My 'Boys were Alive and Kicking - SD is out - GB down - NY for the win!!!

[Kahuna Burger]

Well, the cheating does have to factor in the conversation somewhere, doesn't it?

Sure, it could be part of an actual discussion, where folks broke down the nature of the rules violation for those casual followers of the sport such as myself and gave their opinions on how much an assumed consistent breaking of said rules would have "tainted" the team's current record, that would be cool.

As a sour grapes insult to throw in whenever a team comes up as if it's obvious that the incident should define the entire season or recent history of the team? Not so much a "has to" situation. (esp since my casual understanding is that even in levying the fine, the commissioner stated that the violation was not considered to have changed the outcome of the game - but if you have reason to believe that assessment was wrong, that would be an interesting conversation too.)

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I don't understand how a team, any team, can be the greatest team in all sports unless they've played in ALL sports and proven it.

Otherwise, they can only qualify to be the greatest team of THEIR sport.

No, it's possible to compare teams from sport to sport.

For example, I'd pit the accomplishments of Lance Armstrong and his Tour de France team against the Patriots.

From what I understand, they dominated cycling-- without breaking the salary cap.

And with just one testicle.

 

[ClashmoreDave]

Well, the cheating does have to factor in the conversation somewhere, doesn't it?

Sure...for half of a game.
What about the other 16 and a half?

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Sure...for half of a game.
What about the other 16 and a half?

Oh no! You have awakened the sleeping giant! Now he'll go on a posting spree. Maybe 3 posts in a row or something....

(Love you, honey)

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

Sure, it could be part of an actual discussion, where folks broke down the nature of the rules violation for those casual followers of the sport such as myself and gave their opinions on how much an assumed consistent breaking of said rules would have "tainted" the team's current record, that would be cool.

As a sour grapes insult to throw in whenever a team comes up as if it's obvious that the incident should define the entire season or recent history of the team? Not so much a "has to" situation. (esp since my casual understanding is that even in levying the fine, the commissioner stated that the violation was not considered to have changed the outcome of the game - but if you have reason to believe that assessment was wrong, that would be an interesting conversation too.)

First, is ClashmoreDave your hubby? If so, hi Mr. Kahuna.

Second, I think that I will try to tackle your request.

I will start by explaining what the team was punished for:

The Patriots were fined and are losing their first round draft pick in 2008 (this year) because they were caught taping the Jets' sideline. Specifically, they were pointing the camera at the defensive coaches as they sent signals to the players. They were then pointing the camera at the scoreboard to get the down and distance.

Each team received a notice from the league that it was against the rules to tape the coaches on the sideline, prior to the season starting, so the Patriots had no excuse for not knowing this rule.

Now I will touch on the punishment:

The team and coach were both fined. The team has lost it's first round draft pick for the upcoming draft. The team was ordered to hand over all tapes to the NFL Commissioner's office, so that they may review them and decide on a course of action. The NFL Commissioner's office has since reviewed and destroyed the tapes (admittedly, I am not happy that they didn't disclose what they found to the public, but that was their perogative).

Now I will touch on the nature of defensive signal calling (as well as legal sign stealing), so that I can later explain how the Patriots' actions could have assisted them:

Teams will often have multiple members of the team/coaching staff send signals in to their defense (these signals are hand signals and such, like in baseball, since the defense does not have a player with a radio in his helmet, like the Quarterback on the offense does). The reason that multiple people send these signals in is because it is not illegal to look at the defensive coaches from the opposing sidelines (it is only illegal to tape). So, in order to confuse anyone who may be watching, they use multiple people, some who send in fake signals. Based on these signals, the defense will position itself prior to the snap and how the defense should act after the snap (coverages, blitzes, stunts, etc.).

Now I will touch on why it is legal to visually steal signals, but not use surveillance equipment (a.k.a. video recorders):

Since it would be silly to try to prevent all of the players and staff from looking across the field, there really is no way for the NFL to prevent sign-stealing. This is combated by the teams in a couple ways, including having multiple people sending in fake signals. In practice, it's similar to reading your opponent in poker or counting cards. At worst, it is considered unprofessional and bush-league, at best, it can give your offense a slight advantage. Using video recorders allows you to study the signals and figure out which ones are real and which ones are fake. This could help in the second half, but more likely would be useful the next time the teams play, provided the coaching staff is largely unchanged.

Now I will touch on how knowing the signals could have helped the Patriots, if they had been doing it in the past (this is widely speculated, but I have no proof):

If the offensive coaches had a way of know what the coverage would be or if there was likely to be a blitz, they could call a play that would take advantage of said defensive setup. Since a blitz sends at least one extra defender in to rush the passer, it leaves on less defender to guard a pass-receiver, so an offense may call a quick pass play to take advantage of the open spot and get rid of the ball before the blitzer gets to the quarterback (or they could call a max-protect play in order to keep a running back or tight end in to block the extra pass-rusher). Basically, it could provide enough of an edge to help the offense be more effective.

Now I will touch on why it is fruitless to be too decisive on this issue, from a fan standpoint, whether you are for or against the Patriots:

We don't know what teams do between games to change their signals. We don't know if the Patriots were able to gain any advantage from this. We don't know if they were even able to decipher enough defensive signals to make a difference. Likewise, if it was helping them, we don't know how long they were doing it and if it had an effect on any of their prior seasons. So, we just have a he said/he said with fans of the Patriots and those who don't like the Patriots going back and forth. This is the reason for the reaction that I got from Kahuna and others when I broght it up. It really has been used as a sour-grapes attack by fans of other teams who want to downplay the Patriots' success this year.

Finally, I will touch on my personal feelings on this:

I do think that the Patriots have had one of the, if not the, best season (to this point) of any sport. I also think that it is a low point on the season and will follow the team in some way. It's too bad, because without it, the season truly would have been flawless (to this point). I brought it up because it does make the season less than perfect and leaves the door open for another team in the future to actually have a better year. If the Patriots do win the Super Bowl, I will agree that the 2007 Patriots are the best team and had the best season to date in the history of the NFL. They are also closing in on being one of the, if not the, best dynasty in the history of the NFL. It's pretty scary (or exciting if you're a Patriots fan).

I will admit that I really enjoy bringing it up to get under the skin of Patriot fans. I also normally refer to the team as the Cheatriots and the coach as Belicheat. Normally, I am an irrational Packers fan, because it is fun to be irrational and sports talk gives me that outlet. This is a rare moment and I'll try not to be so rational in the future.

I think that I covered everything that I wanted to cover, so I'll end with this:

Go Packers!

Go Operation 18-1 (this would be the Patriots' record if they lose in the Super Bowl, which I hope happens if the Packers are there to play them)!

 

[ClashmoreDave]

First, is ClashmoreDave your hubby? If so, hi Mr. Kahuna.

Second, I think that I will try to tackle your request.

I will start by explaining what the team was punished for:

Yep, that would be right, I'm the hubby.

Your analysis is fairly reasonable, but as you point out, it was against the rules (not sure if "illegal" is really the right word to use?) to tape from the sidelines, no where else in the stadium. And I can only assume that they all do (edit: I meant to say, that they probably all tape from within other parts of the stadium). Of course, I could easily have this part wrong, but its what I've gleaned the few times I've really cared to pay attention. If the NFL is happy with the outcome, who am I to really complain?

(hm, looking a little bit online, I can't confirm that its just illegal to tape from the sidelines. The best I could find is this: '"The rule is that no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game," the league said in a statement from spokesman Greg Aiello.' And that quote came from a site that I've never heard of before, so I can't claim its reliable.)

To be honest, if I had to pick a team that I could live with beating the Pats, it would be the Cheeseheads. This could be some deep seated childhood brainwashing from living in Madison for several years. That could also be why I was not upset when the only Pats game I've attended was a loss to the Packers.

Yes, they cheated, were caught, they got punished, I've moved on. Please don't get me wrong: I do believe that what they did was wrong, and the Pats should not only play by the rules, but they should also play by the spirit of the rules. Play the game the "right" way. Win with dignity and class (something sorely missing, IMO, from the team. Big chips on their shoulders from Day One).





Edited to clarify that I assume all teams tape withing the stands or other "non-diisallowed" parts of the stadium.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

You sir, I like.

Also, my analysis was all from memory, so there may be holes here and there.

Now, back to being irrational fans, okay.

GO PACK!

 

[drothgery]

Now, back to being irrational fans, okay.

GO PACK!

What's irrational about that? Maybe this...

GO PACK!

... would be a bit irrational.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

What's irrational about that? Maybe this...

GO PACK!

... would be a bit irrational.

Nope, that's just using the right colors and a large font. Irrational would be misrepresenting the story or stretching it in order to make it look as though the Cheatriots didn't earn their victories. Stuff that pisses off their fans, because it discounts the team's accomplishments.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

To be honest, if I had to pick a team that I could live with beating the Pats, it would be the Cheeseheads. This could be some deep seated childhood brainwashing from living in Madison for several years.

If that's the only brainwashing you got out of Madison, count yourself lucky.