Do you think it will ever be common knowledge that taping signals isn't illegal?

[Fixit]

It doesn't really matter. Taping the signals in the manner done by the Patriots is illegal, hence the punishment. It may not be illegal under other circumstances (based on things like location), but all the elements were there to make it against the rules in this case. Everything else is just semantics.

Except when the Jets did it. That was okay, because they got permission.

 

[Pujo]

Except when the Jets did it. That was okay, because they got permission.

Whatever else happened in other cases, all of the elements of a rule infringement were there in the actions the Patriots took. I'm not going to get into an argument about the fairness of the punishment compared to how other teams were treated, but there's absolutely no way to make the argument that the Pats didn't break a rule because simple taping isn't against the rules.

 

[Fixit]

Whatever else happened in other cases, all of the elements of a rule infringement were there in the actions the Patriots took. I'm not going to get into an argument about the fairness of the punishment compared to how other teams were treated, but there's absolutely no way to make the argument that the Pats didn't break a rule because simple taping isn't against the rules.

I agree 100%. But it's not "cheating" and it's not "spying." It is, however, something for the protohumans to latch on to and regurgitate without having to burn any calories actually thinking about it.

 

[BradyManny]

Whatever else happened in other cases, all of the elements of a rule infringement were there in the actions the Patriots took. I'm not going to get into an argument about the fairness of the punishment compared to how other teams were treated, but there's absolutely no way to make the argument that the Pats didn't break a rule because simple taping isn't against the rules.

I don't want to get into this argument AGAIN as its time to put it to bed, but I believe the OP is saying that its commonly thought that taping signals is what got the Pats in trouble. It's not - it's from what vantage point that they taped signals that got them in trouble.

If anything, what the Patriots did was not surreptitious at all, the fact that it's called "SPYgate" is laughable. It should either be called "Bill was being arrogant-gate" or, depending upon how much benefit of the doubt you want to give BB, "Bill really didn't know the rule-gate", but for some reason those haven't caught on....

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Excellent post, man. :rocker:

Coming from someone with whom I've disagreed out here in the past, I appreciate the compliment. Thanks!

 

[Funkbat]

The following link does a good job of dissecting the nfl rules pertaining to video taping.


http://thesportslawprofessor.blogspot.com/2007/09/bill-belichicks-interpretation.html

In summary it says video taping signals is legal and depending on one's interpretation it's the location of the video taping that may make it "illegal".

 

[castlelong1]

No. ten characters

 

[TedyB54]

People will be calling the Patriots "cheaters" until the end of the NFL. It's just a fact. Doesn't mean it's warranted forever, but there will be no end to it.

In a way it's very similar to the stigma that is attached to Peyton Manning. Even though he finally managed to win a SB, he'll still never escape the rep as a "choker" in big games. Given how hard it is to win a championship, every time the Colts fail, he'll be the one that gets blamed.

Fair or not, it's the way the rest of his NFL career will go.

 

[Hardboiled]

In a September 2006 memorandum sent out by NFL Vice President of Football Operations Ray Anderson, though, all teams were told that "videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

Read that as videotaping from those locations is prohibited - regardless or what is being done.

No where is it written that videotaping signals in and of itself is prohibitited.

 

[castlelong1]

i would like to see a link that proves this...

...

Now about about sign stealing
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/magazine/life_of_reilly/news/2002/01/09/life_of_reilly/

 

[Fixit]

Now about about sign stealing
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/magazine/life_of_reilly/news/2002/01/09/life_of_reilly/

Nice quote by Shanny: "Our guy keeps a pair of binoculars on their signal-callers every game. With any luck, we have their defensive signals figured out by halftime. Sometimes, by the end of the first quarter."

Pats are cheaters!

 

[MKats31]

No, they wont admit they are wrong because who are usually wrong at times dont like to admit it

 

[castlelong1]

In a September 2006 memorandum sent out by NFL Vice President of Football Operations Ray Anderson, though, all teams were told that "videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

Can you quote the rule, not the memo? Thanks.

 

[castlelong1]

I'm still wondering why the Dolphins never got fined. I guess I'll be wating forever on this one. I know everyone knows the story, here it is again: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/stor y?id=2696227 Funny how John Clayton said back then that "Teams are always trying to steal signs and signals off other teams. That's just football."

This entire "spygate" story has been overblown with Fish, Estabrook, King, Tomase, etc. continually confusing stealing signals and taping signals and continually regurgitating the same info over and over and presenting it as new "evidence."

Link doesn't work. Played around with the link, but the best I get is a 404. I maybe innocent, but I think ESPN is doing a shredd-a-thon.

 

[JoePats]

I didn't know where to put this so I'll put it here...

To me there are a couple of things that the media (and thus the public) have blatantly missed regarding the entire situation.

1) Most importantly: videotaping signals does not equal stealing them. There is another step that needs to be taken, and there is no evidence that this was taken. Mainly this means studying the tapes in about an 8 minute window at halftime. The tapes Walsh supplied that showed the signals and then multiple angles of the play basically show that the tapes were used for scouting purposes and not sign stealing. Why would they go to the trouble to show multiple angles of the play if all they wanted was the sign and what the play actually was? They wouldn't.

2) Sign stealing is not against the rules. I can't believe people don't mention this more. It's mindboggling.

3) Video-taping itself is not against the rules, just video-taping from the sidelines/open location is.

4) The tapes were not used for sign-stealing during the games they were taken. If a team uses the same signs from one game to another, that's their own problem and stupidity.

That seems to be about it. Anything else you would add?

 

[fgssand]

I didn't know where to put this so I'll put it here...

To me there are a couple of things that the media (and thus the public) have blatantly missed regarding the entire situation.

1) Most importantly: videotaping signals does not equal stealing them. There is another step that needs to be taken, and there is no evidence that this was taken. Mainly this means studying the tapes in about an 8 minute window at halftime. The tapes Walsh supplied that showed the signals and then multiple angles of the play basically show that the tapes were used for scouting purposes and not sign stealing. Why would they go to the trouble to show multiple angles of the play if all they wanted was the sign and what the play actually was? They wouldn't.

2) Sign stealing is not against the rules. I can't believe people don't mention this more. It's mindboggling.

3) Video-taping itself is not against the rules, just video-taping from the sidelines/open location is.

4) The tapes were not used for sign-stealing during the games they were taken. If a team uses the same signs from one game to another, that's their own problem and stupidity.

That seems to be about it. Anything else you would add?

Why do you think logical, common sense will mean anything today??

 

[NEPatriot]

Of course, it has been common because every team has done it for 18+ years. They did it before BB became a NFL coach.

 

[chech1965]

People will be calling the Patriots "cheaters" until the end of the NFL. It's just a fact. Doesn't mean it's warranted forever, but there will be no end to it.

I don't hear people calling the Broncos* cheaters and it has only been ten years.

Oh wait....violating the salary cap probably isn't cheating in their eyes....

 

[JoePats]

Why do you think logical, common sense will mean anything today??

I'm naive I guess. I mean, why should people who get paid to know these things know way less about it than the people who don't?