why does congress want to look into"spygate"?

[rypper11]

Originally Posted by redwagonskins

Additionally, if the league is indeed hiding more information regarding "Spygate" then it is perpetrating fraud on the public. Because the government gives the NFL an antitrust exemption, it is their duty to enforce anti-fraud provisions. Otherwise, what we end up with is subsidized professional wrestling.

As an aside, one of the funny things about this site is that someone can post a great response such as the one quoted above that essentially answers the question in a logical manner, and a couple of responses latter we'll get the "because Congress is dumb" or "Congress has nothing better to do" arguments. While both statements may have a basis in reality, amorentz has pretty much hit the nail on the head here.

Good points, and sorry for piling on. I was writing my post when yours went up.

[redwagonskins]

Originally Posted by rypper11

Good points, and sorry for piling on. I was writing my post when yours went up.

No worries. I think you have a very valid and cogent argument. What I think is funny is that in the face of the law and the facts of this matter, people think Congress has no duty to get involved. Well in that case, let the NFL give up their limited exemption and then Congress won't have a say. Until then, Congress is going to stick their nose in whenever there is a possible violation of their limited antitrust exemption (in the case of steroids or cheating).

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by redwagonskins

No worries. I think you have a very valid and cogent argument. What I think is funny is that in the face of the law and the facts of this matter, people think Congress has no duty to get involved. Well in that case, let the NFL give up their limited exemption and then Congress won't have a say. Until then, Congress is going to stick their nose in whenever there is a possible violation of their limited antitrust exemption (in the case of steroids or cheating).

I would agree with anti trust/cheating but this whole baseball/steroids issue.....investigating whether players used steroids back in the 80's and 90's is rediculous. If they are so concerned then appoint a DEA agent to investigate and inform all parties that if they need to co opperate with the investigation. If someone used drugs against the law then charge them. If the Doctor was giving it out drugs like candy charge him. Why do we have polititions asking the questions. Assign an investigator and allow him or her to do their job and report back to them with a final report.

[redwagonskins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I would agree with anti trust/cheating but this whole baseball/steroids issue.....investigating whether players used steroids back in the 80's and 90's is rediculous. If they are so concerned then appoint a DEA agent to investigate and inform all parties that if they need to co opperate with the investigation. If someone used drugs against the law then charge them. If the Doctor was giving it out drugs like candy charge him. Why do we have polititions asking the questions. Assign an investigator and allow him or her to do their job and report back to them with a final report.

Good point. I think that is what they were hoping the Mitchell Report would do (albeit MLB funded). However, remember that there are criminal investigations going on (remember Bonds). I think the investigations into the '80's and '90's has a lot to do with pressuring MLB and MLBPA to go way beyond what they wanted to do in terms of drug testing.

[Oakland Red]

Sen. Arlen Specter is doing the right thing, and I will be very encouraged if he holds hearings on the issue. The NFL, it seems, has been covering up the misdeeds of the Patriots by refusing to investigate them seriously, and possibly also by the destruction of the evidence in the case.

Good for Sen. Specter in pursuing this matter.

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by Oakland Red

Sen. Arlen Specter is doing the right thing, and I will be very encouraged if he holds hearings on the issue. The NFL, it seems, has been covering up the misdeeds of the Patriots by refusing to investigate them seriously, and possibly also by the destruction of the evidence in the case.

Good for Sen. Specter in pursuing this matter.

I agree. If the misdeeds were great enough to impose the stiffest penalty in NFL history, then WHY would the NFL destroy the evidence? It smells of a cover up of even greater impropriety, and the NFL and Goodell have lost credibility by destroying the key evidence that they ruled on.

Goodell claims that the Patriots only turned over evidence from the 2005 and 2006 seasons, neither of which were Super Bowl seasons for NE. If Matt Walsh's allegations that the Pats taped the Rams final walkthrough before their first Super Bowl victory, or any other evidence from Super Bowl winning seasons turns up, I want to see much harsher penalties. Perhaps a 1-2 year suspension for Belichick, or stripping of the title won during a season where videotape cheating occurred. Goodell left open his right to revisit this case if NE did not hand over all evidence, and if he's really a man of his word, he will be as harsh with this as he has been with individual players.

[70Chip]

I think it's necesarry because obviously the league did not do due diligence with its own investigation. Everyone likes Robert Kraft so they did a quick and dirty, burned all the tapes and hoped everyone would forget about it. They especially were hoping everyone would forget about it after the Pats started drawing big t.v. numbers on their undefeated run. The fact that they never talked to this Walsh guy is alone reason enough for someone to look into it. If some other industry were committing consumer fraud, no one would think twice about a government investigation. And to me, that's all the Patriots are -a fraud.