Just when you thought "Spygate" has finally become a thing of the past, the New England Patriots and the NFL have been targeted yet again. This time, Arlen Specter, a Senator from Pennsylvania, has publicly questioned the motives of Roger Goodell and the NFL in their destruction of the videotapes they confiscated from the Patriots earlier in the year.
Conspiracy within the NFL or a cheap publicity stunt?
Senator Specter made headlines this week by questioning Goodell's intentions in handling the investigation surrounding Spygate. In fact, Specter wants to bring Goodell in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain why he destroyed the videotapes related to Spygate.
The notion of destroying evidence immediately translates into an inference of guilt. It leads one to believe that the NFL had something to hide in those tapes. And more importantly, it begs the question - Why did the actual videotapes from Spygate have to be destroyed?
But lets be real here people. We're talking about the NFL, not our nation's national security.
Although these tapes were effectively destroyed and the public will never know exactly what was on those tapes, I'm pretty sure the contents of those tapes would be relatively unimportant to members of the United States Senate.
So why is Senator Specter lambasting Commissioner Goodell and his decision to destroy the videotapes associated with Spygate?
Does he really care what was on those tapes? Doubtful.
Are Specter's constituents concerned about Mr. Goodell's actions? No chance.
Then why does Senator Specter care so much?
The answer is simple.
Senator Specter's number one political contributor is Comcast, a major cable company based out of Philadelphia. Comcast has been unsuccessful in persuading the NFL to allow the "Sunday Ticket" (coverage of every NFL game) and the NFL Network on Comcast's regular cable. Instead, the NFL has insisted on making their product a premium.
Specter has now threatened to strip the NFL of their "anti trust exemption," which permits the league to negotiate it's television contracts for the entire league as opposed to each team negotiating their television deals individually.
Interestingly enough, this is not the first time Specter has attacked the NFL on this issue.
In 2006, Specter publicly denounced the NFL's anti trust exemption and vowed to sponsor legislation that would effectively deprive the NFL from negotiating television contracts for every team.
Specter's public condemnation of Goodell and the NFL has nothing to do with Spygate. It has everything to do with Comcast's desires to get a piece of the billions of dollars the NFL is making off television contracts each year.
And as any shrewd politician would do, Spector chose to cry foul right before the NFL's biggest event. How convenient.
4 comments:
Daniels
I can read Pro Football Talk as much as the next guy, but you are missing a few things. We do know what was on those tapes. The 6 total tapes came from the 2006 season and only contained game tape.
THIS MEANS THEY DIDN'T EVEN TURN OVER TAPE FROM WHEN MANGINI WAS THERE. How did Mangini know about it if they weren't taping when he was there.
Yet the NFL stated that no filing had taken place during any of the Patriots Super Bowl runs, yet all the tapes turned over covered periods after the Patriots played their last Super Bowl.
The current allegations are that they taped the Rams Super Bowl practice in 2001. If the tapes were only from games during the 2006 season, it would seem likely the NFL could not make any determination from those tapes. Moreover, the NFL conducted an investigation without speaking to Matt Walsh. Clearly, that could not be a complete investigation. They would have been better off interviewing him and dismissing him out of hand.
You may be right about Spector's motives, but you forget a key one, which you should remember as an Eagle fan. Arlen can be a hero here if he can prove the Pats taped Eagles practices in Super Bowl 39. They knew that McNabb would puke at a certain temperature and made it hotter haha.
Some argue this out of the province of Congress, I say mularkey. If the NFL can't police themselves, then someone has to do it. No different than baseball getting called in front of congress about steroids. Regardless of the motive, it is worthwhile.
Also, anyone that knows anything about politics knows that nothing gets done in Congress (ever) but especially during a Presidential campaign year.
By the way, I wagered large on the Bucks in the title game. What was the deal on that roughing the punter?
Michael,
As a fellow Birds fan, your comment dissapoints me.
Hypothetically speaking, even if Specter uncovered evidence that the Pats spied on the Eagles before their Superbowl matchup in 2005, would you want to have an Eagles Superbowl Victory by DEFAULT?!
If so, that's weak. I'd much rather win one STRAIGHT UP, rather than be handed one due to my opponent's foul play.
You're also missing my point.
I'm not saying that new information may shed more light on the extensiveness of Spygate, because I think it does go deeper than what the public knows now.
All I am doing is exposing a Senator's motives to please his number one supporter.
The fact that nothing gets done in politics does not justify a Senator to key in on the NFL, a private entity encompassing the game of football. I think you would agree with me that there are a few more important things going on in the world.
On a side note - big bucks on Ohio State obviously a bad decision. They were outmatched, outplayed and outcoached. Maybe you should have consulted with me before you chose the Buckeyes....
Wow. A senator doing what he can to please a contributor, thats new. Only one I know who doesn't do that and he is running for president(and he's black).
Easy to say, you'd rather win one straight up since you at least have an NCAA title. I aint seen shit and I would be perfectly fine if every NFL team gets Ebola and the Eagles get the Lombardi trophy by default
Yo
Good interview with Spector on Mike and Mad Dog. Podcast on WFAN website
Post a Comment