By Derek Lofland
I’ve been holding off on writing an article about “Spygate” since reports surfaced days before the Super Bowl that former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh had taped a Rams’ walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.
I wanted to see what new information came out of this, which quite frankly wasn’t much. Now that Matt Walsh has met with the Commissioner and the tapes have been shown to the public, what is the final effect of Spygate on the Patriots' legacy?
The problem that we have on this topic is that there are too many people who are emotionally attached to the situation.
You have a number of fans who are huge supporters of the Patriots. They believe this is an attempt by fans of other franchises to discredit the accomplishments of the most successful franchises in the league since 2001. They believe giving this matter any credence is pure jealousy.
Conversely, you have another group of people who hate the Patriots so much that they will take any bit of negative information and use it to discredit the entire Patriot dynasty. They want to believe the Patriots were a 6-10 team transformed into a Super Bowl Champion with this conduct.
The fact of the matter is that both positions are utterly ridiculous. Many Patriots fans have lost their minds in trying to justify or explain this. It was against the rules and if the Patriots didn’t know it was against the rules, the only reason they didn’t know is because they didn’t want to know. Blind eye, anyone?
The method they were using to tape these games was very systematic. On every play, they would tape the scoreboard showing the clock, score, down, and yardage. Then they would show the signals being used by the coaching staff on the other sideline. They had done this practice as early as 2001.
Common sense dictates two things:
1. In a league where coaches spend 15-20 hours a day preparing for their opponent, why would they use those valuable hours viewing footage that didn’t give them any advantage?
2. If it wasn’t working, why did they continue to tape opposing sidelines from 2001-2007?
It obviously gave them an advantage; otherwise they wouldn’t have gone through the painstaking systematic approach in taping these signals over multiple seasons. If it weren’t a competitive advantage, the league wouldn’t have fined the Patriots $250,000. They wouldn’t have taken away a first-round pick nor fined “The Hood” $500,000.
However, the anti-Patriot crowd has also lost their minds. First, do you honestly believe the Patriots were the only team in the league engaged in this activity? In reading and watching TV about this topic, I have heard two interesting stories on ESPN from unconfirmed sources:
1. There was another team in the league that had tried to tape coaching signals. When the opposing coaching staff saw what was going on, they sent a huge security officer to stand in front of the camera to block the taping.
2 comments Last one added about 1 year ago — Leave a Comment
Steve Frith about 1 year ago
Yet again, this is blown out of proportion. Let me split hairs for a second-the fine was for camera placement, not "cheating" or "gaining an competitive advantage". Had the camera been in the press box (3 walls with a roof over head out of view of the coaches etc. etc.) it would've been fine. We're back to where they taped from rather than what they taped. Check it out, you'll see I'm right. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's nothing in the NFL rule book that says it is illegal to tape opposing team defensive signals. For the record, a memo put out by someone who doesn't have the authority to change rules doesn't count any more than if I put out a memo saying that only players whose name ends with the letter "Q" are allowed to physically touch the football.
The tape of the Jets from week one that was leaked to the media showed the defensive coaches signals, then panning to the play clock. In combination with game film, this would show that the Jets would usually go for it on 3rd and short with a pass rather than a run (for example), or that the Jets would blitz on every down when under 5 minutes remained in the quarter (for example). Now, lets say that the huddle happens, the teams come out and line up with 20 seconds left on the play clock. The QB's headset turns off (they're not allowed to use it) with 15 seconds remaining on the play clock. The defense makes an adjustment....ok, what now? Where is the advantage? The sideline can't radio into the QB, and the QB doesn't see the defensive coach to see what play he just called (assuming the QB knows every single hand gesture and what play it stands for). What now? Where's the advantage? Makes it hard to argue when it's put that way.
Why is it that coaches for years have been covering their mouths when they call in a play? Did any catch the Boston Celtics vs. Clevland Cavaliers game last night? They showed how sometimes it gets so loud in their that the coach not only yells out what plays to make, but also uses hand signals, too! They put it on TV! Why isn't everyone in an uproar over that-putting the opposing teams signals on national TV along with the coach yelling what the play was-now the opposing team knows both the name AND signal of it.
Ugh...I'm so sick of this entire issue that I don't even want to debate it any more. It boils down to these few things IMHO-the Pats did something against the rules and were penalized for it. This includes the taping of the opposing teams cheerleaders....apparantly that's wrong too. So, from week 1, not even half way through the game, the Pats in fact DID NOT tape any signals whatsoever. They then went on to become 16-0 and 18-1 in the playoffs. Why is this not enough evidence to show that they are in fact that good that they can win games without the use of tapes of signals? As you said, other teams do the same thing (tape signals). John Madden even stated that taping signals was standard practice "back in the day". Why is it that only the Pats are being beat up for it, and no other team? Why is it that the Pats are labeled cheaters when other teams fudge their salary cap or pump fake crowd noise into their stadium, or open gates to allow strong winds to come into the stadium when the opposing team is kicking? Isn't that the same, or worse? Why is it ok for them to do it but not the Pats? It's because the Pats are in the spotlight and people tend to root for the underdog. Goodell tried to make changes and used the Pats as a scape goat. Fine, just be sure to hold the other teams to the patheticly high standards that the Pats are being held to.
This whole spygate thing has gone on long enough and people need to let it go. There was no smoking gun, not Rams walkthrough tape, no Kraft or Bellichick caught on tape saying "we're evil, screw the NFL and the commishioner", nothing more left to say about spygate-nothing.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jeremy Lewis about 1 year ago
Steve just so you know they taped offensive and defensive signals and If this is not cheating then why did they develop so many methods to avoid getting caught. Belicheat new exactly what he was doing and he got caught, the best thing for him to do is own up and be a man about it.
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.