PDA

View Full Version : Mike Martz wants the truth.


polamalu82
02-21-2008, 04:40 PM
Posted by Christopher L. Gasper, Globe Staff February 21, 2008 01:55 PM

INDIANAPOLIS -- San Francisco 49ers offensive coordinator Mike Martz, who was the head coach of the St. Louis Rams team that lost to the Patriots in Super Bowl XXXVI, said he is interested in seeing whether Matt Walsh comes forward.

Walsh is the former Patriots employee who has hinted he has potentially damaging material, including an alleged tape of the St. Louis Super Bowl walkthrough prior to the Patriots' 20-17 win in 2002.

"Of course, I'm interested. I was involved in that," said Martz to a group of reporters at the NFL Scouting Combine who asked about Walsh. "It was my responsibility. I was responsible for a lot of people in that game. I am interested. But I'm going to assume, like anything else, that this is totally false. Until it proves differently, there's really not much to talk about."

When asked whether he was surprised that one of his former St. Louis players, Willie Gary, was named as a plaintiff in a $100 million lawsuit filed last week against the Patriots, owner Robert Kraft and head coach Bill Belichick stemming from the alleged taping, Martz demurred.

"I'm not going to go there. When this is all over with and the investigations are finished I hope that Bill is exonerated and this didn't happen, so we'll see."

However, Martz did say that if the Patriots did tape the walkthrough it would have to be considered cheating.

"First of all, I doubt that this happened, I really do," said Martz. "I'll only say this, and I'm not going to talk about it anymore. I don't think the point is ever whether they got something out of it. The whole point is, were they cheating or not? Isn't it? Isn't that really the point? I think so.

"When you say he took some steroids that did help or didn't help. ...that's never the point. The point is to all these high school coaches and high school kids and college kids, if they did cheat, I think that's the point, not whether it was effective or ineffective. I guess that's what is being glossed over.

"But I'm going to choose to believe this is all not true. I just have too much respect and admiration for Bill, and I just don't think it's true. But I guess when I hear people say it didn't affect [the game], well, it probably didn't. No, it probably didn't affect it at all. But that's really not the point, now is it?"

rbryan
02-21-2008, 04:52 PM
Martz is taking the high road which is good to see, I guess. I'd be less cordial considering that SB had a lot to do with him eventially losing his job in St Louis.

polamalu82
02-21-2008, 05:00 PM
The way I see it is, Martz can't come out and say I want these bastards caught. He has to do it this way.

83-Steelers-43
02-21-2008, 05:05 PM
What I found odd was Bill Cowher's comments. He stated "Is it an advantage to steal signals? Yes. Did it determine the outcome of the game? No.''

Maybe I'm the only one, but that makes absolutely zero sense to me.

This is also the same guy who preached time and time again that "there is a fine line between winning and losing.".

So which is it Bill?

At least Martz wants to find out what in the hell went on and more power to him.

Preacher
02-21-2008, 05:14 PM
What I found odd was Bill Cowher's comments. He basically stated that it's not a big deal and that it did not effect the game. Yet Cowher preached time and time and time again that "there is fine line between winning and losing.".

So which is it Bill?

At least Martz wants to find out what in the hell went on and can you blame the guy? I know I can't.

I think Cowher and Martz basically did the same thing.... take the high road.

What else could he do without sounding like sour grapes?

Really is a shame though... In reality, we could have been sitting here with 3 SB trophies from the last few years, instead of 1, and ANOTHER back to back win.

83-Steelers-43
02-21-2008, 05:17 PM
I fail to see how wanting to know the truth is considered sour grapes.

IMO, losing a game and blaming it on the refs is sour grapes. Losing a game and using injuries as an excuse is sour grapes. Losing a game because the opposition's HC is a cheating sack of shit in more ways than one is a legitimate beef in my book...lol.

klick81
02-21-2008, 05:19 PM
What I found odd was Bill Cowher's comments. He stated "Is it an advantage to steal signals? Yes. Did it determine the outcome of the game? No.''

Maybe I'm the only one, but that makes absolutely zero sense to me.

This is also the same guy who preached time and time again that "there is a fine line between winning and losing.".

So which is it Bill?

At least Martz wants to find out what in the hell went on and more power to him.

Well, i think this is Bill's way of making it known that he feels that they cheated, but does not want to come off as a cry baby.

Preacher
02-21-2008, 05:21 PM
I fail to see how wanting to know the truth is considered sour grapes.

IMO, losing a game and blaming it on the refs is sour grapes. Losing a game and using injuries as an excuse is sour grapes. Losing a game because the opposition's HC is a cheating sack of shit in more ways than one is a legitimate beef in my book...lol.


You and I agree... but it could and would be spun as sour grapes by many... especially those who hate the Steelers

83-Steelers-43
02-21-2008, 05:21 PM
The way I see it, the only places they will come off as crybabies is with the bandwagon fans up in New England (shocker) and on ESPN where polishing Patriot knob has become a job qualification.

I think a good number of football fans want to see Belicheat and that organization held accountable.

polamalu82
02-21-2008, 05:24 PM
I fail to see how wanting to know the truth is considered sour grapes.

IMO, losing a game and blaming it on the refs is sour grapes. Losing a game and using injuries as an excuse is sour grapes. Losing a game because the opposition's HC is a cheating sack of shit in more ways than one is a legitimate beef in my book...lol.

Exactly! If your considered to be a "coaching genius" then you shouldn't be taping teams and expecting them to forget about it. Sour grapes is the Patriots* team.

TackleMeBen
02-21-2008, 05:33 PM
I think a good number of football fans want to see Belicheat and that organization held accountable.
:iagree: they were held accountable..just ask goddell???lol

83-Steelers-43
02-21-2008, 05:34 PM
Exactly! If your considered to be a "coaching genius" then you shouldn't be taping teams and expecting them to forget about it. Sour grapes is the Patriots* team.

IMO, much like with the owners (Rooney being one of them), it has less to do with sour grapes and more to do with pulling the company line. It's no different with a good number of coaches and players in my mind.

Btw, I love your signature. :sofunny:

BlastFurnace
02-21-2008, 06:07 PM
What I found odd was Bill Cowher's comments. He stated "Is it an advantage to steal signals? Yes. Did it determine the outcome of the game? No.''

Maybe I'm the only one, but that makes absolutely zero sense to me.

This is also the same guy who preached time and time again that "there is a fine line between winning and losing.".

So which is it Bill?

At least Martz wants to find out what in the hell went on and more power to him.

I thought the same thing when I read Cowher's comments. You know that he has got to be P.O'd that a team potentially cheated a 15-1 Steelers team out of the chance to win the SB. That 2004-5 team doesn't get mentioned much as one of the best Steeler teams ever, but had that record occurred between 1992-1997, it would be talked about like the 1994 Team does today and that team wasn't as good in the W/L column.

Personally, if cheating took place during that 2004-5 CC game, it really angers me because that was a Steelers team that was special. I think that Steelers team would have destroyed the Eagles in the Super Bowl.

jjpro11
02-21-2008, 06:08 PM
I fail to see how wanting to know the truth is considered sour grapes.

IMO, losing a game and blaming it on the refs is sour grapes. Losing a game and using injuries as an excuse is sour grapes. Losing a game because the opposition's HC is a cheating sack of shit in more ways than one is a legitimate beef in my book...lol.

i think peoples' tones will change if they ever are caught cheating against in the super bowls and the games vs us. nobody wants to say anything now that can make them look like an idiot later on if the pats are cleared. coaches might not say much, but players will pipe up.

83-Steelers-43
02-21-2008, 06:28 PM
nobody wants to say anything now that can make them look like an idiot later on if the pats are cleared.

I totally understand that point, but completely passing it off as no big deal and that even if it is proven that they cheated it still did not change the outcome of the game(s) is crazy in my opinion.

Pulling that company line.

lilyoder6
02-21-2008, 07:15 PM
i want to know how knowing the signals of the def doesn't change the outcome cowher... they could study the signals and when they see it on the field when they are "looking around at the field" and then audible to a play that will demolish the play

fansince'76
02-21-2008, 07:22 PM
I thought the same thing when I read Cowher's comments. You know that he has got to be P.O'd that a team potentially cheated a 15-1 Steelers team out of the chance to win the SB. That 2004-5 team doesn't get mentioned much as one of the best Steeler teams ever, but had that record occurred between 1992-1997, it would be talked about like the 1994 Team does today and that team wasn't as good in the W/L column.

Personally, if cheating took place during that 2004-5 CC game, it really angers me because that was a Steelers team that was special. I think that Steelers team would have destroyed the Eagles in the Super Bowl.

Despite the utter contempt I have for that franchise, I really do believe we lost the '04 AFCCG to a team who at the time was playing better than we were. The only reason we survived the divisional game against the Jets the week before is because their PK shanked not one, but TWO chip-shot FGs that would have won them the game. The 2004 team peaked in late October/early November and the team's overall quality of play tapered off big time after clobbering the Pats* and Eagles in successive weeks.

polamalu82
02-21-2008, 07:31 PM
Despite the utter contempt I have for that franchise, I really do believe we lost the '04 AFCCG to a team who at the time was playing better than we were. The only reason we survived the divisional game against the Jets the week before is because their PK shanked not one, but TWO chip-shot FGs that would have won them the game. The 2004 team peaked in late October/early November and the team's overall quality of play tapered off big time after clobbering the Pats* and Eagles in successive weeks.

While I agree the Steelers did tucker out at the end of that season, I have to say what this is all about is the "could've, would've, should've." It makes you think.

revefsreleets
02-21-2008, 08:04 PM
Mike Martz wants the truth? "He can't handle the truth!"

Normally, that would be a joke, but I'm serious this time. Nobody seems willing to handle or actually accept the truth. It's potentially too damaging to a huge multi-billion dollar industry. Can it really be that an otherwise failure of a coach, a guy who ran the Browns into the ground and really only just knows a little about being a defensive coordinator could have made ALL of us look like fools simply by cheating? Year after year? Taken this sacred game we all love and shit on it so badly that it's possibly tarnished forever? Then callously and arrogantly parade his disdain for class and fair-play in front of us all only see his actions swept under the rug?

Hell, I'm not even sure I want to know the truth now.

jjpro11
02-21-2008, 08:18 PM
While I agree the Steelers did tucker out at the end of that season, I have to say what this is all about is the "could've, would've, should've." It makes you think.

to be honest, it was mostly ben who fell off at the end of the year.. being that it was his rookie year, it was understandable. but i remember the defense played well throughout the entire season, up until the pats afccg of course. and bus was rolling on like never before. its a shame, because i think we would have spanked the iggles in the super bowl.. but chances are 2005 would have ended up like 2006.. a down year.

BlastFurnace
02-21-2008, 09:16 PM
Despite the utter contempt I have for that franchise, I really do believe we lost the '04 AFCCG to a team who at the time was playing better than we were. The only reason we survived the divisional game against the Jets the week before is because their PK shanked not one, but TWO chip-shot FGs that would have won them the game. The 2004 team peaked in late October/early November and the team's overall quality of play tapered off big time after clobbering the Pats* and Eagles in successive weeks.

I agree that we peaked around the time of late October and early November, but what I saw all year long was that this team found ways to win. The only game I felt we were extremely lucky in was the Jets game because Ben was just not playing well that game.

If the Patriots did have film on the Steelers, it did tilt the game to their advantage. I just wanted to see an even playing field for both teams.

fansince'76
02-21-2008, 11:14 PM
to be honest, it was mostly ben who fell off at the end of the year.. being that it was his rookie year, it was understandable. but i remember the defense played well throughout the entire season, up until the pats afccg of course. and bus was rolling on like never before.

I agree, but wasn't that pretty much the pattern for most of Cowher's tenure? The D and running game repeatedly carrying the team DEEP into the postseason only to have the QB screw things up when the stakes got to be their highest?

Atlanta Dan
02-21-2008, 11:23 PM
I agree that we peaked around the time of late October and early November, but what I saw all year long was that this team found ways to win. The only game I felt we were extremely lucky in was the Jets game because Ben was just not playing well that game.

If the Patriots did have film on the Steelers, it did tilt the game to their advantage. I just wanted to see an even playing field for both teams.

The Pats had video of signals on everyone they played until they were caught in the 2007 season opener Jets game - Belicheat started taping in preseason of his first year as coach in 2000 and used preseason tape in the 2000 regular season opener (his first regular season game as HC coach) against Dungy's Tampa Bay

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/sports/football/22patriots.html?ref=sports

Belicheat was hooked on his crack pipe of taping

fansince'76
02-21-2008, 11:36 PM
Mike Martz wants the truth? "He can't handle the truth!"

Normally, that would be a joke, but I'm serious this time. Nobody seems willing to handle or actually accept the truth. It's potentially too damaging to a huge multi-billion dollar industry. Can it really be that an otherwise failure of a coach, a guy who ran the Browns into the ground and really only just knows a little about being a defensive coordinator could have made ALL of us look like fools simply by cheating? Year after year? Taken this sacred game we all love and shit on it so badly that it's possibly tarnished forever? Then callously and arrogantly parade his disdain for class and fair-play in front of us all only see his actions swept under the rug?

Hell, I'm not even sure I want to know the truth now.

I'm beginning to feel the same way, for the same reason. It's not just about one organization anymore.

Rhee Rhee
02-22-2008, 02:07 AM
apparently their going to drop spygate...

karma is a bitch.. to all patriot fans prepare for it...

rbryan
02-22-2008, 10:20 AM
Mike Martz wants the truth? "He can't handle the truth!"

Normally, that would be a joke, but I'm serious this time. Nobody seems willing to handle or actually accept the truth. It's potentially too damaging to a huge multi-billion dollar industry. Can it really be that an otherwise failure of a coach, a guy who ran the Browns into the ground and really only just knows a little about being a defensive coordinator could have made ALL of us look like fools simply by cheating? Year after year? Taken this sacred game we all love and shit on it so badly that it's possibly tarnished forever? Then callously and arrogantly parade his disdain for class and fair-play in front of us all only see his actions swept under the rug?

Hell, I'm not even sure I want to know the truth now.

You beat me to the punch, I was just thinking about that line, lol

As much as I'd like to see some of these people take a harsher stance against the patsies I'm pretty sure its not going to happen either due to the reasons already stated.

The good news is the media isn't going to let go of it and I still think things are going to get a lot worse for NE despite all the efforts of the league to make this go away.

CanadianSteel
02-22-2008, 12:44 PM
Yes watching all the politiaclly correct comments coming form some of the owners and coaches is getting ridiculous. I am sure most of the players will tow the company line also.

Where is Joey Porter for a good soundbite when you need one..... ask Joey what he thinks about possibly being cheated.... Cheat this....

Hoping the media and Spector keep the heat on until the full truth is known.
:tt02:

revefsreleets
02-23-2008, 07:55 PM
Here's what I DO want to see. I want to make sure it's over now. FOREVER. There is zero chance from here on out that Belichick can ever cheat again. And I want to see that franchise fall apart game by game, year by year...I want to see the teams they humiliated by cheating turn around and humiliate the Pats fairly and squarely. Miami 67-NE 3 sounds good to me.

Eff the Pats. They are the ebola virus of the NFL and they need to be wiped off the face of the planet.

Godfather
02-23-2008, 11:26 PM
Despite the utter contempt I have for that franchise, I really do believe we lost the '04 AFCCG to a team who at the time was playing better than we were. The only reason we survived the divisional game against the Jets the week before is because their PK shanked not one, but TWO chip-shot FGs that would have won them the game. The 2004 team peaked in late October/early November and the team's overall quality of play tapered off big time after clobbering the Pats* and Eagles in successive weeks.

Plus the Pats* didn't have that much of an advantage in the two AFCCGs where they beat us. The first time, they won on special teams meltdowns and two Kordell interceptions in the last two minutes. That couldn't have come from videotapes.

The 2004 game came down to Rodney "HGH" Harrison's pick 6, which was a 14 point swing in a 14 point game, and Cowher getting too conservative when we were staging a comeback. Shoulda gone for the TD instead of the FG.

Haiku_Dirtt
02-25-2008, 03:27 AM
What I found odd was Bill Cowher's comments. He stated "Is it an advantage to steal signals? Yes. Did it determine the outcome of the game? No.''

Maybe I'm the only one, but that makes absolutely zero sense to me.

This is also the same guy who preached time and time again that "there is a fine line between winning and losing.".

So which is it Bill?

At least Martz wants to find out what in the hell went on and more power to him.

Where there is smoke there is fire?

Zero sense and more. Zero in this case is becoming worth a small fortune. Cowher is officially not on the record until the 'smoking gun' gets loaded and fired. He is in 'political correct mode'.

The HUGE FINE LINE in between the "cat out of the bag" and the "genie out of the bottle" you can almost smell. We might all have one person in our life who we would believe at face value.

Hines Ward's recall should not be discounted back in 2002. Unfathomed? I guess. But this is no longer about if...this is about to what extent.?