Belichick's cheating could lead to dark days

[batman]

By Gregg Easterbrook
Special to Page 2


The situation with the National Football League is a lot worse than people realize, and the only one who seems to grasp this fully is commissioner Roger Goodell. You don't issue emergency orders backed by threats on Sunday morning of a game day, as Goodell just did regarding the New England Patriots' files of cheating information, unless the situation is a lot worse than people realize.

Why is the situation worse than people think? Because the NFL is on the precipice of blowing its status as the country's favorite sport. The whole NFL enterprise is in jeopardy from that single word: cheating. It's the most distasteful word in sports. And now the Patriots have brought the word into the NFL.

Think the NFL can't decline? Fifteen years ago, the National Basketball Association was going up, up, up by every measure and was widely considered the gold-plated can't-miss "sport of the next century." Since then, NBA popularity and ratings have plummeted while NBA-based teams have floundered in international competition. At the moment of its maximum success, the NBA became overconfident and arrogant in ways that need not be recounted here. Key point: There was no law of nature that said the NBA had to stay popular, and it did not.

Today the NFL is king of the hill in sports status, ratings, merchandising and association with the American psyche. There is no law of nature that says the NFL has to stay popular. Overconfidence and arrogance could be the downfall of the NFL, too – and we might be on that precipice. People will always watch and play football, of course. But nothing guarantees that the NFL's version of football must remain the super-successful money machine that it is today. There could be autumn Sunday afternoons in the near future in which the overwhelming majority of Americans couldn't care less what NFL games are being shown. Fifteen years ago, sports-marketing types would have said "impossible!" to the notion that only 11 percent of American households would watch the NBA Finals, which is what happened this June. Plummeting popularity for NFL broadcasts seems "impossible!" right now, but might happen fast enough to make your head swim.

Criminal behavior by NFL players, haughty owners who demand public subsidies, negative press for the union, coaches who snarl at the public instead of acting grateful for their privileged positions, insufferable egotism from multimillionaire athletes: All these things can be overlooked as long as the games themselves are good. If the games themselves are tainted, the NFL could tumble with amazing speed. And now there is a cheating scandal – cheating by the team that presented itself as the epitome of the sport – which calls the games themselves into question.

First we learn that the Patriots were cheating by using video equipment to steal signs, in blatant violation of league rules. Then we learn that even after the scandal broke and Bill Belichick issued his Nixonian stonewalling statement, the Patriots were still keeping sign-stealing videotapes and notes from past games. Surrender of the tapes and notes was the subject of Goodell's emergency order, first reported by ESPN's Chris Mortensen. Sunday night on NBC's "Football Night in America," Goodell threatened more punishment of the Patriots if all cheating materials aren't surrendered, and repeatedly declared it was imperative that NFL games be fair and equal competition. That's exactly the crux of the threat Belichick has created to the league's golden goose.

Consider the Sunday night contest. New England had played San Diego just four games back, in the January 2007 postseason. Perhaps Belichick's cameraman was illegally taping the Chargers that day, and perhaps Belichick illegally used the information against the Chargers on Sunday night. The San Diego coaching staff has changed since the playoff game, so presumably its defensive calls are different. But San Diego's new defensive coordinator, Ted Cottrell, was defensive coordinator for the Bills and Jets, both AFC East teams, in the Belichick period. Perhaps Belichick has spied on Cottrell's calls before and took out the tapes of the spying rather than handing them over as Goodell demanded. Was New England cheating again Sunday night, when the Patriots advanced the ball with such ease it seemed they knew what defense San Diego would be in?

And the Patriots' cheating might have been more extensive than so far confirmed. Fox Sports reported that former NFL players believe Belichick had microphones installed in the shoulder pads of defensive linemen so the Patriots could tape other teams' offensive audibles and line calls. Needless to say, putting microphones on players violates NFL rules. Andrea Kremer of NBC reported that several teams might charge the Patriots this week with having stolen playbooks from the visitors' dressing room. The convenient "malfunction" of visiting teams' headphones at the Patriots' two fields under Belichick seems to have happened far too often to be an IT department error. The rumor mill says Belichick, Richard Nixon-style, has file cabinets of info on opposing coaches and assistant coaches – some gleaned honestly, some obtained by cheating.

It seems more than just an eerie coincidence that Belichick's unethical behavior involves illicit taping, the same offense that made Nixon's actions so sordid. The parallels to Nixon don't stop there. Caught, Belichick – like Nixon – tried to hide the true extent of the prohibited acts; Belichick – like Nixon – tried to claim his prohibited action hadn't been prohibited; Belichick – like Nixon – immediately stonewalled. It would be tempting to break the unhappy tone of this column with a Nixon joke – when the league plays Belichick's tape of the Jets' sideline, will there be an 18-and-a-half minute gap? But for all lovers of the NFL, there's just nothing to laugh about now.

The Patriots announced they have hired "Swede" Risberg to investigate cheating allegations against the team.
What else is there about New England cheating that the team or league isn't telling us? Are the Patriots one bad apple, or is cheating common in the league? Worst, did the Patriots cheat in their Super Bowl wins? If New England was cheating in the Super Bowl, this will become the darkest sports scandal since Shoeless Joe and the Black Sox. If you don't think Goodell and all owners, including Robert Kraft of New England, are in abject terror of any possible disclosure that the Patriots were cheating in the Super Bowl, perhaps you just don't understand the situation.

The weasel wording of Belichick's Nixonian statement shows the New England coach full of contempt for the NFL fans, and the NFL enterprise, that made him a wealthy celebrity. Belichick declared that his super-elaborate cheating system was only a "mistake" caused by his "interpretation" of the league's rule. Wait, "interpretation"? The NFL rule bans teams from filming each other's sidelines. There's no room for interpretation, it's a ban! Here's the NFL policy, from a memo sent to all head coaches and general managers Sept. 6, 2006: "Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game." Prohibited. There's nothing there to "interpret." Videotaping opponent's signals even after getting this warning isn't a "mistake," it's cheating. Belichick's cheating was not some casual spur-of-the-moment blunder but rather an elaborate staffed system that took a lot of work to put into place and that Belichick worked hard to hide. And you don't hide something unless you are ashamed of it.

Michael Vick tried to deny and stonewall, but at the last owned up and admitted what he did. That's dignity. Belichick is now using weasel words to deny responsibility for his own choices. What kind of example does that set for the young? "Make good choices," football coaches constantly preach to the young. Now, caught, Belichick wants a special exemption to responsibility for his own choices. Belichick also is trying to close the matter by saying he won't talk about it anymore. So he cheated and now unilaterally declares the matter closed because he doesn't want to face the consequences of his own choices. But this is not over and not going away. Before the cheating scandal, Belichick had a reputation for being heartless but a really good coach. Now, he seems little more than a creepy con artist, and it's the refusal to act like a man and take full responsibility that's really offensive. Goodell's draft-choice penalty against the Patriots – either a first or a second and a third – is the highest draft penalty ever imposed in the NFL. The severity of this sanction shows how seriously Goodell takes the violation. If more disclosures are coming, there might be a lot more punishment of the Patriots. And unless Belichick comes clean and stops lying about his cheating, this event should disqualify him from consideration for the Pro Football Hall of Fame – it is, after all, not the Hall of Cheaters.

Will Belichick even be in coaching by season's end? When the Vick dogfighting scandal first broke, most football pundits, and most in the Atlanta and league offices, thought there would be few repercussions. Then they thought Vick would have to make some kind of apology. Then they thought he'd need some leave of absence. Then they thought he'd be suspended for a year. Now they wonder whether he'll ever be allowed to play again. By acting Nixonian, Belichick is accelerating his fall from grace. Today, Belichick and New England are trying to pretend the scandal is over. It would not surprise me in the slightest if, before the season ends, Belichick resigns, or is suspended, or is fired by Kraft, or even is permanently barred from the league. Belichick's head might be necessary to preserve the integrity of the game. Surprisingly soon, sacrificing Belichick to save professional football might seem an attractive option, even to Kraft. Remember, there is no law of nature that says the NFL must remain popular.

[kings]

This guy is an idiot, All the NFL need to do is wire up the defences. Then there's no worry about stealing defence signals - which are fair game.

[batman]

It doesn't matter what the NFL "needs to do". What matters is that the rules were clear as day and the Coach cheated and is acting like it shouldn't be that big a deal.

[kings]

batman said:

It doesn't matter what the NFL "needs to do". What matters is that the rules were clear as day and the Coach cheated and is acting like it shouldn't be that big a deal.

I don't think it was that clear. Did you watch Sunday night? They do have legal cameras on the field recording and printing out each play.

It's just silly man, all they would need to do is look and write down the signal, then compare it to the "legal" camera footage and they'd have the same effect.

What's silly is any coach assuming field signals are safe and protected.

[batman]

kings said:

batman said:

It doesn't matter what the NFL "needs to do". What matters is that the rules were clear as day and the Coach cheated and is acting like it shouldn't be that big a deal.

I don't think it was that clear. Did you watch Sunday night? They do have legal cameras on the field recording and printing out each play.

It's just silly man, all they would need to do is look and write down the signal, then compare it to the "legal" camera footage and they'd have the same effect.

What's silly is any coach assuming field signals are safe and protected.

Did you read the rule? It's clear as day, you can't do it. Period. The NFL has cameras which is how he got away with it so long, they hid in the mix.

The coaches SHOULD get to assume that, since there is a blatant rule outlawing anything that would jeopardize that.

[batman]

NEW YORK -- The NFL has received and destroyed all materials it requested from the New England Patriots concerning videotaping of opponents' sidelines, and a league spokesman said the team was unlikely to face any further sanctions.

An NFL statement Thursday said the team was in compliance with a request for tapes and other documents.

"The Patriots have fully cooperated and complied with the requirements of the commissioner's decision," the statement said. "All tapes, documents and other records relating to this matter were turned over to the league office and destroyed, and the Patriots have certified in writing that no copies or other records exist.

"League policies on in-game videotaping and audio communication will continue to be closely monitored and strictly enforced with all 32 teams."

Last week, Patriots coach Bill Belichick was fined $500,000 by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and the team was fined $250,000 for violating a league rule that prohibits clubs from using a video camera on the sidelines for any purpose -- including recording signals relayed to opposing players on the field. New England also must forfeit a first-round draft pick next year if it makes the playoffs or a second- and third-rounder if it doesn't.

Asked if there could be additional penalties, NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told the Boston Herald: "I don't expect anything further."

A spokesman for the Patriots, Stacey James, said the team was satisfied the case was closed and was focused on Sunday's game against the Buffalo Bills.

A video camera aimed at Jets coaches was confiscated from a Patriots employee during the first quarter of the team's 38-14 win Sept. 9 over the New York Jets. Jets' coach Eric Mangini has had a cool relationship with Belichick since leaving as Patriots defensive coordinator after the 2005 season.

When asked if the Patriots' defensive players also used microphones or other recording devices in their shoulder pads to pick up Jets audibles, Aiello said: "We have no evidence to support that claim."

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press

[batman]

By Gregg Easterbrook
Special to Page 2

Reader Abhijit Kumbare of San Jose, Calif., writes, "It is very fishy that the NFL immediately destroyed all the evidence submitted by the Patriots." Steve Libenson of New York writes, "Consider what the press reaction would have been if David Stern had collected all the evidence about the ref altering games, then immediately destroyed that evidence without saying what it showed, and did so four days after going on national television and promising to get to the bottom of things."

Fishy, indeed. On Sunday, Sept. 16, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell went on national TV and promised he would get to the bottom of the Patriots' sign-stealing. Four days later, the NFL announced all videotapes and other spying materials compiled by the Patriots had been obtained by the league and destroyed. Goodell, who until then had been very upfront in addressing the Beli-Cheat scandal, didn't go back on television to say what the tapes contained; the commissioner has been in radio silence about the Patriots since the files arrived at the NFL's Park Avenue headquarters. The league acted in a hurry to dispose of d**ning documents, but has not revealed what was in the tapes and notes, nor said why there was a rush to get rid of them.

The lack of answers leaves several questions hanging out there. Chief among them: Is it possible the Patriots' tapes showed some evidence of New England cheating in a Super Bowl?

This weekend, in an e-mail exchange with NFL spokesman Greg Aiello, I asked twice whether the Patriots' documents contained evidence of cheating in the Super Bowl, and Aiello twice declined to either confirm or deny the existence of such evidence. The first time, he changed the subject with a detailed response about the original penalty; and the second time, after I protested he hadn't answered my questions, he replied, "I did answer your questions to the extent I'm going to answer them."

As a matter of logic, refusing to deny something is not the same as admitting it. But if the Patriots' tapes and documents contained no indication of cheating in the Super Bowl, it would be strongly in the NFL's interest to publicize this. Instead, the New England documents were shredded within roughly 48 hours of the NFL receiving them -- see timeline below. The rapid shredding occurred although Goodell said nothing about plans to destroy the materials when he was on national TV vowing his purpose was "maintaining the integrity of the NFL."

After Aiello twice declined to say what the Patriots' materials showed, I heard from him a third time Sunday. He wrote in an e-mail that I disagreeumption the tapes contained indications of Super Bowl cheating is "wrong," then wrote, "There is no such evidence regarding the Patriots' Super Bowl victories." So, is this the denial that I've been seeking? But wait: Three days earlier, the NFL destroyed the evidence. I asked Aiello whether he meant there is no evidence now of New England cheating in a Super Bowl -- that is, after the destruction of the files -- or whether examination of the materials positively affirmed no cheating. He did not reply.

Aiello's "There is no such evidence" phrasing calls to mind what Richard Nixon's attorney general John Mitchell dubbed the "non-denial denial," an assertion that seems to say something but doesn't. On Sunday, I asked Aiello whether the league would make a simple, declarative statement that the spying files proved the Patriots did not cheat in a Super Bowl -- and have not heard back from him. I assume this is not because he has forgotten: I've heard from Park Avenue sources that the fact I am asking these questions is very much on the NFL's radar. I have known Aiello professionally for years and, like others who deal with him, have always found him skilled, knowledgeable and forthright. It's very odd to be getting a "non-denial denial" from him now.

I further asked Aiello who had examined the New England materials before they were destroyed, and he would answer only "senior members of the league office staff." I asked when the materials actually arrived at league headquarters -- How long were they there before being destroyed? -- and he would not answer. I asked whether the materials had been inspected by anyone conversant with the game plans and signals the Rams, Panthers and Eagles used against Bill Belichick's Patriots in the Super Bowl; football signs and terminology are cryptic, so it would help to have a skilled eye. Aiello wouldn't answer that. I asked who had ordered the tapes and notes destroyed, and he wouldn't answer that, either.

And I asked, if there was nothing incriminating in the New England documents, why was the league in such a hurry to shred them? First, Aiello wrote, "The purpose of destroying the tapes and related documents was to eliminate any advantage they might have given the Patriots going forward and ensure a level playing field for all 32 teams." But the league announced last week that the Patriots "certified in writing" that no copies of the materials exist. If the sole copies of the sign-stealing materials had been sent to the league office, it would be impossible for these materials to give the Patriots any advantage. When I pointed that out, Aiello countered that the reason for the destruction was "so that our clubs would know they no longer exist and cannot be used by anyone." Again, if the sole copies were being held by the league, how could any club use the material?

Aiello further said Tuesday Morning Quarterback was wrong to assert, in last Tuesday's column, that Goodell issued an "emergency" order on the morning of Sunday, Sept. 16, mandating New England turn over all illegally obtained videotapes and sign-stealing materials. Aiello explained Goodell actually issued that order Thursday, Sept. 13, but that the existence of the order did not become known publicly until the morning of Sept. 16, when it was reported by Chris Mortensen on ESPN. I regret the error.

Aiello said the heavy penalties assessed the Patriots on Sept. 13 were for "the totality of the conduct" in multiple instances of sign-stealing over several years, not for "one tape seized at the end of one quarter of one game," meaning the tape taken from the Patriots in their season opener at the New York Jets.

It is unclear why, if Goodell on Sept. 13 issued an order for the surrender of all New England spying tapes and materials, the league said nothing about that directive at the time. More important, come Sunday night, Sept. 16, Goodell told Bob Costas of NBC that the Patriots had not yet complied with the order that we now know was issued Thursday and that he would "absolutely" impose additional penalties on the Patriots if they did not comply promptly. This means there were at least 72 hours in which New England was failing to abide by a high-profile direct order from the commissioner of the NFL -- and in that time was doing with its spying materials, well, lord knows what.

Here is a timeline of events so far:

Sunday, Sept. 9: During the Patriots-Jets season opener, security officers seize a video camera a team official on the New England sideline was using to film signal-calling on the New York sideline. NFL rules forbid filming the opponents' sideline or recording opponents' signal calling. Clubs had been reminded of this prohibition by a strongly worded directive sent from league headquarters in September 2006.

Thursday, Sept. 13: Commissioner Goodell declares the Patriots guilty of "a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid long-standing rules designed to encourage fair play and promote honest competition on the playing field." He imposes on New England the strongest penalty in NFL history: loss of a first-round pick (if the Pats make the playoffs), or second- and third-round choices in the 2008 draft (if New England fails to reach the postseason); a $500,000 personal fine against Belichick; and a $250,000 club fine. Goodell orders the Patriots to turn over all videotapes and other materials obtained in violation of NFL rules, although this part of his decision is not publicly announced.

Sunday morning, Sept. 16: On ESPN, Chris Mortensen reports Goodell's directive that the Patriots surrender all videotapes and notes containing cheating materials.

Sunday evening, Sept. 16: On NBC's "Football Night in America," Goodell says New England has not yet complied with his order to surrender all illegal materials, adding the Patriots will be penalized more if the materials don't arrive soon.

Monday, Sept. 17: Asked whether he will surrender videotapes and notes to the league, Belichick answers, "Of course." Asked by The Boston Globe whether NFL headquarters has received the Patriots' materials, Aiello answers, "We don't have anything else on the matter to report right now."

Sometime between Monday night, Sept. 17, and Thursday afternoon, Sept. 20: The New England materials arrive at league headquarters.

Thursday night, Sept. 20: The NFL announces all of the Patriots' materials have been destroyed, disclosing nothing about their contents.

The history of scandals teaches us that when the point is reached that everything has come out, then the principals apologize in public and tell all. When the point has not yet been reached that everything has come out, there is usually stonewalling, denial and weird Nixonian/Clintonesque statements. The destruction of evidence and the lack of answers about what the evidence contained, leaves me wondering if there is something very important about the Patriots' spying scandal that has not yet come out.