2020 Pats: Bengals Coach Implies Patriots Taping Play Signals
- Thread starter CaptainLaddie
- Start date
Your #1 and #3 still apply, if I'm not mistaken. The whole point about the documentary is that there's a perfectly legitimate reason to film the sideline, if you're there shooting a documentary about a week in the life of an advance scout.
I'm not even sure where you're going on this. People are saying it's not against the rules, and you're complaining that that's irrelevant? In what part of your life are rules irrelevant? Are you an agent for the CIA?
Without a screen capture of the video, it's hard to know exactly what it's showing.
A distant shot of the sideline where the coaches are making barely discernable signals is one thing, especially if there are no plays being shown (teams typically don't snap the ball near the sideline, unless you're the Colts). Close ups of signals, down/distance, plays, and play sheets would be another thing entirely.
A distant shot of the sideline where the coaches are making barely discernable signals is one thing, especially if there are no plays being shown (teams typically don't snap the ball near the sideline, unless you're the Colts). Close ups of signals, down/distance, plays, and play sheets would be another thing entirely.
If this is actually what's on the video, I can only assume Belichick is playing 4D chess and deliberately sent the crew to tape the Bengals as a long-term motivational ploy - it's the Patriots against the world again. Because that would literally be the only explanation that makes any sense. And frankly, Belichick is so shrewd that I really wouldn't put something like this past him.
(I nearly made a similar point in the Goat thread about the Chiefs game on Sunday, which is that while the refereeing was so slanted against the Pats in the second half as to be laughable, the Pats were getting dominated in the first half, and it's quite possible one of the reasons they rallied in the second half was that the refereeing mistakes fired them up. I didn't write that because I wasn't sure it was my place as a non-Pats fan to say that, but it might help put all of this into context...)
A lifetime ban is insane. I know they were there for the Do Your Job thing but the camera was focused for 8 minutes on the Bengals sideline. Come on...
Soooooooooooooo dumb.
But then again, the original Spygate was pretty dumb. And Deflategate was galactically dumb. None of that mattered with respect to public opinion or the NFL's punishment.
I mean, this is all most likely a case of Hanlon’s Razor, but stupidity is still punishable when you’ve lost the benefit of doubt.
All of the network morning shows covered it as another cheating scandal with pretty much no context.
There's a massive difference, imo, between filming signals of the team you're playing on Sunday at home or in their stadium and going to another team's stadium to film their opponent.
So you've connected the dots that BB is the mastermind behind this scheme?
Fair or unfair, the fact that the scout apparently said nothing while the videographer filmed the Bengals sideline for eight minutes is not a good look. It certainly opens the door wide for the NFL and Pats detractors to argue that the scout was not familiar with NFL rules.
I certainly hope that the independent videographers do their postproduction work at someplace other than on the Patriot Place premises.
I certainly hope that the independent videographers do their postproduction work at someplace other than on the Patriot Place premises.
In the rules? A massive difference in the rules?
I'm really not sure why there'd be a massive difference in any respect other than geographical. Because either way, if you're doing it for football reasons, you're doing it to try and decode the opponent's tactics, ascertain their patterns, predict what they'll do, and use that to counter their efforts when you play them. To do so you're going to need to watch them in action, doing it at your own home (i.e. when you're playing them) defeats the purpose.
Either scouting is legal or it's not legal. In 2007, the issue wasn't the scouting, it was the location thereof. Fine. This wasn't on the sideline. I ask again: Is scouting legal?
(leaving aside that this was an entirely different part of the organization and so on)
Based off of your days working in video production or as a cameraman or it just kinda sounds like enough without actually knowing what goes into the process?
This. I believe getting coverage and shooting more footage than than you will actually use is SOP in these kinds of productions.
Setting up a camera in the press box, by a logo'd Patriots employee, and overtly filming the Bengals sideline seems the exact opposite of spying.
Never said that. I said whoever is responsible him or Kraft should be suspended. Sharpe said a lifetime ban. I'm curious how you can defend a team pinched for cheating multiple times filming another teams sidelines. 8 minutes isn't exactly a short amount of time. It's not the first quarter like Russini said but with the optics on the Pats even if they did nothing wrong they need to be extra careful.
If we are talking 8 minutes of real time - given clock stoppage, tv breaks, play clock etc etc.... That might be around 6 plays. The atrocity!!!
The Patriots are dumb.
For everyone whining that "BUT BUT BUT they were doing a documentary!1!", the other 31 teams also do documentary as well right? Why is it the Patriots got caught doing this?
All over the terrible 1-12 Cincinnati Bengals. Hilarious to see the morale police defending yet another rule breaking scandal by the organization yet get their pitchforks out over Antonio Brown.
The NFL is going to absolutely hammer the Patriots. And rightfully so. As a Patriots fan, this is absolutely inexcusable.
For everyone whining that "BUT BUT BUT they were doing a documentary!1!", the other 31 teams also do documentary as well right? Why is it the Patriots got caught doing this?
All over the terrible 1-12 Cincinnati Bengals. Hilarious to see the morale police defending yet another rule breaking scandal by the organization yet get their pitchforks out over Antonio Brown.
The NFL is going to absolutely hammer the Patriots. And rightfully so. As a Patriots fan, this is absolutely inexcusable.
I worked in media for a few years. B-roll is important when telling a story by video.
From: https://contentmarketinginstitute.com/2011/10/what-is-b-roll-and-why-is-it-so-valuable/
What Is B-Roll and Why Is It So Valuable?
B-roll is the extra footage captured to enrich the story you’re telling and to have greater flexibility when editing. Instead of featuring only talking heads on video, you want to have other images you can cut away to that will add dimension to your story. B-roll can include additional video footage, still photographs, animation or other graphic elements.
Here are a few things to keep in mind when planning your film shoot:
So anyone doing a story for video (as opposed to radio or print media) will almost certainly take tons of B-roll footage. 8 minutes really isn't that much, to be honest. What's "damning" in people's eyes is that it will hit Cincy's coaches and such (which, honestly, would be a normal thing to film for a project like this), and it will just feel nefarious, especially given Spygate, Deflategate, and people's perception of the Patriots.
From: https://contentmarketinginstitute.com/2011/10/what-is-b-roll-and-why-is-it-so-valuable/
What Is B-Roll and Why Is It So Valuable?
B-roll is the extra footage captured to enrich the story you’re telling and to have greater flexibility when editing. Instead of featuring only talking heads on video, you want to have other images you can cut away to that will add dimension to your story. B-roll can include additional video footage, still photographs, animation or other graphic elements.
Here are a few things to keep in mind when planning your film shoot:
- Depending on the type of video you are creating, evenly divide filming between recording interviews and capturing b-roll. In our experience, having plenty of good b-roll makes a video more powerful.
- Because the times for capturing b-roll are often fixed (a certain activity only happens at a certain time), start by identifying the must-have footage and inserting that into your filming schedule.
- Fill in the rest of the schedule with interviews and nice-to-have b-roll. If you discover, due to limited timing, that you need to sacrifice either a must-have piece of b-roll or a nice-to-have interview, we often recommend sacrificing the interview. The value of b-roll should not be underestimated, not only because it can strengthen the impact of your current video project, but also because it can serve as key footage for additional video assets created down the road.
So anyone doing a story for video (as opposed to radio or print media) will almost certainly take tons of B-roll footage. 8 minutes really isn't that much, to be honest. What's "damning" in people's eyes is that it will hit Cincy's coaches and such (which, honestly, would be a normal thing to film for a project like this), and it will just feel nefarious, especially given Spygate, Deflategate, and people's perception of the Patriots.
It’s quite a stretch to assume that these independent contractors who are making documentaries are sharing this video with the Pats coaching staff. Any evidence at all for this? I’m sure there is none.
Zero chance this has happened
Antonio Brown sent threatening texts to someone that accused him of sexual assault. One of these things is nothing like the other.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28265914/patriots-bill-belichick-denies-involvement-videographer-caught-taping-bengals-sideline
"New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick on Tuesday denied any involvement with the videographer who was caught taping the Cincinnati Bengals' sideline during their game against Cleveland on Sunday.
The incident was similar to the league's findings in 2007 that led to multiple penalties in an incident that what was dubbed "Spygate." Belichick said the franchise has altered its approach since then."
"New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick on Tuesday denied any involvement with the videographer who was caught taping the Cincinnati Bengals' sideline during their game against Cleveland on Sunday.
The incident was similar to the league's findings in 2007 that led to multiple penalties in an incident that what was dubbed "Spygate." Belichick said the franchise has altered its approach since then."
I like Belichick but despise the Patriots. This whole thing seems really dumb. Not as ridiculous as deflategate turned out to be, but is is early.
It shouldn't take much time to get it sorted one way or another. They have the tape. The tape either is either focused in a way that can help a team or it is not. I can't imagine football professionals watching it and not being able to recognize that fairly quickly. Even the '8 minutes' thing should be easy to unravel. Was that 8 minutes focused specifically on offense or defense? Was the taping stopped early, so we don't know how long it would have gone otherwise? Was it just 8 minutes of mostly broad panning around in the context of the feature? Solid chunks of footage focused on the sideline in a specific way? I just can't imagine much ambiguity.
I doubt the league would be able to get B-Roll from the other features in this series to be able to compare, but I suppose that could be another thing they want to look at.
Looks like a big nothingburger. Can't be too hard to figure things out quickly.
It shouldn't take much time to get it sorted one way or another. They have the tape. The tape either is either focused in a way that can help a team or it is not. I can't imagine football professionals watching it and not being able to recognize that fairly quickly. Even the '8 minutes' thing should be easy to unravel. Was that 8 minutes focused specifically on offense or defense? Was the taping stopped early, so we don't know how long it would have gone otherwise? Was it just 8 minutes of mostly broad panning around in the context of the feature? Solid chunks of footage focused on the sideline in a specific way? I just can't imagine much ambiguity.
I doubt the league would be able to get B-Roll from the other features in this series to be able to compare, but I suppose that could be another thing they want to look at.
Looks like a big nothingburger. Can't be too hard to figure things out quickly.
People were claiming it was not against the rules until the patriots came out with a statement apologizing for breaking the rules.
I don't know if it's against the rules or not. I assume the Patriots do. I think their apologizing for breaking the rules is probably pretty good evidence that we were all wrong and that they broke the rules.
Of course it's relevant. Unfortunately, it seems the answer is not in our favor.
Or maybe you are saying that "policy" doesn't equate with "rules"? If you are, I think that's a pretty tenuous hook to hang one's hat on.
Just to add in a bit on B roll context, I just was the point person for my company on a video production. Our videographer shot 3 hours of B roll footage for a 3 minute 30 second video...
The Patriots violated league rules. By the team's own acknowledgement. The burden of proof isn't going to be on the NFL or the other owners to show how the film was used. Nor should it be, in this case.
We should be prepared to see the Pats get absolutely crushed with penalties.
The guy reportedly got confronted by Bengals staff and NFL security, so it only being 8 minutes is pretty irrelevant.
Here's the play-by-play. Cinci starts with the ball and keeps it from the start of the game to 10:56 left in the quarter. The Browns then have the ball from 10:51 to 7:31. My presumption is that any signals team's still use are on the defensive side, but I could be wrong about that (yes, I get that the plays are called in via the headset, but teams still make other signals pre-play).
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201912080cle.htm#all_pbp
During the spy gate investigation videographers from Kraft were told to say they were filming the QB's, Kickers, or a TEAM SHOW. I'd say that's evidence of possible wrongdoing. The problem is we don't know exactly what is on the tape. Only 2nd hand accounts.
The underlying crime they’re being accused of is so dumb. The league broadcast during live games has focused on people giving signs. Don’t use them, switch them up, do anything. Any schmo can sit in the stands and tape you. It’s like the Houston Astros thing. Stealing your signs? Throw a 2 down low and away and come up and in with a heater. Problem solved.
Shannon Sharpe called for a lifetime ban of BB at the break of Deflategate btw.
Shannon Sharpe called for a lifetime ban of BB at the break of Deflategate btw.
Why? Or do you not think intent matters?
Not all rule violations are created equal.
Point of order, the Patriots didn't apologize for breaking the rules. The rules were that they notify the home team to get permission to film from the press box. They did. They could have, but did not, also notify the Bengals and the league. E5 keeps pointing out that not doing so was a stupid oversight, and maybe it was, and the Patriots apologized for not doing so whether they truly think it a mistake or are just saying so for mollification purposes - but if rules matter as to punishment, they followed the rules.
(and yeah here rules and policy are somewhat interchangeable, we're talking about the NFL's rules for its teams' conduct)
Nonsense. Depends on what the footage actually shows. I mean, I'm assuming advance scouts look at the sidelines.... If it turns out this was a nefarious scheme, I'll be shocked.
TSC said:
"I mean, this is all most likely a case of Hanlon’s Razor, but stupidity is still punishable when you’ve lost the benefit of doubt."
Yep, this was remarkably idiotic. No argument there.
If it's the first 8 minutes, that would cover 15 plays according the game log. Of those 15, one would be the Bengals FG try, one would be the subsequent kickoff, and then 5 or 6 plays of the Bengals on defense, possibly ending with the Mayfield INT.
Sorry, how are you parsing this: "We understand and acknowledge that our video crew, which included independent contractors who shot the video, unknowingly violated a league policy by filming the field and sideline from the press box."
You're relying on the fact that the contractors, not the Patriots, violated the policy? Again, this is a pretty tough argument. Filming the field and sideline from the press box violates league policy. That's my point. Going back to my original post, we originally all took solace in the idea that you could film from the press box. Which is wrong. Unless the Patriots are wrong. You asked where I was going. That was my point.
As noted many times by multiple posters, the press box is located behind the Bengals bench. Even if they were up to something nefarious, they wouldn't be able to see hand signals unless they had X-ray specs.
This the type of shit that causes the mass hysteria. As much blame as the NFL gets, it's the media. This is "11 out of 12 footballs" bullshit that makes it sound like there's something on paper that dummies will eat up.
Meh, I could be being naive, but I still say this is more or less over by Friday. Even if I was the biggest Pat's hater, I don't see how I could feel confident enough to enjoy this.
Agreed. Here's the thing. I'm pretty sure that the Patriots don't need to film the Bengals. However, it's absolutely stupid and the sheer optics for a repeat offender is going to be the reason for the hammer getting put down on the Pats. Now you're going to have 31 other teams coming forward asking for the B reel of any Patriots web series filmed at their stadium ever.
Funny though how this coincidently overshadowed the blatant fixing of the game on Sunday.
This is fair. I remember vividly from 2007 what the rules were then, but if the Patriots are now saying they violated a league policy by filming from the press box, then perhaps it's changed since that time.
I'd very much like to see what the current league rules/policy are on this topic. We have a lot of hysteria and takes, but very little in the way of useful facts.
The picture of the press box shown earlier in the thread shows the press box off at an angle-- closer to the end zone than the 50. Given that coaches often raise and or extend their hands out when signaling it's completely reasonable that signals could be discerned from the Cleveland press box.
I'm gonna guess that what happened is this: The Pats were doing another in their "Do your job" series. This one on advanced scouting. They hire a non-Patriots crew to go in and film this. They clear it with the Browns, who say yeah no problem. The scout is there and the video crew sets up right there in the press box, in front of all kinds of people (not just fans, but personnel of other teams, media, etc.). The film crew starts filming. Part of the job of telling a video story is getting tons of B-roll. It's how these things are done. I get that not a lot of people understand this but it's how films and video news stories are done. Tons of B-roll, of all kinds of things. It makes 100% sense to film *what the advance scout is looking at* as part of the B-roll.
So the crew - who may not have any idea of the league rules, just knowing that they were given permission by the Browns to be there, and doing this in front of everyone wide open, just start doing their normal job. Someone from Cincy sees that they're filming various shots of the Bengals' sideline - you know, the thing the Patriots' advanced scout is looking at - and raises a concern. The film crew stops filming. That's that.
That's, I'm pretty sure, what happened. But it's obviously being spun as "The Patriots are cheating again". The ESPN article I linked to said, "The incident was similar to the league's findings in 2007 that led to multiple penalties in an incident that what was dubbed "Spygate."" even though it was nothing at all like it. The Pats didn't cross every T or dot every i, so this looks bad. I don't think it WAS bad, but it LOOKS bad, and ANY film where the Pats (not really the Pats, but this independently contracted crew, but people won't make the distinction) are taping opposing sidelines is going to raise all kinds of hell.
I think this is a totally stupid thing, and clearly NOTHING. But here's the key: THAT. DOESN'T. MATTER. It never has mattered. Spygate: other teams were doing the same thing. The Jets, *the year before*, were caught doing the same exact thing and the NFL did NOTHING. Deflategate: omg it was the laws of physics, and even that year, the Panthers were caught ON LIVE TELEVISION tampering with footballs in a cold game to warm them up (and, duh, increase air pressure) and the league did NOTHING. But the Pats? Both cases they got frigging HAMMERED.
So while I hope the optimists here are correct, I see no reason whatsoever to believe that the rational, optimistic scenario will play out. I thoroughly expect a loss of draft picks (single or plural) here.
So the crew - who may not have any idea of the league rules, just knowing that they were given permission by the Browns to be there, and doing this in front of everyone wide open, just start doing their normal job. Someone from Cincy sees that they're filming various shots of the Bengals' sideline - you know, the thing the Patriots' advanced scout is looking at - and raises a concern. The film crew stops filming. That's that.
That's, I'm pretty sure, what happened. But it's obviously being spun as "The Patriots are cheating again". The ESPN article I linked to said, "The incident was similar to the league's findings in 2007 that led to multiple penalties in an incident that what was dubbed "Spygate."" even though it was nothing at all like it. The Pats didn't cross every T or dot every i, so this looks bad. I don't think it WAS bad, but it LOOKS bad, and ANY film where the Pats (not really the Pats, but this independently contracted crew, but people won't make the distinction) are taping opposing sidelines is going to raise all kinds of hell.
I think this is a totally stupid thing, and clearly NOTHING. But here's the key: THAT. DOESN'T. MATTER. It never has mattered. Spygate: other teams were doing the same thing. The Jets, *the year before*, were caught doing the same exact thing and the NFL did NOTHING. Deflategate: omg it was the laws of physics, and even that year, the Panthers were caught ON LIVE TELEVISION tampering with footballs in a cold game to warm them up (and, duh, increase air pressure) and the league did NOTHING. But the Pats? Both cases they got frigging HAMMERED.
So while I hope the optimists here are correct, I see no reason whatsoever to believe that the rational, optimistic scenario will play out. I thoroughly expect a loss of draft picks (single or plural) here.