Evidence of other NFL teams stealing signs

[Larry Whigham]

To me, the question that should be asked by every reporter to every head coach around the league is "Do you steal signs?" This is one aspect of the story that has never been investigated the way it should around the league. I think we all know the answer but why can't other coaches go on the record on this issue?

I propose that this is the place where all evidence of other teams stealing signs goes here. If you are a reporter covering the NFL, I suggest you sack up and ask some other coaches to go on the record about this topic.

I'll get things started.

"That type of sign-stealing goes on a ton in the league,'' said one NFL source who was both a former coach and player in the league. "From a coaching standpoint, you know who's signaling in the personnel on the opposing sideline, and then there's another guy making the play calls on the headset. Defenses used to watch the play-caller, and if a guy spoke for a real long time, that was usually a pass, because the calls take longer. A run is always a shorter call. So coaches shield their mouths when they're calling plays now. If you make your calls out in the open, the other team will steal your signals and your tendencies.''

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/don_banks/07/06/cheating.nfl/index.html

 

[Rob0729]

You forgot this one:

Teams have also been chastised for having a second camera in the press box-area video box, with one camera shooting the game action and the other one being trained on the opposing team's signal-givers. On offense, that's why coaches have taken to holding their play-calling charts in front of their mouths when they're sending in the play to the quarterback via the radio headset system.

Banks does talk about the 2006 e-mail being specific for the Patriots, but he does use the word "Teams" in that quote.

 

[maverick4]

I hope the FRAMe website guys post up evidence/info of all the other teams.

For example, the Dolphins getting the Pats line calls through audio mics. Or, the Jets being caught and told to stop taping during a playoff game against the Pats

 

[questionman]

I thought the issue was the taping of other teams signals, not just trying to steal them, right?

 

[Zeke_Mowatt]

How have I never seen that article before throughout all this Spygate horsesh!t? (answer, I'm lazy and don't read enough but still...)

This should be tattooed on the face of every douchenozzle at ESPN with permanent ink and 5 needle packs.

Thank you very much Whigam, I enjoyed reading that, and have forwarded it to every hatriot in my address book.

 

[JoeSixPat]

While we're on the topic - here's a quote from the story decrying the allegation that a player who regained his health while on IR actually practiced.

IR ISSUE BIGGER THAN SPYGATE?

Posted by Mike Florio on May 23, 2008, 11:53 a.m.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/23/ir-issue-bigger-than-spygate/

With the lidless red eye of the media now focusing on ten-day-old evidence of then-fresh cheating allegations regarding the Patriots, ... we’ve gotten some feedback on the situation, unsolicited, from someone not in the media. Instead, a high-level exec with a team other than the Patriots has shared some opinions about the differences between the videotaping of defensive coaching signals...

“I honestly feel like the IR issue is a way bigger issue than taping signals. I always felt that was overblown because everyone was doing it in some way (i.e. with a scout in the press box, etc).

Of course the admission from the "source" that "everyone's doing it" is disregarded and disbelieved while everyone eagerly accepts his take on the IR issue

If anyone's looking for the clincher, ask yourself - have you ever seen coaches covering their mouths calling plays in during games OTHER THAN AGAINST THE PATRIOTS?

Of course the answer is Yes - every team attempts to cover their playcalling becasuse they know that every team has a camera in the press box... even - gasp - teams OTHER than the Patriots.

If "everyone isn't doing it" there'd be no need for them to cover themselves.

 

[Zeke_Mowatt]

First of all, questionman is right that the main issue is videotaping signals, not just stealing them.

Also, I'm not sure how many times this has to be explained. Coaches cover their mouths because of the plethora of network cameras that focus on them so often. You can't just say "coaches cover their mouths, which means other teams are taping." No, actually coaches don't want other people to just be able to Tivo the game and figure out their signals from that.

There was this whole big deal late this past season where one of the cameras caught the other side of Mike Holmgren's cheat sheet - the one used to cover his mouth. He got really pissed and told them not to do that. So just because coaches cover their mouths doesn't mean the opposition is taping them.

Your first point is correct...but did you actually read the article where they talk about "teams" not just the Patriots videotaping signals from the sidelines? They mention the pats vs. packers issue, but in this pre-spygate article before the witch hunt started, the memo and the discussion was about "teams" not just a team. JoeSixPat's point is valid, he just framed it in a way that allowed you to cast aspersions on it.

 

[BelichickFan]

I always felt that was overblown because everyone was doing it in some way (i.e. with a scout in the press box, etc).

Yeah, where the hell was that the past 8 months. Bullsh!t. The Patriots go through all that crap and NOW it's overblown. Bull.

 

[JoeSixPat]

First of all, questionman is right that the main issue is videotaping signals, not just stealing them.

Also, I'm not sure how many times this has to be explained. Coaches cover their mouths because of the plethora of network cameras that focus on them so often. You can't just say "coaches cover their mouths, which means other teams are taping." No, actually coaches don't want other people to just be able to Tivo the game and figure out their signals from that.

There was this whole big deal late this past season where one of the cameras caught the other side of Mike Holmgren's cheat sheet - the one used to cover his mouth. He got really pissed and told them not to do that. So just because coaches cover their mouths doesn't mean the opposition is taping them.

Which do you think they are more concerned about - a passing network camera, or the admission of the "high level exec" that there's widespread videotaping from the pressbox. The Network might show about 60 seconds a game of signals being called. The videotaping from the pressbox will show the ENTIRE game.

And you don't need to remind me or most fans here that the issue is taping - not just stealing - signals. When we say "everyone does it" we mean videotaping - not stealing signals, which is allowed by the league because - apparently like videotaping signals from the press box - they can't enforce it, and make no effort to determine what is being taped.

I'd find it hard to believe that the "high level exec" failed to recognize that distinction in his remarks either. Here again we have another "high level executive" stating that everyone's doing it (i.e. taping signals - in this case from the press box)

 

[chech1965]

I thought the issue was the taping of other teams signals, not just trying to steal them, right?

The issue is solely the location of the camera.

:horn:

 

[Larry Whigham]

Here's another oldie but a goodie from Phil Simms:

The theory that Spygate is a serious issue was destroyed best from players like former New York Giant Phill Sims, who said, "In the Super Bowl, we knew every play they (opponent was) going to run before the snap and that didn't help us. The bottom line is that you have to execute!"

http://www.bleacherreport.com/artic...Non-Issue-In-Sports-In-Quite-Some-Time-240508

 

[Tucker]

The issue is solely the location of the camera.

:horn:

there was one on the grassy knoll, i swear

 

[Larry Whigham]

Another oldie - Madden says Raiders stole signs too:

Madden, who coached the Oakland Raiders from 1969-79, said stealing signs is nothing new.

"Well, I mean, we all did it, and that was part of it, getting signals," he said. "Every coach in the world is always pushing to get a competitive advantage, that's always been happening.

"And if they are giving away cues, or clues, or whatever tendencies that you could pick up, you take them, and you play against them.

"Part of it is a player giving away a play. Part of it can be the snap count, part of it can be signals that they're signaling in, or you hear the things they yell. That's always been, happening from Day 1 of football."

http://www.boston.com/sports/footba.../09/14/madden_charged_up_over_stealing_signs/

 

[HSanders]

Former Falcon Tim Green matter of factly discloses this little tidbit without any sort of outrage in his book called The Dark Side of the Game P. 290 paperback edition: "When a team plays an opponent two times in one season, and the first contest is at home, this form of spying (stealing signals he means) can be done even more effectively by filming signals from somewhere in the stadium and comparing them against game film to see what play corresponds with what signal."
His book was published in 1996. He doesn't even mention that it wasn't legal though it has been long before then from what I understand.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Former Falcon Tim Green matter of factly discloses this little tidbit without any sort of outrage in his book called The Dark Side of the Game P. 290 paperback edition: "When a team plays an opponent two times in one season, and the first contest is at home, this form of spying (stealing signals he means) can be done even more effectively by filming signals from somewhere in the stadium and comparing them against game film to see what play corresponds with what signal."
His book was published in 1996. He doesn't even mention that it wasn't legal though it has been long before then from what I understand.

Nice find. That needs to go into the Frame data. I believe back in those days they called it gamesmanship and football.

One of the things that tape allowed for that is overlooked in the rush to make an even bigger deal about it's use is how it simply allows for better decifering of trends. If coaches signal in a defense quickly and with authority, it's likely they are wedded to a rote down and distance system of calls. If it is taking time or there is confusion, it's more likely they are making gut calls and guessing and are therefore less predictable in their approach.

Belichick was always more interested in the thought process of/behind the men signaling in the defense than the signals themselves.

 

[PatriotsReign]

First of all, questionman is right that the main issue is videotaping signals, not just stealing them.

Also, I'm not sure how many times this has to be explained. Coaches cover their mouths because of the plethora of network cameras that focus on them so often. You can't just say "coaches cover their mouths, which means other teams are taping." No, actually coaches don't want other people to just be able to Tivo the game and figure out their signals from that.

There was this whole big deal late this past season where one of the cameras caught the other side of Mike Holmgren's cheat sheet - the one used to cover his mouth. He got really pissed and told them not to do that. So just because coaches cover their mouths doesn't mean the opposition is taping them.

Actually, the more obvious assumption here would be that coaches don't cover their mouths to avoid network cameras that may focus on them once or twice a game. These coaches are far more concerned with the other team's efforts to steal their signals.

It would be stupid and foolish to assume they are more concerned with the network cameras filming them

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Here's another oldie but a goodie from Phil Simms:

The theory that Spygate is a serious issue was destroyed best from players like former New York Giant Phill Sims, who said, "In the Super Bowl, we knew every play they (opponent was) going to run before the snap and that didn't help us. The bottom line is that you have to execute!"quote]

I don't think that it was the Super Bowl he was referring to ( and hope not) because Simms went 22/25 in his only Super Bowl. Hostetler was the QB in the Giant's second SB....

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I hope the FRAMe website guys post up evidence/info of all the other teams.

For example, the Dolphins getting the Pats line calls through audio mics. Or, the Jets being caught and told to stop taping during a playoff game against the Pats

Maverick, that info is on the site (Dolphins AND Jets.) Also Jimmy Johnson coming right out and saying "sure we did it, everybody does it."

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Former Falcon Tim Green matter of factly discloses this little tidbit without any sort of outrage in his book called The Dark Side of the Game P. 290 paperback edition: "When a team plays an opponent two times in one season, and the first contest is at home, this form of spying (stealing signals he means) can be done even more effectively by filming signals from somewhere in the stadium and comparing them against game film to see what play corresponds with what signal."
His book was published in 1996. He doesn't even mention that it wasn't legal though it has been long before then from what I understand.

HSanders, that's a keeper - nice one!

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Former Falcon Tim Green matter of factly discloses this little tidbit without any sort of outrage in his book called The Dark Side of the Game P. 290 paperback edition: "When a team plays an opponent two times in one season, and the first contest is at home, this form of spying (stealing signals he means) can be done even more effectively by filming signals from somewhere in the stadium and comparing them against game film to see what play corresponds with what signal."
His book was published in 1996. He doesn't even mention that it wasn't legal though it has been long before then from what I understand.

HSanders, help me out with something - there should be a publisher mentioned somewhere in the edition you have (as in "Harcourt Brace" or whatever.) Also, a city of publication. It's helpful for the source quote especially for a book where you want to use a page number (it specifies the edition.) Also, help me out with double-checking the date - Wiki says it came out in 1997.