Hardboiled
Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2006
- Messages
- 1,094
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Jets Fined 100K for tripping incident....
Section 3 FRAME
‘That’s Football’
"Reaction around the league office was, 'That's football' "
— AFC Spokesman Steve Alic, December 2006
In response to stories of improper use of videotape by the Miami Dolphins
The staggering penalty imposed on the Patriots created the perception that this was a rare and unusual occurrence, which called for a rare and unusual consequence. As we've all learned from folks like Jimmy Johnson, it wasn't.
— CBS Sportsline’s Mike Freeman, March 2008
Too often, competitive violations have gone unpunished because conclusive proof of the violation was lacking. I believe we should reconsider the standard of proof to be applied in such cases, and make it easier for a competitive violation to be established.
— NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, March 2008 memo to NFL competition committee, as reported in The Washington Post.
Is the “Cameragate” story a one-time-only example of cheating by one hypercompetitive pro football coach? Or were the actions of Bill Belichick, on the part of the New England Patriots, part of a continuum of off-field gamesmanship, engaged in frequently by NFL head coaches?
“Cameragate” coverage so often lacks context that one could easily conclude the former: that the coach of the Patriots, in flagrant violation of a clearly-worded league rule and a subsequent memo, simply banked on never getting caught, or arrogantly flaunted his own aberrant behavior, in the belief that he was above prosecution.
In the FRAMe fact-sheet ‘ “Offseason Memo” Was in 2006, Not 2007,’ we demonstrate that at least two teams from the Patriots’ own division skirted the edges of the league memo between its 2006 release, and the Patriots’ 2007 infraction. One of those two teams was the New York Jets, the very organization that alerted the league to the Patriots videotaping practices. Tellingly, Commissioner Roger Goodell, in declining action against the Jets’ own 2006 actions, makes the point that the Patriots did not come forward with a complaint against the Jets.
But gamesmanship – or cheating, if one prefers – in the NFL did not begin in 2007, with the “Cameragate” scandal, nor with the Dolphins’ and Jets’ own videotape mis-steps of 2006, nor with the League’s 2006 offseason memo, nor with the thus-far uncorroborated complaint that the Patriots taped the Rams’ walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.
Spying in the NFL was a well-established art by the time one Lee Grosscup wrote an August 1967 Sport magazine article, “Spying in Pro Football.” Grosscup – himself a former quarterback (and spy) – writes:
In addition to interrogating former players, other football espionage techniques include:
Watching practices. . . (Usually requires binoculars, sometimes a love of tree climbing.)
Stealing notebooks. . . (One AFL coach, whose autobiography will no doubt be called "The Collector," has allegedly collected a notebook from every other team in the. league.)
Bugging. . . Particularly scouting phones, locker rooms, training rooms and meeting rooms. (Most effective, though plantee had best not be caught with his insurance lapsed.)
Filming practices. . . Requires a super spy plus special equipment.
Spy-messenger . . . On game days this spy is usually disguised as a writer or photographer who snoops on one team and relays information to his employer. (Need a guy who looks like a writer or photographer; that is, disheveled.)
Among the incidents Grosscup disclosed, over 40 years ago, were these:
• When Raiders owner Al Davis suspected spies were watching his practices, he ran 12-man formations to confuse the enemy;
• Giants coach Al Sherman would often send a staff member to disperse crowds at the Lexington Avenue subway stop overlooking Yankee stadium, wary of spies among them;
• Grosscup relates numerous incidents of what the CIA would call “HumInt” – or human intelligence. They range from casual in-game inquiries of opposing team doctors about injuries, to the Rams’ rumored two-and-a-half-hour debriefing of a recently released Falcons player, focusing on the Falcons’ game-plan against the Rams that week;
• “Papa Bear” George Halas of Chicago went to court to try to stop George Allen from becoming the head coach of the Rams. Grosscup recounts one columnist’s judgment of his motivation: “Halas didn’t want to lose his ‘super spy.’”
• The Rams themselves employed a detective, whose purpose was to conduct counterespionage against other teams’ spies;
• When the Rams played the Bears at Wrigley Field, former linebacker Les Richter use to sweep the dressing rooms for bugs.
• A scout for the Bears relates a story of a game at the LA Coliseum. He relates what he sees from the press box to the field: “they were trapping Ed Sprinkle real bad…” The trouble is, he is using the phones in the Coliseum press box. He hears tapping noises on the phone, and discontinues the call. “By the time I got to the field they had trapped Sprinkle five more times and scored on the damn play…. [but afterwards] They didn’t hurt us with the trap anymore because I showed Halas what they were doing….”
• “The Chiefs are the Bears of the AFL,” Davis says. “Lamar Hunt has come out publicly and admitted it…. he’s admitted budgeting for espionage.”
• Former Kansas City executive Don Klosterman says of the Chiefs: “Kansas City spies, we caught ‘em last year…. They had this guy who was supposedly a roving photographer, but he was really a spy… Every time one of our coaches would say something important to one of our players, this guy would… relay the information…. we’ve got pictures of it.”
• Grosscup asks what happened, and Klosterman replies, “We registered a complaint….Kansas City got fined for it. That was their second offense with us. We caught ‘em during preseason taking pictures of our practices with a Polaroid.”
• Many other incidents, involving many other teams, are documented. The Raiders’ Davis counsels, however, “You’ll never get them confirmed because everybody denies it… they all say ‘we just don’t do those things.’ But you can take it from me, they do.”
Although the Grosscup article dates from 1967, surprisingly contemporary references to “modern” technology appear throughout, especially as regards filming and photographing of opposing teams. Disciplinary measures such as fines are also mentioned, and teams are referred to as being “caught” at spying. It isn’t that spying was once legal, and now is not; it is that spying has always been against the rules, yet has always been practiced, and, when brought forward, has historically been lightly punished.
One virtually indispensable coda at the end of a segment or article on “Cameragate” seems to be “what the Patriots did was different.” The trouble is that none of the criteria hold up: that the Patriots snuck around and did off-field “white collar” stuff (this has been in the league for decades); that the Patriots were flouting a recently released memo; that the Patriots used this tricky modern technology. All of those things are duplicated in other such incidents over the same year that the Patriots did them.
Even the behavior pundits like to call “flouting the Commissioner’s memo” is being repeated as we speak. Sports Illustrated’s Peter King reports possession of a January 31, 2007 memo from the league, reminding teams that tampering will not be tolerated in the 2008 offseason. King quotes the memo as reading in part,
"You are specifically reminded that any contact -- direct or indirect -- by one club with players under contract to another club, about potential future employment, is not permitted. Such contacts could potentially interfere with the employer-employee relationship of the second club. Further, any public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club's player to the player's agent or representative, or to the news media, is a violation of the Anti-Tampering Policy.
Yet how often did we turn on a sports network, or open a sports page this February, and read about a team saying or hinting they would make a run at one or another free agent? Now that there is a memo out, is this the sort of behavior that “now” rises to the level of Belichickian monstrosity?
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has admitted that a great number of unfair competitive practices are rampant in the league, and he appears bent on cleaning up those practices. His anti-tampering memo, as King mentions, is one signal of this. His more recent appeal for greater power to bring league penalties with a lower standard of proof, is another.
Ask the tough question: What, exactly, is different and unprecedented about “Cameragate”? Would we care, were this not a team with three fairly recent super bowl wins, and a fourth, more recent, super bowl appearance?
Were the team in question the Houston Texans, would there even be a story?
Commissioner Goodell seems intent on ferreting out a league culture that’s survived at least since the 1960s, and he started in New England. Senator Arlen Specter seems to believe the story begins and ends in New England, and is attempting to bring the story into the halls of congress.
But from the looks of the historic record, there is no reason to believe that the staff of any given team – even Specter’s beloved Eagles – will emerge unscathed.
If Steve Alic’s 2006 quote, “That’s Football,” will no longer suffice as our collective reaction to gamesmanship among the coaching fraternity, it can no longer suffice for the whole league, not just one successful franchise. It appears that Commissioner Goodell is seeking to ensure exactly that.
Section 3 FRAME
‘That’s Football’
"Reaction around the league office was, 'That's football' "
— AFC Spokesman Steve Alic, December 2006
In response to stories of improper use of videotape by the Miami Dolphins
The staggering penalty imposed on the Patriots created the perception that this was a rare and unusual occurrence, which called for a rare and unusual consequence. As we've all learned from folks like Jimmy Johnson, it wasn't.
— CBS Sportsline’s Mike Freeman, March 2008
Too often, competitive violations have gone unpunished because conclusive proof of the violation was lacking. I believe we should reconsider the standard of proof to be applied in such cases, and make it easier for a competitive violation to be established.
— NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, March 2008 memo to NFL competition committee, as reported in The Washington Post.
Is the “Cameragate” story a one-time-only example of cheating by one hypercompetitive pro football coach? Or were the actions of Bill Belichick, on the part of the New England Patriots, part of a continuum of off-field gamesmanship, engaged in frequently by NFL head coaches?
“Cameragate” coverage so often lacks context that one could easily conclude the former: that the coach of the Patriots, in flagrant violation of a clearly-worded league rule and a subsequent memo, simply banked on never getting caught, or arrogantly flaunted his own aberrant behavior, in the belief that he was above prosecution.
In the FRAMe fact-sheet ‘ “Offseason Memo” Was in 2006, Not 2007,’ we demonstrate that at least two teams from the Patriots’ own division skirted the edges of the league memo between its 2006 release, and the Patriots’ 2007 infraction. One of those two teams was the New York Jets, the very organization that alerted the league to the Patriots videotaping practices. Tellingly, Commissioner Roger Goodell, in declining action against the Jets’ own 2006 actions, makes the point that the Patriots did not come forward with a complaint against the Jets.
But gamesmanship – or cheating, if one prefers – in the NFL did not begin in 2007, with the “Cameragate” scandal, nor with the Dolphins’ and Jets’ own videotape mis-steps of 2006, nor with the League’s 2006 offseason memo, nor with the thus-far uncorroborated complaint that the Patriots taped the Rams’ walk-through prior to Super Bowl XXXVI.
Spying in the NFL was a well-established art by the time one Lee Grosscup wrote an August 1967 Sport magazine article, “Spying in Pro Football.” Grosscup – himself a former quarterback (and spy) – writes:
In addition to interrogating former players, other football espionage techniques include:
Watching practices. . . (Usually requires binoculars, sometimes a love of tree climbing.)
Stealing notebooks. . . (One AFL coach, whose autobiography will no doubt be called "The Collector," has allegedly collected a notebook from every other team in the. league.)
Bugging. . . Particularly scouting phones, locker rooms, training rooms and meeting rooms. (Most effective, though plantee had best not be caught with his insurance lapsed.)
Filming practices. . . Requires a super spy plus special equipment.
Spy-messenger . . . On game days this spy is usually disguised as a writer or photographer who snoops on one team and relays information to his employer. (Need a guy who looks like a writer or photographer; that is, disheveled.)
Among the incidents Grosscup disclosed, over 40 years ago, were these:
• When Raiders owner Al Davis suspected spies were watching his practices, he ran 12-man formations to confuse the enemy;
• Giants coach Al Sherman would often send a staff member to disperse crowds at the Lexington Avenue subway stop overlooking Yankee stadium, wary of spies among them;
• Grosscup relates numerous incidents of what the CIA would call “HumInt” – or human intelligence. They range from casual in-game inquiries of opposing team doctors about injuries, to the Rams’ rumored two-and-a-half-hour debriefing of a recently released Falcons player, focusing on the Falcons’ game-plan against the Rams that week;
• “Papa Bear” George Halas of Chicago went to court to try to stop George Allen from becoming the head coach of the Rams. Grosscup recounts one columnist’s judgment of his motivation: “Halas didn’t want to lose his ‘super spy.’”
• The Rams themselves employed a detective, whose purpose was to conduct counterespionage against other teams’ spies;
• When the Rams played the Bears at Wrigley Field, former linebacker Les Richter use to sweep the dressing rooms for bugs.
• A scout for the Bears relates a story of a game at the LA Coliseum. He relates what he sees from the press box to the field: “they were trapping Ed Sprinkle real bad…” The trouble is, he is using the phones in the Coliseum press box. He hears tapping noises on the phone, and discontinues the call. “By the time I got to the field they had trapped Sprinkle five more times and scored on the damn play…. [but afterwards] They didn’t hurt us with the trap anymore because I showed Halas what they were doing….”
• “The Chiefs are the Bears of the AFL,” Davis says. “Lamar Hunt has come out publicly and admitted it…. he’s admitted budgeting for espionage.”
• Former Kansas City executive Don Klosterman says of the Chiefs: “Kansas City spies, we caught ‘em last year…. They had this guy who was supposedly a roving photographer, but he was really a spy… Every time one of our coaches would say something important to one of our players, this guy would… relay the information…. we’ve got pictures of it.”
• Grosscup asks what happened, and Klosterman replies, “We registered a complaint….Kansas City got fined for it. That was their second offense with us. We caught ‘em during preseason taking pictures of our practices with a Polaroid.”
• Many other incidents, involving many other teams, are documented. The Raiders’ Davis counsels, however, “You’ll never get them confirmed because everybody denies it… they all say ‘we just don’t do those things.’ But you can take it from me, they do.”
Although the Grosscup article dates from 1967, surprisingly contemporary references to “modern” technology appear throughout, especially as regards filming and photographing of opposing teams. Disciplinary measures such as fines are also mentioned, and teams are referred to as being “caught” at spying. It isn’t that spying was once legal, and now is not; it is that spying has always been against the rules, yet has always been practiced, and, when brought forward, has historically been lightly punished.
One virtually indispensable coda at the end of a segment or article on “Cameragate” seems to be “what the Patriots did was different.” The trouble is that none of the criteria hold up: that the Patriots snuck around and did off-field “white collar” stuff (this has been in the league for decades); that the Patriots were flouting a recently released memo; that the Patriots used this tricky modern technology. All of those things are duplicated in other such incidents over the same year that the Patriots did them.
Even the behavior pundits like to call “flouting the Commissioner’s memo” is being repeated as we speak. Sports Illustrated’s Peter King reports possession of a January 31, 2007 memo from the league, reminding teams that tampering will not be tolerated in the 2008 offseason. King quotes the memo as reading in part,
"You are specifically reminded that any contact -- direct or indirect -- by one club with players under contract to another club, about potential future employment, is not permitted. Such contacts could potentially interfere with the employer-employee relationship of the second club. Further, any public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club's player to the player's agent or representative, or to the news media, is a violation of the Anti-Tampering Policy.
Yet how often did we turn on a sports network, or open a sports page this February, and read about a team saying or hinting they would make a run at one or another free agent? Now that there is a memo out, is this the sort of behavior that “now” rises to the level of Belichickian monstrosity?
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has admitted that a great number of unfair competitive practices are rampant in the league, and he appears bent on cleaning up those practices. His anti-tampering memo, as King mentions, is one signal of this. His more recent appeal for greater power to bring league penalties with a lower standard of proof, is another.
Ask the tough question: What, exactly, is different and unprecedented about “Cameragate”? Would we care, were this not a team with three fairly recent super bowl wins, and a fourth, more recent, super bowl appearance?
Were the team in question the Houston Texans, would there even be a story?
Commissioner Goodell seems intent on ferreting out a league culture that’s survived at least since the 1960s, and he started in New England. Senator Arlen Specter seems to believe the story begins and ends in New England, and is attempting to bring the story into the halls of congress.
But from the looks of the historic record, there is no reason to believe that the staff of any given team – even Specter’s beloved Eagles – will emerge unscathed.
If Steve Alic’s 2006 quote, “That’s Football,” will no longer suffice as our collective reaction to gamesmanship among the coaching fraternity, it can no longer suffice for the whole league, not just one successful franchise. It appears that Commissioner Goodell is seeking to ensure exactly that.
