In the wake of the Patriots' dominating 38-14 win over the San Diego Chargers, it seems that the furor over Bill Belichick's video-taping of the New York Jets' defensive signals last week is continuing and growing. Just when it seemed that the affair was running its course -- culminating in an unprecedented fine and loss of the Patriots' first round draft pick -- the media is looking for new ways to rehash and expand the story.
Now we hear reports of three additional bits of information.
- First, the Jets apparently complained about the same sort of videotaping last year. Apparently, nothing was done about it.
- Second, we learn that the Jets are urging a continuation of the investigation into the Patriots use of technology for picking up the audio from the game.
- Third, it seems that the NFL is demanding that the Patriots produce all videotapes and notes contained in the Patriots' "library" of information that they supposedly maintain.
In an interview before last night's San Diego game, Roger Goodell disclosed that he would consider further sanctions in the event he learned of additional sanctions. He did not say whether the current sanctions (e.g., the fines and draft pick) are meant to cover all past misconduct (so long as the Patriots voluntarily disclose it), or whether it only covers the videotaping during the Jets game.
Until last week, it seems that the league rule against videotaping on the sideline was most honored in the breach. The effect of the league's memo to teams was to put everyone on notice that, effective this year, the league will be serious about enforcing these rules. Gone are the days of the league turning a blind eye.
Having given specific notice that the league will be rigidly enforcing the rules against videotaping, it is perfectly fair for the league to impose stiff sanctions on teams that violate the rules from this point forward. However, notwithstanding the fact that videotaping may have violated the letter of the rules even in 2001-2006, as a practical matter it seems that it tacitly accepted (as evidenced by the fact that a similar complaint by the Jets last year was not acted upon).
It would not be fair for the league to apply the new, strict standards to conduct that occurred before teams were put on notice that videotaping would not be tolerated. It would be equally unfair for the Patriots to be selectively singled out for punishment for pre-2007 violations when other teams may have committed the same historical violations.
In this spirit, it is interesting to note that while Belichick was punished for the taping that occurred during the Jets game, no other coaches were similarly punished. I would like to know if Goodell determined whether other coaches knew about, and acquiesced in, the videotaping, and if they were, why the assistant coaches were not also punished.
Lest we forget, Eric Mangini was the defensive coordinator for the Patriots a couple years ago, and if the Patriots were videotaping during this time period, Mangini likely knew about it, condoned it, and acquiesced in it.
Perhaps it's too much to hope for, but it would be poetic justice if the investigation into the Patriots' prior misconduct ended up revealing that Mangini himself had engaged in the very same misconduct.
When one approaches the league commissioner seeking a remedy from big brother, he should make sure he comes with clean hands.
Comments