Did BB Turn Over To Goodell Video Of The Pats Being Taped

[BradyToMoss]

Not sure, did this Rams spy turn over the stuff he taped before SB36

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE4DB153DF931A35751C0A9649C8B63

 

[mgm79]

Why would he try?? What the camerman is filming isn't the issue. It's where the videotaping is being done from.

Mercy.

So do you think if the Jets complained that the Patriots had a cameraman in an illegal spot instead of turning over the confiscated tape and making it about videotaping signals the punishment would still be the same?

 

[Hardboiled]

So do you think if the Jets complained that the Patriots had a cameraman in an illegal spot instead of turning over the confiscated tape and making it about videotaping signals the punishment would still be the same?

Firstly, a NFL employee took the tape.

Secondly, I still don't understand your original comment. You are aware the stealing signals isn't against any rule, aren't you?

Actually, videotaping to steal signals isn't against the rules. I see from some of your other posts, you disagree.

If you read Anderson's memo, it is taking about all videotaping in the mentioned areas. It doesn't matter what it is for. "including but not limited to..." As people have commented here, the violation is the same as videotaping the cheerleaders from the sideline.

BB hung his hat on the constitution and by-laws interpreting in game use.
Anderson's memo doesn't matter as it's in-game use.

But significantly your question is a question that the media and nation haven't been asked.

I don't think it would have been as big a deal if framed in that fashion.
But it wasn't. BB was pretty much silent and that lead to the cheating hysteria in the media and sports fandom.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Just to add another bit of useless speculation, I have thought since day one that BB turned over a tape from his Giants and/or Jets days that were made when Parcells was HC.

 

[Hardboiled]

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition...

Go away or I will taunt you a second time

 

[DaBruinz]

How would he have gotten video of opposing teams taping him??????????

Very easily. All he'd have had to do was have his guy doing the taping film a few seconds of the opposing team's camera man.

 

[DaBruinz]

This is the most ridiculous thing to prove. I think people are grasping at straws

Then you are as ignorant as the mediots out there and truly don't understand what the whole camera issue is about.

The whole POINT is that teams are not supposed to have cameras on the sidelines. REGARDLESS of what they are taping. Teams may ONLY have cameras in places DESIGNATED by the NFL and that meet the NFL's requirements (enclosed space).

 

[DaBruinz]

So do you think if the Jets complained that the Patriots had a cameraman in an illegal spot instead of turning over the confiscated tape and making it about videotaping signals the punishment would still be the same?

Note to MGM, it was NEVER about the videotaping of signals from the Jets standpoint. It was the fact that the Pats had a cameraman on the sidelines. The MEDIOTS are the ones who turned it into the whole signal stealing crap. And YES, the punishment would have been the same because of the letter Goodell has sent out in September 2006.

 

[nittanylions52]

Good idea guys. Obviously, if you can find a guy with a video camera then you've automatically proven that 1) he's an employee of the other team, 2) he's actually filming something that would consitute cheating or stealing signals, etc.

For those that are arguing "it doesn't matter if they steal signals or not, they could be taping the cheerleaders and they'd still be breaking the rule," if the NE video had shown only cheerleaders on it, would NE have been fined that much money and had a draft pick taken away? The sign stealing matters, and unless you can prove it one way or another then maybe a small fine would be handed the team if anything.

 

[DaBruinz]

Good idea guys. Obviously, if you can find a guy with a video camera then you've automatically proven that 1) he's an employee of the other team, 2) he's actually filming something that would consitute cheating or stealing signals, etc.

For those that are arguing "it doesn't matter if they steal signals or not, they could be taping the cheerleaders and they'd still be breaking the rule," if the NE video had shown only cheerleaders on it, would NE have been fined that much money and had a draft pick taken away? The sign stealing matters, and unless you can prove it one way or another then maybe a small fine would be handed the team if anything.

WOW.. You've not listened to a damn thing anyone has said, have you?

1) There is no video playing equipment allowed in the locker-rooms during games. That includes DVD players and such by the players. The NFL actually has its security in there to check and verify this.

2) There isn't enough time (15 minutes) to break down the tape/video during half-time for it to be a difference.

3) Any coach who doesn't change his signals from one time to the next is stupid. And that is out of the mouth of Bill Parcells. Not to mention Jimmy Johnson, Dan Reeves, and Mike Shanahan. Hell, Dan Rooney, your own OWNER, says its a NON-ISSUE.

 

[mgm79]

Note to MGM, it was NEVER about the videotaping of signals from the Jets standpoint. It was the fact that the Pats had a cameraman on the sidelines. The MEDIOTS are the ones who turned it into the whole signal stealing crap. And YES, the punishment would have been the same because of the letter Goodell has sent out in September 2006.

I agree this is what the rules state, but its up to the Commish to determine the punishment, its not all black and white. For example I don't think theres a chance in hell a team will lose a first round draft pick and face 500k+ in fines for having a cameraman filming game footage on the sidelines. I seem to remember the Jets admitted to filming from the endzones during games and the NFL didn't even investigate it let alone punish them.

 

[Hardboiled]

I agree this is what the rules state, but its up to the Commish to determine the punishment, its not all black and white. For example I don't think theres a chance in hell a team will lose a first round draft pick and face 500k+ in fines for having a cameraman filming game footage on the sidelines. I seem to remember the Jets admitted to filming from the endzones during games and the NFL didn't even investigate it let alone punish them.

You've come to the same question as other people. Why such a big fine over the placement of the camera? Ask yourself the question again, If stealing signs is legal, (signs are being displayed out in the open) why is videotaping them a leap into cheating?

As far as the Jets go. You should ask yourself about that in the context of Spygate. Here is the line on that:

"It is not uncommon for visiting team video crews to request permission to shoot coaching video from both upper end zone positions," spokesman Greg Aiello wrote in an email. "Home clubs must provide visiting clubs with equal vantage points for the taping of games. Teams typically shoot coaching video from one upper 50-yard line location and one upper end zone location, but there are no restrictions on shooting from both upper end zone positions as long as the opportunity is provided to both teams. No permission is needed from the league office."

I thought this was an ignored twist when it came out. Notice the word "typically." I've wondered in another thread what is ok and untypical.

So there seems to be exceptions to the many "clear" rules we've had repeated to us over and over. Which also begs a question along the lines of yours. If teams can tape from open areas, it seems to have been ok for the Jet's employee to have taped our signal callers as long as the Patriots had given the Jets (or any other team) permission to tape.

Also the Jets employee was removed from the mezzanine level.

 

[Joker]

BB denied the Jets were ever given permission, though...which means Ratgina lied...yet Goodell did nothing.

double standard

 

[Hardboiled]

BB denied the Jets were ever given permission, though...which means Ratgina lied...yet Goodell did nothing.

double standard

Major inconsistancy in light of the Patriots penalty.

What if the Patriots did give permission. Why couldn't the Jet's employee tape Dean Pees/Pepper Johnson/etc?
I don't see why they couldn't.

Also note: Aiello's explanation seems to trump Anderson's memo.

So couldn't the Patriots tape from the sideline if they gave the Jets (or any other visiting team) permission to likewise.

"Home clubs must provide visiting clubs with equal vantage points for the taping of games."

I would love someone ask Peter King (or even Goodell) to explain for us when is it alright for teams to tape. I doubt they could explain it. Instead we get "spying" "cheating" and "illegal"