Welcome to PatsFans.com

Biggest Myth: "Impossible to decode tapes at halftime"

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by borg, Apr 9, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. borg

    borg Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    3,913
    Likes Received:
    69
    Ratings:
    +156 / 11 / -13

    For all those willing to accept the party line that it would be impossible to examine and decode the defensive signals, I suspect you never actually thought out the process. First in this age of digital video, just progressing through a half of football, especially to specific downs and yardage takes all of a split second. Second, I believe that the info most desired would be third down plays, more than likely passing situations. Using the Jets defense as the example...In 2007, the Jets averaged 63 defensive plays and 13 third down defenses per game. So the Patriots would be looking at 32 defensive snaps, of which maybe 7 were third downs in the first half of games. Of these seven third down plays, the Patriots would probably call 5-6 passing plays. So tell me why it would be so difficult for BB's secret circle of operatives to decode a half dozen signals during halftime, during the third quarter, and if necessary, during the fourth quarter. Oh, that's right, because the Patriots said it wasn't possible.
  2. Fixit

    Fixit Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,696
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +45 / 0 / -0

    That's a lot of work to do in 12 minutes.

    EVERYONE TAPES. Some even do it with the blessing of the league. Hello, Jets!
  3. miDeuce

    miDeuce Rookie

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    766
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    #50 Jersey

    The problem I see with your argument is that while you can zip right through digital video, most likely the video was being shot on actual video which would have to be digitized. That has to be done in real time so already you're looking at more time to get the footage into the computer than there is for halftime.
  4. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,658
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +429 / 5 / -5

    Don't forget, there are usually three people on the field signaling to the defense, only one of which is actually calling the intended play. And since they can change the person calling the play on each possession, I'm not sure there's even enough of a sample size to figure it all out, regardless of whether or not there's enough time.

    In addition, there are limits to what equipment teams have access to during gametime. [I'm not saying that proves my argument, but it certainly doesn't help yours, either.]
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,563
    Likes Received:
    184
    Ratings:
    +438 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    The biggest myth is that teams wouldn't consider CHANGING THEIR SIGNALS at halftime or after every quarter. Its clear all teams knew we were taping so . . . duh . . . change your signals.
  6. PonyExpress

    PonyExpress Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,660
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +25 / 3 / -0

    I'm sure the trilateral commission and the Bilderberg society were in on it. @$$clown.
  7. BrianPat

    BrianPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I disagree, from my understanding, they used tapes. To get those tapes converted into the type of format your talking about would take at least 10 minutes, then in the time left your going to learn something you can use on the field in the second half. The assumption they dind't use it in the second half, is just that, an assumption, but it's a much much more valid one then the one your making.
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2008
  8. kolbitr

    kolbitr Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Despite your own arrogant tone, some of us sheep have thought out the process, and we still think your post is pretty confused. The "party line" has been that such in-game use was not done, period; moreover, for in-game decoding, no videotaping is necessary, as has been said many times by others outside the "party". The in-game decoding that had been bragged about by Coach Shanahan, for example, required no tape, no camera, only eyes and brains.

    The actual use and purpose of the tapes have perhaps not been satisfactorily explained for many people, both on the board and elsewhere. Many seem to think that there had to have been a major "Madden cheat code" advantage, or why do it? BB himself gave us the entire kernel of the process when he said that the Pats were studying tendencies, not deciphering immediate actions.
  9. borg

    borg Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    3,913
    Likes Received:
    69
    Ratings:
    +156 / 11 / -13

    Why 12 minutes? Does everyone stop working at kickoff?
  10. borg

    borg Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    3,913
    Likes Received:
    69
    Ratings:
    +156 / 11 / -13

    Why actual video?
  11. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,093
    Likes Received:
    336
    Ratings:
    +863 / 5 / -3

    First, it has been well reported that the NFL confiscated a VIDEOTAPE from Matt Estrella. So who cares what happens in the age of digital video? The signals were videotaped onto an analog tape. So they would have had to transfer the tape to a digital format to do what you are sugguesting. That would mean that the transfer time would be at least the length of the tape and that doesn't include pre and post prep work. So it would have taken the Patriots an hour or two at halftime to get to the point they could process the video in a split second.

    Second, even if they used digital cameras, it would require the cameraman to make each defensive signal and catalog it so they were able to pull us signals that quickly. That means they would have at least needed on other person to work with Estrella.

    Third, as stated, there are three signal callers with two dummy callers and one real caller. The person who is the live caller can change over the game several times and calls also can change over time. That means the Pats in a very shot period of time would have to determine who was the live caller and whether the signals every changed over the first half onto of decifering what a particular signal meant.

    So if you ignore simple logic and provide assume the Patriots used technology they clearly didn't have, I guess it could be true that the Pats decoded plays during halftime. And of course, the psychics the Pats use to read opposing coaches' minds also have their detailed reports all typed up by halftime too.
  12. miDeuce

    miDeuce Rookie

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    766
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    #50 Jersey

    Because if they were shooting on a Digital Video Camera that records to a disk there wouldn't have been a tape for the Jets to confiscate and send to the NFL.
  13. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    151
    Ratings:
    +581 / 20 / -14

    Do you have any concept whatsoever of how plays are signalled? If you really think that you can take 5 or 6 plays and effectively decode signals, you must think the signals are "If I touch my hat its zone" "If i touch my shoulder its man" and "If I grab my b@lls its a bliltz"

    All of that aside.
    If one half of a football game could allow teams to decode signals, why would you even need to film it?
    You would take one, or even 5 guys working together to watch the signal, chart it, chart the defense played, and then decipher it. Cameras would be unnecessary and in fact, only slow the process.
  14. BrianPat

    BrianPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    This is silly, there's no way the video could be converted to a usable format for decoding signals then reviewed in time to be used at all in the second half. I'm not expert, but I've used Avid editing equipment and worked with video conversions, the Brady to Moss TD pass that broke the record took me 10 minutes alone to edit out and convert and I was using high end equipment. I know that any tape driven camera needs to be streamed to digitial format, which means playing the video to the computer, which can be in fast forward with some equipment. You can't copy video off tape, even DV tape needs to be streamed. Granted I'm assuming they used tapes because everyone said they were tapes. DVD and HD Camcorders, you can just copy the video file because it's already in MPEG format.
  15. KontradictioN

    KontradictioN Do you even lift? PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    27,146
    Likes Received:
    524
    Ratings:
    +1,456 / 26 / -47

    No Jersey Selected

    You guys are forgetting one thing: Belichick ate his Wheaties and got the decoder ring out of it. Of course it's possible for BB to decode tapes at halftime.
  16. nashvillepatsfan

    nashvillepatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    3,213
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

  17. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    It can be done - Clayton reported he uncovered through sources that at least three teams were doing just that in 2006, though none of them was the Patriots. It requires a dedicated staff on site who match up the polaroids to tape that has been downloaded to computer according to John in a matter of seconds. So maybe those teams were not recording from the sidelines using standard video cameras in hiding in plain sight. He said teams who were doing it had the information ready about 12 minutes into the second half. If true I think these are the teams we were punished for because we were caught with tape and they weren't. I think the punishment was heightened to send them a message at our expense because absent a first round draft penalty they are likely still doing it.

    I think the Commissioner believed Bill when he stated we did not use tape in game. Teams who did likely would have no use for the extensive written analysis we then compiled post game and retained. Our use was to map playcalling trends specific to systems and coordinators, information we could tap even when they moved on to another organization. Theirs was to crack codes in game from game to game, to facilitate second half adjustments on offense. Extensive notes would be of no use to them because signals change. Clayton said the "tell" on those teams if you knew who they were was fairly dramatic second half performances when compared to the first half. I would guess a research project would be to look for teams whose defense played well in the first half only to be almost inexplicably ***** slapped late in the third and fourth quarter - and see who they were playing...

    For me one formerly predictable team that had for 2 years been playing almost rope a dope first half's only to pull away late immediately came to mind. Especially given they had a master signal decipherer on staff coaching their OL. But they were coached by a saint who would never do anything illegal, so... I guess that couldn't be. :rolleyes:
  18. sebman2112

    sebman2112 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,535
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    This entire thing is stupid.

    First, I process and edit video almost every day, so I know a few things about the procedures.

    Depending on your equipment, you could process the video rather quickly, and matching the plays up to the defensive signals used wouldn't be all that hard. So, I have no doubt that you could get all the info needed from the video by halftime.

    But, I have MAJOR issues with those who think NE used this video for in-game use, and that they somehow gained an unfair advantage with video.

    1) Teams constantly change their defensive signals. This used to be on more of a game to game basis, but teams now change their signals from half to half, or even quarter to quarter. Also, On offense what seems like the same play call (if you can hear the QB) can actually be an entirely different play the second time around.

    2) Stealing defensive signals IS NOT against the rules. You can steal defensive signals using the naked eye, or even binoculars, and it's not against the rules. Some backup QB's will spend half the game on the sideline trying to figure out the other teams signals, and certain coaches are especially good at figuring out opposing signals, as well. Some ex players have claimed they used to have the other teams signals all figured out by the end of the first quarter, or first half.

    So, I think it's more than possible to get the info needed by halftime, but I also don't think a camera was needed for that, as you can get the same info using other methods. I also think it really doesn't matter since stealing signals isn't against the rules, and the entire issue was completely overblown by the media, and idiot fans who seemingly don't realize anyone in the stadium can see those signals.
  19. castlelong1

    castlelong1 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Key word here is digital.

    Why then were they using tape? A digital recorder can also be erased real quickly as you fight over the camera.

    Have a nice day with your conspiracy theory.:rolleyes:
  20. borg

    borg Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    3,913
    Likes Received:
    69
    Ratings:
    +156 / 11 / -13

    You got me on the conficated TAPE. Regardless, taping 32 defensive signals and flashing to the scoreboard would take (at 15 seconds per signal/flash) is 8 minutes per half of video. I would assume a team would have the technology to transfer video faster than actual play back time.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>