theogt
Surrealist
- Messages
- 45,846
- Reaction score
- 5,912
New Claim of Cheating Emerges Against Patriots
By JOHN BRANCH and GREG BISHOP
Published: February 22, 2008
INDIANAPOLIS — The Patriots’ pattern of illicitly videotaping the signals of opposing N.F.L. coaches began in Coach Bill Belichick’s first preseason with the team in 2000, a former Patriots player said. The information was then put to use in that year’s regular-season opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Belichick’s debut as New England’s head coach.
The habit of secretly taping signals, which is against league rules, continued at least through three championship seasons to the 2007 season opener against the Jets, when the Patriots were caught and subsequently sanctioned by the league.
But it was not the first time the Patriots had been spotted taping another team’s defensive coaches at the Meadowlands. In the final preseason game of 2006, the Patriots were caught taping a Giants defensive assistant coach giving signals, several executives within the league said.
The incident prompted a letter addressed to all teams seven days later from the N.F.L. vice president Ray Anderson that detailed the league’s interpretation of the rules.
That letter was cited by Commissioner Roger Goodell when he punished the Patriots. Belichick has said that he misinterpreted the league’s bylaws, telling Goodell that he thought it was permissible to use electronic equipment as long as the information was not used in the same game. That explanation has been greeted cynically by some peers and league officials, hundreds of whom gathered here for the annual scouting combine to evaluate college players for the draft in April.
In a news conference last week, Goodell said Belichick’s explanation led to the assumption that he had been videotaping opponents’ signals “as long as he has been head coach.”
The league’s nine-member competition committee spent three days this week discussing various rules changes that it might recommend for next season. After a 90-minute briefing on the Patriots’ videotaping scandal Thursday by Goodell and three league vice presidents, the committee said taping rules would not be changed in the aftermath of the controversy.
“The rules are very, very clear,” said Tennessee Titans Coach Jeff Fisher, a committee member. “There is no need to be more specific or clarify any rules whatsoever as far as the bylaws are concerned.”
Questions still linger about how much of an advantage the Patriots may have had if they intercepted defensive signals. Under Belichick, the Patriots have often run a no-huddle offense, which forces opponents to quickly call a defensive play. N.F.L. rules allow quarterbacks to hear instructions from coaches — through a headset and into a speaker in the quarterback’s helmet — until there are 15 seconds left on a play clock.
When the defensive play call is deciphered, the Patriots could call a play to counteract. This would lead to a sizable advantage.
The Patriots lost the 2000 opener against the Buccaneers, the first time taped signals were used under Belichick, according the former Patriots player, who said he was among several former players interviewed by the N.F.L but did not want to speak publicly because it is an ongoing investigation.
In September, Goodell fined Belichick $500,000, fined the Patriots $250,000, and took away a first-round draft choice in 2008. After the sanctions were announced, the Patriots submitted six tapes, from games in 2006 and 2007, and some notes that dated to 2002, Goodell said. The tapes and notes were destroyed days after being handed to the league, because Goodell considered the matter closed.
But questions remain about how wide and deep the Patriots’ taping habits extended. Senator Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican who met with Goodell last week, is among those still questioning why the league was so quick to sanction the Patriots and destroy the evidence.
Goodell met with the competition committee Thursday to discuss his handling of it of the spying case. Committee members seemed satisfied and eager to turn the page.
“We were all satisfied, every one of us,” said John Mara, the Giants’ president. “All of us have our different opinions about the Patriots, but we were all satisfied that this thing was investigated properly and that they came to the proper conclusion.”
Bill Polian, the Colts’ president, said: “It’s behind us. It’s time to move forward.”
Yet emerging details continue to pull the league back in time. On Feb. 2, The Boston Herald reported that the Patriots may have also taped a Rams walkthrough practice the day before the teams played in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won, 20-17, on a last-second field goal. Belichick, speaking to The Boston Globe, recently denied that the practice was taped.
In the hallway at the convention center here, Mike Martz wanted to talk about his new job as offensive coordinator with the 49ers. Instead, reporters peppered him with questions about the Patriots. Martz was head coach of the Rams when the teams met in the Super Bowl six years ago.
He took exception to the theory that the Patriots could not have gleaned much information from taping the walk-through. He said indeed they could, but added that was not the point.
“For somebody to say that, it’s kind of disgusting,” Martz said. “The whole point is if they really cheated. To say he took some steroids and it did help or it didn’t help, that’s never the point. The point is, to all these high school coaches and high school kids and college kids, that if they did cheat, that’s the point.”
Martz said he assumed the walkthrough report is false. Martz was asked if he wanted the N.F.L. to continue investigating the walkthrough. “Of course,” he said. “I was involved in that, I was responsible for a lot of people in that game.”
He declined to comment about a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of a former Rams player, a seat-license holder and Super Bowl ticket holders.
Executives dismissed any lingering notions that the Patriots’ taping opponents was a common practice around the league. While teams have long tried to steal signals, the Patriots, it is believed, are the only ones who actively taped them.
“I don’t want the outside perception to be, ‘Boy, there are all these teams and they’re all doing all these things,’ ” said Rich McKay, the Falcons’ president and a member of the competition committee. “Because it’s not true.”
Belichick was not seen in the hallways of the convention center Thursday. Representatives of 21 teams are scheduled to meet with reporters for news conferences from Thursday to Sunday. Belichick and the Patriots are not among them.
By JOHN BRANCH and GREG BISHOP
Published: February 22, 2008
INDIANAPOLIS — The Patriots’ pattern of illicitly videotaping the signals of opposing N.F.L. coaches began in Coach Bill Belichick’s first preseason with the team in 2000, a former Patriots player said. The information was then put to use in that year’s regular-season opener against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Belichick’s debut as New England’s head coach.
The habit of secretly taping signals, which is against league rules, continued at least through three championship seasons to the 2007 season opener against the Jets, when the Patriots were caught and subsequently sanctioned by the league.
But it was not the first time the Patriots had been spotted taping another team’s defensive coaches at the Meadowlands. In the final preseason game of 2006, the Patriots were caught taping a Giants defensive assistant coach giving signals, several executives within the league said.
The incident prompted a letter addressed to all teams seven days later from the N.F.L. vice president Ray Anderson that detailed the league’s interpretation of the rules.
That letter was cited by Commissioner Roger Goodell when he punished the Patriots. Belichick has said that he misinterpreted the league’s bylaws, telling Goodell that he thought it was permissible to use electronic equipment as long as the information was not used in the same game. That explanation has been greeted cynically by some peers and league officials, hundreds of whom gathered here for the annual scouting combine to evaluate college players for the draft in April.
In a news conference last week, Goodell said Belichick’s explanation led to the assumption that he had been videotaping opponents’ signals “as long as he has been head coach.”
The league’s nine-member competition committee spent three days this week discussing various rules changes that it might recommend for next season. After a 90-minute briefing on the Patriots’ videotaping scandal Thursday by Goodell and three league vice presidents, the committee said taping rules would not be changed in the aftermath of the controversy.
“The rules are very, very clear,” said Tennessee Titans Coach Jeff Fisher, a committee member. “There is no need to be more specific or clarify any rules whatsoever as far as the bylaws are concerned.”
Questions still linger about how much of an advantage the Patriots may have had if they intercepted defensive signals. Under Belichick, the Patriots have often run a no-huddle offense, which forces opponents to quickly call a defensive play. N.F.L. rules allow quarterbacks to hear instructions from coaches — through a headset and into a speaker in the quarterback’s helmet — until there are 15 seconds left on a play clock.
When the defensive play call is deciphered, the Patriots could call a play to counteract. This would lead to a sizable advantage.
The Patriots lost the 2000 opener against the Buccaneers, the first time taped signals were used under Belichick, according the former Patriots player, who said he was among several former players interviewed by the N.F.L but did not want to speak publicly because it is an ongoing investigation.
In September, Goodell fined Belichick $500,000, fined the Patriots $250,000, and took away a first-round draft choice in 2008. After the sanctions were announced, the Patriots submitted six tapes, from games in 2006 and 2007, and some notes that dated to 2002, Goodell said. The tapes and notes were destroyed days after being handed to the league, because Goodell considered the matter closed.
But questions remain about how wide and deep the Patriots’ taping habits extended. Senator Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican who met with Goodell last week, is among those still questioning why the league was so quick to sanction the Patriots and destroy the evidence.
Goodell met with the competition committee Thursday to discuss his handling of it of the spying case. Committee members seemed satisfied and eager to turn the page.
“We were all satisfied, every one of us,” said John Mara, the Giants’ president. “All of us have our different opinions about the Patriots, but we were all satisfied that this thing was investigated properly and that they came to the proper conclusion.”
Bill Polian, the Colts’ president, said: “It’s behind us. It’s time to move forward.”
Yet emerging details continue to pull the league back in time. On Feb. 2, The Boston Herald reported that the Patriots may have also taped a Rams walkthrough practice the day before the teams played in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won, 20-17, on a last-second field goal. Belichick, speaking to The Boston Globe, recently denied that the practice was taped.
In the hallway at the convention center here, Mike Martz wanted to talk about his new job as offensive coordinator with the 49ers. Instead, reporters peppered him with questions about the Patriots. Martz was head coach of the Rams when the teams met in the Super Bowl six years ago.
He took exception to the theory that the Patriots could not have gleaned much information from taping the walk-through. He said indeed they could, but added that was not the point.
“For somebody to say that, it’s kind of disgusting,” Martz said. “The whole point is if they really cheated. To say he took some steroids and it did help or it didn’t help, that’s never the point. The point is, to all these high school coaches and high school kids and college kids, that if they did cheat, that’s the point.”
Martz said he assumed the walkthrough report is false. Martz was asked if he wanted the N.F.L. to continue investigating the walkthrough. “Of course,” he said. “I was involved in that, I was responsible for a lot of people in that game.”
He declined to comment about a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of a former Rams player, a seat-license holder and Super Bowl ticket holders.
Executives dismissed any lingering notions that the Patriots’ taping opponents was a common practice around the league. While teams have long tried to steal signals, the Patriots, it is believed, are the only ones who actively taped them.
“I don’t want the outside perception to be, ‘Boy, there are all these teams and they’re all doing all these things,’ ” said Rich McKay, the Falcons’ president and a member of the competition committee. “Because it’s not true.”
Belichick was not seen in the hallways of the convention center Thursday. Representatives of 21 teams are scheduled to meet with reporters for news conferences from Thursday to Sunday. Belichick and the Patriots are not among them.
