On the Dennis and Callahan show this morning they had former Patriots quarterback Hugh Millen on as a guest to talk about the Super Bowl matchup, as Millen is working in the Seattle as an analyst of the Seahawks and Washington Huskies.

While they were discussing the inflation of the footballs, Millen dropped that he played for a coach with two Super Bowl wins who put together a huge scheme to install speakers inside the helmets of the offensive linemen so they could be given instructions remotely. He said they had it in place and working.

I played for a team, the coach has two Super Bowl wins, and there was an elaborate scheme to put speakers into the offensive lineman’s ears, and they had these custom made speakers, it was a covert operation, they would install it in a back room in the locker room on the road and what have you, and they did that week after week and presumably in the Super Bowl.

He also said the same team had offensive linemen who were caught with a substance on their jerseys and that the coach just shrugged when they were caught.

Millen declined to actually name the coach, but he played for Mike Shanahan in Denver in 1995. Three of Shanahan’s linemen were caught with Vaseline on their jerseys during a 1998 playoff game against the Chiefs.

Millen did also have a brief stint with the Jimmy Johnson-coached Cowboys, (the Patriots traded him there following the 1993 season) so it’s possible, he was referring to Johnson, but Gerry Callahan made a “beedy eyes” reference to Shanahan and it seemed like Millen went along with it.

We know that the Broncos were also caught cheating the salary cap those Super Bowl seasons. So here are two confirmed and one alleged (very serious) cheating incidents that the media and public will never pay attention to.

Can you imagine the uproar if any of these incidents happened with the Patriots? We’re on week two of the world going insane over allegations that the footballs the Patriots used were a tick under regulation inflation.

WEEI Audio – Former Patriot Hugh Millen on deflating footballs and the Seahawks 1-29-15

Published by Bruce Allen

Automattician.

85 thoughts on “Hugh Millen Drops A Bomb. No One Reacts.”

  1. The national media has already jumped on a NEW scandal, of course involving the Patriots. Somehow LaGarrett Blount orchestrated his release from the Steelers knowing he would end up on the Patriots. So says some broad who allegedly writes a sports blog for the Washington Post. And here is the most mind boggling part of the story….REPUTABLE sports sites are picking up the story. Sites that should know that Blount had to clear waivers for 30 other teams before the Patriots had a shot at him. Something this lady neglected to report and something other sites also don’t report and 10000% should know.

    Like

    1. I’m sorry, what is the relevancy of the reporter being female – I’m sorry, “some broad”?

      Cindy Boren’s experience including reporting stints at the Kansas City Star, the New York Daily News, the Sporting News and the Washington Post. I suspect her CV is far more impressive than anything on yours.

      Like

      1. Um, it’s just as relevant as when somebody says “some guy from…”. So we can call male reporters every name in the name book, but calling her a “broad”…well, holy cow. We can’t have that!! Just stop. You’re trying way to hard to try and find something to be offended about. Grow a pair.

        Secondly, impressive resume. But still has NO IDEA how the NFL waiver wire works. Would rather spew some conspiratorial bullsh!t instead. And make veiled innuendo and accusations.

        But please. Keep fighting the good fight on behalf of ignorance disguised as journalism.

        Like

        1. Learn how to properly use ellipses and punctuation, little boy. You won’t sound like any less of a moron when you post comments, but at least you’ll look like less of a moron writing them.

          Like

          1. Oh, the grammar nazi routine. SO just to recap…you can call me a moron and a little boy…BUT, I can’t refer to a woman as a broad. Cool. Good to know the rules of the game.

            Like

          3. You can do anything you want – but why don’t you just call her a moron, if that’s what you think she is?

            It’s like white guys throwing around the n-word. That’s the best you got? What’s someone gender or race got to do with anything? Hate people for the content of their character.

            Like

      2. It’s funny. I’ve never once seen you complain when we all call Michael Felger an a-hole or a douchbag. Or the names we refer to Mazz, Tanguay, etc as.

        But call a woman a “broad” and it’s pitchforks and torches. Get the f— out of here with that crap. Is this like how black guys can call each other the “n-word” and nobody else can? Women can call each other “b!tch” and so forth but if a man says something, let’s act all outraged and indignant!

        Like

        1. Well not to put too fine a point on it, little one, but this is the first time I’ve been to this site. And given that the biggest loudmouth in the comments section (hint: you) seem sto be personification of Tawmmy from Quinzee, it will probably be the last.

          By the way, “some broad” is not the equivalent of “some guy.”

          Also, are you aware there’s an edit function so you can append a comment, rather than responding multiple times? Or did your remedial Internet class at Bunker Hill skip that lesson plan?

          Toodles, ignoramus.

          Like

          1. Aw, well we’ll miss ya sweetie. Toodles.

            I love how you try and take the high road and insult me at the same time. Careful. The fence post you’re sitting on can’t be comfortable.

            Like

        2. Is it safe to post anything on this site without being attacked by a insane menstrual broad . Hey you’re ruining my super bowl

          Like

      3. Agree that her gender has no relevance, but the question is – if her CV is so impressive, why would she publish something that moronic? Anyone who knows anything about pro sports knows you can’t “conspire” to get a player through waivers, unless every GM in the league is in on it.

        Like

          1. Annnnnd….?? I’ve read it three times. Please try and tell me this was tongue-in-cheek. Please. Defend this trash blog.

            Like

          3. OK, I read it. It’s shit. She throws out allegation upon allegation, and very late, slips in a line about waivers, like someone quickly reciting a disclaimer in a car ad.

            Lousy column dancing on the edge of libel that never should have come close to being published.

            Like

          4. “The edge of libel”? Only if the edge is North Rim of the Grand Canyon and the libel is on the South. U.S. Libel law is more complicated than “columnist wrote something I don’t like!” and has a very high threshold; Boren is nowhere near the line of demarcation.

            Like

          5. I’ve been an editor for more than 30 years, but thanks for the lesson.

            No, she smartly throws in a CYA disclaimer, so of course it’s not libel. But the column is a purposefully shit-stirring load of bull, and will be – IS being – used as more tinder in the “culture of cheating” bonfire.

            I would have spiked it and given the writer an earful. My old journalism 101 prof would have rolled up the copy and smacked the writer upside the head. Unfortunately times have changed. It’s all about page clicks and sensationalism, accuracy and verification be damned. I can’t wait to retire.

            Like

          6. Ah, make hyperbolic claim – walk it back. That’s very Joe Morgan of you; it almost makes me miss him on SNB.

            Like

          7. I see you’re not disputing that the column is a pile of crap.

            The question remains – if this columnist has such an “impressive CV” – why is she writing such bullshit? She’s obviously not interested in the truth; she’s going for sensationalism and page clicks. Like just about everyone adding fuel to the fire in this whole sordid, ridiculous affair.

            Like

          8. I’m pointing out you talked a big game about something and when called on it, walked it back as if of course you knew better, like most blowhards tend to do.

            Boren is doing what columnists do, reporting what’s being talked about. Like it, don’t like it, but don’t lie and act like the Patriots didn’t bring a lot of the scrutiny onto themselves with their shady behavior in the past and the present. You can plug your ears and only listen to the echo chamber of WEEI and their ilk, but facts are facts. This sort of fuckery feeds the frenzy; this team, like any other, is not a bunch of innocent naifs and anyone who pretends differently has their head up their ass.

            Maybe you should branch out and listen to what sports reporters – not the ones on ESPN, not the loudmouths on the radio – are writing about. It might broaden your horizons, something that seems to be an urgent need in these parts.

            Like

          9. WHAT “shady behavior,” exactly?

            And how do you know what or whom I do or don’t listen to? I’ve made every effort to focus on this stupid column (“report what’s being talked about”? Then why not write a column detailing how brainless such talk is?) and not you, but you certainly are determined to make this personal. Here’s a hint – to make a point, concentrate on the subject, not on personal insults.

            Like

          10. What shady behavior? You can’t be serious. How about the big one that everyone points out as the landmark between our winning Super Bowls and – after its discovery and halt – our losing them?

            Like

          11. LOL you can’t be serious.

            Since “spygate,” the Patriots’ winning percentage has *improved.* Look it up. And they lost two Super Bowls the same way they won three – on a handful of key plays (or one, if you count that Tyree catch).

            But OK, Spygate. Now, please detail all those other instances of “shady behavior in the past and the present.”

            Like

          12. Ever notice when you ask for specifics on the “history of shady behavior” the trolls disappear?

            Like

          13. Those are the people who take every sour grapes-related allegation made by other teams at face value, as if they were established fact. For example, in an article in which he basically “exonerated” the Pats over Deflate-gate last week, Mike Westoff (ex-Jets S/T coach), never the less, went on a crazy rant about all of the “other” things the Patriots do that are either outside or barely inside the rules. Of course, he gave zero examples, and if he had given examples, my guess is that most of his accusations would have been drive by pure paranoia, and the others would have been found to be completely legal—-remember, John Harbaugh was crying about “deceptive” formations after the AFC divisional round because he simply didn’t understand the rule and he hadn’t done his homework as well as BB (if he had, he’d have known that Detroit used a similar formation earlier in the year). Pure Hatorade.

            Like

          14. Exactly. They can’t provide examples because they don’t exist. I’ve challenged several trolls the past week and all they can do is rant, “Cheaterz…. blafhdkehdnyhghh…” before running away with their tails between their legs.

            Like

          15. Charlotte you have been right on through this whole thread. They can’t cite real examples but they “feel” like the Pats must be cheating because …well …um… well… because…they must be cheating.

            Like

          17. Welcome to the board…I hope you stay a while. I promise to only call you sweetie, missy, honey, sugar or pumpkin…but I am magnanimous…you can pick which pet name you would like us to call you 🙂

            Like

          19. Lets be fair. The roster that won three Super Bowls was completely different from the teams after Spygate.

            Consider that in comparing the starting roster and key contributors from 2004 to 2009 only four starters were the same on offense and only two on defense. Of the four starters on offense it was Brady and three offensive linemen. The RB’s, WR’s, and TE’s were all different. On defense, the strength of the championship teams was the LB’s and not a single one remained in 2009. The same was true of the secondary.

            Like every other team in the league, the Patriots had to rebuild their roster. The difference is that while every other team demonstrates a significant dip in wins while rebuilding, the Patriots were able to rebuild their team without ever falling below the 10 win plateau.

            That point is that while the “team” may wear the same uniforms, they are, in fact, a completely different team. Such is life in the NFL. Players get old. They retire, become free agents, or get traded. The only constant is constant change.

            Like

          21. I disagree with your take on Boren. She’s feeding the lowest element. Its a cheap tactic. Its manipulating facts to create a story that will get clicks. It reeks of a high school mentality. She’s catering to the popular kids at the expense of the kid nobody likes. Its bullying. It’ll go over great if your one of those bystanders laughing at the victim but its a disservice to what quality reporting should be. Having said that, the lack of ethics in today’s media is commonplace so I suppose that just makes her common. Not extraordinary. Not talented. Not unique in an appreciable way. Just a typical follower like all the rest.

            Like

          22. Let me ask you a question Chattygal. Do you believe in due process? At its core, that is the complaint Patriots fans have with this fabricated controversy as well as Spygate. In both instances, false information was reported, speculated on, and then amazingly accepted as fact. Sensationalistic headlines get created and the accused are tried and convicted in the court of public opinion before the facts come out. Then when the facts start sprinkling out, only those that support the version of the story created by the media are acknowledged. The ones that don’t are ignored. Before long you have a mass hysteria that is based more on ignorance than anything else. Its dangerous and irresponsible and when you see it happening from the perspective of someone standing outside of the mainstream, the ugliness and inappropriateness becomes all the more obvious. Unfortunately, for those caught inside of it, they just can’t see it. They’re blinded by the excitement of the “big story” and often incapable of understanding the proper context of all the layers of complexity within that story. As such the story is mistold and misunderstood. The end result is a public that is not enlightened by the truth but instead stupidified by the entire process.

            Like

      5. Because it adds insult to injury. She already needs to work harder to prove she belongs. When she does shoddy work she adds to the stereotype that she should not be in the business because she is a girl.

        Like

        1. “because she is a girl”

          Cindy Boren is not a tween. She’s an accomplished journalist. Learn the word “woman.”

          Like

          1. Oh please. She is a girl. Read the spew she puts forth as journalism. Unsubstantiated drivel. Arguments less sophisticated than the average 10 year old girl. I have called John Tomasse, Bert Breer, Mike Felger, Tony Mazzeroti and Mike Holley far worse than girl. Pick and choose your battles. You really want to go to bat for a no talent hack because she is the same gender as you? If so you are just as dumb as she is.

            If you truly want equality, which I doubt because you seem to be too narrow minded to listen to what we are all telling you…then you will learn that when media hacks say stupid things we use whatever insult is available to characterize their stupidity. No one cares what gender Boren is…all we are showing is she incompetent. So we insult her by calling her a broad, a girl or whatever other demeaning term is available. It is no different than when I call Mike Felger an insufferably 8 year old boy (something I did last year).

            Lastly, get over your crusade. If I wanted to argue the merits of Andrea Dworkin thought police policies I would go back to academia. Boren is a professional journalist and a bad one. If she can’t handle criticism she should get out of the kitchen. If you feel obligated to defend her because of your shared gender then you represent all that is wrong with post Virginia Wolfe feminism. You are stuck fighting a battle you do not believe in to prove a point that no one cares about all in the name of gender equity.

            Like

          3. Nice one missy. You know what the problem with you coopted feminists is…you can’t think. You are so busy feeling that things should be a certain way that you toss logic and reason and replace them with nonsense.

            Go play with people who agree with your perverted politics. As far as I can tell you have added nothing to the conversation on this board other than blind defense of a poor writer because you are the same gender. Come back when you have legitimate sports arguments rather than ruffled feathers because someone used the term “girl” when describing a talentless moron.

            Like

          4. Okay, little girl. I think it’s past your bedtime. You must be tired from looking up all those big words to use today!

            You guys really have lived up to the
            Tawmmy from Quinzee             persona. “EVERYONE IS JUST JEALOUS OF US MEMBERS OF GREATRIOT NATION! LIBEL! I MEAN NOT REALLY LIBEL BUT CLOSE ENOUGH! UNFAIR!!!”

            A person couldn’t have asked for a better, more predictable response.

            Enjoy your Twisted Tea, darlin’.

            Like

          5. Child…I find you amusing. Quick to insult but not really sophisticated in your thinking. Thanks for the good laugh. Winding you up and watching you expose your silly arguments and while you retreat into name calling because several of us called you on your bullshit pseudo feminism has been a welcome respite from deflategate.

            Like

          6. Take it to the dart board at Sullys, girl. You’re a waste of space and a brain cell killer.

            Toodles and good luck in pursuit of that Associates degree at Bunker Hill!

            Like

          7. I think we now know what happens when the comments sections on Jezebel and FoxNews.com finally meet.

            Like

        2. She doesn’t need to work harder to prove she belongs – she needs to work harder to overcome ignorant stereotyping and outdated, absurd beliefs.

          The people who fall back on stereotypes like that are the people I would stereotype as “morons.”

          If she’s wrong than she’s “an idiot moron journalist.” Not an idiot moron woman journalist. Just an idiot moron journalist.

          Like

          1. My point is she is both. Look…very few people on this board insult Jackie Mac because she is a woman. She has proven she is a competent journalist (at least when she talks hoops…not so much when she talks football). As such no one looks at her gender. On the other hand Shalise Manza Young is so bad its hard not to look at the fact that she is a girl trying to make it in a man’s professional especially when she complains how hard the Pats make her job when they do not give her access. Those days she sounds like the whiney little girl she is.

            People want equality of opportunity…and they have it. That does not mean they then do not deserve equality of criticism/ venom when they say and do stupid things. All things are on the table. Even their gender.

            Like

          2. Well, I don’t agree with that, but it’s a fair explanation. So yeah, I get it.

            But you would never make a “Felger’s a white male so he thinks a certain way…” kind of comment. It’s ONLY women/non-white people who get these insults directed at them.

            I just think it’s lazy – if all anyone’s got is to pull the gender/race card, then there must not be much weight to the argument.

            Now, you’re rebuttal could easily be “hey, she’s not worth my effort – so I’m going with the easiest insult I can think of,” which again, is lazy and irrelevant, but I think we’ve all been there.

            Like

          3. You are wrong. One of my favorite phrases is “never underestimate the stupidity of the average white well adjusted middle class white person.” I would say that about Felger if it made sense in context of what he is writing/saying. The good thing about Felger is there are so many ways to insult him and the caricature he has become that I have not needed to insult his ethnicity yet. I have mocked his yiddish on occasion but that was more because it sounds so forced.

            Like

          4. That’s fair – but I still would argue that gender/race is low-hanging fruit. A moron’s a moron’s a moron. Haha

            Like

          5. Sure…but if the argument warrants it use it. For example I never call Mike Holley the product of affirmative action because insulting his race is too simple when describing how bad he really is. I used the example of Jackie Mac before. Another one would be Karen G…when she does something stupid we call her dumb…not a dumb woman because she has earned our respect. I think the quality or lack there of determines how much time and energy I need to spend finding the correct insult. There is much science to being a successful blog post commenter! Its not like I rolled out of bed this witty and sardonic.

            Like

    2. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Pats had to wait for Blount to clear waivers, or at least have to wait until something like 25 other teams passed on him before they could sign him, no? How could there be a “conspiracy” in play to get him back to the Pats if two dozen other NFL teams had a perfectly legal chance to sign him first? This one simply doesn’t pass even the initial smell test IMO.

      Like

      1. You are correct. All 32 teams could have claimed Blount off waivers. None did. (Though admittedly, if they had they would have had to honor his existing contract. The moment he cleared waivers his contract ceased to exist.)

        Like

    3. What does the sex of the blogger have to do with validity of the opinion? And, do you refer to your wife or mother as a “broad”?

      Like

  2. Hmmm…if true, that implicates Mark Schlereth. Schlereth who currently works for ESPN, was an offensive linemen for Shanahan in Denver. Schlereth also was extremely harsh in his coverage for ESPN during the Spygate incident. Having said that, outside of his misguided impressions on Spygate, Schlereth has always struck me as a likable guy. Therefore I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt as I’ve seen firsthand how awful it is when people rush to judgement unfairly. And therein lies the truth regarding what I call Belichick-Gate. None of the public and media outcry has ever been about the trumped up allegations on the New England coach. Instead they’ve merely been a pathetic attempt by the media to tear down the man who restricts their access and warm and fuzzy with them. He isn’t personable with them and they use their positions to influence the public to hate the man as much as they do. Thats what deflate gate is about and thats what spygate was about as well. Revenge.

    Like

  3. If the Seahawks were facing even half the scrutiny, I’m sure a scandal much worse than deflated balls would come out. But nope, they get not a second glance. Despite that Coach’s track record.

    Like

  4. Wnna have your head explode? Like, brain matter splattered all over the walls? Go listen to the ultimate @ssclown troll of them all, Gregg Doyle with D&C&M. WOW. I sat in stunned silence when it was over. The guy who said the AFC-CG should be replayed, that Belichick and Brady should be fired and suspended from the Super Bowl…..he puked up an all-timer today.

    Ready for it? He said the 2014 DeflateGate is the biggest, ugliest sports scandal since the 1919 Black Sox. Doyle is a EPIC troll but I actually believe HE believes this. Now, I’ve heard it all in relation to this story.

    Mind. F##king. Blown.

    Like

    2. Doyle is just plagiarizing from Greggggggg Easterbrook, who, in one of his typical, insane and unhinged rants over “Spygate”, also compared it to the 1919 Black Sox scandal more than 7 years ago. Of course, these mediots wouldn’t be interested in knowing, or caring, about the fact that the 1919 White Sox were consorting with gamblers with major underworld ties (Arnold Rothstein went to the grave because he ended up on the wrong end of a pistol); and so equating these minor infractions (if there even was ball deflating going on — we still don’t know that for a fact) to the Black Sox scandal is ignorant and moronic, at best, and slanderous, at worst.

      Like

      1. The fact that you had to explain how they two are not analogous speaks volumes about how dumb certain “professional” mediots are. I think the bigger scandal is that there are outlets that still employ these morons. Free Speech does not mean it has to be endorsed by being given a platform. Remember the good old days when there were journalistic standards and ethics? Oh wait Journalists have always been holier than thou.

        Like

        1. LTD: I may have to steal this one from you: “Free speech does not mean it has to be endorsed by being given a platform.” Great line, and very spot-on.

          Like

          1. Tony…you can use anything I write always. Heck steal it and don’t give me credit. We are all part of the BSMW family, bro (I had to…don’t hate ;-))

            Like

  5. If only individuals were less civil on internet discussion boards. I don’t know about all of you, but I get real bored when people try to share thoughtful insights. What we really need are good old fashioned flame wars between internet tough guys and tough gals. Nothing exemplifies ones intelligence more than the ability insult another by pressing keys on their computers under some anonymous identity. I am so impressed!!!

    Like

    2. Yeah, this board used to be so much better when it was just me making 90s wrestling references that three people on here appreciated. #ShockMaster

      Like

    3. Your dissenting opinion may be more measured, more rhetorically sound, but it’s still just an opinion. And you shake it like a finger, while other, less eloquent, posters extend their comments like a finger.

      Lamenting poor form on the interwebs is lame. Grow up.

      Like

  9. You are absolutely correct. Every single team in the NFL had the chance to claim Blount off waivers (though admittedly, if they did they would have had to honor his existing contract). No one did.

    Like

  10. Wow! Mike Reiss had his Wheaties today!

    http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/boston/chat/_/id/51566

    “I’ll add a few more thoughts in this chat. I think it stinks. If anyone has ever felt piled-on before, and a target of something that they deem unfair, we know how helpless of a feeling that can be. You just ask whoever is doing it to be fair and balanced, and let the process play out. But this has been an absolute avalanche in many circles and the general lack of personal empathy stands out to me. Words like “jealousy” and “nasty” come to the forefront of my thoughts when I recap how this whole thing has gone down.”

    and

    “…here’s the bottom line: It doesn’t matter because the damage has already been done. Opinions are already formed/shaped. Reputations have been damaged and legacies potentially affected. It’s like the correction to a mistake in a newspaper story (I had plenty of those) — everyone remembers the story, not the correction. This is part of why the whole situation just stinks from my view. I’m not sparing the Patriots accountability; if they were found to manipulate the footballs, they should face a penalty. But the fact it has gotten to this point — without any hard-core evidence — is just crazy and makes me question the direction and leadership of the league office.”

    Like

  11. I could live without the “Could you imagine!!??” question at the end of these posts. Yes, we could imagine – that’s why we’re here.

    Like

  12. Bob Kravitz is on D+C right now. Reacts to his little hunt not going so well.

    Basically says that he doesn’t trust the NFL to “do the right thing’ and find the Patriots guilty. Why doesn’t he trust them? Because they didn’t do it with Ray Rice.

    Ok, so you don’t trust the NFL because how bad they bungled the Ray Rice investigation but you do trust them when they find something against the Patriots?

    Got it. Many continue to use this logic. This is before we get into the rest of it, but I still find this laughable.

    And, I love how he dismisses everyone who disagrees with him as “fanbois”, “bloggers” or “passionate fans”.

    Like

    3. That is the troll’s (Columnist) cute way of saying that he knows knows the NFL has nothing on the Pats.

      re: “Basically says that he doesn’t trust the NFL to “do the right thing'”

      He dismisses his opponents as “fanbois”, “bloggers” and “passionate” fans, but his own opinion on the story is that the NFL and Kraft are operating a conspiracy!

      Trolls loathe to admit to being wrong about anything.

      Like

    4. Kravitz dismisses those criticizing him as “fanboys.” He’s also stated that when you become a media member, rooting interests go out the window.

      That’s fine, but I think he forgets that part of being a fan is not just rooting for your team. You also root against your team’s rivals.

      I bring this up because, on the 19th, Kravitz was explaining why he ran with his story. It wasn’t only because it came from a source he trusted. He also mentioned that it was because it involved Belichick and the Patriots. To me, that means if it was, for example, the Bengals, he might have looked into it more or sought another source before reporting it. It was his fanboy-ish dislike for the Patriots that influenced his decision.

      Like

Comments are closed.