PFT's Mike Florio is now presenting rumor as fact over at the Sporting News. His most recent article for the Sporting News, detailing the facts of the incident involving Marvin Harrison outside a bar, is riff with multiple errors that anyone really following the true facts of the investigation should know.

Again, to put it bluntly, Florio is writing rumor and conveying it as fact, only this time he's not doing it for his own blog. He's doing it for the Sporting News:

Harrison reportedly claimed the gun involved in the shooting never left his home but yet on the same day it turned up in a bucket at his car wash. If the reports are true, police detectives surely view everything Harrison now says with a strong dose of skepticism.

This statement is completely and utterly false, based on reports from the police and from the Philadelphia Daily News:

On Wednesday, detectives visited Harrison's garage and detail shop, which he purchased in 2006 for $200,000, according to tax records.

Sources said that Harrison had a Belgian firearm, an FN5.7, in his garage. Harrison handed the high-powered weapon - which fires armor-piercing rounds - over to investigators.

He then spent about four hours at Central Detectives, accompanied by his attorney, Jerome Brown.

Now, that's pretty significant fact, one that Mr. Florio seems to have missed as he continues to scurry for more insider "dirt" on the Harrison case. To say that police essentially "stumbled upon" the weapon is very different from the fact that Harrison turned it over.

The other error here is invoking the NFL's  The Personal Conduct Policy. Florio states that if Harrison fired the gun or if someone else fired his gun, he is elligible for discipline under the policy:

The commission of a violent crime clearly is grounds for discipline, as is conduct that imposes "inherent risk" to the safety and well-being of another person. Shooting a man in the hand and sending five other bullets whizzing past him presumably would be enough to meet such a standard. Entrusting a gun to someone else who does the same thing could be a violation of the Personal Conduct Policy as well.

Not true, especially if self defense is the motive for firing the gun. If Roger Goodell wants ot try and suspend a player for defending himself against someone who, two weeks prior, was kicked out of the same bar for bad behavior, he better get ready for a suit from the Player's Union. This is especially true if Harrison didn't fire the gun. Suspending him for an act he did not even do makes absolutely no sense. Firing a gun in self defense is not illegal, and since Marvin Harrison has nothing on his record that indicates he is the kind of man who runs wildly into the street shooting at people, this explanation is reasonable.

This is likely why the NFL is being responsible and not saying anything until the facts of the case are revealed by the actual police detectives investigating the case, not the "Harvey the Rabbit sources" we readers keep hearing about. It's a shame writers like Mr. Florio are not as responsible.

The other thing that Mr. Florio likes to do (and for those who believe in due process and things like that, this should scare you) is jump to rash judgments before someone is even arrested or charged with a crime, let alone actually convicted:

Firing shots at someone else in public, complete with flying glass from one of the bullets striking and cutting a child, falls somewhere between 9 and 10 on the scale of the worst possible things an NFL player can do. Such behavior arguably is far worse than anything Jones, Vick, Chris Henry or Tank Johnson has done.

That said, it's unlikely that Goodell will act against Harrison before criminal charges (if any) against him are resolved. And given that Harrison reportedly still is having trouble with his knees, there is a chance he'll retire before he could be suspended.

Let's be clear about the facts here, because Mike Florio can't seem to get them straight (and for someone who is a lawyer in his day job, as Mr. Florio is, I express extreme concern for the clients he represents):

1) Marvin Harrison has not been charged with a crime. In fact, the police themselves have said he isn't even a suspect. So, writing an article which, essentially, states that Harrison is guilty, will go to jail, and will get suspended by Commissioner Goodell makes absolutely no sense.

2) Michael Vick and Tank Johnson were charged and pleaded guilty to their crimes. Vick, in particular, was suspended from the NFL for lying point blanc to Goodell's face. Pacman Jones has been involved in multiple off-the-field incidents that resulted in charges filed. Marvin Harrison hasn't been charged with anything and has cooperated fully with authorities who have questioned him. So, lumping him in with players like these is inappropriate and wrong at this point.

3) We don't know all the facts of the case because the police haven't officially released them. We've heard a lot of hearsay and rumor, much of which peddled by Mr. Florio. The fact that the injured party is not even willing to identify Marvin Harrison as the shooter speaks volumes as to how fragile this case is.

Could Marvin Harrison get charged? It's possible. It's also possible that Mike Florio will get fired from The Sporting News for botching up a pretty significant fact in an article presenting itself as providing facts on the incident. Does that mean it is appropriate for someone like me to start floating articles out there that Florio is getting the ax at TSN? No, of course not. Just as it is inappropriate for Florio to suggest Harrison will see jail time and suspension even though he isn't a suspect in the case (let alone charged or convicted).

He can do that over at PFT, but at the Sporting News I expect a different standard, and I hope their editors do to. Even people in Florio's comments area for the TSN article are killing him for his gaff:

Harrison voluntarily gave the gun to police. This was according to named police sources; more reliable than Johnny Anonymous' claims as reported by Angelo on WIP.

To recap, the Johnny Anonymous claimed:

-the shooting was outside the bar - wrong
-a two year old girl had glass in her eye - wrong
-Harrison hid the gun - wrong, wrong, wrong
-multiple witnesses were fingering Harrison as the shooter - wrong so far

Again, it is entirely possible that Marvin Harrison fired a gun at a man. But, since it is not proven (let alone charged as a crime), this kind of speculation is plain and simple bad journalism. And since Florio is writing this under The Sporting News' banner, he must be held accountable for this.

He can act like a "hack" all he wants at PFT. At the Sporting News, I expect some integrity and professionalism. I think their loyal readers do as well, and this type of "journalism" does not seem in line with those expectations.

Until we see the words Marvin Harrison Arrested the incident outside Harrison's North Philly bar is a non-story, and the people pushing the baseless rumors as if they were facts (Mike Florio, Michael David Smith) continue to make the rest of us bloggers look like amateurs. Despite what Florio and Smith have suggested, Marvin Harrison is not a suspect in the shooting. In fact, we don't even know if the gun recovered was his.

Bullets found at the scene of a shooting in Philadelphia last Tuesday came from a handgun owned by Indianapolis Colts receiver Marvin Harrison, according to reports on ESPN and the Philadelphia Daily News, both citing unnamed police sources. But Philadelphia police are not calling Harrison a suspect.

"He's not a suspect at this point," police spokesperson Tanya Little told The Star this morning, declining further comment.

Translation: The reports are not officially from the police. They are from ESPN and the Philly Daily News, via "unnamed sources" they claim are within the police department. We have no idea what their credibility is or even if they are police assigned to the case. They could be a desk sergeant or Moe the janitor. "Unnamed sources" are never good sources, and are not used by real journalists reporting on anything credible. Anyone who works in journalism will tell you that. And no, I do not consider Sal Paolantonio, the ESPN reporter covering this incident, a real journalist, nor do I consider anyone else who uses "unnamed sources" in this way. The always "objective" Paolantonio also came out recently and criticized Marvin Harrison for committing the sin of all sins: Opening a bar in a bad neighborhood, which Marvin just so happened to grow up in.

If the gun recovered did indeed belong to Harrison, and if the shell casings did indeed come form that gun, you would think Marvin Harrison would be a suspect. However, since the police have stated that Harrison is not a suspect, that should call into question ESPN's reporting, especially these "unnamed sources" they are rolling out as credible.

And since we have absolutely no firm, concrete proof on the key details of this investigation, it was irresponsible of people like Florio and Smith to blog about them as if they were fact. To even suggest that they were facts, using "unnamed sources" that they know nothing about as back-up, is bad journalism DEFINED. Now, I've never fancied myself a journalist, but Mike Florio works for The Sports News, and Michael David Smith works for the NY Times.

Somehow, I don't think both those entities would agree with how these two have conducted themselves. I'm sure ESPN is fine with Paolantonio though, which is typical ESPN.

From 18 to 88 (emphasis mine):

A Philadelphia Inquirer Daily News piece now has other discrepancies with the original report broken by a Philly radio reporter on Friday:

On Friday it was reported that the gun fire was exchanged after Harrison chased a man into the parking lot of his bar. Now it appears that the shooting took place several blocks away.

Harrison is now said to have kicked the victim out of his bar 2 weeks ago, and they have been fighting since. Harrison admitted to getting into a fist fight with the man earlier in the day.

It was reported that a girl had been slightly hurt by flying glass. Now it's reported that it was a 2 year old boy.

It was unclear though not inaccurate in previous reports that police cannot confirm that there was a third victim. They received a call from a lawyer saying that he represented a man who was hurt and could finger Harrison. That is not confirmed and as of now, no one has accused Harrison of anything. Police are looking for this alleged victim.

The original victim first told police that he was hurt driving on the freeway, before changing his story. He has not identified Harrison.

The Inquirer is reporting that Harrison turned the weapon in question over to the police. It was reported on Friday that police found it in a bucket outside Harrison's carwash.

So from the original sensationalistic reports on Friday, we had one picture of what happened, now there is a slightly different one. The small detail changes may or may not make any real difference, but they are interesting to note.

So, all the sensationalist crap ESPN reported on Friday (gun found in paint can, gunfire right outside the bar, witnesses identifying Harrison, etc.) seems to be all bunk according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. On top of this is the news that the Philly PD turned this case over to the Philly DA's office because they are too busy to deal with it (ie, it ain't important).

I more I look at this, the more it seems ESPN, Anthony Gargano of 610 WIP Radio in Philadelphia, and irresponsible rumor mongers like Mike Florio and Michael David Smith have made a whole lot of something from a whole lot of nothing, reporting rumor and speculation as if it were facts. Unless Daily News reporters David Gambacorta and Ted Silary are mis-stating or misunderstanding the facts, ESPN and WIP Radio have badly reported this incident. Unlike WIP Radio and ESPN (and Mike Florio), the Philly Daily News is citing actual sources and not unnamed sources. This makes their tale of the facts more credible. Currently, ESPN and Florio have made no attempt to correct the inconsistent facts they reported as truth, even though Florio admits to having read the Philly Daily News article.

We'll see how this plays out, but right now it looks like ESPN and WIP Radio have egg on their faces. We will see. BTW, Pro Football Talk is now insinuating Marvin Harrison wanted to shoot and kill police officers with the gun. Nice, classy outfit over there.

Mike Florio of PFT loves to report rumors as facts. It's about as professional as a doctor performing surgery on a patient without anesthetic. With the the recent shooting investigation outside a bar owned by Marvin Harrison, I knew it was only a matter of time before Florio brought up two other incidents that (just like the "Bill Polian beats up Jets employees" rumor) were complete and utter falsities. However, typical Florio, he paints them as events that did happen, despite no actual proof that they did.

If Mike Florio ever becomes a judge folks, run for the hills.

Florio reports on two incidents, none of which resulted in charges, suspension, fines, or even proof they even happened, aside from "unnamed sources," which essentially means nothing:

Granted, the five-year-old incident involving Harrison is a far cry from a shooting.  But it’s further evidence that maybe Marvin isn’t the great guy that we’ve been led to believe he is.

In 2003, Harrison allegedly knocked a Jets’ ball boy to the ground because Jets punter Matt Turk was kicking balls in the direction of Harrison and quarterback Peyton Manning prior to a game.

And another:

Three years ago, Harrison was sued for "violently and physically attack[ing]" three boys who were seeking his autograph a day before the Pro Bowl in Hawaii.

Harrison allegedly put one of the boys in a choke hold.

There were never any further reports about the lawsuit, which suggests to us that it was quietly settled for a confidential payment.

Let's be clear on something here: A man is innocent until guilt is proven. If guilt is not proven, the man didn't do it, especially if the event involved an attack. It is that simple. Ironic that Florio, a LAWYER by trade, has a hard time grasping this very simple, very universal fact of our society. From what I remember (and there are no links to support this) but the autograph, choke-hold, whatever lawsuit was dismissed for lack of evidence, not settled quietly out of court. And since when do the Jets count as a reliable source? They were the ones who said Bill Polian attacked a Jets employee back in 2006, and that turned out to not be true.

So, because of these other incidents Florio has referenced (none of which proven true with actual evidence), I've decided to make a resolution: If nothing results from this Marvin Harrison investigate, I will no longer read PFT.

The one thing I cannot stand is when rumor mongering condemns someone in the eyes of the public before that person has been condemned in a court of law. This is what PFT has lived on for years, and he is using this police investigation to pad his hit count, nothing more. Yes, he is within his rights to do this. However, I am within my rights to call him a skeezy, sleazeoid lawyer looking for a quick buck.

So, until Marvin Harrison is charged, this is a dead story. Until he is proven guilty in court, this is a dead story. If Marvin had been Pacman Jones or Tank Johnson, I could somewhat understand the witch hunt. Those guys have a long history of repeated events that call into question their character. Tank Johnson did actual jail time. Harrison doesn't have these kinds of repeated events listed, no matter how hard Mike Florio tries to paint it as such.

If there is one thing positive to take from Buzz Bissinger's angry rant about blogs, it's that when it comes to fact and rumor, we bloggers should not confuse the two. Yes, we can report rumors and even make fun of them, especially when they involve Matt Leinart in a pool sharing beer with underage drinkers. But in this case, using rumor to assassinate someone's character is just plain wrong. It's as wrong a pushing a ball boy, pushing a kid for an autograph, or "making it rain."

The irony is Florio is seemingly just as dirty and sleaze ridden as the rotten players he seems to take joy in exposing. Typical in Florio's lawyer profession, it looks like Mike is chasing an ambulance here. If nothing results from this Harrison investigation, I would like to see that ambulance run Florio over a few times.

Pretty much everyone and their mother has commented on "Friday Night Ligts" author Buzz Bissinger making an ass out of himself while trying to bully Deadspin founder Will Leitch on Bob Costas' HBO Show the other night. Costas, famous on the blogosphere for trashing bloggers and then apologizing afterwards, did a special show on the explosion of blogs and how they are changing media. Some of you have asked me to give my opinion on this Bissinger v. Leitch sissy slap brawl, but it wasn't until yesterday evening that I got a chance to sit down and watch it.

All I will say about it is Buzz Bissinger did more in 20 minutes of white knuckled ranting to legitimize blogs than I could do in 20 years of actual blogging. It says something when a subject like blogs threatens an Ivy League educated Pulitzer Prize winner to the point where he goes on television and makes a complete fool out of himself. If his intent was to win people over to his brand of thinking (that blogs are dumbing people down), then he failed miserably. Bissinger came off as an angry, entitled, bitter, old man scolding Will for walking on his front lawn.The bottom line is Bissinger would rather you learn about sports (and other important topics) from smart people like him rather than collectively gathering together on a common place, like an Internet blog, and learning as a community.

If you haven't seen the clips, check them out at Deadspin.

 

 

I'm impressed with all of the new whiz-bang things here on Stampede Blue 2.0.  It's like getting that new piece of technology, and wanting to read through the manual, finding all of the cool stuff you can use.  I may use a couple here, most likely as overkill, just to try them out.

I was perusing around trying to find some Colt's related news, and found this article by Mike Florio, where he goes through the First Round of the draft, picking any player in the NFL.  As has been laid out before here and here, he really doesn't like the Colts, and especially doesn't like Manning.  It is very apparent to anyone with a pulse, that if everyone in the NFL went in for a redraft, the first two picks would be Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, in which ever order you choose (I'm obviously biased, as many of you are, for #18).  Not the wanna-be GM Florio.

He, of course, picks Brady first, for the Dolphins.  He says:

1. Miami Dolphins: Tom Brady, quarterback, Patriots. Is there any doubt about this one? Though he's now 30 years old, Brady will make any team a contender until the day he retires.

Again, no problems here if you want Brady first.  Him and Manning are 1 and 1A.  I really think he made his second choice, just fishing for someone from here to call him out for it.  His second pick:

2. St. Louis Rams: Jared Allen, defensive end, Chiefs. Allen is an absolute beast, arguably the best defensive player in the league. And he's only 26.

Now, don't get me wrong:  Jared Allen is a great player, and no doubt is a top 15 player.  But #2 overall in the NFL, when building a team from scratch?  I couldn't even begin to figure out how that makes any sense at all.  We all learned in last year's Super Bowl that Defensive Ends are very important to winning in the NFL.  However, I wouldn't say Allen is, by far, the best of the bunch at DE.  Many others are quite good, including, of course, Dwight Freeney.  I really think Florio is just pulling hairs, as this isn't even close to a reasonable pick.

Almost begrudgingly, Manning is selected third.  He says:

3. Atlanta Falcons: Peyton Manning, quarterback, Colts. The Falcons need to put a new face on the franchise. Manning gives them a whole head. And a big one at that.

You have the standard cheap shot at Manning's head, which I've done myself.  You can tell he really doesn't want to take him, but knows nobody will take his list seriously if he drops him any more.

The rest of his list is ok.  He has both Freeney and Wayne being taken in his first round, but, again, takes a cheap shot at a Colt: 

24. Tennessee Titans: Dwight Freeney, defensive end, Colts. Though a tad on the overrated side, Freeney would make a very good defense downright dominant.

A defense can be dominant with an overrated player?  I don't understand the logic.  It doesn't look like he's actually taking the best player at certain points, like with the Jets and Patriots at 6/7.  He has Marion Barber at #15, and Chad Johnson before Moss, Owens, and Wayne.  He can be our rival's GM any day, especially making some of these picks.

This, my friends, is the greatest WR in football not named Jerry Rice.

Listen, I understand there are some stooooooopid people out there. Take this person; I mean, that is one dumb lady. But almost equally as dumb is the recent article by ESPN writer Mike Sando. This is the same Mike Sando who, months ago, said the 2007 Colts were one of the best teams... ever! Sando used statistics to make that bold (and idiotic) claim. I mean, I live the Colts and I often make some silly homer comments about them, but "best ever?" Apparently, months later, Sando still likes over-valuing stats. Recently, after Sando canvassed such intellectual stall worths as Keyshawn Johnson, he came to the amazing conclusion that Jerry Rice is the best WR ever, and right behind him is... Randy Moss?

In fact, of the top 10 WRs of all time, Colts receiver Marvin Harrison is ranked 10th, behind Cris Carter (8), Terrel Owens (9), and Michael "Where's the f&*king COCAINE!" Irvin (4).

Now, if there is a fast track way to piss me off, it's dumbass articles like this. First of all, of the panelists evaluating the greatest receivers of all time, not one of them is a cornerback. Warren Moon (QB), Raymond Berry (WR), Mike Holgreme (Fat coach), Ted Thompson, (General Manager), Boyd Dowler (WR), and Keyshawn Johnson (over-rated WR and braindead TV commentator) were never corners. The lone former-defensive back on the panel, Ken Houston, played safety. As many know, cornerbacks are usually the first line of defense against a WR, and if anyone knows if a WR is good or not, it's a CB. Safeties are in the know to, obviously. but having only one on the panel makes the entire panel laughable and the article a worthless piece of crap.

I understand that articles like this are especially created so hotheads like me can go "WTF!" and post links to it on my blog so it can spike ESPN's ugly, video-laced website. Knowing that, I won't waste time picking through the obvious stupidity of having idiots like Keyshawn Johnson decide who the best WR of all time is. What I will say is that whenever CBs, or defensive backs in general, and modern-day WRs are asked who the consensus best WR in football is, they always say Marvin Harrison.

Indeed, an article as recently as two days ago spotlighted Niners CB Nate Clements. Clements was asked who the best WRs are right now. His response was this:

Now, I love Marvin Harrison, but his injury has many lingering questions. So, currently, I would not rank him ahead of Randy Moss. Comparing careers, is Marvin better? Absolutely, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot who should be immediately dismissed. I could pull out all kinds of numbers, games won, and show off that shiny ring Marvin has. I could also point out Marvin has never punched his head coach or tried to run over a cop with his car. It's amazing how, when evaluating a player's entire career, incidents like these are never brought into the evaluation process even though they have a direct correlation to a team winning or losing football games. Creating an unnecessary distraction for your team (especially distractions like those) is the same as dropping a key pass during a key situation.

Regardless, what truly speaks volumes is high level NFL DBs still consider Marvin the best WR of the modern era. While media idiots like ESPN trumpet Owens or Moss, the people who actually play the friggin' game always say Harrison, Harrison, HARRISON! Yet, one sees very little recognition for Marvin on this.

It's just another example of why sports media is in the toilet bowl, and why blogs (like this one) are so important to keeping things real. Now, please excuse me as I step off my high horse, look for my chainsaw, and track down Mike Sando so I can persuade him never to write dumb articles like this again.

A week after insulting bloggers everywhere if the old "loser in his mom's basement" cliche, Bob Costas contacted Will Leitch at Deadspin and clarified his comments:

Costas' clarification is enough for me to retract my claim that he is a human fart stain. In regards to political blogs, or blogs about medicine, health-care, car repair, or cloning, I agree with Costas that being an expert in the field gives added weight to a person's credibility when it comes to talking about the subject.

In sports, it's different.

Peter King, Costas' colleague on NBC's Football Night in America, has covered the NFL for decades. He is an excellent reporter with numerous connections in the league, and his news is very credible. But, when it comes to commenting on the league, Peter King is still utterly clueless. The same is true for guys like Jay Marriotti, Dan LeBatard, and a host of other "columnists" who are part of the established sports media landscape. Many are clueless boobs who have numerous contacts in the business but rarely provide any real insight into how the game is played. Costas seems to confuse reporting (which guys like King are very good at) with informed commentary (which guys like King suck at).

What Costas also does not seem to understand, and he even admits it is a generational thing, that blogs don't serve the sole purpose newspapers do. Newspapers inform the public of news. Blogs comment, a lot. Sports blogs in particular offer a clear, unfiltered POV of the fan (also known as the paying customer). Reporters like Peter King cannot provide this.

All that said, Costas' clarification helped to suck the poison out of the wound. Click here to read the rest of his comments with Will.

Bob Costas: Human fart stain.

It's so damn disappointing when someone who seems to be an intelligent, thoughtful, insightful guy ends up really being a narrow-minded, elitist prick who thinks his job is much more important than it actually is. For years, I have enjoyed Bob Costas and his work. In the "Boo-Yah!" era of sports journalism, Costas seemed like one of the few that took it seriously. He'd report on games and events with a seriousness that made them seem important, and when he'd interview people he would not shy away from tough questions. He did not berate people or treat them with disrespect.

Until now.

Apparently, Bob Costas feels that people like me are "idiots" using this crazy tool called the Internet to express my opinion when what I should really do is leave the opinion-making to "professionals" like Costas. Like Stephen A. Smith, the poster boy for ignorance in sports journalism, Bob Costas thinks we bloggers should shut up and leave the sports writing to people more intelligent than us:

Yes, yes, yes. How dare people actually COMMENT on articles written by others! Such a silly concept. I mean, we should just take everything Dan Le Batard says at face value, and when the opportunity arises to comment on Dan sharing his thoughts with us, we should shut up because we're stupid losers who are typing (all together now) IN OUR UNDERWEAR IN OUR MOM'S BASEMENT. In fact, Costas feels the entire feedback medium (article comments, blogs, etc.) itself is crap and should be taken away from readers.

I could go into a lengthy rant about how Costas is nothing more than another rich, big media prick who is threatened by average Joe's with Ivy Tech educations who are infringing on his bread and butter. But I won't. Costas is an upper crust schmuck, and he knows next to nothing about what sports fans (you know, the people who pay to see idiots like Costas talk about our sport). What Costas really fails to understand is there is no "professional accountability" in his world of "real" journalism. If there was, blogs would not be necessary. Real professional accountability is listening to your readers. In a way, blogs are like letters to the editor, only unfiltered and unedited by copy staff. They are the real, raw feedback directly from your readers and viewers, and belittling that feedback is nothing more than shooting yourself in the foot with a double-barreled shotgun.

Let's get one thing straight: Talk radio is not the same as blogging. Regular, everyday people blog about their passions. Morons, like Stephen A. Smith, get on talk radio and spew the poisoned crap they are known for. For Costas to confuse the two just confirms by feeling that his upper crust status has blinded him from what everyone else in the world knows. And on the subject of respect, it is hard to respect someone like Costas who seems threatened by feedback from his viewers. Once you achieve a certain level of respect, it is no longer a "given" that you have it. You must continue to earn it as if you never had it in the first place. Thanks for your concern Bob, but I think we listeners and viewers will decide for ourselves who is worthy of our respect and time, not you. I know you'd prefer to make our decisions for us, but we like this idea of responding directly to stuff like, say, you calling bloggers "idiots."

Bob Costas: Man of the people.

I'll close with The Big Lead's comments on Costas' whine fest, because I read about this first at his site:

Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter.

The roll of media is to report and scrutinize events and activities that affect the public. Mark Fiarnella at The Sun Chronicle seems to agree somewhat with that. That said, Fairnella seems to think it's pretty sad that local Boston era media has fallen lock step in with the Patriots over the latest allegations of cheating by Bill Belichick:

Nice to know WEEI is adhering to journalistic ethics. I guess those "riveting" Bill Belichick interviews are too important to keep, and aren't worth risking if they have to, you know, report the news on "Spygate II." The reason the Patriots are going on the offensive with Matt Walsh (former Pats employee who says he has video evidence showing the Patriots taping other teams) is they are afraid his information will damn them. So, they are attacking his character before he even says a word on record.

Folks, if this Walsh guy really was of no importance, the Patriots would have dismissed him and continued on with their "We're moving on" crap. Now, they are attacking the guy before he says a word to Senator Arlen Specter or Roger Goodell. And speaking of Goodell, he has to be feeling the heat for all this as much as Scott Pioli, Bill Belichick, and Bob Kraft are.

The more these allegations come to light, the more you see people divide themselves into one of two camps: Those that are looking for the truth, and those that want to protect the NFL from itself. I have no sympathy or understanding for the latter group. The truth is more important than protecting the NFL's image. Suggested cheating is far worse than actually knowing, because the suggestion could linger for decades and slowly rot the NFL's credibility (example: Major League Baseball and steroids). Actual knowledge forces one to deal with the problem, and if the best method to deal with that problem is by cutting a cancer out from the NFL ranks, so be it. Farinella's line "Goodell's own future might be at risk if he is perceived by the owners who pay his salary that he harbored and protected cheaters in their midst," is especially interesting. Bob Kraft has a great deal of influence in NFL circles, and if he has used that influence to pressure Goodell to shut this up, then the problem is much more systemic than initially realized.

What is important to understand here is that taping your opponent to either understand their formations or steal their signs is a violation of NFL rules. To do so gives the opponent a competitive advantage, which is why there is a rule in place to forbid it. Debating whether or not it gives one an advantage is nonsense, and is meant to throw you off the real issue. It is an advantage. No debate. People saying otherwise either don't know what they are talking about, or are lying to make this thing go away. Coaches like Tony Dungy and Mike Martz, and players like James Farrior, Marshall Faulk, and Kurt Warner all agree it is troubling that these kinds of things were done. And using the old "We didn't interpret the rules that way" excuse didn't work in September 2007. Why would it work now?

Is Roger Goodell trying to sweep Belichick's seven years of cheating under the turf to protect Paul Tagliabue's legacy?

Walsh's lawyer is now claiming his client has video evidence. Walsh is trying to work out a deal with the NFL to let him talk without violating his confidentiality agreement with the Patriots. BTW, the Pats are the only team in the NFL that require their video production staff to sign a confidentiality agreement. Gee, I wonder why? Of all people, Mike Florio at PFT actually offers the best solution to this problem:

If the Patriots are innocent, and if Walsh is such a lying pig, then the Patriots should release Walsh from his confidentiality agreement and let him talk to the NFL. If the Patriots have nothing to hide and have done nothing wrong, then why muzzle Walsh with this agreement? Let him talk. If he's a lying lair that does nothing but lie (as the Patriots have suggested he is), then his lies will be exposed.

Hopefully, we'll have some real, concrete answers to this whole mess very soon, but I'm not optimistic. Goodell really screwed up with this, and he might be looking to simply bury it in order to save his hide, and protect Paul Tagliabue's legacy in the process. Most of this video taping occurred during Tagliabue's tenure as NFL Commissioner.