Belichick has been taping signals since 2000

Didn't see this posted.

---

 

There might have been other teams that taped signals, but I don't believe for a second that every team did it...and they definitely didn't all tape other teams' walk-throughs.

Any coach who would sanction any of that is completely unethical in my mind. Anyone can see that it violates the spirit of fair competition. Who's to say they weren't also intercepting headset communications between coach and QB? Wouldn't that be fair game to Belichick, too?


Cheaters who get caught are the only ones who say "everyone was doing it." Ask A&M.

 

this seems underhanded, but on the other hand... every team uses video of their opponent's actual on field play from previous games, and still photos (if not video by now) of formations and plays that happened during the game they are playing. taping signals isn't too far away from that- especially considering the amount of time you would have to interpret the signal and relay the information to your offense for them to call the correct play.

this is easily solved by having a defensive player wear a mic'd up helmet like the qb does for play calls. not sure why offense gets one but defense does not.

 

Do you think Sen. Specter would be taking as much of an interest in this if the Eagles had beaten the Patriots in the Super Bowl a few years back?

 

I think he'd be taking a lot less interest if Comcast wasn't a pretty big donor.

 

Boston is about to be jousted off their high horse...

 

My interest is that people may have won or lost millions or dollars based on the Patriots cheating, especially in the Super Bowl against the Rams.

 

Here's an idea. Why don't congressment worry about running our country instead of pro sports. This and the Clemens thing is such BS...fiddling while Rome burns.

 

The defense doesn't get to wear the mic in the helmet b/c of all the substitutions they throw in. Multiple players would have to have their helmet rigged. Somehow the NFL has a problem with that. But, there is talk of changing it for next year based Belicheat and spygate.

 

the NFL gets an anti-trust exemption. You can bet the government will be looking into such a business that generates the revenue and has the net worth the NFL does. Just the angle of how much money changes hands raises their ire. Its federal, it crosses state lines.

 

Congress show such an interest because of the tax exempt status professional leagues enjoy. If they want extra privileges that few businesses get they should not cheat. MLB basically get to run a monopoly, and we all know how bad monopolies are. That's why it is so important.

 

Baseball coaches have been stealing signs for years. Have there ever been congressional hearings about that?

You can be sure that every team has someone watching the signals of their opponents. Maybe not with a cameras, but they are watching.

 

The crossing of state lines is a good point. Interstate commerce...

If they sweep it under the rug, you could make the argument that they are cheating fans who pay for tickets out of a fair product.

The fact that the NFL does not have a substitute product worth mentioning also leaves room for this. People can't go anywhere else within reason to get their professional football. The NFL knows this and may be trying to abuse customer trust by covering it up.

 

I agree with Diggler and Orange.

Though it's as common as staph at Kyle Field, abuse of the "commerce clause" should not be encouraged. The extent of Congress' power to regulate "interstate commerce" consists in regularizing the flow of goods between states. (Commerce actually means "with merchandise.") Their powers are few and defined, and their sovereignty is limited. Sorry for the bunny trail, but Congress lacks jurisdiction to consider these matters.

Even if I'm wrong (and now I'm sorry I posted that because I know some of you will not be able to resist schooling this originalist in the evils of strict construction), I still think there are dozens of more pressing issues before the Congress than policing MLB and NFL internal rules violations.

I suggest a Congressional recess to consider these dilemmas. We will convene again in 2012.

 

Argh. I'm not sure if the prior poster is confusing originalism and strict constructionism - but it appears so, and they're not remotely the same thing.

 

I don't think they're tax exempt, just exempt from anti-trust. Big difference.

Still, this and the Clemens stuff is all congressional grandstanding, in my opinion.

 

the "illegally" in the original quote is the key word. correct me if i'm wrong, but it's not "illegal" trying to steal signals. it's illegal to use cameras to assist you.

it doesn't warrant congressional hearings, i just wish sports talk radio would go on ad nauseum about whether the pats titles deserve an * like they did about bonds HR record, if for nothing else than they're talking about football rather than baseball.

 

If they are guilty, what does this mean?

There is no precedent set for this level of offense.

 

DKR said he and his staff figured out Navy's signals in the Cotton Bowl, and if any of you remember the Oiler-Charger playoff in 1979 (the one where Vernon Perry had 4 INTs), they stole the signs as well.

I have no issue with this. If teams are stupid enough not to change their signals more often...

 

I don't think Bill's admitted difficulty in interpreting the rules of the league makes him any smarter than the 31 other NFL coaches who have not been found to be in violation of the rules to date.

 

Uncle Rico, your opinion is highly regarded in my dojo.

However, do you not see how the use of cameras makes the Patriots' situation different? If the Pats were simply memorizing the signals or taking notes on paper, more power to them. But they took it a step further and used video tapes, after said method was declared to be against the rules. To me, that is a big difference.