How bout them skins?

[.RJ]

i dont think the hand signal stealing is really the issue at hand. its the video taping of the hand signals thats illegal.

I'm glad you have a grasp on the obvious

in baseball, players try to steal signals all the time, but then the pitchers and bench coaches will just change it up and basically nullify the stolen info.

So why cant this be done in football?

but defenses in football are well choreographed and tipping off what defensive play basically gives the offense a free play.

Assuming the offense not only correctly reads the hand signals/audibles, they also have to be ready to capitalize on it. Get it wrong, and its a big backfire.... its still not a free pass.

[ScottyB]

But if motorcycle noises are nothing but audible, ironically before the 4 stroke era and Ducati's dropping of mufflers Honda prided themselves on a quiet bike, then aren't hand signals nothing but visual?

darnit i really think i have a point somewhere but i can't convey it right. you have good reasoning there.

i guess its more of a thing related to how the competition can advance. with exhaust notes, someone may study and take that tech to create a new product with more competitive speed....but it's still down to the rider to pilot it and the mechanics to implement it.

with hand signals, by decoding them you're kind of cancelling out the competition from the get-go. instead of a response and escalation of competition over time it's like killing it at the source. there's something weak and not cool about it, and i can't convey it any further.

[Maengelito]

in baseball, players try to steal signals all the time, but then the pitchers and bench coaches will just change it up and basically nullify the stolen info.

So why cant this be done in football?

there are more than 4 different defensive plays you can run. you also have 25 seconds to get your particular defensive package on the field while getting the others off the field and thats assuming that the offense is using the full play clock.

but defenses in football are well choreographed and tipping off what defensive play basically gives the offense a free play.

Assuming the offense not only correctly reads the hand signals/audibles, they also have to be ready to capitalize on it. Get it wrong, and its a big backfire.... its still not a free pass.

if your team can't make plays even when you know what the defense is gonna do, then the coach may wanna start having practice where players actually practice instead of run laps and do pushups

[stevegula]

the part that just seems way too coincidental is that the Pats aren't just stealing hand signals (which should have been nullified mostly by having wireless headsets in the offensive captain's and defensive captain's helmets) but they also magically have a stadium where opponents radio equipment seems to stop working, forcing teams to have to fall back on the hand signals.

Offenses these days have playbooks the size of textbooks, they can't do hand signals for everything. Defenses aren't particularly simple either when you're trying to assign man-to-man coverages, or LB/secondary drops/blitzes in a handful of seconds.

And I'm sure a plenty of people believe part of the fun part of the sport is that one side doesn't know what the other is doing, so anything can break open at anytime. When one side of the ball knows what both sides of the ball are going to do then it's considerably less exciting.

[Ginger]

This isn't helping the "football is full big, dumb oafs" stereotype.

What I see being said is "football is complicated, we wouldn't want to have to compete with education (which is essentially what videotaping is) because we worked so hard to establish the airport plane jockey signaling."

I understand why you guys are so charged up... the Pats obviously broke the rules in place. That's not fair and they should be penalized for it. But why not consider this a chance to revise the rules? If it's illegal to videotape then it's logical to assume that teams will do the next best thing - probably do something like hire a "Hand Signal Identifier" who's job it is to figure out what each team's signals mean without the use of tape. The regulation, it would seem, would then hinder the efficiency of money spent in the sport because teams would be significant sums on Their Man because his effectiveness is directly related to theirs. So why not cut to the chase?

I think, and I'm totally ignorant, that allowing one player on the field from each team at any given time to have a communicator would be a good solution, Hand signals would vanish and an expectation of secrecy would be established... it would be much easier to support an Intellectual Property theft claim (yeah, I know, the current rule is cut and dry, but as a dissenter I see it as kind of silly), essentially what's at stake, if there were some kind of actually barrier to that theft. A lot like leaving your car running while you go into a store - yes, it's still illegal for somebody to take it, but don't expect much sympathy, or help, from the Police when they find out you didn't make any effort to protect your investment. The NFL should take the keys out of the ignition... otherwise I wouldn't be surprised to see this kind of thing again.

*ninja edit* to respond to Steve's statement which seems to tell me that the radio rule is already in effect which I mentioned a few lines up: perhaps the NFL should mandate the type of communicator and assign secure channels at random immediately preceeding kickoff? This would seem to solve the "Bermuda Stadium" problem... if they blocked communications then they would be shooting themselves in the foot.

[Hunter]

The tuesday morning quarterback on espn talked about the pats running up the score this week.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/071030">http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ook/071030</a><!-- m -->

In other football news, man, the Patriots play well -- and, man, are they bad sports. With 13 minutes remaining, New England led Washington 38-0 -- 13 points more than the margin of the greatest fourth-quarter comeback in NFL history -- yet Tom Brady was still on the field, still in the shotgun and still throwing deep. When it was 52-0, most New England defensive starters were still on the field, desperately trying to prevent a Redskins consolation touchdown. In a nationally televised game, Bill Belichick went out of his way to display bad sportsmanship; it was especially coarse that Belichick sought to humiliate Hall of Fame coach Joe Gibbs, a mild-mannered, dignified man who always treats others respectfully. See more on the Patriots' good play plus bad sportsmanship below. For now, it's enough to say that other teams could have run up the score Sunday but instead showed dignity. When Indianapolis took a 31-7 lead at the beginning of the fourth quarter at Carolina, Peyton Manning and most of the Colts' starters sat down. Tony Dungy made no attempt to run up the score. When New Orleans went ahead 31-3 early in the fourth quarter against San Francisco, Drew Brees and most of the Saints' starters sat down.

... later on

This Week's Anti-Belichick Item: First, praise where due: No one draws up a better game plan than Belichick. This season, he usually has started with the shotgun spread and lots of quick slants. Belichick correctly guessed Washington would spend the week practicing to defend the shotgun spread and quick slants, so the New England coach opened with Tom Brady under center and the Patriots running up the middle. Sure enough, the Redskins were in a defense tailored to stop slant passing, with their linebackers backed off nearly 10 yards. After several consecutive runs worked, Washington brought its linebackers up, and Brady immediately started throwing slants. Belichick varies his game plan more from week to week than any other NFL coach, and the variations are almost always intelligent and sophisticated. If you wanted to win a game and had to choose a coach, all other things being equal, you'd be nuts not to choose Belichick.

But all other things aren't equal. Last week's TMQ called the Colts the good team and the Patriots the bad team in a "Good vs. Evil" setup for next week's clash. After the column posted, I felt badly that I had not made clear I was being satirical -- that was my failing as a writer -- because, after all, none of us has the slightest idea what is in the hearts of Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. There was Internet chatter calling me biased, ignorant, lower than pond scum; although in 2004 when I wrote a column for NFL.com saying Belichick was not only the best coach of the moment but perhaps the best coach ever, I don't recall anyone calling me biased or uninformed. Anyway, I apologize to Brady for complaining that he smirks -- saying this is an insult, and although it's fine to criticize public figures, insults are childish. (Remember, my argument is not with the New England players, it is with bad sportsmanship and cheating.) I even toyed with apologizing to Belichick, since comparing him to Beelzebub was a tad overloaded. But then I watched Sunday's game and thought, Belichick is exactly what I said!

With 13 minutes remaining, the Patriots led 38-0, yet Brady not only was still on the field but was in the shotgun and still throwing deep. With 12 minutes to play, New England jumped offsides on third-and-2; Brady visibly yelled "f---!" in angry disgust. With his team ahead 38-0! At 11 minutes remaining, Belichick went for it on fourth-and-1, frantically trying to humiliate genteel Joe Gibbs by running up the score. When Brady threw to Wes Welker for yet another touchdown, he celebrated wildly afterward. OK, it's unfair to say Brady smirks. But a true sportsman, or anyone with dignity, would have felt embarrassed about celebrating wildly at 45-0 in the fourth quarter. Matt Cassel came in at quarterback, and immediately began throwing from the shotgun. Belichick went for it on fourth-and-2 with a 45-point lead, and soon the Patriots were celebrating wildly when Cassel ran for a TD himself.

Now it's 52-0 late in the fourth quarter, but Belichick wasn't satisfied. Most defensive starters remained in the game. With four minutes to go, Mike Vrabel was still on the field and Patriots coaches were still calling blitzes. With three minutes to go, Rosevelt Colvin was still on the field and Patriots coaches were still calling blitzes. With 30 seconds remaining, Asante Samuel and many other starters were still on the field, frantically trying to prevent Washington from recording a second consolation touchdown.

You certainly can ask why the Redskins, especially tastefully named Gregg Williams, took their humiliation at New England so passively. If it were 38-0 in the fourth quarter and the other side still had its starting quarterback on the field throwing deep, I would have called a double safety blitz and slammed Brady to the ground; Belichick immediately would have taken the starters out, and the mockery of sportsmanship would have ended. After the game, Colvin and other Patriots players said that in the pros, you should play full-tilt no matter how lopsided the score. If that's true, no one from New England could have complained if Williams had called an all-out blitz to hammer Brady. Why Williams kept calling vanilla defenses in the fourth quarter, passively submitting to being mocked, is something only he knows. But the fact that Washington took its humiliation lying down is no excuse for New England's classless victory. The bad sportsmanship doesn't even make coaching sense -- what if Brady or some other valuable player gets injured during a meaningless fourth quarter running-up-the-score

[Feersty]

The Redskins have a lot of work to do, there is no doubt about that. Some consistency would help. I think Clinton has to start doing some power running and not just dance around and try and make people miss.

I am happy with the Pats, I have Tom Brady on both my fantasy teams. He is a great effin' quarterback.

[John]

This is their best performance yet - will they hold?

[Hunter]

Quit jinxing the redskins!

[WRXtranceformed]

Ugh they're blowing it

[John]

They're coming back... Jason Campbell has been on point all game...

[WRXtranceformed]

*sigh*

At least Campbell is looking really good now. He's coming a long way and is going to be a great QB for us.

[Evan]

Fire Jason Campbell. He looks like shit, I dont care what Joe Buck says, he needs to stick to baseball.

Slow decisions, late passes, he doesnt see the whole field and constantly misses wide open recievers (2 which would have won the game today), every pass is thrown behind a receiver or off target.

The Redskins are going to blow 2 or 3 seasons on this guy before they realize he is never going to be a good quarterback.

[Apoc]

At least Campbell is looking really good now. He's coming a long way and is going to be a great QB for us.

That's just crazy talk.

It's clear to me that the Cowboys defense doesn't have a defense to win the SB. I said it a few weeks ago and it's even more obvious today. I think Cambell's success was a due to a serious inability of the Cowboys to A) rush the passer and B) cover the middle of the field.

[WRXtranceformed]

He's a young player, I think he's done very well and made a lot of mature decisions for how long he's been a starting QB. He's certainly doing better than our last starting QB!

[WRXtranceformed]

If anyone should be fired it should be Gibbs imo!

[Mike]

today was the first day that i actually thought campbell looked like he might be something to invest your future in... previously, i thought he was shit. they let him throw down field a bit more and what do you know? 300+ yards.

today's game was lost to randy moss. had sean taylor been playing, i think two or three of those touchdowns may not have happened.

[Evan]

I think you mean T.O.

[Mike]

yeah yeah, i'm a little tipsy and watching moss dominate right now.

[Maengelito]

did the skins forget the TO was playing and a pretty good receiver? holy shit