If the Pats did videotape the Jets

[nowayback]

It's because Belichick didn't mind if the Pats got caught...as he has a hidden reason for doing it...or even he wanted to be caught...why? Maybe he just wants to get into the other teams' heads...there is no way that he who is so careful in anything he does would be so obvious with the videoing. Up 'till now from what I have seen of him (from afar), anything he does has been done for a reason. He doesn't leave anything to chance.

I want to say he is a man beyond reproach...but I more think he is a man who believes that...if you use underhanded methods...well OK 2 can play at this game.

Does that make it right...or within the rules? No...but that is how the game is played. If I am and off lineman and I don't hold, grab a hold of the def lineman...no matter how good I am...I won't last in the NFL.

 

[NEPatriot]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

It's because Belichick didn't mind if the Pats got caught...as he has a hidden reason for doing it...or even he wanted to be caught...why? Maybe he just wants to get into the other teams' heads...there is no way that he who is so careful in anything he does would be so obvious with the videoing. Up 'till now from what I have seen of him (from afar), anything he does has been done for a reason. He doesn't leave anything to chance.

I want to say he is a man beyond reproach...but I more think he is a man who believes that...if you use underhanded methods...well OK 2 can play at this game.

Does that make it right...or within the rules? No...but that is how the game is played. If I am and off lineman and I don't hold, grab a hold of the def lineman...no matter how good I am...I won't last in the NFL.

The whole thing is a little curious, especially in light of the Green Bay incident. I wonder if this is the reason that BB seemed to pile on at the end of the game with a TD. By the way, if there is sanction from the league, any thougths as to what it will be? I'm assuming a loss of a draft pick would be a very low round pick.

 

[Pats726]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

The whole thing is a little curious, especially in light of the Green Bay incident. I wonder if this is the reason that BB seemed to pile on at the end of the game with a TD. By the way, if there is sanction from the league, any thougths as to what it will be? I'm assuming a loss of a draft pick would be a very low round pick.

I heard possible multiple or first day...which I think is a load of crap...

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Well, it wouldn't be a win for the Jets and they are crying about for the simple fact that it would create a nightmare in Las Vegas.

It won't be a suspension of BB as someone else mentioned unless they can tie this directly to him.

I suspect (if it's true) it would be a low round draft pick.

 

[Sundayjack]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

its because belichick didnt mind if the pats got caught...as he has a hidden reason for doing it...or even he wanted to be caught....why? maybe he just wants to get into the other teams heads.. there is no way that he who is so careful in anything he does would be so obvious with the videoing. up till now from what i have seen of him(from afar), anything he does has been done for a reason. he doesnt leave anything to chance.
i want to say he is a man beyond reproach...but i more think he is a man who believes that... if you use underhanded methods...well ok 2 can play at this game.
does that make it right..or within the rules? no...but that is how the game is played. if i am and off lineman and i dont hold, grab a hold of the def lineman....no matter how good i am..i wont last in the NFL.

Or, how about this for another theory: he wanted to gain a competitive advantage. Seems to me the more likely reason.

 

[DarrylS]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Or, how about this for another theory: he wanted to gain a competitive advantage. Seems to me the more likely reason.

Can you explain to me how he would get a competitive advantage? There are camera's all over the stadium, there are photographers all over the place.. there are spotters in the press box. There are much better vantage points than behind the Jets Bench. Why would he do it so blatantly behind the bench? The signals are given facing the players? None of this makes any sense to me.

 

[Sundayjack]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Can you explain to me how he would get a competitive advantage? There are camera's all over the stadium, there are photographers all over the place.. there are spotters in the press box. There are much better vantage points than behind the Jets Bench. Why would he do it so blatantly behind the bench? The signals are given facing the players? None of this makes any sense to me.

Well, of the two posited reasons - that this was a Belichick, sooper-sneaky, double-switcheroo; or, that this was video taping to be used for game-planning - the latter is most certainly the plausible one.

Here's what I think: As I said in a thread here last night, the Patriots have (or, at least, had) video and audio taped their own sideline for quality control during the Belichick coaching era. It's indisputable that they have used cameras on their sideline. I read where the Commissioner's office issued a recent instruction about that being against the rules, so they were supposed to have stopped. In any event, it wouldn't surprise me if, along the way, those cameras were also aimed across the field. It wouldn't surprise me if the Patriots kept a database on each team's field signals. I wouldn't fault them one bit - except after being told to stop.

The short answer to your question is that, if they were taping opposing teams, it wouldn't be anything usable during that particular game. There simply isn't time. Even during half time, there just isn't enough time. And, I also don't buy the notion that the camera man was sending hand-signals back to the Patriots coaches. Seems sort of silly to me. I mean, they'd be sending hand-signals about the opposing team's hand-signals? Odd. That said, if your point is that videotaping opposing hand-signals is of no value, I wholly disagree.

 

[DarrylS]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

The short answer to your question is that, if they were taping opposing teams, it wouldn't be anything usable during that particular game. There simply isn't time. Even during half time, there just isn't enough time. And, I also don't buy the notion that the camera man was sending hand-signals back to the Patriots coaches. Seems sort of silly to me. I mean, they'd be sending hand-signals about the opposing team's hand-signals? Odd. That said, if your point is that videotaping opposing hand-signals is of no value, I wholly disagree.

But why do it from behind the Jets Bench, it would make more sense to do it from behind the Pats Bench so they could see the signals as they face the Jets. Not sure what you can see from behind the Jets Bench. Secondly, the plays change and the signal callers change from game to game. There is usually two or three people giving signals, but only one is actually doing the other two are decoys. None of this makes any sense to me. You have guys in the spotters booth with binoculars, there are cameras all over the stadium..

 

[Bella*chick]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Well, of the two posited reasons - that this was a Belichick, sooper-sneaky, double-switcheroo; or, that this was video taping to be used for game-planning - the latter is most certainly the plausible one.

Here's what I think: As I said in a thread here last night, the Patriots have (or, at least, had) video and audio taped their own sideline for quality control during the Belichick coaching era. It's indisputable that they have used cameras on their sideline. I read where the Commissioner's office issued a recent instruction about that being against the rules, so they were supposed to have stopped. In any event, it wouldn't surprise me if, along the way, those cameras were also aimed across the field. It wouldn't surprise me if the Patriots kept a database on each team's field signals. I wouldn't fault them one bit - except after being told to stop.

The short answer to your question is that, if they were taping opposing teams, it wouldn't be anything usable during that particular game. There simply isn't time. Even during half time, there just isn't enough time. And, I also don't buy the notion that the camera man was sending hand-signals back to the Patriots coaches. Seems sort of silly to me. I mean, they'd be sending hand-signals about the opposing team's hand-signals? Odd. That said, if your point is that videotaping opposing hand-signals is of no value, I wholly disagree.

If what you say is true, then why do this during the Green Bay and Detroit games? We hardly ever play them and not twice in the same year.

 

[cubicle_6]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

But why do it from behind the Jets Bench, it would make more sense to do it from behind the Pats Bench so they could see the signals as they face the Jets. Not sure what you can see from behind the Jets Bench. Secondly, the plays change and the signal callers change from game to game. There is usually two or three people giving signals, but only one is actually doing the other two are decoys. None of this makes any sense to me. You have guys in the spotters booth with binoculars, there are cameras all over the stadium..

The cameraman in question was on the Pats' sideline, not the Jets'.

 

[DarrylS]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

The cameraman in question was on the Pats' sideline, not the Jets'.

But without regard, there are spotters in the spotters box.. there are camera's all over the place.. it might be a violation, but does not give them a competitive edge.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

The cameraman in question was on the Pats' sideline, not the Jets'.

Article said Jets' bench...source?

 

[Sundayjack]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

But why do it from behind the Jets Bench, it would make more sense to do it from behind the Pats Bench so they could see the signals as they face the Jets. Not sure what you can see from behind the Jets Bench.

It wasn't me who suggested that the camera guy was on the Jets bench. The camera and audio guys that the Patriots used to use were always on their own bench. They would roam, but not beyond their own sideline. Somewhere along the way, and assisted by a photo someone posted last night on this board, it was suggested that the guy was on the Jets bench. I'm not so sure that's correct.

Secondly, the plays change and the signal callers change from game to game. There is usually two or three people giving signals, but only one is actually doing the other two are decoys. None of this makes any sense to me. You have guys in the spotters booth with binoculars, there are cameras all over the stadium..

Which is why I said that I don't think it's anything you could use during that game. I could see them keeping a database, though. If you have a video file on Lovie Smith's preferred handsignals, that's pretty useful information.

The wildcard in this is that, there's really only ONE guy on the field for whom this information would be useful. It's not Belichick. It's not the coaches in the booth. It's not the 10 of 11 players on the field. The Packers complaint, and Kerry Rhodes statements on Sunday, was that the Patriots always had the correct check-off to what they were doing defensively. The helmet mic is off by that time. There's only one guy, if anyone, using that information on gameday in the manner that has been alleged.

 

[Sundayjack]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Article said Jets bench... source?

Chris Mortenson, ESPN:

NFL security confiscated a video camera and its tape from a New England Patriots employee on the team's sideline during Sunday's game against the Jets in a suspected spying incident, sources said.

The camera and its tape were placed in a sealed box and forwarded to the league office for investigation, the sources said.

"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. "Clubs have specifically been reminded in the past that the videotaping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals on the sidelines is prohibited.

"We are looking into whether the Patriots violated this rule."

The Patriots' cameraman was suspected of aiming his camera at the Jets' defensive coaches who were sending signals to their unit on the field, the sources said. The league also is investigating some radio frequency issues that occurred during the game. . . . . . . .

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Well, there seem to be conflicting articles then.

 

[sieglo]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Wasn't there a rumor after the Jets beat the Pats last year that the Jets had the Pats signals? I seem to remember this but I can't find any mention of it.

 

[Sundayjack]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

If what you say is true, then why do this during the Green Bay and Detroit games? We hardly ever play them and not twice in the same year.

I would suspect for a couple reasons. First, as I mentioned above, to keep a complete database. Wouldn't that be useful if, by some chance, Detroit made it to the Superbowl. (Haw. Can't believe I just said that).

The other reason I would think is that coaches move. If the Patriots do keep such a database - and I'm only throwing it out as a theory - then they might review any film they have on Norv Turner from his Raider or Redskin days for any common signals.

Here's something you Patriots people will certainly relate to. It's 200?, and the Patriots are playing the Colts in Indianapolis. The Colts have driven all the way down to the two (or whatever) yardline with zero time left. One last play, one of the Patriots players (McGinest?) blitzes and stuffs the run in the backfield - game over. After the game, the player comments about how they watched film of how Peyton Manning always pats his right ass cheek (or some such thing) when it's a run play. My point - the guy seems to study EVERYTHING on film. Why not sideline interaction?

 

[letekro]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

If what you say is true, then why do this during the Green Bay and Detroit games? We hardly ever play them and not twice in the same year.

This is the great unanswered question. Unless they were test runs - to see how much they could potentially get and get away with.

 

[upstater1]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

Well, of the two posited reasons - that this was a Belichick, sooper-sneaky, double-switcheroo; or, that this was video taping to be used for game-planning - the latter is most certainly the plausible one.

Here's what I think: As I said in a thread here last night, the Patriots have (or, at least, had) video and audio taped their own sideline for quality control during the Belichick coaching era. It's indisputable that they have used cameras on their sideline. I read where the Commissioner's office issued a recent instruction about that being against the rules, so they were supposed to have stopped. In any event, it wouldn't surprise me if, along the way, those cameras were also aimed across the field. It wouldn't surprise me if the Patriots kept a database on each team's field signals. I wouldn't fault them one bit - except after being told to stop.

The short answer to your question is that, if they were taping opposing teams, it wouldn't be anything usable during that particular game. There simply isn't time. Even during half time, there just isn't enough time. And, I also don't buy the notion that the camera man was sending hand-signals back to the Patriots coaches. Seems sort of silly to me. I mean, they'd be sending hand-signals about the opposing team's hand-signals? Odd. That said, if your point is that videotaping opposing hand-signals is of no value, I wholly disagree.

I agree with your analysis. Which makes me wonder, why are there charges they did this to the Packers? What would they have to gain? Against the Jets I can understand. They play again.

Plus, where was all this hullaballoo when the Dolphins used video to steal the Patriots signals last year? The NFL said it was ok for a team to do that.

So what really is the problem here? If it's ok to steal signals and employ them in the game, then what did the Patriots do wrong? Are people only on the Patriots because of a technicality, as you wrote. They technically broke a rule. Whereas the NFL is completely ok with using stolen signs in a game.

 

[upstater1]

Re: if the pats did video the jets

I would suspect for a couple reasons. First, as I mentioned above, to keep a complete database. Wouldn't that be useful if, by some chance, Detroit made it to the Superbowl. (Haw. Can't believe I just said that).

The other reason I would think is that coaches move. If the Patriots do keep such a database - and I'm only throwing it out as a theory - then they might review any film they have on Norv Turner from his Raider or Redskin days for any common signals.

Here's something you Patriots people will certainly relate to. It's 200?, and the Patriots are playing the Colts in Indianapolis. The Colts have driven all the way down to the two (or whatever) yardline with zero time left. One last play, one of the Patriots players (McGinest?) blitzes and stuffs the run in the backfield - game over. After the game, the player comments about how they watched film of how Peyton Manning always pats his right ass cheek (or some such thing) when it's a run play. My point - the guy seems to study EVERYTHING on film. Why not sideline interaction?

And dozens of teams have done that to Tom Brady. It's pretty common. You seem to be missing out on the fact that the NFL has no problem with stealing signals and employing them on Sundays. They said so last year when the Fish had videotape of the Patriots signals, and they beat the Pats badly.