Interesting thought....forfeit of the game in question would be a great way to emphasize the unprofessional and downright rotten behavior shown by the patriots if the allegations are true!
yerfatma: As an example of other teams, the Dolphins bought a tape of a Pats practice last year.
See, that's why this seems penny-ante; what exactly is the no-filming rule meant to address? Seems like if someone taped a practice and sold that to the Dolphins, then Dolphins fans have no real claim to the moral high-ground. It's the same "Well, of course they'll try to get intel wherever possible". Is this rule a violation not of any spirit or letter of anti-cheating rules, but rather of filming rules that are an outgrowth of the NFL's historically tight fist on game broadcasting rights? Effectively, the real rule is that every camera has to be accounted for; this is the same league that will actually not broadcast games in a local market if the stadium itself didn't sell out. If that's the context, this really does seem like a tempest in a teapot.
Atheist: I think the league should just say teams beware and let the teams figure it out. Protecting your plays and strategies should be the teams responsibility. The league already has too many stupid rules. If you allow another team to learn you signals shame on you. The minute you figure out they are filming your coaches, it should open up the opportunity to really fool them.
I
completely agree with this. In the war of the gridiron, the information that a team is successfully stealing your signals is a god-send: you can nab a touchdown or two simply by setting them up with the wrong signal, leading to horribly blown coverage. It's almost like the NFL is expecting a Microsoft-like "security through obscurity" approach. For the billions of dollars the NFL earns each year, use encrypted radio and the like. Heck, give some tech college student from MIT two season tickets and a year's supply of Pabst, and he'll whip up the helmet devices for your whole team in two weekends. =)
Debo270: Bullshit, you dont think knowing what defense or pass coverage a team is running helps. It is one thing to watch and steal signs. It is another to film signals then with video match those signals to the defense run and KNOW what is coming.
Wait... what exactly
is the difference? In the first case, you're watching, looking for signs, and adapting your plays from what you saw with your naked eye. In the other, you're using a videotape to do the same thing. That's like saying it would be against the rules to videotape a pitcher's stance and tics before every pitch, to see if he's tipping his pitches. Which... it
isn't against the rules. If the teams hired someone with a photographic memory to watch without a camera, would that be cheating, then?
Take away New Englands franchise and have them move the team to Montana. That way everyone in Mont. could go to the game and they could all fit in one stadium.
If the teams hired someone with a photographic memory to watch without a camera, would that be cheating, then? No because it ISNT IN THE RULES
Wait... what exactly is the difference? In the first case, you're watching, looking for signs, and adapting your plays from what you saw with your naked eye. In the other, you're using a videotape to do the same thing. the difference is in difficulty. In the former, you get 30 different signals and then a play. It's hard to associate what signal matched the play unless your Rainman. Now think of the converse where there is already snapshots of every single play before snap and after snap that the players review during the game. Now imagine sitting at halftime and being able to look at those snapshots and say "OK, these are the signals, here is the play. Let me find that same play and see what the signals were. Hmm, these 2 have this in common...." It wouldn't take too long to "crack" any secret codes in that case. You wouldn't have that opportunity with the naked eye. Besides, the fact is Goodall sternly warned all NFL teams about this exact practice during the summer break. The Pats were caught red-handed ignoring that warning. The hammer should be brought down on them the same way it's brought against the players for ignoring the conduct rule. Rumor is it's going to be a 3rd round pick, which isn't stiff enough IMO.
Thank you BDADDY for making my point clearer. YOU DA MAN
Burn them! Burn them! I'm sanguine about this, but that's because I think sports that rely upon sooper-seekrit signs all the time turn coaching into puppetry. Either disguise them yourself or exploit the other side's attempts to read them.
Im lost Debo, I still havent been able to find a rule that says person A can not film person B useing basicly sign language. If it is a rule then why do teams use three or four people flashin' signs when only one of them is the correct sign and the others are decoys?
It wouldn't take too long to "crack" any secret codes in that case. You wouldn't have that opportunity with the naked eye. Some would disagree: "When Marty Schottenheimer coached the Cleveland Browns in the late 1980s, he routinely sent a scout to watch the signals opposing teams used to relay messages from coaches to players. When the scout returned, Schottenheimer's staff would watch the game film and match the signals to the plays that followed."
The rule has to do with who is and is not allowed to video tape and what you are and are not allowed to video tape. I am not the rule keeper. I have not looked at the NFL rulebook and if that is what you are doing right now, i want your job or you have to much free time. You cant do what they did, the league has warned them in the past, they did it AGAIN, they got caught, AGAIN, THE END. what else you lookin for
It has to be a top pick or it is useless. Anyone remember Todd Blackledge or Percy Snow?
#1: I think Hal and Atheist are absolutely right. It's a terrible and highly unnecessary rule. #2: Even if the rule is as bad as the unnecessarily low speed limit on the road in front of my apartment building, you should expect reasonable punishment if you break it. #3: In this age of video technology, if you can't record the actions of a single person without getting caught you deserve everything you have coming to you. That breaks down to some combination of cheap, stupid and lazy. Your average sleazy voyeur on the street is better than that. #4: When you find out the Raiders have been doing exactly the same thing (but hiring better qualified dirt bags), will you give the Patriots their trophies back? This smells so much like another sports scandal it makes me wonder if you shouldn't just become immediately suspicious of anyone with the initials BB. (Non-disclaimer: I don't have a horse in this fight. I don't care all that much about the Patriots -- I basically root against them because their fan base by and large also roots for another team I don't like at all, but I don't have my heart in it. I do have a warm spot for dynasties and I've liked the way the Pats have constructed theirs.)
As much as I dislike the Pats and Bill Belichick, I have always admired the way he could tear an opponent's defense apart. I am disappointed to learn of this, especially against the Jets. And there is not even the playoffs to worry about yet! As punishment, Goodell should make him wear Reebok Mickey Mouse pajamas on the sidelines.
Thank you debo. I don't get all of the excuses I keep reading. It doesn't matter if you think everyone should be allowed to steal signals by any means necessary. They were warned not to do it again and they did. Its cheating they got a pass the first time and now they are going to pay the piper. There are a number of ways you can try to pick of the other teams signals, but sending your own cameraman over to film the opposing teams coaches is not one of them. It is illegal, the league has said so (so don't go reading the rules folks it's already been said) and now Pats have tainted their dynasty a little.
Steeler girl, Pajamas would be an improvement to his usual I-live-under-a-bridge attire. You see, homeless people usually don't own pajamas.
Let me find that same play and see what the signals were. Hmm, these 2 have this in common...." It wouldn't take too long to "crack" any secret codes in that case. You wouldn't have that opportunity with the naked eye. Given the general reaction from ex-coaches (I'm thinking specifically of Parcells on ESPN and a couple others) is that everyone tries, it doesn't make a difference and you're an idiot if you don't plan for this, how are we getting reactions like "Bullshit, you dont think knowing what defense or pass coverage a team is running helps. It is one thing to watch and steal signs. It is another to film signals then with video match those signals to the defense run and KNOW what is coming." Where has anyone said the Pats knew what was coming or this made a difference? Complain all you want about low-class, but let's give up on the idea this makes a difference in the outcome. Which of the stolen signs allowed a 108 yard kick return? Which one made it so the Jets only hurried Brady once? Which one caused the Jets line to fold like Superman on laundry day? They were warned not to do it again and they did. Its cheating they got a pass the first time and now they are going to pay the piper. Citation, please. They had done it in the past but none of those teams brought the NFL in, so the Pats were never warned. There's a rule in the rule book and they broke it. Stop making stuff up to back your position.
They were warned in green bay last year. So you stop making stuff up
IF it doesnt make a difference why is everyone doing it?? bored? yerfatma, your agrument make NO SENSE
I'm also a Pats fan, and I'll see you guys at the Superbowl when no one remembers this. Didn't Shawn Merriman almost win defensive player of the year? I'm sure LT doesn't remember what happened earlier in that season either.
Just like no one rembered steroid allegations from several years ago when Bonds broke the HR record.
You know in boxing the ref always warns each fighter to protect themselves at all times. You know a low blow is illegal yet they still happen and the penalty is a warning from the ref. After repeated offenses the ref may take away a point. Big deal, in the end a fighter takes responsibility for protecting himself, and punishing the offender. Well my advice to NFL teams is to protect themselves at all times and not rely on the NFL to enforce something like this evenly or consistantly. Right or wrong, you better find a way to disguise and protect your signals and playcalling or some other team will find a way to get the upper hand. In the end all football games come down to the team that blocks and tackles better. Lets face it as some one pointed out. Just because you know in advance a team is going to try to return a kick for a touchdown doesn't necessarily mean you are going to stop them. You don't need to steal signals to know Payton Manning is going to pass to the open receiver as the play develops. To me this is just an indication of how sports are going. Everything in sports is becoming more about the rules and requlations, then about playing the game. Eventually lawyers and legislators will determine the outcome of sporting events more than athletes will. It's becoming depressing. Every victory or record is tainted. Whats the use. I say lets get back to the gladiators. No rules, no regulations, just go at it until there is only one survivor. He wins no if ands or buts.
He got a standing O, didn't he? And how is cheating to break the all time HR record relevant to breaking a video taping rule in the first game of the season?
This is in a sport where the offense calls in the plays through a headset, why is that? Maybe, just maybe because they figured out that the plays were being stolen from the otherside, oh and now they cover their mouth as they call the play through the headset, I wonder if that is so that the person listening can hear them better or if it is because they think maybe someone is able to read lips. Given all that, all this has to be done in 25 seconds or less. Every sport is always trying to figure out what the other side is doing, how much does it affect the game who knows - but I am willing to bet it does not change it as much as a dumbass ref blowing the whistle in the end zone at the end of a game and making a call that even his mother knew was wrong and if that was not bad enough he called another call that even my mother knew was wrong! Like the Pats or hate the Pats this is not that big of deal!
They were warned in green bay last year. So you stop making stuff up You want to provide a link to back that up? I have no problem being wrong, but the media here in New England keeps parroting a line about how GB never said anything because they didn't want to sound like sore losers. The Boston Herald had the story back then and never ran in because they couldn't get confirmation. yerfatma, your agrument make NO SENSE What's my argument? I didn't think I was making one beyond: "It sucks that they did it, but to try to use this to undermine what they've achieved is a non-starter." This is in a sport where the offense calls in the plays through a headset, why is that? I think it was Peter King that suggested the one change he thinks will come from this is a defensive equivalent of the QB helmet radio.
Whether it's a good rule or a bad rule, it doesn't appear much in doubt that the Pats broke it and had a prior warning not to do it. On those grounds alone, they deserve the hit they will take from the league. From what people are saying about Belichick and his character all over the place today, I think we're going to quickly hear about other examples of him bending or breaking rules to get an advantage. The Pats success has spread a lot of former Belichick understudies around the league, any of whom could spill. It will be interesting to see the Unacoacher deal with that adversity.
This is in a sport where the offense calls in the plays through a headset, why is that? Maybe, just maybe because they figured out that the plays were being stolen from the otherside, oh and now they cover their mouth as they call the play through the headset, I wonder if that is so that the person listening can hear them better or if it is because they think maybe someone is able to read lips. Given all that, all this has to be done in 25 seconds or less. Every sport is always trying to figure out what the other side is doing, how much does it affect the game who knows - but I am willing to bet it does not change it as much as a dumbass ref blowing the whistle in the end zone at the end of a game and making a call that even his mother knew was wrong and if that was not bad enough he called another call that even my mother knew was wrong! Like the Pats or hate the Pats this is not that big of deal!
Perhaps there is some doubt about the prior warning: The Milwaukee media is reporting that they didn't accuse the Pats of stealing signals when a cameraman for the Pats was escorted out. They just kicked him out for being unauthorized and regarded the incident as "strange," according to a team spokesman.
Your right Kire, no one remembers the steroid allegations against Bonds and no one feels his HR record is tainted. Athiest, Why enforce any rules then? Just let each team protect itself. Hell, if someone punches your quarterback in balls after the play just give him a warning, its the O-lines job to protect him at all times right? Once again, if knowing the opponents plays doesn't help why is everyone trying to do it? And Again... it is against the rules to use a recording device on the field. There are a number of ways you can try to steal signals but a camera is not one of them. Face it. They cheated and they got caught. there is no justification.
I think the Pats would have beat the Jets with or without cheating, but ham-fisted cheating colors the whole perception of that game, it colors the perception of their success, and it colors the perception of Belichick as a coach. Ultimately, it doesn't matter if it made the slightest bit of difference in the outcome of the game. What matters is that it even opens up the debate we're having today. There may not be an * in the record books next to Belichick's name or the Patriots' early 21st century achievements, but every time the Patriots are discussed now, somebody is going to bring up "ZOMG CHEATING" and they will be justified in doing so. It is very disappointing and the "every team is doing it" argument doesn't hold a lot of water with me. I know this is naive and fanboyish to say, but the Patriots are supposed to be better than that.
I never said there was a justification. I am saying it's not as big a deal as people here are making it out to be. Forfit the game, re-evaluate the last five years, etc.... Give them the punishment, most likely draft picks, and move on. People are acting like the patriots are going to go 1-15 now that they don't have their precious video tapes. It's a small blip on the season and it will be forgoten about by the end. And I was giving an unintelligent response to your unintelligent comparison. Sorry that was lost on you.
The Boston Herald, citing sources, reported that it's the fourth time in the past year that the Patriots have been caught illegally stealing signals from an opponent Sorry, this off of a current Yahoo article. Which of the stolen signs allowed a 108 yard kick return? Which one made it so the Jets only hurried Brady once? yerfatma, obviously the kickoff return is just blown coverage, but your other comment goes straight to the heart of this discussion. If Brady knows that a blitz is coming, he audibles to a quick out or a run. If he knows the Jets are playing the run on 2nd and 5 he goes to the pass. Knowing the defensive set up is a clear advantage to an experienced QB.
Once again kire you are right. I compared one the greatest dynasties of all time getting caught cheating to one of the greatest HR hitters of all time getting caught cheating. How on earth did I connect the two. Thank goodness itelligent people like you are here to point out that the two are totally different. I'm sorry that crazy analogy got lost on you. One thing you are right about is that this won't make them a terrible team. But it does make you question a few close games. How many superbowls were one by 3 points or less?
Where has anyone said the Pats knew what was coming or this made a difference? Complain all you want about low-class, but let's give up on the idea this makes a difference in the outcome. Which of the stolen signs allowed a 108 yard kick return? Which one made it so the Jets only hurried Brady once? Which one caused the Jets line to fold like Superman on laundry day? So if it wouldn't make a difference, why on earth would they break the rules to do it? Of COURSE it would make a difference! You telling me that a offense that knows a defense is going to blitz from the right side with the CB and LB, that then has an opportunity to shift blocking assignments to cover that blitz, and identify PRE-SNAP which WR is that is going to have single coverage wouldn't make a difference? I don't understand your logic there. The example I just gave may be the very reason why "the jets only hurried Brady once".
People are acting like the patriots are going to go 1-15 now that they don't have their precious video tapes. It's a small blip on the season and it will be forgoten about by the end. who's acting like that? Most of us just want them to be punished for blatantly violating the rules. And most of us think a 3rd round pick isn't sufficient punishment for that.
Boston Globe editorial: "New England Patriots Coach Bill Belichick apologized today to ''everyone who has been affected, most of all ownership, staff, and players.'' He did not mention fans, which is unfortunate, because they too have been embarrassed by the team's violation of league rules against taping...Until now, the region could believe that it was the superior choice of players, training, and game plans that has made the team the closest thing to a dynasty the league has seen in years. It is dispiriting to learn that rule-breaking might have been part of the winning formula... [T]he fact that the camera was confiscated in the first quarter and the Pats still dominated in the rest of the game showed how unnecessary the rule-breaking was. From a standpoint of both ethics and smart gamesmanship, the taping was a blunder."
From what people are saying about Belichick and his character all over the place today, I think we're going to quickly hear about other examples of him bending or breaking rules to get an advantage. The Pats success has spread a lot of former Belichick understudies around the league, any of whom could spill. And none of whom would ever, ever, in a million years ever try to "bend or break rules to get an advantage". The only people who will consider this violation -- whatever violation it actually turns out to be; that part is still not completely established and may never be public, although the torches-and-pitchforks contingent in this thread seems to have forgotten that, not that they ever knew -- to be indicative of some kind of major character flaw, are melonheads. Alternately, they're just finding out that "bending or breaking the rules to get an advantage" happens in competitive sports, the NFL's gonna be chock-full of heavily tarnished idols by Week 2 game day, and Belichick will have plenty of company.
Never underestimate the power of homerism. I'm a huge Patriots fan, but even I know they deserve some kind of punishment, though hardly the draconian measures some suggest above... I do think it's interesting (with reference to the link embedded in this comment) that Alabama and Michigan are almost evenly split, markedly more so than other (ostensibly impartial) states. I guess they're full of football fans who can get behind the idea of winning at all costs!
Most of us just want them to be punished for blatantly violating the rules. And most of us think a 3rd round pick isn't sufficient punishment for that. Can you give a cite on that "most"? What do "most" people in this thread want, and where have they said so?
I accuse Tom Brady of being a robot. Ya' know, like a super android with a winning smile or something. And I also think that Bruschi and Seau are clones of their former diminished selves and that their heads reside in Belichick's office on a shelf. In addition, I think that Belchaclick is a magic troll that can read other peoples thoughts and has no need to record defenses. Get out of my head, Banacheck!!! (This cold medicine is awesome!!!)
Never underestimate the power of homerism. I am proud of my blue state. What do "most" people in this thread want, Free tickets to a game. And free beer. I'll stand by that. [T]he fact that the camera was confiscated in the first quarter and the Pats still dominated in the rest of the game showed how unnecessary the rule-breaking was. That's a pretty strong presumption that there was no contingency plan, or second camera, or that they hadn't already gathered sufficient material. The article mentions that the owners are looking at additional expense for a radio system for the defense. I don't understand that. If they already have a radio system for the offense, how expensive is it to just add a receiver or two (that is "radio receiver" of course -- adding a regular receiver would cost them five yards and a loss of down, I believe). I don't see why they can't use the same transmission setup for both sides.
(This cold medicine is awesome!!!) Even better if you mix it with beer.
While the argument that it should all be fair game does have merit, I think it's a good example of holding athletes to a higher standard than coaches. This isn't Spy Club. It really does seem, though, that it is the kind of thing that ought to be preventable. Stick a headset in a couple defensive captains' ears (because defenders sub more than quarterbacks) and call it a day.
Can you give a cite on that "most"? What do "most" people in this thread want, and where have they said so? he said "People are acting like the patriots are going to go 1-15 now that they don't have their precious video tapes." For those of us he was criticizing (who think the Pats should be punished), MOST do not feel that way. MOST of us that think they should be punished feel that way because they broke the rules and don't think it suddenly makes the Patriots suck. I don't think it's a leap to think that MOST of us pro-punishment guys don't feel this means the Pats will go 1-15 now, although I could take a poll if it would make you feel better.
he said "People are acting like the patriots are going to go 1-15 now that they don't have their precious video tapes." For those of us he was criticizing (who think the Pats should be punished), MOST do not feel that way. Whoa up there. In the line immediately before the one you quoted, kire said, "Give them the punishment, most likely draft picks, and move on. " [emphasis mine] So, how exactly is your disagreement with kire rooted in your belief that the Pats should be punished? MOST of us that think they should be punished feel that way because they broke the rules and don't think it suddenly makes the Patriots suck. Whoa up again. If I resort to a purely subjective MOST, as you're doing, rather than count actual comments in this thread, I'd say that not a few of those howling for blood are asking for previous results to be wiped out. That would indicate to me that your MOST feel that these results were based on this alleged cheating, and to someone who thinks that way, hey, why not 1-15? I don't think it's a leap to think that MOST of us pro-punishment guys don't feel this means the Pats will go 1-15 now, although I could take a poll if it would make you feel better. It would make me feel a little better if you'd just say what you think, rather than what MOST think. There's nothing wrong with one's own opinion, but when in addition someone claims the support of the masses, it wakes the skeptic in me.
What if Bill says he's sorry and the Patriots won't do it again? Pinky Promise! Would that help?
Belichick, from an NFL.com article linked somewhere above: "Any questions about the Chargers?" he pleaded in his standard other-things-to-do monotone. "Want to talk about the football game? If not, I think that statement pretty much covers it." No, there aren't any other questions, you douchebag. You cheated, you were caught and now we're all going to ask you questions about it. Your statement says absolutely fucking nothing, other than your "interpretation of the rules," which was what was asked about -- and you walked out of the press conference. So here, I'll ask it again -- how exactly did you interpret the rules to think you could have a video camera trained on the other team's defensive coaches? Just clear that up for us, Bill, and we'll be happy to going back to spreading the love about your mystique.
Here is a thought, maybe the idea of taping was so that they could review it, watch game film to evaluate the schemes and see if they could pick something up in a future game maybe not at all intended for the present game. But then again Bill is a genius and I am sure he has figured out a way to get the taped information deciphered before the play is called relayed to Sir Tom after the play has been called and before the mics are turned off - unless of course Bill can talk to Sir Tom up until the snap of the ball - is that legal, maybe Sir Tom has a hidden speaker or another player WITHOUT the GREEN dot has one imbedded and they can converse all the way up until the snap of the ball, we could always check with homeland security to make sure.
So here, I'll ask it again -- how exactly did you interpret the rules to think you could have a video camera trained on the other team's defensive coaches? Yeah, Belichick. Especially since you can read minds. Damned telekinetic yard gnome. Even better if you mix it with beer. I'm tastin' colors, man. BLAST OFF!!
yerfatma, obviously the kickoff return is just blown coverage, but your other comment goes straight to the heart of this discussion. If Brady knows that a blitz is coming, he audibles to a quick out or a run Ok, but what I'm talking about isn't that. The game is the NFL Network's game of the week. If you get a chance, take a peek. Sims and Nantz spent the game marvelling over the time Brady had to throw. One or two of the completions to Moss came after he finally broke free of coverage after 2-3 seconds of terrific coverage by the Jets. The ineffectiveness of the Jets' 3 and 4 man rushes weren't the result of knowing which play was coming; assuming they did, I'm sure it didn't hurt, but it didn't lead to the complete line domination the Pats showed.
This is so crazy, fine them and move on! How many other teams are doing this? And no I'm not a Pat's fan. They still are one of but a few teams that are the best of the NFL, PERIOD!!!!!
Why are you yelling at me, Robi? What did I do to deserve this?
I think the Pats would have beat the Jets with or without cheating, but ham-fisted cheating colors the whole perception of that game, it colors the perception of their success, and it colors the perception of Belichick as a coach. Well said. And I say that as a Jets fan. The better team won. But cheating is still cheating. It's in the rule book and it's unambiguous. Sims and Nantz spent the game marvelling over the time Brady had to throw. One or two of the completions to Moss came after he finally broke free of coverage after 2-3 seconds of terrific coverage by the Jets. The ineffectiveness of the Jets' 3 and 4 man rushes weren't the result of knowing which play was coming; assuming they did, I'm sure it didn't hurt, but it didn't lead to the complete line domination the Pats showed. Again, as Jet fan, I am not going to argue about the ineffectiveness of our D-Line. Mangini is trying to fit a round hole in a square peg. But I have to disagree with your argument. Defensive schemes, especially those devised by BB and his ex-protege, are extremely complex. What if, on the Moss TD for example, BB knew that the Jets were playing a soft zone looking to defense the short pass and they'd only be rushing 3 men? Then he and Brady know that they'll have time to wait for Moss to break free in the end zone. And they also know that he'll have a linebacker guarding him with safety help. So they take advantage of it. I don't think this taints what the Pats have done in the past. I do think it taints this one game. Even if the better team won.
Debo270, it's not a question of whether they broke the rules: we both agree they did. The question is, if you put aside "burn them! burn them!" hyperbole, what is the point of the rule, and how serious an infraction is it in terms of the integrity of the sport and the games played? If they've particularly been warned before, the punishment should be meaningful simply to drive the point home- but obviously not to a "forfeit games/players" way. Hence, the draft picks or monetary fines: they are enough for the owners to stop this behavior because they don't want to pay out money for every game they play. My thoughts, as an obviously very casual football fan, is that the sport's too technological already to act like this particular use of technology and information gathering is somehow beyond the pale, or breaks new into totally new territory. As Venicemenace noted, it's been a long time practice of any and every team to get the information they can get to gain an edge; even using existing game tape to analyze patterns, or watching team practices, or sharing scouting information between teams, all fall into this category. In short: Yes, they broke the rule, and yes the organization should be penalized in a way that will discouraging them from wanting to do this again (i.e., if they pay a fine and lose draft picks every time they break this rule, they'll quickly have no cash and no draft picks) No, this doesn't invalidate any of the Patriots' accomplishments, and no this should not result in changing the outcome of already-played or future games (via benching of key players, etc).
But I have to disagree with your argument. Defensive schemes, especially those devised by BB and his ex-protege, are extremely complex. What if, on the Moss TD for example, BB knew that the Jets were playing a soft zone looking to defense the short pass and they'd only be rushing 3 men? In the abstract, I agree with what you're saying, but everything I've heard suggests teams change the signals on a game-by-game basis and the signal schemes are hard to break (first off, you need to know which of x people flashing signs is the one flashing the proper ones). It's not like baseball where there are only so many signs to look for, steal, hit and run, sacrifice, etc. If the Pats could even figure out the general shell or whatever, that's definitely an unfair advantage. I just wonder how likely it is. Success, or lack thereof, doesn't enter into whether what they did is wrong, I'm just here as a homer trying to keep the dogs away from the Pats record. As for the Moss play, no signal breaking is going to lead you to throw to a guy who you know is going to be triple-covered. He just outran his coverage and Brady had too much time in the pocket.
If the Pats could even figure out the general shell or whatever, that's definitely an unfair advantage. I just wonder how likely it is. But wasn't Belichick the one that broke the German Enigma code in 1939?
but everything I've heard suggests teams change the signals on a game-by-game basis and the signal schemes are hard to break (first off, you need to know which of x people flashing signs is the one flashing the proper ones). What I have heard is that they took the "illegal" video tape in at halftime, broke it down and used it against the Jets in the second half. Speculation, to be sure, but that does suggest that the Pats were able to use the signals to their benefit. As for the Moss play, no signal breaking is going to lead you to throw to a guy who you know is going to be triple-covered. He just outran his coverage and Brady had too much time in the pocket. His primary coverage was a linebacker chasing him down the field. What if the Pats knew that a linebacker would be the primary coverage on Moss? The "triple coverage" was two safeties coming over to the play, way too late. Nantz said that Brady stood "like a statue" during that play. He knew he was going to Moss the whole time. And that could suggest that they knew the defense the whole time. Soft pass rush and an overmatched defender on Moss. Again, speculation. But that's what cheating does to a win. Taints it and allows for this kind of speculation.
Sir, I refuse to let you bring a taint into the discussion. I may not be the ideal person to police the decorum around here, but I feel a perineum must be established.
If the Pats could even figure out the general shell or whatever, that's definitely an unfair advantage. I just wonder how likely it is. If the Pats didn't think it would help them in some way, why would they bother violating the rules to make the tape?
Sir, I refuse to let you bring a taint into the discussion. I may not be the ideal person to police the decorum around here, but I feel a perineum must be established. If you insist. The cheating perineums the win.
If the Pats didn't think it would help them in some way, why would they bother violating the rules to make the tape? They wouldn't, no doubt. I just don't get how it works. If this kind of thing goes on, someone must know how it works. Why hasn't ESPN camped Pedro Gomez in front of that person's house? (Maybe they have; I can't be arsed to watch Sportscenter anymore because they, and all the sports talk venues, have a vested interest in the "ZOMG! END OF THE WORLD IS NIGH!" type coverage)
So have your defensive captain wear a wristband (like a QB's). Have the plays with corresponding numbers. Flash the numbers from the sideline, check the wristband, get the play. Have a couple wristbands for each game, and no one will be able to get your plays no matter how many cameras they have. A TV news station here in Philly is wondering if maybe the Eagles (or as they put it, "we") were robbed in the Super Bowl. God, we're so desperate for a winner. Aside from a silly rule being broken, the only thing really wrong with this is the Patriots being dumb enough to (allegedly) get caught. Seriously, you could have a guy in the stands use a cell phone. Punishment: They should have to play a year in the CFL.
