If the truth came out... the NFL and the Commissioner would have seasons of bullshit on their record books. How do you deal with that? The fans? The go-forward credibility of the game?

Goodell destroyed the tapes just like a crook tries to cover up murder.

Then, how do you explain the Tuck Rule game against the Raiders? It occured during that same post-season.

 

[Stranger]

neither have i and and lots of Rams fans. The Commish destroying those tapes is all the evidence i need that they did contain incriminating evidence, why else do it?
train

Like I quoted earlier in the thread, the agreement with Walsh stipulated that the NFL retain a copy of the tapes and also allowed Walsh to keep copies. Hence, copies of the tapes are probably still out there.

 

[CGI_Ram]

I know for a fact that the NFL wanted the Cheatriots to win that game after 9/11, to make everyone feel so good about it. It makes such a great story, just like pro wrestling.

As much as I am convinced the Patriots cheated, I do not think the NFL was a part of a conspiracy for any linkage to 911. I just don't think it's a sure-thing objective and makes little sense to subject the golden goose for some symbolism toward Patriots and the USA. Does having the Patriots win do that much toward national pride, really? No.

But I DO buy the theory; the game was tainted. The tapes proved it. And other games were effected.

If the truth came out... the NFL and the Commissioner would have seasons of BS on their record books. How do you deal with that? The fans? The go-forward credibility of the game?

Goodell destroyed the tapes just like a crook tries to cover up murder.

Then, how do you explain the Tuck Rule game against the Raiders? It occured during that same post-season.

Good point. I've often wondered about our match-up against the Raiders instead of the Pats. Thinking back we matched up better against the Raiders.

But; the tuck rule was a rule back then. Right?

 

[CGI_Ram]

neither have i and and lots of Rams fans. The Commish destroying those tapes is all the evidence i need that they did contain incriminating evidence, why else do it?
train

Like I quoted earlier in the thread, the agreement with Walsh stipulated that the NFL retain a copy of the tapes and also allowed Walsh to keep copies. Hence, copies of the tapes are probably still out there.

What happened to Walsh?

I mean, if there was ever a gag rule; Walsh is the poster boy.

 

[Ram Quixote]

Anyone can say what they like about that 2001 SB, but as long as I live, I will believe without a doubt that the Rams were the best team in the league that year........without ANY doubt. Certainly statistics aren't the be all some try to make them, but by ANY measure the 2001 Ram version was the best out there and that includes the 99 championship team. Basically, they'd retained the offensive power of the 99 team and significantly improved the defense (thank you Lovie).

So they can speculate all they like about those sorry bastards in N.E., but anyone with a modicum of sense well knows that without an edge, there was no way they could have beaten the Rams.....not even close.

Let's add to that. There was just one week between the NFC/AFC champ games and the SB that year. Now, you're gonna tell me NE came up with a game plan to shut down the GSOT and implemented it in 2 days? No effin' way.

As for the NFL being involved, conspiracy theorists will tell you Kraft and the Bush administration were buddy buddy. And Kraft has been a power broker in the NFL since he became the Patriots owner.

Then there's Bernie Kukar. Despite what some believe, Kukar wouldn't have got away with what he pulled in that SB without the NFL's stamp of approval. The control freaks in the commish's office wouldn't stand for a referee becoming a wild card.

 

[Stranger]

I know for a fact that the NFL wanted the Cheatriots to win that game after 9/11, to make everyone feel so good about it. It makes such a great story, just like pro wrestling.

As much as I am convinced the Patriots cheated, I do not think the NFL was a part of a conspiracy for any linkage to 911. I just don't think it's a sure-thing objective and makes little sense to subject the golden goose for some symbolism toward Patriots and the USA. Does having the Patriots win do that much toward national pride, really? No.

But I DO buy the theory; the game was tainted. The tapes proved it. And other games were effected.

If the truth came out... the NFL and the Commissioner would have seasons of BS on their record books. How do you deal with that? The fans? The go-forward credibility of the game?

Goodell destroyed the tapes just like a crook tries to cover up murder.

Then, how do you explain the Tuck Rule game against the Raiders? It occured during that same post-season.

Good point. I've often wondered about our match-up against the Raiders instead of the Pats. Thinking back we matched up better against the Raiders.

But; the tuck rule was a rule back then. Right?

Yup. From wikipedia..
<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuck_Rule_Game" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuck_Rule_Game</a>

In 1999, though, a new rule had been introduced, which eventually became known as the tuck rule:

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.[6]

And while we're talking about Kurt, remember this Sporting News cover?

 

[kurtfaulk]

I know for a fact that the NFL wanted the Cheatriots to win that game after 9/11, to make everyone feel so good about it. It makes such a great story, just like pro wrestling.

As much as I am convinced the Patriots cheated, I do not think the NFL was a part of a conspiracy for any linkage to 911. I just don't think it's a sure-thing objective and makes little sense to subject the golden goose for some symbolism toward Patriots and the USA. Does having the Patriots win do that much toward national pride, really? No.

But I DO buy the theory; the game was tainted. The tapes proved it. And other games were effected.

If the truth came out... the NFL and the Commissioner would have seasons of BS on their record books. How do you deal with that? The fans? The go-forward credibility of the game?

Goodell destroyed the tapes just like a crook tries to cover up murder.

Then, how do you explain the Tuck Rule game against the Raiders? It occured during that same post-season.

Good point. I've often wondered about our match-up against the Raiders instead of the Pats. Thinking back we matched up better against the Raiders.

But; the tuck rule was a rule back then. Right?

Apparently they used it in the rams game at foxboro that year. I was watching nfl live the day they announced the tuck rule was gone and the former patriots lb (whose name escapes me right now) said a warner fumble was reversed in that game due to the tuck rule.

.

Now I remember, tedy bruschi. How could I forget that turd.

.