We’ve done some digging today on the report that Matt Walsh’s video collection includes at least one instance of the Pats stealing “offensive signals,” from the Miami Dolphins.
And we’ve learned that there’s no such thing as “offensive signals.” At least there aren’t “offensive signals” in the same sense that there are (or, given the coming use of radio receivers for defensive players, were) “defensive signals.” On defense, the coaches signal in the play to the players on the field. On offense, the play is called into the quarterback via the radio in his helmet.
Presumably, the tape created by Walsh shows the hand signals made by offensive coaches to alert the players on the field, and on the sidelines, to the personnel groupings that would be used, such as two running backs, one tight end, and two wideouts, or two tight ends, one running back, and two receivers.
Here’s how one source explained the process to us: “A play ends and the offensive coaching staff yells out on the sideline and simultaneously puts up a hand signal. Let’s say they want ‘regular’ personnel, which is two backs, two receivers and one tight end. The signal would be something like putting one finger in the air. The coach holds it up, but generally so do the players that are running on the field. The whole world sees it.”
And one group of folks who see it are the advance scouts from other teams who are attending the game for the purposes of, among other things, figuring out the number of fingers that are put in the air for each type of offensive grouping. It’s a simple process, and it’s a code that doesn’t require much effort to crack.
That’s in sharp contrast to the signals used by defensive coaches to call in defensive plays, which entails a level of intricacy that would require Rain Man-style abilities to decipher on the fly.
With all that said, it’s not presently known whether the ”offensive signals” on the Walsh tapes are the hand signs used to indicate personnel groupings. But we can’t imagine what else they would be.
And before anyone else sends in e-mails (or posts comments) suggesting that the signals were taped during one of the occasions when the coach-to-quarterback system was on the fritz, most (if not all) teams don’t use hand signals when that occurs. Instead, they either shuttle in players with the information, or the quarterback walks closer to the sideline and the coaches yell out the number that corresponds with the play on the quarterback’s wristband.
So there’s really nothing to it. And, as others have pointed out, the rule that the Pats broke relates to taping generally, not to the taping of offensive or defensive signals. Thus, the presence of one tape with “offensive signals” doesn’t constitute the kind of new evidence that will land the team or coach Bill Belichick in a fresh vat of boiling water.
We know that plenty of folks who don’t like the Patriots and/or media figures who want to see a compelling story fill the slow months because now and July hope that some previously undisclosed proof of cheating will emerge. If it does, it most likely won’t come from the Walsh tape with the “offensive signals.”
_2.gif)





May 11th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Thank you Mike for bringing some reality to all the BS by the media and fans desperate to keep this scandal alive.
Greg Aellio said Friday that the original punishment covered offensive and defensive signals. But people in the media still talk as if these are new charges that will come to punishment. It obviously won’t.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 8:33 am
This whole “spygate” story has been OVERBLOWN from the get-go…It was a MEDIA WET DREAM come true…anybody who can’t see that is blind or KNOWS NOTHING about Football
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 8:41 am
The last paragraph sums it up perfectly. Great job as always, Mike.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 8:46 am
JnBigD, a Cheerleader, says: “Why do it then?”
You seem to be missing the distinction here between using taped signals for THAT game and analyzing them later. Don’t worry, you’re not alone.
When the Dolphins did the same thing in 2006, were you or anyone else outraged? Was the NFL? Read this article to see. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2696227
The NFL condones and encourages taping and stealing signals, even today. Many fans and the media don’t seem to understand that and generate a false sense of outrage over this circumstance.
The only issue with Spygate is the LOCATION of where the tapes were obtained from. Use a telescopic microphone and telephoto lens from a location in compliance with NFL rules, and there’s no issue.
The only legitmate question one could ask is - why take videotape FROM THE FIELD if it gives no additional strategic advantage. The answer in my opinion is that it adds the intimidation factor. Coaches and players are intimidated by Belichick. Having staff on the field taping them call signals adds to that. Belichick wants the tape anyways (and likely continues to obtain it the same way other teams like the Dolphins do) and figures he might as well gain a psychological advantage while he’s at it.
Just one of many ways that coaches all play mindgames. But is this worse than what the Giants did going back to 1955? http://www.thesportgallery.com/sport-stories/1967aug-nflspy.html Worse than what the Broncos did to cheat the salary cap to win their Super Bowls? I think not.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3.65 / 5 with 3 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 8:52 am
Why would BB benefit from video of opposing coaches giving him the bird?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 9:02 am
And Comcast has what to do with this? Spector has been around so long do you really think he needs constituents?
You lost all of the credibility just with that one subject. The rest might as well be flushed.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Its sad but pointing out the obvious was actually needed.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 9:47 am
PhillyRocks, a Cheerleader, says: “And Comcast has what to do with this? Spector has been around so long do you really think he needs constituents?”
Less than 2 years ago Michael Levy worked for a DC lawfirm, very active in giving lucrative campaign donations, that also did work for Comcast.
Is Levy, a likely $500 an hour DC lawyer, representing Walsh out of the goodness of his heart? Or is there some quid pro quo at work here given his ties to Comcast’s lawfirm?
Many people would like to know but no one in the media is willing to look further into it.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 9:48 am
“And Comcast has what to do with this? Spector has been around so long do you really think he needs constituents?”
Uh, Comcast is Spector’s biggest contributor to his campaign funds. The NFL is in a major battle with Comcast over fees to air the NFLN on Comcast. Spector is doing anything he can to apply pressure to the NFL to get them to bend over for Comcast. This has been going on for quite some time and the issues with the Pats simply gave Spector an opportunity to apply more pressure while cdancing on the corporate strings of his owners.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 9:53 am
PhillyRocks,
You may be right about Comcast not being involved. I personally think Specter is abusing his power because of the Eagles fan in him, not because Comcast (although he has admitted used this incident to push his Comcast agenda the last time he met with Goodell).
He has a history of getting involved in NFL business when he feels his Eagles are wronged in some way. He threatened NFL investigations to get the trade of TO voided between San Fran and Baltimore so he could be traded to the Eagles. There have been similiar greivances filed against the league like TOs where Specter chose not to get involved since it did not pertain to his Eagles.
Specter has threatened Senate hearings three times vs. the NFL. All three times represented personal interests of his. The TO incident benefitted the Eagles because if TO won everyone knew that would be where he would go. Spygate because because of his interest soley in if the Pats cheated in the Eagles Super Bowl. He also threatened Senate hearings if the league didn’t provide access to NFL Sunday Ticket to cable companies (including Comcast).
I’m sorry, but Specter represents all that is wrong with our government officials. Whether you think he is working on the right side of this issue or not, his motives are less than admirable.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Hey “Phillyrocks”….you just made yourself look foolish with that post….go buy a clue…you obviously know nothing about politics…
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 10:12 am
the question is why is the nfl trying to cover up and white wash the cheating by the pats. MONey.
IF you were caught cheating and stealing you’d be fired. So why doesn’t the nfl fire bellycheat and the owner of the pats krapft. Because it would acknowledge that the pats cheated and stole those super bowl wins.
All this does is send a message that cheating is fine as long as you can white wash and cover it up so fans keep giving you their money.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 11:43 am
JoeSixPack, a Water Boy:
I was not outraged then nor am I outraged now. It just seems odd that a team would go to the trouble if there was no benefit as the article is contending. Your point about intimidation does make sense though. BTW, nice post.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 11th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Foober,
STFU, you keep posting the same whiney crap over and over.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 11th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Another curious fact that nobody has mentioned, unless I missed it somewhere, is the fact that they were taping the Dolphins of all teams? Were they trying to learn how to not win? Maybe they were trying to gain an advantage over other teams by teaching their players to do the exact opposite of what the Dolphins were doing?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Everyone is missing the big picture here. Its not that they are stealing signals.
Its that they used a camera to do it. The means of theft is the issue here.
Everyone seems to forget stealing goes on without the camera and teams gain
an advantage all the time. They just happen to use a camera. They took it a step
too far. That’s all.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Message received.
Having said that, I took half an hour to do a Google search. The Patriots “said” that there headsets went out during the game on October 7, 2001. This was the game in which the offensive signals were filmed and it was done presumably because the headsets “went out” and the Dolphins *were* using signals. The reference is here:
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-7850487_ITM
I can’t find anything that mentions whether they went out again at New England on December 22 but it was in week 15 and the Patriots won to take over first place (knocking Miami out). Its not the kind of thing that’s usually mentioned in game stories.
The Patriots filmed those signals for some reason. And the commissioner instituted random testing for headset communication during games for some reason as well. I’d have thought inquiring minds would want to know. Maybe becoming part of the national media reduces your professional curiosity.
I’m done.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
May 11th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Arlen Spector would like to know exactly what was Bill Belichick doing taking pictures from the grassy knoll?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 11th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
video to the audio??? that was the dumbest comment i’ve ever read.
Pats cheated, got in trouble. Get over it. Just because you want more punishments does not mean they are coming. There is nothing else to find.
Do some people really think the Pats were stealing audio from head sets?
Random speculation at best.
Over it.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 12th, 2008 at 9:49 am
I’m actually kind of happy we stole a few offensive signals from the Dolphins. I mean, come on, they stole our entire playbook three years ago… where was the investigation then? Where were the buzzwords like “Bill Billicheat” and “Cheatriots”. I suppose nothing good really goes with the Dolphins.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
May 12th, 2008 at 9:56 am
“Last Word”
Is that a promise? This is much ado about nothing. If there had been clandestine taping of walkthroughs or if they had ninja’d the opposition’s playbook, then there’d be something to talk about.
As for why do it if there’s no benefit to it, they do it for the same reason they assign seating on the team bus. Because NFL coaches are anal retentive obsessive compulsive freaks, that’s why.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)