Opinion: Pats are cleared

[primetime]

If filming the opposing team's coaches yielded NO meaningful competitive advantage, the WHY did Belichick do it? Why risk being punished by the league and tarnishing the awesome reputation he had built if using the camera gave him no advantage? Why?

I don't want to pile-on because I know this whole thing has nothing to do with Patriots fans and you guys are hurt more by this than anyone else. But I'm just seeing so many people acting like there's no advantage to using the camera and that makes me wonder why Belichick was doing it in the first place.

Because Belichick is OCD and has to gobble up every bit of advance scouting he can, regardless of whether it gives any sort of advantage? It's also been done since the beginning of time, apparently, and Jimmy Johnson was doing it with the Chiefs 18 years ago (and says there was little advantage then).

 

[kolbitr]

I have intentionally not posted on this forum this week, and I'm sure you'll all tell me to continue to follow that trend in the future, but I've seen this kind of rationalizing so many times I just have to ask the question.

If filming the opposing team's coaches yielded NO meaningful competitive advantage, the WHY did Belichick do it? Why risk being punished by the league and tarnishing the awesome reputation he had built if using the camera gave him no advantage? Why?

I don't want to pile-on because I know this whole thing has nothing to do with Patriots fans and you guys are hurt more by this than anyone else. But I'm just seeing so many people acting like there's no advantage to using the camera and that makes me wonder why Belichick was doing it in the first place.

Uhh...this is a rather simplistic question. Few people are saying that there was no possible benefit. BB likes to look at film, he likes to have every possible knowledge of a team's tendencies...he wants every scrap of information so that he can dissect it for possible benefit!

People are reacting, DagoTom, to the notion that what may have amounted to a small benefit in knowing tendencies over time led to an overwhelming benefit that was unavailable to the rest of the league, since no other coaches ever look at film, never look at coaches, never sift through every scrap of information to give them an edge, right?

That is offensive, and stupid, and ridicuous.

 

[Slagathor]

I have intentionally not posted on this forum this week, and I'm sure you'll all tell me to continue to follow that trend in the future, but I've seen this kind of rationalizing so many times I just have to ask the question.

If filming the opposing team's coaches yielded NO meaningful competitive advantage, the WHY did Belichick do it? Why risk being punished by the league and tarnishing the awesome reputation he had built if using the camera gave him no advantage? Why?

I don't want to pile-on because I know this whole thing has nothing to do with Patriots fans and you guys are hurt more by this than anyone else. But I'm just seeing so many people acting like there's no advantage to using the camera and that makes me wonder why Belichick was doing it in the first place.

I think another perceived advantage is that if the opposition sees/knows you are trying to steal signals, they will go through great lengths and efforts to prevent it. This might take valuable time away from the usual X's and O's and throw the opponent off a bit.

 

[Pedrorocks458]

I think another perceived advantage is that if the opposition sees/knows you are trying to steal signals, they will go through great lengths and efforts to prevent it. This might take valuable time away from the usual X's and O's and throw the opponent off a bit.

How many signalers do the Pats use?

 

[Slagathor]

How many signalers do the Pats use?

That I don't know. I would assume quite a few.

 

[richpats]

People are going to look at the video and call it a smoking gun HOWEVER unless some logistics are explained behind in-game taping then the lynch mob is just wasting their time.

 

[DagoTom]

Uhh...this is a rather simplistic question. Few people are saying that there was no possible benefit. BB likes to look at film, he likes to have every possible knowledge of a team's tendencies...he wants every scrap of information so that he can dissect it for possible benefit!

People are reacting, DagoTom, to the notion that what may have amounted to a small benefit in knowing tendencies over time led to an overwhelming benefit that was unavailable to the rest of the league, since no other coaches ever look at film, never look at coaches, never sift through every scrap of information to give them an edge, right?

That is offensive, and stupid, and ridicuous.

Well, if I believed that no other team had ever won a football game by knowing the opposing coach's tendencies and/or signals this would probably be more of a big deal to me. Hell, look at the Buccaneers SB win against the Raiders. If anyone thinks Gruden didn't have the Raiders defensive playbook sitting on a desk in his office then people truly do wear blinders.

But here's the thing. If the Chargers beat the Patriots tonight, I want to feel like the Chargers beat an outstanding football team. If the Chargers lose to the Patriots I want to feel like they lost to an outstanding football team.

What Belichick has done is throw it all into question. You've already seen it on other boards with other teams. People are going back and questioning the results of games that didn't even involve the Patriots. "Wow, when we played the Chargers last year they sure seemed to have our defense figured out. We never got pressure and they always seemed to know where to go with the ball..." We all know a game, a season, a championship can hinge on ONE play. Who would understand this more than Patriots fans? How many times have you seen an entire season boil down to a single snap?

Personally, I don't question the Patriots' dynasty, but I have no choice but to wonder how much of an impact this may have had in a handful of games and situations. A few (not all) Patriots fans and even a few people in the media don't seem to understand WHY this is a big deal.

Coaches don't really have TIME to put their peepers on the opposing sidelines and write a book on the opposing team's signals. They are too busy focusing on their own team and getting people in and out of packages, reviewing film as it's sent down, analyzing in-game situations, etc. to be writing a book on the other team's signals. And that's how it should be. If, in the course of all that, a coach can visually snatch a signal or two and remember it, then more power to him, and the other guys should be more careful.

But when a coach is using a camera to essentially build a library of every defensive signal that is used in a game to be reviewed at half-time or the next time the teams play that's different. That's not gamesmanship. There's no skill involved in that. And that's why it's illegal. And for people to say "oh, there's no REAL advantage to it," or "this thing is being so overblown, you can read opposing signals from across the field anyway..."

C'mon now. Be a fan, but don't be naive. Belichik's an extremely intelligent man. If he hadn't seen a tangible benefit from doing it in the past, he would've stopped doing it when the league specifically said to stop doing it in August.

 

[primetime]

C'mon now. Be a fan, but don't be naive. Belichik's an extremely intelligent man. If he hadn't seen a tangible benefit from doing it in the past, he would've stopped doing it when the league specifically said to stop doing it in August.

But he's also OCD about things. Strategizing is clearly one of them. Belichick's a strange person and some of the things he does may defy normal logic. Call that genius or intelligence, if you must; call it arrogance or obsession, too. They all fit.

 

[DagoTom]

I think another perceived advantage is that if the opposition sees/knows you are trying to steal signals, they will go through great lengths and efforts to prevent it. This might take valuable time away from the usual X's and O's and throw the opponent off a bit.

And wouldn't be easier to get that stuff figured out for next time if you, you know, had a camera documenting everything?

 

[dtbrks]

And wouldn't be easier to get that stuff figured out for next time if you, you know, had a camera documenting everything?

Only if your opponent was stupid enough to NOT change plays and calls. Most teams change their plays and calls each week

 

[DagoTom]

But he's also OCD about things. Strategizing is clearly one of them. Belichick's a strange person and some of the things he does may defy normal logic. Call that genius or intelligence, if you must; call it arrogance or obsession, too. They all fit.

You know what--I'm honest enough to admit maybe that's exactly what we're seeing here. But I also tend to think people do things for reasons. Sometimes those reasons fall under the category of simple paranoia. Hell, back in the day Sid Gillman (I think it was Sid) actually stopped a practice because there was a helicopter in the area and he was convinced Al Davis was spying on the practice.

I don't claim to KNOW what was going through Belichik's mind, but in my own mind I can see how documenting all the opposing team's signals could be used advantageously in the future. I also agree that part of the outrage over this is artificially generated by people who hate the Patriots and/or Belichick. That's inevitable.

I do think the league has a reasonable case, though. I don't think this sort of thing should be allowed, or else make it completely legal and then give radios to the defensive coordinators like they have on offense so that it's all moot. But either way, teams should not be able to win even a single play by knowing the other team's signals.

 

[BadMoFo]

How are we cleared? We are still fined, we are still losing a first round pick ands we are still under investigation. Because Jimmy Johnson thinks nothing bad happened.

 

[DagoTom]

Only if your opponent was stupid enough to NOT change plays and calls. Most teams change their plays and calls each week

You can't change everything every week. The best you can do is have a set of varying signals and cycle through them, but you can't completely change out your signals. If you did, you'd spend all your time re-training your players as to what the signals are. In case you haven't noticed, some of these guys aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer.

 

[dtbrks]

You can't change everything every week. The best you can do is have a set of varying signals and cycle through them, but you can't completely change out your signals. If you did, you'd spend all your time re-training your players as to what the signals are. In case you haven't noticed, some of these guys aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Yes, some aren't that sharp

 

[sieglo]

I think another perceived advantage is that if the opposition sees/knows you are trying to steal signals, they will go through great lengths and efforts to prevent it. This might take valuable time away from the usual X's and O's and throw the opponent off a bit.

On the contrary, it gives your opponent an unparalleled opportunity to **** you over by sending in fake signals.

 

[Hardboiled]

If filming the opposing team's coaches yielded NO meaningful competitive advantage, the WHY did Belichick do it? Why risk being punished by the league and tarnishing the awesome reputation he had built if using the camera gave him no advantage? Why?

... But I'm just seeing so many people acting like there's no advantage to using the camera and that makes me wonder why Belichick was doing it in the first place.

DT, as mentioned before, the possible advantage is for future games. Try taking that Estrella video of MULTIPLE guys giving DIFFERENT signals along with the panning to the down info and then editing that to try to determine what was the signal for that play? You don't even know who was the correct signaler!

Why is this done then? Because with study you could pinpoint calls and their signals. Some coaches have said it's not worth it - not that it's wrong, but that it is too time consuming compared to the results and may lead you conclude wrongly about a signal and call.

BB obviously thinks differently. Remember who he is. He has been quoted talking about a play in a seeminlgy meaningless game between other teams in the past. How does he know little stuff like that? He studys games. He is a type to study everything. That's his style. That's why he was doing it.