During the off-season, Don Banks of SI.com was among several people to pass along a rumor that Raiders quarterback JaMarcus Russell weighed in the 300-pound range.

Shortly after that, a league source told PFT that Russell was actually under 275. And now that’s what Russell says as well.

“Right now, I’m 269,” Russell said yesterday. “I was never, ever even close to 300 pounds.”

In fact, Raiders coach Lane Kiffin says Russell has been among the team’s hardest workers this off-season and that his teammates have noticed “his body being different.”

Still, 269 is on the heavy side for Russell, even though he’s 6-foot-6 and has a naturally thick frame. At last year’s scouting combine he weighed 265 and looked chubby. And he’s officially listed at 255.

Russell did acknowledge, “I still have some more weight to lose, probably five, six more pounds, but I’m OK.”

Reporter John Tomase of the Boston Herald has posted a lengthy, detailed explanation of the events leading to that fateful February 2 story claiming that the Patriots had taped the Rams’ walk-through practice prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.

The entire article is right here.

Though we’re trying to give Tomase the benefit of the doubt on this one (something he didn’t give to the Patriots at the time he wrote the story), Tomase’s version of the events comes off as a second-by-second description of a train wreck.  In the end, the train still wrecked; all that his story adds to it is the first-hand account of the screeching brakes and the flying glass. 

And the engineer with his cranium buried in his caboose.

We can’t help but think that this is all part of a broader, and carefully calculated, P.R. effort aimed at ensuring that Tomase keeps his beat, and that various editors at the Herald keep their jobs.

After all, Tomase’s sharing of details provides a human context to the story of the story, and we think that someone in upper management at the Herald concluded that this would be a prudent way to generate sympathy for Tomase, in the hopes that everyone can move forward as if this never happened.

But we don’t think that can happen.  There are too many flaws in the explanation.  For example, the original apology implies that Tomase had multiple sources for the story, but Tomase now concedes that the article cited only one source, but then tries to explain that there were in fact more than one:  “The story mentioned only a single, unnamed source because in the end,” Tomase writes, “while I had multiple sources relating similar allegations, I relied on one more than the others.”

Other intriguing aspects of Tomase’s explanation include an acknowledgement that the league’s investigation of the situation revealed that there was no power to the cameras.  Also, Tomase claims that, when he asked Commissioner Roger Goodell about the rumors of the videotaped walk-through following the “State of the League” address on February 1, Goodell said that it was the first he’d heard of it.  After the Herald story was published, Goodell explained that the league previously had investigated the matter and had concluded that the practice had not been videotaped.

Though Tomase refuses to disclose his source or to claim that his source lied to him, the circumstantial evidence continues to point to Walsh.

Think of it this way.  We know for a fact that, at one point, Walsh was squawking like a parrot on speed, on an off-the-record basis.  So why didn’t Tomase simply ask Walsh for a comment, on or off the record, as to whether the walk-through had been taped?  If Walsh would have said to Tomase on an off-the-record basis what Walsh told Goodell face-to-face three days ago, Tomase would have had everything he needed to pull the plug on the story.

In other words, if Walsh’s recent claim that he didn’t tape the walk-through was enough to get the Herald to retract the story, shouldn’t a similar statement from Walsh have been enough to kill it? 

This leads to only three possible explanations, as we see it:  (1) Tomase didn’t bother to try to contact Walsh before running the story; (2) Tomase contacted Walsh, and Walsh refused to talk about it at all (which would have made no sense if he merely would have been saying was “I didn’t tape the walk-through”); or (3) Walsh was the source.

We believe, based on everything we’ve read and heard, that Walsh was the source.  And, if that’s the case, we’d love to know why Walsh told Tomase one thing in February, and the Commissioner something else in May.

We also can’t help but wonder whether the Pats are eager to “move forward” on this one in part because they don’t want that question to be asked, or to be answered.

Patriots president Jonathan Kraft appeared on WEEI radio in Boston on Thursday, and he discussed in candid detail the situation involving the retraction of the February 2 Boston Herald story accusing the team of videotaping the Rams’ walk-through practice prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.

Here, as we’ve been saying a lot lately, are the highlights.

Kraft said that the Herald gave the team roughly one hour of advance notice before going to print with the story, at 9:00 p.m. EST on the evening of Friday, February 1.  He said that the team and the lawyers were adamant regarding their denial of the contention.

Later in the interview, Kraft explained what had occurred when the Herald called the team, as the Patriots were preparing for the league championship game against the Giants.  And the situation became a real distraction for the franchise the next day, one day before the Super Bowl.

“A significant number of people in our organization,” Kraft said, “from Robert [Kraft] to myself to Bill [Belichick] to Scott [Pioli] to Jimmy Dee to Fernando Neto, our assistant video director, to Stacey James and his staff and our lawyers had to spend a significant amount of time with people at the league office dealing and addressing this issue on a day that, I think, maybe not for my father and myself, but for certainly most of the rest of the people, we would have preferred that they spend preparing for the Super Bowl and the opportunity that we had to finish an undefeated season.”  

Kraft implied that the team won’t be taking legal action against the Herald, focusing instead on a desire to “move forward.”  Still, he called the damage to the team as a result of the false story “significant,” citing more than 300,000 stories that have run in the past three-plus months referencing the false story.

Kraft also pointed out that the apology could have come sooner, if Matt Walsh wasn’t the source for the Herald story.  “If Matt Walsh wasn’t the source,” Kraft said, “why did it take until the day after he spoke to get the apology?”

There was a little sparring regarding the notion that coach Bill Belichick “misinterpreted” the rule prevening videotaping of defensive coaching signals.  The contention is that the practice wouldn’t have been secretive if Belichick thought that the practice was permissible.  (In this regard, the only possible explanation is that Belichick didn’t want other teams who might not be videotaping defensive signals to realize that it’s something that might be a good idea to do.)

As to Senator Arlen Specter’s interest in the matter, Kraft pointed out that the absence of any comment from other U.S. Senators in support of taking action regarding the cheating scandal. 

Regarding the media coverage of the situation, Kraft pointed out that several media outlets have been chasing the story in an effort to uncover new wrongdoing by the Patriots, but have found nothing.  “[N]o professional sports team has been under this much scrutiny in the history of professional sports,” Kraft said.

In this regard, Kraft took a shot at the Internet operation of the company that pays the league $1.1 billion per year for the privilege of televising its games.  “I would argue that there are certain people at ESPN.com who have shown journalistic standards that are not up to snuff,” Kraft said.

The New York Times received on Thursday yet another reward for a stream of fluff and puff regarding former Pats video employee Matt Walsh and his lawyer, Michael Levy. 

The Times got the first print Q&A with Walsh.

Here are a few highlights.  (The last one is the most important, in our view.)

Walsh justified his participation in the cheating scam because he apparently feared termination.  Or the loss of his job.  “I wasn’t going to question what they wanted me to do,” he said.  “They became upset if we filmed a practice drill incorrectly.  I didn’t want to imagine what the consequences would be if I refused to do something altogether.”

Also, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the Pats didn’t use the tapes of the defensive coaching signals in the same game.   “There was no rush after I finished to get it to him right away.  Because typically we wouldn’t be playing the team for months to weeks later on.

“At first, it was filming teams we were going to be playing again later that year.  In 2001, it evolved to filming other teams, especially in the [AFC], that we thought we might either possibly see in the playoffs or see again another time.  It was the kind of situation that being the third video guy, there wasn’t anything else I necessarily needed to shoot, especially for home games.  So it was said, ‘Go ahead and shoot the signals.’”

Walsh says that, on at least one occasion, he noticed that an opposing team might be doing the same thing that the Pats were doing.  “[T]here was one time that I was filming and another team had set up their third video guy right next to me in our stadium,” Walsh said.  “And when our team was on defense, I looked over at him, and he was angling his camera toward our sideline. I didn’t ask him about it, because I was doing the same thing he was.  But after the game, I went and told [former defensive coordinator] Romeo Crennel, and there were a couple other defensive coaches standing around in his office at the time.  I’m not sure who overheard it or not.  But I told Romeo, ‘The next time we play this team, you may want to change your signals, because I think they’re doing to us what we do to them.’”

The experiment in nepotism that has unfolded in the Denver Broncos’ front office will soon take on a new dynamic.

Following the termination of G.M. Ted Sundquist, Jim Goodman became the team’s V.P. of football operations/player personnel.  His son, Jeff, is now an assistant General Manager.  (The Broncos curiously have two Assistant General Managers, but no General Manager.  It’s like having an assistant to the traveling secretary, without a traveling secretary.)

A third Goodman will be added to the mix on Friday, we’re told.  Jim Goodman’s other son, Tyler, will be hired as a college scout, and assigned to the talent-rich Southeast Region, which is generally regarded as the plum assignment for any college scouting staff.

Tyler Goodman has, as far as we can tell, no prior NFL experience.  And thus the appearance that Tyler Goodman is getting the job not because of what he knows or what he can do but who he’s related to is a bit troubling, especially when there are plenty of capable scouts out there who lose their jobs every year and have to scratch and claw to get a new one. 

The first official conflict has arisen regarding this week’s information from former Pats employee Matt Walsh.

On Tuesday, Walsh told NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell that Walsh was present at the Rams’ walk-through practice prior to Super Bowl XXXVI, and that Walsh shared with former Pats receivers coach Brian Daboll a couple of observations regarding the session.  (The last tidbit wasn’t disclosed by Goodell during his press conference, but was thereafter disclosed by NFL outside counsel Gregg Levy.)

According to Adam Schefter of NFL Network, the league re-interviewed Daboll, who now works for the Jets, on Wednesday.  Daboll told the league that recalled no such discussion with Walsh.

Of course, Daboll’s failed recollection doesn’t mean that the conversation didn’t happen.

But Schefter points out that, if the conversation occurred, it would not have been a violation of the rules.  Walsh claims that he was in plain view at the practice, and Walsh was wearing Patriots gear.  Walsh also told the Commissioner that he wasn’t asked to eyeball the Rams’ practice.

Meanwhile, former Rams coach Mike Martz takes issue with Walsh’s explanation that he was present on the sidelines during the walk-through in Patriots’ attire.

“I was stunned at Matt Walsh’s allegation that he was on the sideline in New England Patriots apparel during our walk-[through],” Martz said in a statement issued on Thursday night.  “I find that insulting, disturbing and a slap in the face to both our team security and NFL security, who both do outstanding jobs.  I promise you that if he was on the sideline, he was not in New England Patriots apparel because he would have been identified.”

Still, Martz isn’t claiming that anything untoward occurred during the walk-through.  “Let me make this clear – we lost to the New England Patriots in the Super Bowl because we turned the ball over three times,” Martz said.  “If there was anything obtained from our walk-[through] from a casual observer that happened to be present, then that was just part of those walk-thrus and that environment.  What I’ve said all along and what my only concerns were if [(a)] If the walk-[through] was filmed or [(b)] If it was purposely scouted for information.  If so, then that is an issue that the league needs to pursue.  I’m very satisfied that this was not the situation in this instance whatsoever.”

Once per day, yours truly does a Google news search of “profootballtalk” to see whether any members of the “real” media are calling us bad names.  (Roughly three times per week, the answer is “yes.”)

Over the past couple of days we’ve seen in different formats an article from Tony Moss of The Sports Network, in which he lists a few things that the NFL should change. 

Though we’re not big on ideas conjured by folks other than, you know, us, we really like Moss’s offering for the improvement of the Pro Bowl experience.

Moss thinks that the league should “form a Pro Bowl selection committee of no more than five people who cover the league nationally but have no discernable agenda, including but not limited to Peter King (Sports Illustrated), John Clayton or Len Pasquarelli (ESPN), Mike Florio (profootballtalk.com, The Sporting News), Adam Schefter (NFL Network) and someone from FOX or CBS or NBC who knows what they’re doing, to make the picks.”

Tony, I don’t know you, but I already love you.  Not that way.  (Not that there would be anything wrong with it if I did.  Except for the fact that I’m married.)

Anyway, we like the idea on the surface, especially since it would give yours truly a seat at the grown-ups’ table.  Then again, it would actually require me to expend effort, so maybe it’s not such a good idea, after all.

Though his opinion on the matter isn’t surprising given his constituency, Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Ma.) has spoken out regarding the obsession interest of his colleague Arlen Specter regarding the activities of the New England Patriots.

Said Kennedy, per the Boston Globe:  “With the war in Iraq raging on, gasoline prices closing in on $4 a gallon, and Americans losing their homes at record rates to foreclosure, the United States Senate should be focusing on the real problems that Americans are struggling with.  I’m looking forward to another great Patriots season where they can let their play on the field speak for itself.”

The words would carry more weight if they came from another Republican, and from Senator elected by the citizens of a state other than Massachusetts (or Rhode Island or Vermont or New Hampshire).  But, clearly, Kennedy’s sentiments regarding the priorities of Congress mirror those of many non-Congresspersons, regardless of whether they live in New England or New Mexico.

That said, we tend to think that Congress does have a duty to provide, when necessary, an independent perspective regarding matters of significant public interest.  The NFL enjoys an antitrust exemption, and the owners and players reap billions of dollars from American citizens who follow the sport.  So even though there’s a point (i.e., right now) at which Specter will need to stand down unless he can recruit others in Congress to join the cause, it would be an appropriate exercise of legislative authority, if Congress were to decide to hold hearings on the Spygate matter as part of an effort to determine whether to pass federal legislation aimed at ensuring the integrity of professional sports that operate in multiple states. 

The Houston Texans opted not to extend a restricted free agency tender to receiver/kick returner Jerome Mathis, a speedster who never came close to reaching his potential during three seasons with the team.

To complicate matters, Mathis was arrested for allegedly assaulting his pregnant girlfriend in February 2008.

So the Texans allowed him to become an unrestricted free agent, and the Redskins eventually signed him.

But the ‘Skins apparently have seen enough.  With a couple of rookie receivers in the fold (Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly), Mathis was cut on Thursday to make room for rookie defensive lineman Jonathan Mapu.

Mathis technically will enter waivers, since he has less than three years in the league.  But since no one else wanted him when he was an unrestricted free agent, we can’t imagine anyone else wanting him now.

Former Bengals receiver Chris Henry apparently is selling his house in Kentucky.  But not voluntarily.

On May 22, 2008, Henry’s house apparently will be auctioned as part of a foreclosure action. 

The home has an appraised value of $360,000.  The specific amount of the debt isn’t listed on the web page that announces the pending sale.

Since Henry currently is on house arrest, the buyer might be taking on a temporary boarder.

It’s been a very good week for the New England Patriots.

After learning that former video employee Matt Walsh knows nothing about the videotaping of the Rams’ walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI and after having the Boston Herald retract its story that the Patriots videotaped the Rams’ walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI, the Pats have won a victory in court.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that the team may collect more than $65,000 from a fan who defaulted on a ten-year contract to buy tickets to games at Gillette Stadium.  Under the agreement, the purchaser agreed that the full amount of the unpaid tickets would be paid if the purchaser defaulted on the agreement to buy the tickets.

The high court in Massachusetts found that the so-called “liquidated damages” clause was enforceable because it wasn’t a penalty.  Though we haven’t studied the opinion yet (and don’t plan to do so until confronted with our next bout of insomnia), the requirement that the fan pay for tickets that presumably were sold to someone else flies in the face of the concept of mitigation of damages.

The Jets have been practicing all week but today was the first session open to the public. Which player stood out most? Bubba Franks.

Signed to back up Chris Baker, Franks used the starter’s holdout to further his own cause. According to Rich Cimini of the Daily News, Franks made three outstanding touchdown catches during red zone drills. Was it a message to the absent Baker about the costs of his holdout?

Perhaps, although Eric Mangini’s first public comments about the impasse didn’t have the feel of a coach who was looking to punish the missing player. Mangini told Cimini that he’s been sending Baker “information” so he’s aware of changes to the playbook. He told Newsday that he still expects him for the mandatory minicamp next month, presumably because he defines mandatory in the literal sense of the word.

Elsewhere, Chad Pennington took the snaps with the first team offense but only as a result of a coin flip. Kellen Clemens was with the unit the day before.

Kris Jenkins is looking positively svelte, down 30 pounds from last season. He needs to maintain his current weight, 360 pounds, to receive weight bonuses in his contract.

When the Spygate story re-assumed on Tuesday its position as the biggest story in the NFL, I forgot that I’d sent in a new column for SportingNews.com the night before.

And I continued to forget about the “I can’t thing of anything specific to do so let’s come up with a list” article, until it landed on the front page of Yahoo this afternoon.

The item focuses on the ten worst moves (and non-moves) to date of the offseason.  You can read it right here. 

Proof that the product of a case of writer’s block got some attenton on the entry page of one of the top sites on the web appears below.

A year ago, Panthers quarterback Jake Delhomme suffered an elbow injury three games into the season, and the Panthers struggled through a long season with Vinny Testaverde, David Carr and Matt Moore all getting significant playing time under center.

This year Testaverde and Carr are both gone, and the Panthers might be even worse off if Delhomme can’t go. Fortunately for Panthers coach John Fox, he expects Delhomme to be just fine.

“I can tell everybody here that Jake looks outstanding,” Fox said Wednesday of watching Delhomme throw. “He looks fit. He’s bigger, stronger. His arm looks fantastic, maybe stronger than ever.”

Panthers fans had better hope Fox’s optimism is warranted. The team’s decision not to draft a quarterback or sign a veteran free agent means that Moore and Brett Basanez are behind Delhomme on the depth chart.

Two of Cedric Benson’s fellow UT alums weighed in with their thoughts about Benson’s arrest while boating on Lake Travis in Texas.

Ricky Williams told the Austin American-Statesman that he was invited to go along with Benson on the ill-fated voyage. He regrets passing up on the trip because “I find I have a calming influence on people I’m around.”

I think Ricky may be guilty of using some transitive reasoning about what calms people when he’s around but at least he’s not condemning Benson before his day in court. That task is left to Earl Campbell.

He told the same newspaper that Benson made a “dumb mistake” on the day in question. “I think at some point you have to stand up and take responsibility and realize that you not only represent Cedric Benson and the Chicago Bears and your family. It’s bigger than that,”Campbell added.

We’ve been down this road with Benson before. His general manager Jerry Angelo accused him of putting himself in a position to be a victim as did Jay Mariotti of the Chicago Sun-Times. There are at least two sides to the story, though, and none of his detractors are any more enlightened to what actually went down than we are.  If Benson’s telling the truth, he took no less responsibility for his actions than any of the rest of us.

One of the five people charged in Sean Taylor’s murder has pleaded guilty.
Defense attorney Michael Hornung confirmed to the Associated Press that defendant Venjah Hunte agreed to a guilty plea and will cooperate with prosecutors. Hunte will be sentenced to 29 years in prison.

Richard Sharpstein, a lawyer who is serving as the Taylor family’s spokesman, said Taylor’s relatives were satisfied with the plea arrangement.

“It appears on the surface that he’s gotten a deal,” Sharpstein said, “but he still serves at least 80 percent of the 29 years, which is a long stretch. It’s no slap on the wrist. It’s severe punishment and [Taylor’s father] and other family members were consulted and they approved the prosecutor’s decision.”

Hunte entered his guilty plea last week, but it was not made public until after prosecutors filed charges against the fifth suspect in the case.

Taylor, the Redskins’ safety, was shot in his home in November.  The other four suspects are scheduled to go on trial on August 25.

If secondhand accounts of speaking with Matt Walsh hasn’t filled your needs to hear from a videographer turned golf pro, the man himself will be on HBO’s Real Sports tomorrow night.

The Boston Globe has some excerpts from the interview and, needless to say, Walsh’s accounts don’t mirror those of Bill Belichick.

“Coach Belichick’s explanation for having misinterpreted the rules. To me, that really didn’t sound like taking responsibility for what we had done, especially considering the great lengths that we had gone through, uh, to hide what we were doing.”

Walsh goes into great detail about cover stories the team created for why they needed an extra camera and fingered Patriots video coordinator Jimmy Dee as the man who educated him about evading detection.

Walsh also scoffed at the notion that Belichick “couldn’t pick him out of a lineup,” saying Belichick’s wife bought him a Christmas gift and, via this account in the Providence Journal of the interview, repeated the story told by Arlen Specter about a quarterback telling him that tapes he made of Tampa’s defensive signals resulted in Drew Bledsoe being told the correct defense he was about to face 75% of the time during a 2000 game.

Walsh’s comments in full paint a far larger picture than the one that Roger Goodell gave on Tuesday. By destroying the evidence and declaring the case closed, the NFL created an appearance of covering their own rear when total transparency would be the easiest way for this to really fade into the night.

Said Cowboys owner Jerry Jones of RB Marion Barber’s contract situation, “I don’t see that it will have a negative impact in his playing this year.”

The Cowboys have added a couple of journeyman offensive linemen.

Giants DE Michael Strahan hasn’t made any decisions about retirement.

The Eagles have signed three rookie free agents.

Arlen Specter didn’t ask the question Eagles fans wanted answered.

The Saints signed former LSU offensive lineman Carnell Stewart.

The Jets say they have an open competition at quarterback, but they would prefer to see Kellen Clemens beat out Chad Pennington.

Ravens rookies Joe Flacco and Haruki Nakamura will miss workouts this month because their schools haven’t finished the semester.

Bengals LB Ahmad Brooks is still ailing from the injury that cut short his 2007 season.

Says Browns coach Romeo Crennel said of TE Kellen Winslow’s absence, “When he gets here we’ll find out for sure exactly what that is. He’s not here and I haven’t spoken with him.”

The Browns’ quarterbacks like the speed provided by WR Donte’ Stallworth.

Says Titans S Chris Hope of recovering from a spinal cord injury, “I think it’s a positive, it gives you that extra motivation to go back out and play even harder and not take a day for granted.”

Falcons WR Harry Douglas created the greatest buzz at minicamp.

Panthers RB Jonathan Stewart might return kickoffs.

Says Panthers coach John Fox of his draft priorities, “We wanted to get more physical on the offensive line. I was tired of going for it on third-and-1 and then it being fourth-and-2.”

Says Buccaneers coach Jon Gruden of re-acquiring QB Brian Griese, “He gave me a hard time. He’s a sarcastic guy. I took a few punches from him.”

Asked for his impressions of rookie WR Donnie Avery, Rams veteran Torry Holt said, “Right now, I don’t have any impressions … Hopefully, during training camp he’ll show me something.”

Says Chiefs coach Herm Edwards of his wide receivers, “Is it a star-studded group? Is it household names? Maybe just one: Dwayne Bowe.”

The Seahawks have signed WR Chas Gessner.

One of the biggest questions in the wake of the decision of the Boston Herald to retract (without using the “R” word) its February 2 article accusing the Patriots of videotaping the Rams’ walk-through practice prior to Super Bowl XXXVI is when (and if) heads will roll.

Apparently, the guy whose name appeared on the story won’t be fired, or removed from his beat.

In Thursday’s Herald, editor-in-chief Kevin R. Convey said that he “continue[s] to stand behind the work of the Herald sports department and John Tomase, a talented journalist who has dealt with this difficult matter professionally while continuing to do his job under intense pressure.”

Convey also wrote that he personally takes “full responsibility” for the error.

This apparent strategy of responsibility without internal accountability tends to strengthen our belief that someone above Tomase decided to push the story to print when it appeared on February 1 that Matt Walsh was about to finally crack, based on his on-the-record remarks to the New York Times and ESPN.com. 

We believe that the powers-that-be at the Herald previously told Tomase that the story wouldn’t run unless the source (i.e., Walsh) would go on the record.  With Walsh, who previously hadn’t gone on the record with any of the news organizations that had been chasing him since September 2007, suddenly chirping and the Herald holding the story in its back pocket because of Walsh’s unwillingness to put his name to the information, someone in the building decided that the time had come to take a leap of faith.

Tomase is due to explain himself on Friday, and we think he’ll say that his source lied to him.  And that will only further point to Walsh as the source for the story.  (Maybe, in the end, it will be Walsh who sues the Herald for defamation.)

Regardless of whether Tomase was lied to, or whether the ill-fated decision to run the story was made by Convey or someone else in the organization, this is the kind of thing for which someone needs to either resign or be fired.  Yeah, it’s a harsh outcome.  But this story was way too big of a deal, causing way too much trouble for way too many people, to not require a serious consequence for those responsible it.

So if we were giving the legal advice on this one (and the owners of the Herald should be glad we aren’t), we’d recommend asking for the resignation of Convey and the editor in the sports department who recommended green-lighting the story, and we’d reassign Tomase to a combined beat of field hockey and slow-pitch softball.

Harsh?  Sure.  But if the only real accountability is the issuance of a blurb in which someone takes “responsibility” for the situation and then we all move ahead as if nothing ever happened, then this kind of stuff will continue to happen.

PFT Planet, we now yield the floor to you on this one.  Should heads roll, or not?

A lawyer involved in a child-support suit against Bears linebacker Lance Briggs claims that Briggs lied under oath during a deposition taken in connection with the action.

Brittini Tribbett claims that Briggs impregnated two other women while Tribbett was expecting Briggs’ child. Briggs denied knowing one of the two pregnant women.

“I believe that he did,” said Tribbett’s lawyer, Enrico Mirabelli, “and when he said that twice under oath, it was not correct.”

(Mirabelli stopped short of using the “perjury” label. But, under the circumstances, it’s clearly what he was implying.)

Briggs’ lawyer denies that any “incorrect statements” were made during the deposition.

The reality (unfortunately) is that people make “incorrect statements” during depositions all the time. Sometimes, they believe the incorrect statements to be true. At other times, they’re simply flat-out lying. Even then, however, there aren’t sufficient resources to prosecute everyone who lies under oath.

In Briggs’ case, it’s hard to imagine that he accidentally said he didn’t know the pregnant woman, if it turns out that he impregnated her.

And what relevance does the question of whether Briggs knew the other pregnant woman have to his child-support obligations in a separate incident? Good question. But a lie under oath is a lie under oath. If, you know, he lied under oath.

One of the things that is still nagging at us more than a day after the Boston Herald admitted to one of the biggest blunders in the history of sports journalism is whether the powers-that-be at the Herald did so on their own, or with the business end of a bayonet-tipped muzzle-loader tapping against their temples.

The timeline immediately caught our attention. Late Tuesday night, the Herald issued an apology on its web site, which then adorned the front page of the Wednesday fish wrap. Later in the day, owner Bob Kraft declared victory.

Our guess? The Patriots’ lawyers and the lawyers for the Herald spent most of Tuesday afternoon communicating by e-mail and/or (Sprint) phone, in an effort to come up with a procedure for promptly retracting the February 2 story alleging cheating at the highest levels of pro sports, based on Matt Walsh’s Tuesday morning explanation to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell that Walsh knows of no videotape of the Rams’ walk-through practice prior to Super Bowl XXXVI. In exchange for the retraction, we believe that the Pats promised not to launch a legal firestorm that could have resulted ultimately in the renaming of the publication as the Foxborough Herald.

If that’s what happened, it makes sense. No one gains anything from prolonging this sad episode. Besides, as Roger Clemens has learned, a defamation lawsuit opens every closet in the house as part of the search for skeletons.

Also, the ultimate assessment of any legal damages suffered by the franchise would have been driven by comparing the harm from the false story of one-time Super Bowl cheating to the harm the team did to its own public image via chronic non-Super Bowl cheating. Thus, the Patriots wouldn’t be able to move forward on Spygate I, if they chose to pursue legal action over what the Herald erroneously convinced many would be Spygate II.

But if there was some type of a deal between the Pats and the Herald, the settlement apparently doesn’t extend to the corps of columnists at the newspaper. In Thursday’s edition, Tony Massarotti describes the public discourse on the red, white, and blue team as, in essence, a red state/blue state conundrum, with a certain segment of the media and the public staunchly pro-Pats, and the rest lined up firmly against the team.

Basically, Massarotti implies that anyone in the media who does anything other than criticize the Patriots is somehow in bed with them (or, at a minimum, sleeping on officially-licensed team sheets and pillow covers). And that’s just crazy, in our view. Plenty of writers and broadcasters have written good things and bad things about the Patriots since Spygate first hit the fan. And there are, indeed, plenty of bad things and good things to write.

Actually, Massarotti’s column speaks to a deeper problem in our society — a problem to which we heard Peter King allude Wednesday morning on Sirius NFL Radio. Basically, many of us cling blindly to our positions on issues of sports and politics, forming an opinion based on an initial impression, guarding it like a newborn cub, and refusing to entertain any and all evidence that might later show that our initial impression was wrong.

So here’s the reality on this long, drawn out mess, in summary fashion. Good and bad.

The Patriots cheated, for years.

The Pats continued to cheat even after they knew that the league was onto them.

The NFL imposed a stiff punishment for the cheating.

The NFL destroyed the evidence that the Patriots turned over regarding cheating, making it impossible for anyone to know the extent of the Pats’ cheating.

Other teams have cheated, and continue to cheat.

The media generally has failed in its responsibility to develop and to present evidence of other teams cheating.

Some segments of the media instead have focused on trying to develop and to present more evidence of the Patriots cheating.

Meanwhile, the Patriots authored (without cheating) one of the greatest seasons in the history of organized sports.

Senator Arlen Specter, possibly motivated by the lingering dispute between the NFL and a major cable company headquartered within Specter’s jurisdiction, publicly stuck his nose into the matter.

Simultaneously, the race among the “real” journalists to publish the long-rumored story of Super Bowl skullduggery resulted in the Herald rushing to print a story that turned out to be flat-out false.

For the Pats, the timing couldn’t have been worse; the article came out the day before a Super Bowl game that the team would go on to lose.

Though it’s impossible to know whether the Pats would have won Super Bowl XLII if the franchise hadn’t been forced to deal with this tremendous (and, as we now know, unwarranted) distraction only one day before the game, no one can credibly contend that the story had no impact on the preparations and the planning for the game.

And so the Patriots are both villain and victim. Massarotti’s notion that the public and the media can see the Pats as only one or the other is juvenile, and wrong.

It doesn’t mean that there hasn’t been media bias both for and against the Patriots. But not everyone who follows the NFL for a full or partial living is out to prove that the Patriots are good, or that the Patriots are bad. For some of us, it’s about getting to the truth, and about acknowledging all sides of one of the most complex and polarizing stories that sports has ever seen. If the Herald had been willing to do the same, the February 2 story might never have been published.

As his trial on federal charges was approaching, former NFL defensive lineman Sean Jones has somehow finagled a My Cousin Vinny outcome, with all of the counts of the indictment being dismissed.

“I have represented Sean for a long time, and there’s no doubt in my mind that this dismissal of the charges against him is the right result,” said Jones’ lawyer, Thomas Hagemann, in a press release that (inexplicably) was sent to us in advance of its broader dissemination on Thursday morning. Said Jones:  “Being out of the NFL last year was very difficult to say the least, but it did give me time to focus on my family, friends and faith.  There’s more to be said down the road, but right now, I’m just grateful that this nightmare is over.   I’ll enjoy that thought for a few weeks and then start tackling my future opportunities.” 

Last year, Jones was named along with four others in a twelve-count indictment arising from an alleged mortgage fraud scheme.  Jones entered no plea and made no concession in order to achieve the dismissal of the charges.

Though we’re not privy to any stats in this regard, it’s very rare that federal prosecutors will walk away from criminal charges that have resulted in an indictment.  Usually, the feds don’t even pursue an indictment unless they believe that they have enough evidence to secure a conviction.

The reason for the decision to dismiss the charges is presently unknown.

In addition to the press conference conducted on Wednesday by Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Specter released a lengthy statement regarding the results of his interview of former Pats employee Matt Walsh, and other observations regarding the Spygate situation.

The entire statement is right here.  Here are a few highlights:

First, Specter points out the ongoing ambiguity regarding the extent to which the taping was disclosed by the Patriots and/or the league when the matter first came to light in September 2007.  “Originally,” the statement reads, ”Commissioner Goodell said the taping was limited to late in the 2006 season and early in the 2007 season.  In his meeting with me on February 13, 2008, Goodell admitted the taping went back to 2000.  Until my meeting with Matt Walsh on May 13, 2008, the only taping we knew about took place from 2000 until 2002 and during the 2006 and 2007 seasons.”

Second, Specter shares more details about Walsh’s activities at the Rams’ walk-through practice prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.  “Walsh said [former receivers coach Brian] Daboll asked him specific questions about the Rams offense and Walsh told Daboll about Faulk’s lining up as a kick returner.  Walsh also told Daboll about Rams running backs ‘lining up in the flat.’  Walsh said Daboll then drew diagrams of the formations Walsh had described.”

Third, the statement outlines the lengths to which the Patriots went to avoid detection of the taping of defensive coaching signals.  “During at least one game, the January 27, 2002 AFC Championship game, Walsh was specifically instructed not to wear anything displaying a Patriots logo.  Walsh indicated he turned the Patriots sweatshirt he was wearing at the time inside-out.  Walsh was also given a generic credential instead of one that identified him as team personnel.”

Fourth, Specter shared previously undisclosed (to the general public) details information about how the videotaping of defensive coaching signals was used:  “Walsh was told by a former offensive player that a few days before the September 11, 2000 regular season game against Tampa Bay, he (the offensive player) was called into a meeting with Adams, Bill Belichick and Charlie Weis, then the offensive coordinator for the Patriots, during which it was explained how the Patriots would make use of the tapes.  The offensive player would memorize the signals and then watch for Tampa Bay’s defensive calls during the game.  He would then pass the plays along to Weis, who would give instructions to the quarterback on the field.  This process enabled the Patriots to go to a ‘no-huddle’ offensive, which would lock in the defense the opposing team had called from the sideline, preventing the defense from making any adjustments.  When Walsh asked whether the tape he had filmed was helpful, the offensive player said it had enabled the team to anticipate 75 percent of the plays being called by the opposing team.”

Fifth, Specter locked onto the red-herring notion that “offensive signals” were taped, too — even though there is no such thing as an “offensive signal,” and that the only thing taped in this regard (indications of grouping formations) are quickly decoded by advance scouts.

Sixth, Specter relies upon the nonsensical and inane rantings of ESPN’s Mark Schlereth in support of the notion that the tapes of the defensive coaching signals were used in the same game.  Specter’s own statement, as it relates to how the defensive signals were used, contradicts the notion that the Patriots would have been able to decipher the signals on the fly.  Moreover, Specter ignores the fact that Walsh said that the signals weren’t used later in the same game.

Seventh, as to the practice of taping teams whom the Pats weren’t scheduled to play again that year, the reality is that the Patriots clearly were establishing a database of coaching signals that could then be used when facing the same coaches in the future, whether with their current team or with a new team.

Eighth, and finally, Specter lays out his reasons for pursuing this matter:  “There is an unmistakable atmosphere of conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest between what is in the public’s interest and what is in the NFL’s interest.  The NFL has good reason to disclose as little as possible in its effort to convince the public that what was done wasn’t so bad, had no significant effect on the games and, in any event, has all been cleaned up.  Enormous financial interests are involved and the owners have a mutual self-interest in sticking together.  Evidence of winning by cheating would have the inevitable effect of undercutting public confidence in the game and reducing, perhaps drastically, attendance and TV revenues.

“The public interest is enormous.  Sports personalities are role models for all of us, especially youngsters.  If the Patriots can cheat, so can the college teams, so can the high school teams, so can the 6th grader taking a math examination.  The Congress has granted the NFL a most significant business advantage, an antitrust exemption, highly unusual in the commercial world.  That largesse can continue only if the NFL can prove itself worthy. Beyond the issues of role models and antitrust, America has a love affair with sports.  Professional football has topped all other sporting events in fan interest.  Americans have a right to be guaranteed that their favorite sport is honestly competitive.”

Reasonable minds might differ in this regard, but the antitrust exemption gives Congress an obvious interest in the manner in which the NFL conducts itself.  The problem for Specter, however, is that he’s still a lone voice shouting in the desert, with none of his colleagues joining in the quest to investigate the NFL.

When NFL owners gather on May 20 for a one-day business meeting in Atlanta, the primary item of business on the agenda will be a vote on the location of Super Bowl XLVI, which will be played on February 5, 2012.

The finalists are Houston, Indianapolis, and Arizona.

The next three Super Bowls will be played in Tampa, South Florida, and North Texas, respectively.

With the Boston Herald apologizing for its February 2 article claiming that the Patriots taped the Rams’ walk-through practice prior to Super Bowl XXXVI and with Pats owner Bob Kraft accepting the apology, the next step in this saga becomes the soul-cleansing of those involved in the creation of the erroneous story.

On Friday, John Tomase of the Herald will address the situation.

“I know I screwed up on the Rams taping story and I don’t intend to hide behind today’s apology or an editor’s note,” Tomase wrote in “The Point After” blog on Wednesday.  “In Friday’s Herald I will explain as clearly as I can where that story went wrong and begin the journey of restoring your trust in my reporting.”

The phrase “restoring your trust” implies to us that Tomase won’t be fired or reassigned. 

But should he be?  That’s a tough one.  We believe that the same editor(s) who opted not to run the story without an on-the-record source opted to rush the thing to print once it became apparent that Matt Walsh was about to go on the record with a competitor.  If that’s the case, Tomase doesn’t bear the brunt of the blame.

Still, someone needs to be fired over this one.  Otherwise, there would be no true accountability within a medium that whines about the lack of accountability in this one.

For the second time in six days, a bank has won a judgment against Michael Vick.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that a summary judgment was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in favor of Wachovia Bank against Vick, ordering him to pay $1,117,908.85 after he defaulted on a loan.

Last week Vick was ordered to pay $2.5 million to the Royal Bank of Canada.

This week’s judgment stems from Vick borrowing  money to open a wine shop and restaurant in March 2007.  The Journal-Constitution reports that he’s been ordered to pay back the outstanding balance of more than $930,000 on the $1.3 million loan, plus interest,  outstanding fees, overdrawn accounts and attorneys fees.  The total might end up going higher, as further interest could be accrued.

As legend has it, sports broadcaster extraordinaire Al Michaels once proclaimed as to the prospects of working at ESPN that he won’t be working for a four-letter network.  Apparently, that vow still applies.

Per a media source, Michaels has turned down an opportunity to serve as the play-by-play man for NFLN’s regular-season slate of pro football games.

Michaels was pursued by the league-owned network to replace Bryant Gumbel, the big name with small talent who handled the duties for the first two years of the NFLN effort.  Michaels currently provides the play-by-play call for NBC’s weekly Sunday night coverage. 

It’s unclear where the NFL will go from here.  Others who have been linked to the job include Tom Hammond, Brad Nessler, Marv Albert, and Pat Summerall.  Other possibilities, in our view, would be Mike Patrick and Brent Musberger.

We also are intrigued by one or more outside-the-box possibilities, such as our pal Dan Patrick, whose weekday radio show streams live on SI.com — and who from time to time allows us to pollute his air waves. 

Another possibility would be to hire both Albert and our other pal Boomer Esiason (who currently team up for a national radio broadcast of the Monday night games), and make it a three-man crew, with the incumbent Cris Collinsworth, a former teammate of Esiason’s.

Prosecutors in Miami-Dade County have filed charges against a fifth suspect in the murder of Sean Taylor last November. Sixteen-year-old Timothy Brown was arrested in Lee County, Florida early this morning and is currently in jail awaiting extradition to Miami.

Brown is a relative of Charles Wardlow, also under arrest for the crime.  Like Wardlow, accused shooter Eric Rivera Jr. and the other two men charged in the crime, Brown is charged with first-degree murder.  Even if prosecutors hadn’t waived the chance to try for the death penalty, Brown wouldn’t have been eligible because he’s a minor.  Instead he’ll face life in prison without parole.

The trial is set to begin on August 25th.

The Cleveland Browns announced today that they have terminated the contract of defensive back Kenny Wright.

The Browns gave no reason for the announcement, which comes less than 24 hours after reports surfaced that Wright was arrested for possession of marijuana in March.  Wright was also arrested in April, but he had managed to keep the March arrest under wraps.

Under the NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy, players are required to inform their employers when they’ve been arrested.  It is not clear when or whether Wright informed the Browns of the March arrest.  The April arrest was widely reported in the media (as was his hideous mug shot) and the Browns obviously learned of that one shortly after it happened whether Wright contacted the team or not.

The 30-year-old Wright played seven games last season, starting one.  His multiple arrests make it possible that he’ll be suspended, although that won’t matter if the rest of the league decides that his production on the field isn’t worth the off-field problems he brings with him.

Arlen Specter was very upfront about part of his motivation for calling for an independent investigation into Spygate.  He’s a Senator from Pennsylvania and he’s concerned that tapes made of the Steelers in 2004 may have contributed to their loss in the AFC Championship game.

He was less forthcoming about another potential reason for his anger at the NFL.  Specter has very close ties with Comcast, based in his state, and they’ve been fighting with the league about the placement of the NFL Network on their cable networks.

On ESPN’s NFL Live, Sal Paolantonio said “the NFL Network, just last Tuesday, filed a complaint with the FCC against the Comcast Corporation for discrimination.  They want those NFL Network games to go on the regular tier.”  Because they’re dealing with the federal government and because Specter is so close to Comcast, they need to tread lightly lest the league make more of a mess for itself in Washington.

Paolantonio also said that part of the reason Specter made a public plea for the outside investigation is that Senator Patrick Leahy, the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, balked at holding Senate hearings on Spygate.  That leaves a Mitchell Report-type investigation as the likely outlet for Specter’s concerns.

That raises another question.  The Mitchell Report investigated all of baseball for steroid use, shouldn’t a similar investigation into cheating in the NFL go beyond the Patriots to find out how many teams are guilty?

If reports racing around the country are to be believed, the Dallas Cowboys will only have themselves to blame if they fall short of a championship this season.

Get your hankies ready for it seems Tony Romo and Jessica Simpson’s relationship is no more.  TMZ reported the news late yesterday and Alan Peppard of the Dallas Morning News has done some digging of his own to find that the first couple of football have called the whole thing off.

As long as Romo doesn’t let new teammate Pacman Jones take him out to drown his sorrows, the Cowboys, and I dare say the entire world, will be able to move forward without much difficulty.

Patriots owner Bob Kraft doesn’t sound like he’s holding a grudge against the Boston Herald.

The Herald issued a front-page apology today for its story citing an anonymous source who said the Patriots videotaped the Rams’ 2002 Super Bowl walk-through, saying, “While the Boston Herald based its Feb. 2, 2008, report on sources that it believed to be credible, we now know that this report was false, and that no tape of the walkthrough ever existed.”

Kraft was asked about that apology today, and he sounded relieved and not litigious.

“I must compliment the Boston Herald for doing what is unprecedented in terms of recognizing their error in a major way,” Kraft told the Associated Press.  “I’m really delighted with that, but I wish it never happened.”

Kraft added,  “I think I speak for all Patriot fans.  We’re relieved that this is over and you see that this is nonsense and we were unfairly accused and we’re moving on. . . .  The erroneous story really led to a second round of inquisitions after September, and it really was a distraction.  The sad part [is] that it took away from an 18-0 Super Bowl season.”

Kraft’s comments came before Sen. Arlen Specter said he wants an independent investigation of the Patriots’ taping activities; a Patriots spokesman said the team had no immediate response to Specter’s suggestion.

Bengal