Blog Entry

Spygate: An Inconvient Truth

Posted on: May 14, 2008 10:23 pm
Recently, it has become painfully obvious that most people are quite irritated at the NFL and the New Patriots for their "scouting" of NFL team's Offensive and Defensive signals. At first, as a fan, I was crushed too. As the story broke, it started to make less and less sense to me. Members of the press core who were former coaches, Jimmy Johnson most notably, started to admit and even imply that the Patriots were not the only teams to video-tape other teams.

Furthermore, in great detail, information started to arise that this was an NFL wide problem. Most recently, Roger Goddell said that "scouting NFL signals is commonplace and legal." Obviously, the use of a camera in certain spaces makes it more illegal than other places, but that's not what's troubling.

Keep in mind, the punishment of the Patriots was a 1st round pick in the 2008 NFL draft and a 750k dollar fine (500k to be paid directly out of Bill's own pocket).The punishment wasn't for spying. As a matter of fact, the spying is completely legal as pointed out above. It's merely where you spy from. If the Patriots had taped signals from the press box, a fine would have never been imposed. As Jimmy Johnson said though "it's not possible to tape signals from the press box when the team is on the wrong side." In other words, you can't tape their signals but they can tape yours, and it's 100% legal.

Jimmy Johnson also went on to elaborate by saying that the idea was given to him by then KC Chiefs sideline coach to tape from the sidelines. "You merely have to put an extra camera man beside the rest of them."

What has become painfully obvious is that the above is not only very unfair it is also very speculative. I won't attempt to convince you that Belichick believed in what he was doing was justified. I will attempt to merely justify it.

Now remember, if you are the team under the press box, the other team is completely in viewing range of the box. Cameras can be pointed in their direction and signals can be easily recorded. You are protected from this because the NFL prohibits you from taping from anywhere that is not enclosed by walls. There are no other places like this than 1 press box.

Well, you might be thinking that the tape recorded from the press box can't be very good. You obviously don't have an HDTV. HD Cameras (used to record games in High definition) have optical zoom levels exceeding 16x. What does that mean? It means that you can record video from the Press-box at nearly the same quality zoomed in as zoomed out. Imagine, High definition video of the Jets coordinator or the Chargers cheerleaders. Surely the NFL coaches would be able to get one such camera. 50k$ (not sure of the price, but that'd be absurdly expensive for a camera - my dad is a professional photographer. I'm positive the top cameras might go that high, but most do not)

What Belichick could have been thinking is that if it's legal for one team to do it (the home team) then it must be legal for another team to do it when they are on the road. I'm not saying he thought it was legal, but that it should be legal. It just doesn't seem to promote a competitive advantage to allow the home team to tape signals for future games. I mean, at one time, the Jets made the playoffs. If they taped the Patriots signals, they could possibly beat them because of it.

I'm not condoning the practice of breaking rules (I actually believe in strict enforcement), highlighting the obvious discrepancy is a must in this situation.

While most fans are tired and ready to move on, I really suggest they take a hard look at what really happened instead of listening to the "but they cheated" 'Hatriots'. (I hate that name, but it seems to become standardized).

This isn't a conspiracy theory. It's a reminder that the rules aren't always set up to be fair. Sometimes they are unfair and it's just not convienent to talk about where they fall short. The people that challenge the laws are often ruled as heretics or unclean, but history often stands on their side. Maybe Belichick is nothing more than a coach looking to bend or break rules or maybe he didn't want to be victimized by a practice he saw as common and biased.

Just a thought.
Category: NFL

Since: Sep 18, 2007
Posted on: September 29, 2009 11:03 am

Spygate: An Inconvient Truth

Another jilted steeler fan straying away from the facts. BTW, 'stoolers' have been used for years to describe steeler fans who flood the NFL board with stool

Since: Apr 14, 2007
Posted on: June 7, 2009 4:16 pm

Spygate: An Inconvient Truth

Plain and simple the Patriots cheated.
It was in no way the placement of the camera that has become the excuse of the Hatriot nation.
Hatriots btw has been used on the NFL Board for years to describe the Patriot fan base that attempts every year to steamroll the NFL board with hate, hence the name. They stole it as another weak attempt to justify the frauds that the Patriots are.

Another myth they tend to use is that the stolen signals could not possibly have been used in the same game. They were. And because daddy is a photographer, he should be able to set you straight in that regard.

High end camera run up into the hundreds of thousands, and some in the millions.

35X is not a great zoom level, much less 16x. Sony Cameras used in games zoom far greater than that.

You can't simply hide a camera man in with all the rest.

Roger Goodall did not say anything about stealing signals being legal, that is yet another fabrication. Jimmy Johnson did not claim every team does it.

Tired old excuses to attempt to mask that the Patriot are indeed frauds.

They are in fact Cheats.

Nothing more, and nothing less.

Since: Mar 7, 2008
Posted on: May 16, 2008 7:46 am

Spygate: An Inconvient Truth

Plus, did he really need to do that against a team that is both inferior and intimidated of your's?

No, Bill did not need to tape the Jets or any team that Eric Mangini was coaching, since he is not a good coach, I mean I am just comparing him to BB, but you are right he did not need to tape them or any other team. However, Matt Walsh and Eric Mangini were gone for a few years before this whole Spygate issue came about, so why didn't either one of them bring it up?

Since: Mar 28, 2007
Posted on: May 15, 2008 12:49 pm

Spygate: An Inconvient Truth

Donny,  you hit on the other often-overlooked aspect of the Week 1 taping.  However, I must take a different tact from yours.

It's not just that Belicheck did something that he knew was wrong--implicity ('misinterpretation' of the rules) and explicitly (memo from NFL specifically stating not to use video to record oponents' signals).  He had the audacity to do it against an acomplice-turned-enemy on the road!  Think of the arrogance--he practically dared Mangini to bust him.  Plus, did he really need to do that against a team that is both inferior and intimidated of your's? 

Since: Mar 7, 2008
Posted on: May 15, 2008 7:35 am

Spygate: An Inconvient Truth

I will have to admit I was hurt that the Patriots "cheated" but you are right, the Pats are not the only teams to tape signals. Again, I find it funny that Eric Mangini tried to stir the pot since he was so pissed at getting beaten by the Patriots. Could he get into trouble as well? I mean he was on the Pats when "most" of the taping was going on right?

Since: Dec 9, 2007
Posted on: May 14, 2008 10:24 pm

Spygate: An Inconvient Truth

Just as a warning, the quotes are paraphrases. I can get you the actual quote if you don't believe it.

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or