[semoball.com] [semoball.com]
Spygate: the other non-scandal
Posted Monday, February 18, 2008, at 9:29 AM
<< Previous | Read comments | Respond | Email link | Next >>

We have two great alleged sports scandals now in America. One involves who injected what into someone's rear end a decade ago. The other matter so important it requires congressional attention involves who videotaped what over the past decade.

Here's the deal. You can videotape NFL football games. You can steal signs from the sidelines. You just can't mix the stealing with the video. Got that?

That, in essence, is what we are arguing in the so-called Spygate scandal involving the New England Patriots.

Here's Sunday's New York Times:

An N.F.L. team could place an army of lip readers on the sideline to try to steal messages from the opposing side. It could fill a row of seats behind the other team's bench with espionage experts to decipher all the sideline cues. It could have scouts in the press box aiming binoculars at every opposing coach, scribbling notes to match with game tape to glean what all the signals mean.

All that is allowed, and maybe some of it is done. But videotaping the other sideline? Do not think about it.

And therein lies one of the quirky twists to what may already be the biggest cheating scandal in the N.F.L.'s history, a chapter that began when the Patriots were caught taping the Jets' sideline last September.

The issue is not stealing signals. That is allowed, "and it is done quite widely," Commissioner Roger Goodell said recently.

The issue, rather, is the method of acquiring the signals.

Of course, there's an added twist to this story that involves the St. Louis Rams. At issue here is not videotaping of the sidelines, but rather the final pre-game walk through of the team the day before the Rams faced the New England Patriots in Super Bowl 36.

What did the Rams emphasize during that walkthrough? Kurt Warner told ESPN.com he remembers very little other than the offense running some red zone plays.

If the Patriots knew what the Rams were going to do inside the 20-yard line, New England coach Bill Belichick and company failed miserably.

The Rams penetrated the red zone twice -- both times in the fourth quarter. The Rams scored a touchdown on each drive.

Even if the allegations were true, "I don't think it had any effect on the game," former Rams coach Dick Vermeil said recently. "That stuff's been going on forever and I don't think you gain from it."

That's bad news for former Rams player Willie Gary, who filed a class-action lawsuit on Friday. In order to cash in, he's going to have to prove a cause-and-effect link.

"It is probably going to be difficult to win," University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias told the Times. "Maybe not impossible."

The other part of this story, rarely mentioned, is that the Rams were most likely monitoring the Patriots in the days before the game.

Here's what happened the Friday before that Super Bowl.

Halfway through practice, Patriots' linebackers coach Pepper Johnson noticed something in a third-floor window of a house next to the field.

Club and league officials said a telescope was clearly visible in the window, according to a pool report, and that 15 minutes later, a person appeared at the window, and then vanished.

Officials scanned the window with binoculars, but the person never returned.


Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

Mike, please keep in mind that sports exist so that athletes can compete. All participants must abide by the same set of rules not only to justly determine a winner, but also to provide mutual guidelines for preparation.

I agree that it is impossible to measure the impact of illegally videotaping an opposing team on a given night. However, the widespread use of technology in an attempt to decode or memorize an opposing team's signals could ultimately diminish the significance of physical ability in the sport. Football teams should be defined by their athleticism and willpower, not by their cinematography skills.

Furthermore, many fans believe that teams should disguise their signals to the extreme that not even hours of studying sideline vidoetape recordings could "crack the code." Perhaps they would, if it were legal for their opponents to record them. To those that abide by the rules, such preventative measures would be about as useful as designing a blocking scheme to pick up the opponent's pre-snap blitz. Most competitors give their opponents the benefit of the doubt that they are not deliberately breaking the rules, and rely on officials to enforce them.

Whether or not the Patriots won any games because of "Spygate," there has to be a limit. The NFL set that limit and warned the Patriots in 2006, yet Belichick still failed to comply. In order to protect the integrity and longevity of the NFL, such violations should not be taken lightly.

By the way, I read somewhere that the Rams Superbowl 36 walkthrough was open to the media and public, and that it was in fact legal for the Pats to videotape it (of course, they still couldn't have used it in the locker room during the game). Has anyone else heard this, or did I get a bad source?

-- Posted by Moneybags on Wed, Feb 20, 2008, at 2:11 AM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


Prepcasts.com