Now that Matt Walsh has been interviewed by both Roger Goodell and Arlen Specter, most people around the country have accepted an end to the Spygate saga.  From listening to the talk shows, most fans around the country are willing to forgive and forget.  They know that no new tapes have come out and are ready to let Spygate go, but I wonder how much of that is based on the tone of the NFL, which now claims that Spygate is over.  Roger Goodell would have us believe that Matt Walsh brought nothing new to the table, and that the tapes he supplied were old news.  The Patriots have claimed a victory because no new tapes were revealed, and the Boston Herald was forced to print an embarrassing front page retraction concerning the taping of the Rams walkthrough. 

Many have questioned the role of a US Senator in all this, and I did as well, but I also thought the same thing when the whole baseball steroid scandal was exposed, based simply on a book by Jose Canseco.  That has led to some substantial changes in baseball.  Specter argues that since the NFL enjoys an antitrust exemption from the government, without which they would not be nearly as profitable, that the government and thus the people deserve to know the truth.  I suppose I can buy that, but do agree with most that there are more pressing matters affecting this country.  In any case, the entire text of his press conference can be seen here.

There are some interesting details from Specter’s interview which did not come out in Goodell’s press conference, either because Goodell didn’t ask the proper questions or did not want to discuss them.

During the AFC Championship Game against the Steelers on Jan. 27, 2002, at Heinz Field, Walsh was instructed not to wear anything displaying a Patriots logo. Walsh said he turned the Patriots sweatshirt he was wearing at the time inside out. Walsh also was given a generic credential instead of one that identified him as team personnel. Walsh was instructed to use a "cover story" if anyone questioned him about the filming. 

This to me is the most damning statement I have heard the past few days because it makes it clear that Belichick flat out lied to Goodell.  He initially claimed that he didn’t intentionally cheat, but he simply misunderstood the rules.  From the instructions given to Matt Walsh, Belichick clearly knew that what he was doing was against the rules.  Goodell severely sanctioned both Pac Man Jones and Micheal Vick with suspensions when they were caught lying to him.  Belichick deserves the same punishment.  Both players lost years of salary.  They each lost multiple millions of dollars for indiscretions outside the football field.  Belichick was only fined half a million for indiscretions on the field.  Goodell needs to be more consistent.  So far, there’s been no comment from Belichick.

Walsh first filmed an opponents' coaching signals during the Aug. 20, 2000, preseason game against Tampa Bay. After Walsh filmed the game, he gave the tape to coaching assistant Ernie Adams. Walsh was told by a former Patriots quarterback (Walsh declined to name the quarterback, but the QB’s on the Patriot roster at that time were Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, John Friesz, and Michael Bishop) that a few days before New England's Sept. 11, 2000, regular-season game against Tampa Bay, the player met with Adams, coach Bill Belichick and Charlie Weis, then the offensive coordinator, during which it was explained how the Patriots would use the tapes. The quarterback told Walsh the information from the tape enabled the Patriots to anticipate at least 75 percent of the plays being called by the opposing team.

I’ve heard several coaches and Goodell himself say that this videotaping would not provide much of an advantage, yet in this game against Tampa Bay, the Patriots player claimed he knew what defensive play he would be facing 75% of the time.  That is a whopping number of plays, and would give a considerable advantage.  I’m only a decent chess player, but if I knew what moves you were going to make 75% of the time, I should be able to beat you 100% of the time.

It will be interesting to see how the Patriots do next year.  With the implementation of radio receivers in the helmets of defensive players, the stealing of signals will be at least much more difficult, though probably not impossible.  The Patriots will have to go old school, and try to figure out defenses by looking at tendencies and pre snap formations, just like everyone else.  Of course, with Randy Moss, Wes Welker, and Tom Brady, that might not matter.  The most telling statistic might be the number of sacks the offensive line gives up.  Presumably, if the offense knew what defense would be coming 75% of the time, they would be able to shift the protections to protect Brady, but without that information, will the protection suffer?  Brady’s completion percentage might also suffer.  Throughout his career, I’ve always been amazed at how fast Brady could find and hit the open receiver.  Perhaps this was because 75% of the time, he knew who would be open before the play started.  After all, he was on the roster in 2000, and could have been the quarterback who told Walsh they knew the plays 75% of the time.

Has everyone forgotten about the lawsuit filed by the lawyer/Jets fan in New York?  He was the first to file against the Patriots in September after Spygate was first exposed.  Patriot fans all assume this to be a silly lawsuit brought on by a lawyer with a history of filing frivolous suits, so they expect this case to be thrown out.  Can any judge throw this out as frivolous given the fact that this case has actually been investigated by a US senator?  Think what you will about Arlen Specter, but he is a highly respected US senator, so this lawsuit must be taken seriously.  I think one of the reasons the Krafts and the Patriots did not sue the Herald for libel was that they did not want to come under the scrutiny that would come with such a lawsuit.  If this fan’s lawsuit is allowed to go forward, that scrutiny will come.

In the past few days, I’ve heard and read patriot apologists scream:  What about tampering?  That’s cheating too.  What about Denver and San Francisco cheating with the salary cap?  Arlen Specter is only doing this because he’s working for Comcast which is in a fight with the NFL about the NFL network. 

First of all, as too the tampering and cap violations, those only affect the composition of the roster.  Granted these are against the rules of the NFL, but do no affect the integrity of the game itself.  Once the rosters are set, these infractions do not affect how the games are played.  Spygate directly affects how a game is played and can influence the outcome.

On most of the websites and on Sirius NFL radio, Mark Schlereth of ESPN has been skewered for suggesting that the videos might have been used to give the Patriots an advantage during the game.  Most of the argument against him revolves around the fact that it would be difficult to break down the tape during halftime, decode it, and then use it during the second half.  This probably would be difficult if you were trying to do it de novo, ie., if you had no other information.  What if they did have other information though?  If they studied previous tape of their opponent’s defensive signals, then all they’d have to do is look to see if anything had changed.  If not, then they knew that most of the signals they had in their library were valid for that game.

Walsh has stated in several media outlets that there was no hurry in processing the tapes, and that they were to be used for future games, so as far as he knew, they were not used in the same game.

I’ve heard it argued that defenses should simply change their defensive signals every game to deter signal stealing.  While this may seem like a simple solution, applying it would be much more complicated and fraught with peril.  I heard Peter King on Sirius radio say that teams can’t change all their defensive signals every game because this would require memorization of too many signals would be hard for veterans let alone rookies who might be receiving the signals.  Getting a defensive signal wrong could lead to a big play by the offense, so I doubt that most teams would want to change their signals every game.   Walsh stated that some teams, when playing the Patriots, used several people to send in the signals simultaneously, so only the defensive player knew who to watch.  That could be decoded as well.  It would just take more time.

I’ve heard some argue that video taping is the same as taking notes, and that’s not illegal, so why is videotaping illegal?  To this I say, if a picture is worth a thousand words, then what is a video worth?  There is no way a skilled coach could describe in words what an unskilled videographer could provide.  Just try conveying in words a series of complex movements, then try to replicate it from what you wrote.  Then try to do it while analyzing a defensive play.  It gets incredibly complex to put both into words, but very easy with video.  That’s why videotaping is illegal.

Several years ago, I bought a book called Freakonomics.  I started reading it, got bored, and let it sit on my shelf for several years.  Since I have the week off, I got it out again.  In case you haven’t read this book, it was written by an economist, Steven Levitt, who applies economic theories to other issues.  The first chapter deals with cheating: Basically, anyone who cheats derives some sort of gain from this action.  That’s why we do it.  So we need incentives not to cheat.  There are basically three incentives not to cheat; monetary, social, and moral.  In this case, monetarily, Belichick has already been fined a half a million dollars, but that’s a drop in the bucket to him, especially if he continues to win, so I don’t think that’s much of a deterrent.  Socially, his peers are already supporting him, saying that it’s time to move on, and that his cheating wouldn’t have much outcome on the game, so again this is not much of a deterrent.  Morally, we already know that Belichick has lied to the commissioner and to his peers, so unless he’s had some sort of moral awakening, this will not deter him from cheating again.

Basically it comes down to risk/reward.  For Belichick, a man who has football in his blood, winning is the only thing, so the reward is certainly worth the risk of cheating.  Personally, I don’t think he will stop cheating; he’ll just get better at it.