Comments on: In Soviet Russia, Football Watches You!

By: Roger Wiseman

Roger Wiseman — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:30:42 +0000

Any way you look at it, I refer back to my good friend, Sun Tzu who wrote the Art of War. The Pats played it smart, don’t think you can call that cheating. Anyhow, let them decide what’s proper, but this is football!

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:44:49 +0000

I’m not a sports fan in any capacity, except when the wife watched Green Bay Packers. The reason is their behavior, such as this, has turned me off from watching. Athletes at one time were idolized and made into heroes for ourselves and children.

By: AughtSix

AughtSix — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:44:40 +0000

I think the problem is there’s a rule against what they’re doing… taping the other team’s signals. If I understood an article (can’t remember which one) correctly, that’s the issue. Stealing signals is part of the game. Heck, in college the back up quarterbacks and I would spend the entire game swiping signals. We were darn good, for all the good it did us. (2nd and 5 at the other teams 20 yard line… signal means lead to the twins side, we yell it out, play comes as called… 80 yard touchdown run. doh!)

That isn’t cheating. But even in college there were rules about what could be taped. For example, you couldn’t send a coach to another game to tape it. You could only use the “official” tapes for scouting.

By: straightarrow

straightarrow — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:55:18 +0000

I just don’t see the problem. Stealing signals is no different than deciphering intent based on formation or tendency or overhearing the defensive captain say blitz.

If it were not part of the game nobody would use signals. Ergo, it is safe to assume that every team will make every effort to divine intent, and they fully expect that others will too. Barring bribery, theft of actual material such as playbooks, etc. I just don’t see the problem.

Interception of a defensive signal is no different than interception of a forward pass.

That is why baseball managers have a complete “feel-up” with a signal buried somewhere within. They expect the other team to try to divine their intent.

I hate the Pats, but I just don’t see the problem with this.

By: Brad

Brad — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 17:47:00 +0000

Only the quarterback has an audio receiver in his helmet. Players on defense don’t because of the number of personnel changes, etc. Defenses might get into situations where they have 4 people with audio receivers on the field, and then zero people on the field. The league would like it if there was only 1 player on each side with the equipment.

There was a vote by the owners in this most recent offseason to allow audio equipment in the helmets of defensive players, but it didn’t pass. I expect them to revisit this in the offseason. This will eliminate the use of signals alltogether.

By: Alcibiades McZombie

Alcibiades McZombie — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 16:23:50 +0000

I don’t know much about football, but I thought radios-in-helmets could be used for communication.

I don’t think taping is cheating either. There are lots of better ways to cheat. For instance, you could blind opponents with lasers.