Sources: Camera confiscated after claims of Pats spying on Jets

[blumj]

Personally, I'd have suspended him for the year and taken away multiple draft picks. If other coaches were accomplices in this (likely), then they should be suspended for the remainder of the year as well. A fine is *not* the equivalent of a suspension, because Belichick gets to keep doing his job--true punishment would have included depriving the team of the coach that has helped guide them to such success. A monetary fine seems rather limp to me.

Okay, that's a lot worse, but the punishment you're asking for is totally unrealistic. Goodell doesn't have a guaranteed lifetime contract as NFL dictator, and Kraft isn't the only backer he'd lose if he did anything like that.

[MaineRed]

Riiiiight.

I'm sure Bill was just trying to figure out what flavor of Gatorade they were serving.

Where did I say anything like this? They either used the info they had to predetermine what plays were coming or they didn't.

What you think or believe they were going to do doesn't really matter. Obviously it wasn't to check on the gatordade.

Again I think this is why the penalty was not as harsh as you would like. The infraction just wasn't as bad as you want to believe, especially since they were caught before they were able to do what you think they were going to do.

I understand you can make an educated guess at what they were going to do but how can you throw the book at them? If a terrorist is cuaght taking flight lessons we can't charge him with killing 3,000 since that was probably his goal. We can charge him with a number of things, but not that.

Just like the hole in the pocket of the golfer. He isn't cheating until he drops the ball down the pant leg. We can argue about his intent but you can't penalize the guy for having a hole in his pants. I know this isn't the same thing but people have accused Belichick of "cheating". It just isn't true if the info wasn't used. He was caught with info that may have led to cheating, probably even likely led to cheating but if he didn't get that far it is hard to penalize him for it the way many want him punished.

[MaineRed]

Okay, that's a lot worse, but the punishment you're asking for is totally unrealistic. Goodell doesn't have a guaranteed lifetime contract as NFL dictator, and Kraft isn't the only backer he'd lose if he did anything like that.

Good point. According to Peter King, not all teams do this but it is A LOT more prevelant than people want to believe and there are unwritten rules about speaking of it.

He said it, not me. But I agree with him. Those guys holding the clipboards over their heads are hiding from someone, for a reason. They are scared to death someone is watching and probably because they know someone is. I also wondered why those idiots were doing that but perhaps this is why.

King said that Mangini didn't gain many friends in the coaching ranks by opening his mouth. Makes me think Brian Billick might not have been as animated after last weeks game with the Jets if Mangini had just kept quiet.

[Yachtzee]

Personally, I think the appropriate punishment would be to make the Patriots hand over their playbook to everyone else on their schedule and ban them from using headsets so that they have to yell out all their signals.

[WMR]

Personally, I think the appropriate punishment would be to make the Patriots hand over their playbook to everyone else on their schedule and ban them from using headsets so that they have to yell out all their signals.

[GAC]

They either used the info they had to predetermine what plays were coming or they didn't.

Isn't that another way of saying cheating?

[MaineRed]

Is it cheating to have info on your opponent? IMO, not until you use it. Your breaking the rules by having it. Not cheating.

Now, let me ask you, was it cheating when Lawyer Milloy went to Buffalo just before the season opener a few years back and then somehow helped Buffalo beat New England 31-0?

There are many ways to gather info on an opponent, I really don't think the fact that Belichick used a camera to gain the same info you can get by signing a player who has recently played for that team should be causing such a fuss in the year 2007.

[Roy Tucker]

From www.dictionary.com...

cheat /tʃit/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[cheet] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object)
1. to defraud; swindle: He cheated her out of her inheritance.
2. to deceive; influence by fraud: He cheated us into believing him a hero.
3. to elude; deprive of something expected: He cheated the law by suicide.
–verb (used without object)
4. to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5. to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
6. to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers.
7. Informal. to be sexually unfaithful (often fol. by on): Her husband knew she had been cheating all along. He cheated on his wife.
–noun
8. a person who acts dishonestly, deceives, or defrauds: He is a cheat and a liar.
9. a fraud; swindle; deception: The game was a cheat.
10. Law. the fraudulent obtaining of another's property by a pretense or trick.
11. an impostor: The man who passed as an earl was a cheat.

[Yachtzee]

Is it cheating to have info on your opponent? IMO, not until you use it. Your breaking the rules by having it. Not cheating.

Now, let me ask you, was it cheating when Lawyer Milloy went to Buffalo just before the season opener a few years back and then somehow helped Buffalo beat New England 31-0?

There are many ways to gather info on an opponent, I really don't think the fact that Belichick used a camera to gain the same info you can get by signing a player who has recently played for that team should be causing such a fuss in the year 2007.

In school, if you have the answer key to the test, they're going to bust you for cheating regardless of whether you used it or not. There is no way of knowing whether you got the information properly or were using it from your improper source, so the presumption is that you cheated.

The difference between using a camera and using a player is that the player that left the team did so because the team terminated his contract. Therefore, they can do nothing if that player decides to sign with another team. Since the player couldn't possibly unlearn what they know, they're free to spill the beans to the other team. If the team that let the player go doesn't want the player to sign with another team and give out info, they can keep him under contract. On the other hand, having the tape of the signals not only gives you insight into the plays they're calling that game, but you can also catalog those tapes, compare them season to season, and start noticing tendencies that coaches have in their signals. It makes the code easier to crack down the road.

[registerthis]

Okay, that's a lot worse, but the punishment you're asking for is totally unrealistic. Goodell doesn't have a guaranteed lifetime contract as NFL dictator, and Kraft isn't the only backer he'd lose if he did anything like that.

Hence my criticism of Goodell. Either you come forth and make it known that this type of behavior absolutely is not tolerated, or you cave in to lesser punishments. Suspending Belichick for the year and depriving the team of multiple draft picks *shouldn't* have been an unrealistic option, but I'm sure Goodell viewed it that way.

[registerthis]

Where did I say anything like this? They either used the info they had to predetermine what plays were coming or they didn't.

There's only one reason why a Patriots employee would have been videotaping the defensive signals from the opposing team--to steal the signs so that the offense would later know what defensive call was made. They don't have to catch a cadre of Patriots coaches huddled around a video monitor scribbling notes to know what was going on. As Yachtzee stated, it's akin to possessing the answers for a test in school. There's an implied infraction of cheating by simply possessing such information. That's why the NFL has a rule explicitly forbidding the practice of videotaping an opposing team's signals.

[MaineRed]

Hence my criticism of Goodell. Either you come forth and make it known that this type of behavior absolutely is not tolerated, or you cave in to lesser punishments. Suspending Belichick for the year and depriving the team of multiple draft picks *shouldn't* have been an unrealistic option, but I'm sure Goodell viewed it that way.

The penalty was plenty harsh. You either have very little understanding of the NFL or you just don't want to be objective.

A first round pick is a starter. The Patriots were stripped of a starting player. That isn't harsh?

And besides, I thought half the reason everyone was so upset was because this is an isolated incident and no other team would do such a thing. Only Belichick. So what is there to discourage?

You think the Pats are going to keep doing this and risk losing more picks?

I don't think teams with mediocre talent like the Patriots want to give up high draft picks willingly.

[GAC]

Is it cheating to have info on your opponent?

It depends on how he was acquiring that info? Was what he was doing in accordance with/allowable by said NFL rules?

IMO, not until you use it.

Not according to the NFL rules. The means by which you acquire that info (i.e. video taping the opposing team's sideline coache's signals) is, by itself, a violation of the rules.

Your breaking the rules by having it. Not cheating.

Obviously not all "breaking of rules" can be defined as cheating. A player can violate team rules, or maybe NFL policy involving off field personal conduct/activity, like Chris Henry and Pacman Jones for instance. They broke the rules, but it wasn't cheating.

It depends on what rule was broken and the intent behind breaking that rule. There are obviously NFL rules that deal specifically with the area of cheating, and this falls within that criteria.

And I think it's very safe to say that he was gathering that info in order to use such info. Why else do what he did to get it if you wasn't going to use it? What was the point?

You're not addressing that issue Maine.

Now, let me ask you, was it cheating when Lawyer Milloy went to Buffalo just before the season opener a few years back and then somehow helped Buffalo beat New England 31-0? There are many ways to gather info on an opponent, I really don't think the fact that Belichick used a camera to gain the same info you can get by signing a player who has recently played for that team should be causing such a fuss in the year 2007

Respectfully, you're really jumping all over the place on this. Milloy was a safety who was released from the Pats, and yes, signed by Buffalo. Players change teams all the time. Now, did Milloy possibly share what he knew/learned under the Pat's system with Buffalo? Possibly. I'm sure they tried to glean what they could from him. Is that stated in NFL rules as being illegal?

It's not a violation if Milloy was telling a fellow defender(s)... "Watch so-and so, he tends to do this or that in this particular situation."

Yes there are many ways to gather info on an opponent.

Teams, since the game was invented, have always tried to devise/find ways to understand and know the opposition's game plans and strategy. The difference is.....There are legal (permissible) means to do it, as sanctioned by the rules of the NFL, and there are illegal means that are prohibited by rules.

Watching game films for instance.

I just finished a book on the championship years of the Browns under Paul Brown and Blanton Collier. These coaches, as well as their players, spent hours and hours watching and pouring over game films of their opposition studing offensive/defensive schemes, devising plans to thwart them, looking for player weaknesses and tendencies, trying to gain an advantage. These are legal means, sanctioned by the NFL, that are available to all teams.

It involves strategy, not overt cheating.

It's nothing but semantics and excuse making to say that all teams probably cheat in various manners. Probably true. And when they are caught, and it's shown to be a direct violation of stated rules, they are disciplined.

If a terrorist is cuaght taking flight lessons we can't charge him with killing 3,000 since that was probably his goal. We can charge him with a number of things, but not that.

Terrrible analogy. Terrorists don't play by or respect rules. And unless one knows they are terrorist beforehand, then going to flight school is not an illegal activity. And as I stated above.... it's a violation of stated NFL rules for a team to videotape an opposing team's sideline ALSO.

You keep saying it's not cheating, or the rule isn't violated, until they use the info gathered, and that's just not true.

Then I guess I can use this analogy.....

It's OK if someone steals a gun; but until he uses it you can't charge him with a crime until he actually uses the gun.

Was the act of stealing the gun a crime (breaking of the rules)? How about if he never used it? But then what was the point in him stealing it then, if not to commit further breaking of the rules? Just because he went on to commit further wrongdoing doesn't lessen the wrongdoing he did initially.

In fact - his initial actions, which was also breaking the law, were only done to help him succeed in committing further wrongdoing. Both broke the rules.

Damn! I gotta quit watching Perry Mason!



I can remember when a player had better guard with his life the team's playbook. You lose it and you may as well commit suicide. Good article on this..... http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/preview07/news/story?id=2973338

Is it permissible, in accordance with NFL rules, for a team to be in possession of another team's playbook? Is it cheating, and if a violation, subject to disciplinary action?

If so, then why isn't, during gametime, filming another team's sideline coaches sending in signals?

[GAC]

There's only one reason why a Patriots employee would have been videotaping the defensive signals from the opposing team--to steal the signs so that the offense would later know what defensive call was made. They don't have to catch a cadre of Patriots coaches huddled around a video monitor scribbling notes to know what was going on. As Yachtzee stated, it's akin to possessing the answers for a test in school. There's an implied infraction of cheating by simply possessing such information. That's why the NFL has a rule explicitly forbidding the practice of videotaping an opposing team's signals.

Exactly. If I know their defensive coach's signals/what plays they are sending in - like say they are calling for a safety blitz - makes it alot easier on my QB/offense to quickly adjust/change plays at the line of scrimmage when I know what's coming. Takes alot of the surprise/guess work out of it.

[GAC]

Personally, I think the appropriate punishment would be to make the Patriots hand over their playbook to everyone else on their schedule and ban them from using headsets so that they have to yell out all their signals.

Please do so before the Browns play them. We need all the help we can get!