Tony Dungy: We Stole Signals, Everyone Steals Signals

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
33,435
Here
Since I know other threads will get sidetracked, I figured we can separate and #BringBackSpygate #MSGA

You know, what pisses me off is that he is both completely correct and also a complete weasel and coward for blowing it up the way he has for years. He never admitted to stealing signals and explaining how taping was a minor line-step, but he went along with the "they knew our plays!" BS, despite having also stolen signals himself. He is such a sanctimonious douchecanoe. And so are many other coaches who left Belichick, who has tremendous respect for his peers and their career roles, out to dry.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/02/08/tony-dungy-on-stealing-signals-its-been-done-legally-for-years/
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
“It wasn’t getting signals, it was the process of videotaping and using electronic equipment during the game,” Dungy said of the difference between the Patriots and other teams.

Well it took ten years, but we're almost there. If he just adds a "from the wrong location" in there we're finally close enough to a description of what actually happened.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,260
To be fair, the author of the article added the following just before Dungy's quote:

What was different with Spygate is that teams had specifically been instructed not to videotape opposing teams’ signals on the sideline during the game, and the Patriots did it anyway.
 

Dogman

Yukon Cornelius
Dope
Mar 19, 2004
14,361
Missoula, MT
The Patriots won #5 on Sunday. This is a silly ploy by a bitter man because he and Peyton are not in the class BB and Brady are.

Dungy: "Let's keep the cheating BS front page despite what the Patriots just did" It's an attempt to downplay how fucking good NE is and the insane accomplishments of a franchise that is so much better than the rest of the league.

Sweet, sweet tears.
 

Oil Can Dan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2003
7,333
0-3 to 4-3
“It wasn’t getting signals, it was the process of videotaping and using electronic equipment during the game,” Dungy said of the difference between the Patriots and other teams.

Well it took ten years, but we're almost there. If he just adds a "from the wrong location...which enabled the team to utilize and take advantage of the signals during the game, which is kind of the entire point in the distinction" in there we're finally close enough to a description of what actually happened.
 

Ralphwiggum

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
8,898
Needham, MA
I hesitate to even ask this, but, why would they have been able to use tapes of signals made from the sidelines during games, but not tapes of signals made from permitted taping locations?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
48,302
Tape was confiscated on its way to the locker room at halftime, yes?

Are you saying that they taped the first half and during the 15 minute halftime break analyzed that hour plus long tape and changed their game plan?
 

Number45forever

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2003
1,967
Vermont
This homophobic, egotistical, hypocritical prick can always and forever continue fucking himself. Garbage human wrapped in a shiny faux-moral shell of plastic grinning bullshit.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
9,373
To be fair, the author of the article added the following just before Dungy's quote:
Yes, the Pats got in trouble because the league made this activity a specific point of emphasis, and the Pats continued to do it. That the league warned all the teams and not just the Pats suggests it was a wider spread activity than people made it out to be after they got caught. At least that's how I interpret all of that. But they were told not to do something and then obviously got caught doing it, so I have no problem with them being punished. But like with Ballghazi, the not that major violation was exaggerated into some maniacal scheme only the Patriots would ever engage in, and the punishment was completely out of proportion. It should have been a fine the next day and that's that.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
9,622
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Tape was confiscated on its way to the locker room at halftime, yes?
Matt Walsh himself said the tapes weren't used during the game and that he was instructed to get the footage to Ernie the following day. Or, you can disregard that and believe they had time to break down about 35 defensive plays and get every specific signal in 15 minutes.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
18,219
Yes, the Pats got in trouble because the league made this activity a specific point of emphasis, and the Pats continued to do it. That the league warned all the teams and not just the Pats suggests it was a wider spread activity than people made it out to be after they got caught. At least that's how I interpret all of that. But they were told not to do something and then obviously got caught doing it, so I have no problem with them being punished. But like with Ballghazi, the not that major violation was exaggerated into some maniacal scheme only the Patriots would ever engage in, and the punishment was completely out of proportion. It should have been a fine the next day and that's that.
This is exactly right. Though there was an ESPN article that came out (I know, I know) that had a lot more detail in it, and the way the story read, with lots of attribution, it sure seemed like the Patriots knew they were doing something they shouldn't have been doing.

So I don't have any problem (and I've said this from the beginning) with the Pats getting whacked for Spygate. I think the penalty was way too harsh, but they should have gotten whacked in some way.

That the Broncos (McDaniels...ahem) were actually caught taping the 49ers practice before their 2010 London game and only got fined (no loss of draft picks), even though Denver was a repeat offender, and even though this was McDaniels - part of the Pats' staff when Spygate broke - is just incredible to me.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
It was BB's edge pushing loophole too. "Oh I thought that just pertained to taping footage to use during the game, we're not doing that so its cool"

But people believe what they want to believe, is what it is.
 

Oil Can Dan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2003
7,333
0-3 to 4-3
Are you saying that they taped the first half and during the 15 minute halftime break analyzed that hour plus long tape and changed their game plan?
I'm not saying that they did that. I am saying the spirit of the rule is to prohibit that.

How much film time do you think is involved in recording a snapshot of a scoreboard showing down & distance and then hand signals from a coach? You don't even need the play. I could literally ask the videographer to show me the signals from the 3rd & 8 play at 10:45ish of the 2nd quarter (the one with the blitz that I'd like to know what the signals are), and it would take less than a minute to get that with the mostly any videocamera.

Next time I see those signals I know what's up.

I should know better than to get back in to this here, because I know what a sensitive subject it is for Pats fans. Please note I do not think the Pats are some crazy insane cheaters that have to cheat to win, or that what they did warranted the hoopla and hysteria around it, nor do I think they videotaped Rams walkthroughs or whatever. But on this particular subject I think I have a clear understanding of what they did and I can hypothesize as to why they did it. I have personally seen the tapes that teams exchanged with each other back then and have been inside teams video rooms. To me there was absolutely no reason for the filming on the sidelines to happen given those things. The information was freely exchanged by teams post-game at that time. Add in that the situation was specifically addressed via memo and yet the Pats STILL did it, I can come to my own conclusion that it's likely that they were looking to decipher some signals during the game.

It's okay for us to disagree on this.
 

H78

Fists of Millennial Fury!
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2009
4,613
I just love that this team is held to a completely different standard when it comes to enforcing league "rules" yet all they do in the face of it is continue to win championships.

People like Tony Dungy just don't matter anymore. He knows it and he's just trying to minimize the damage to his own "legacy."
 

kelpapa

Costanza's Hero
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
4,267
I hesitate to even ask this, but, why would they have been able to use tapes of signals made from the sidelines during games, but not tapes of signals made from permitted taping locations?
I read a post on here a while ago that said audio could be an issue. You could potentially record audio from the other sideline if you are on the opposing sideline. I don't know if that's possible with the recording equipment that was used given the distance and action in between it, but I guess I could see that as a potential reason for the rule.
 

bradmahn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
591
I'm not saying that they did that. I am saying the spirit of the rule is to prohibit that.

How much film time do you think is involved in recording a snapshot of a scoreboard showing down & distance and then hand signals from a coach? You don't even need the play. I could literally ask the videographer to show me the signals from the 3rd & 8 play at 10:45ish of the 2nd quarter (the one with the blitz that I'd like to know what the signals are), and it would take less than a minute to get that with the mostly any videocamera.

Next time I see those signals I know what's up.

I should know better than to get back in to this here, because I know what a sensitive subject it is for Pats fans. Please note I do not think the Pats are some crazy insane cheaters that have to cheat to win, or that what they did warranted the hoopla and hysteria around it, nor do I think they videotaped Rams walkthroughs or whatever. But on this particular subject I think I have a clear understanding of what they did and I can hypothesize as to why they did it. I have personally seen the tapes that teams exchanged with each other back then and have been inside teams video rooms. To me there was absolutely no reason for the filming on the sidelines to happen given those things. The information was freely exchanged by teams post-game at that time. Add in that the situation was specifically addressed via memo and yet the Pats STILL did it, I can come to my own conclusion that it's likely that they were looking to decipher some signals during the game.

It's okay for us to disagree on this.
Except the league and Matt Walsh have both declared that to not be the case. Notably, they're both Patriots sympathizers, so of course they'd say that.
 

Sox and Rocks

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
5,808
Northern Colorado
The whole purpose of taping wasn't to steal signals. There are only so many signals that can be used, so many teams use the same, though they mix it up (much like in baseball). The purpose of taping is to know what coverage was called originally, before a possible audible or breakdown in coverage, which is obviously helpful when gameplanning a defense.

That is why it is allowed, and why the Pats did it, along with everyone else. The only thing the Pats were guilty of was defying Goodell's self-appointed authority (sound familiar?)
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
31,738
The Patriots won #5 on Sunday. This is a silly ploy by a bitter man because he and Peyton are not in the class BB and Brady are.

Dungy: "Let's keep the cheating BS front page despite what the Patriots just did" It's an attempt to downplay how fucking good NE is and the insane accomplishments of a franchise that is so much better than the rest of the league.

Sweet, sweet tears.
Dungy is talking about this now because Deion Sanders forced him to by calling the Colts out publicly.

I read a post on here a while ago that said audio could be an issue. You could potentially record audio from the other sideline if you are on the opposing sideline. I don't know if that's possible with the recording equipment that was used given the distance and action in between it, but I guess I could see that as a potential reason for the rule.
Jeff Fisher & Co. on the Competition Committee were engaged in a multi-year effort to minimize the use of technology in coaching teams, so that might have been the reason.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
9,454
Westwood MA
To be fair, the author of the article added the following just before Dungy's quote:
That is plain as day and hits on the key issue; explain to me why people cannot grasp that concept?

It's not WHAT they did, it's WHERE they did it from.

People/fans can't be that stupid, they get it, they just don't want to acknowledge it.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
56,524
Rotten Apple
Dungy is talking about this now because Deion Sanders forced him to by calling the Colts out publicly.
Exactly. Dungy on many occasions hit the Pats and BB for cheating but never fessed up to this. Only now when he is forced to, he talks about it. He's a (Hall of Fame) hypocrite and a liar.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,506
Tape was confiscated on its way to the locker room at halftime, yes?
Do you have any idea how long it takes to edit video now? It was a lot more difficult way back when, especially as they were using actual fucking videotape. There simply isn't enough time to get a working highlight reel of all the relevant signals in the 15 minutes you have for a halftime meeting.
 

allstonite

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 27, 2010
1,991
That is plain as day and hits on the key issue; explain to me why people cannot grasp that concept?

It's not WHAT they did, it's WHERE they did it from.

People/fans can't be that stupid, they get it, they just don't want to acknowledge it.
I think the vast majority of people don't know. Not that they're stupid but they just know the rule the Patriots were punished for. How many times have you been in a discussion about spygate and the other person simply says "they were taping signals." The obvious response is "your team does too" but a lot of people don't get that and don't look beyond the headline.

Also, just to pile on because he deserves it: Fuck Tony Dungy that bigoted, sanctimonious asshole.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,260
The most complete article I found about the whole Spygate nonsense is here:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/199345-the-truth-about-spygate-punishing-success-and-promoting-parity

Now, folks are willing to dispute the author's conclusions. But the article does a really good job explaining the actual facts, the rules in question that were violated, and why there were issues open to interpretation.

It also explains how the Jets were videotaping from the Gillette end zone, which happened after the league memo was published. It also recaps the situation that happened during a game in Green Bay in 2006 in which the Pats were caught videotaping from the sidelines. After the game, Mike Holmgren complained publicly about the Pats videotaping, but the league decided not to act. That incident also happened after the memo. None of this absolves Belichick; he decided to ignore the memo rather than contact the league office to get clarification ahead of time.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,506
I'm not saying that they did that. I am saying the spirit of the rule is to prohibit that.

How much film time do you think is involved in recording a snapshot of a scoreboard showing down & distance and then hand signals from a coach? You don't even need the play. I could literally ask the videographer to show me the signals from the 3rd & 8 play at 10:45ish of the 2nd quarter (the one with the blitz that I'd like to know what the signals are), and it would take less than a minute to get that with the mostly any videocamera.
Not with actual videotape, no. The Patriots didn't have modern digital video recording equipment in 2007. Their video library, which they were ordered to turn over to the NFL for destruction, was actual videocassettes.
 

Oil Can Dan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2003
7,333
0-3 to 4-3
Do you have any idea how long it takes to edit video now? It was a lot more difficult way back when, especially as they were using actual fucking videotape. There simply isn't enough time to get a working highlight reel of all the relevant signals in the 15 minutes you have for a halftime meeting.
There is no editing required. There is rewinding required. Do you have any idea how long it takes to rewind recorded video? Not long. And nobody is suggesting that 12 minutes is enough time to review *all* playcalls or whatever. Perhaps this recording only helps decipher one signal. That's one more than they should be allowed to do.

- Record down, distance, game clock
- Record hand signals calling defense

Coach knows this is going on, and notes the time of a particular play he wants to know the hand signal for

- Have cameraman rewind through the viewfinder to that point, then let coach watch the defensive play call

There's a good reason recording is permitted at some areas but not at others. Nobody here seems to want to acknowledge that.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,506
It also recaps the situation that happened during a game in Green Bay in 2006 in which the Pats were caught videotaping from the sidelines. After the game, Mike Holmgren complained publicly about the Pats videotaping, but the league decided not to act. That incident also happened after the memo. None of this absolves Belichick; he decided to ignore the memo rather than contact the league office to get clarification ahead of time.
At the time the consensus around here was that it was a stupid clarification (because it doesn't really fucking matter where you're recording this stuff from) and that Belichick was equally stupid for trying to exploit the poorly written memo (which is where the whole "the Patriots exploit loopholes!!!" thing was born that we saw play out so hilariously after the Ravens were too stupid to defend a trick play despite being warned by the referees about an ineligible receiver).
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Its more like in a world where Patriots taping Super Bowl walkthroughs has become fact no one has come forward to say "yeah they were using these tapes during the game". The Patriots response to the league office was "yeah, we know we arent supposed to tape footage to use during the game here. We didnt use the footage during the game". The league never contradicted that even in the deflategate hit piece that came out in '15 on NFLRT

So Im going to remain skeptical they were using the signals during the game because there's no evidence at all that they were using the signals during the game. If you have evidence, post it.

Punishment was harsh and the way the league handled it was, of course, dumb because the league is run by idiots, but they did break a rule so the consequences are what they are.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,506
There is no editing required. There is rewinding required. Do you have any idea how long it takes to rewind recorded video? Not long. And nobody is suggesting that 12 minutes is enough time to review *all* playcalls or whatever. Perhaps this recording only helps decipher one signal. That's one more than they should be allowed to do.
I actually know how this stuff works, unlike some people around here, apparently. With modern digital video and professional editing software it's easier to find what you're looking for, except that teams really don't use signals anymore (unless in an emergency when communications equipment is down) so it's a moot point.

Aside from this you're now entering "The moon landing was faked!" region of conspiracy stuff. Everyone was recording the games. Everyone. What Belichick did was record in the wrong spot because the memo was worded badly and he saw a loophole. And it was stupid to use the loophole as an excuse. But it doesn't change the fact that you're way out in left field on this one.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,172
Springfield, VA
I think the vast majority of people don't know. Not that they're stupid but they just know the rule the Patriots were punished for. How many times have you been in a discussion about spygate and the other person simply says "they were taping signals." The obvious response is "your team does too" but a lot of people don't get that and don't look beyond the headline.
A lot of this falls on Kraft/Belichick though. If the team had immediate come out with a statement saying "Videotaping is entirely legal and we don't believe we've broken any rule", then the story would have been written a lot different. Instead Belichick put out some weasel words and acted like he had something to hide. (Of course, BB always acts that way, but whatever) But that's the biggest reason why it blew up from a rule violation to OMG Cheaterz!!

It's really Public Relations 101.
 

natpastime162

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,081
Pennsylvania
Do you have any idea how long it takes to edit video now? It was a lot more difficult way back when, especially as they were using actual fucking videotape. There simply isn't enough time to get a working highlight reel of all the relevant signals in the 15 minutes you have for a halftime meeting.

One VHS tape of known recording length was placed into a camcorder bag, which was
provided by Paul, Weiss. The bag is believed to be similar, if not identical, to the bag used by the
Patriots on day of the Week 1 Game against the New York Jets, which occurred on September 9, 2007. For
Exponent’s testing, an individual carried the bag into an enclosed room that measured 76 feet by
98 feet. The bag was initially completely zippered shut prior to entering the room. The door that
was used to ingress/egress the room opened inwardly into the room, with a latching door lever.
Once inside the room, the subject, who had access to video editing equipment, closed the
door and attempted to edit the film (such that coaches had access to opponent's signals) in as short a time period as possible. After editing the film, the subject rezippered
the bag and exited the room, while holding the bag, from the same door in which he/she
entered.

An electronic timer was used to measure the amount of time that elapsed during the entire procedure.
The timer was started as the subject turned the door handle, and stopped after the subject had exited
the room and closed the door. The number of slides containing signals was measured at the conclusion of
the test and compared to the number of defensive plays. The slides were developed with
professional photo printing equipment.

Three subjects independently performed the above procedure. Each subject was allowed to practice
the experimental procedure once. After this practice round, the experimental procedure was then
performed by each individual again, with the entire process being timed.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
I actually know how this stuff works, unlike some people around here, apparently. With modern digital video and professional editing software it's easier to find what you're looking for, except that teams really don't use signals anymore (unless in an emergency when communications equipment is down) so it's a moot point.

Aside from this you're now entering "The moon landing was faked!" region of conspiracy stuff. Everyone was recording the games. Everyone. What Belichick did was record in the wrong spot because the memo was worded badly and he saw a loophole. And it was stupid to use the loophole as an excuse. But it doesn't change the fact that you're way out in left field on this one.
Didn't the guy doing the taping have a Kraft Sports Productions bib on? And when asked he said he was just taping background stuff?

I think this whole thing is overblown but Bill knew he wasn't supposed to do what he did and he did it anyway.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
9,454
Westwood MA
. How many times have you been in a discussion about spygate and the other person simply says "they were taping signals."
Agreed, but I gave up trying to have discussions with other fans about Spygate a long time ago, you'll never win a pissing contest with a skunk and Einstein was right with his definition of insanity.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,260
A lot of this falls on Kraft/Belichick though. If the team had immediate come out with a statement saying "Videotaping is entirely legal and we don't believe we've broken any rule", then the story would have been written a lot different. Instead Belichick put out some weasel words and acted like he had something to hide. (Of course, BB always acts that way, but whatever) But that's the biggest reason why it blew up from a rule violation to OMG Cheaterz!!

It's really Public Relations 101.
Actually, that's not correct. They both said they were cooperating with the league and would prefer to defer to the league for further comment. Belichick admitted he misinterpreted a rule.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
31,738
Actually, that's not correct. They both said they were cooperating with the league and would prefer to defer to the league for further comment. Belichick admitted he misinterpreted a rule.
Furthermore, it entirely ignores the power of the NFLHQ/NYC media nexus to whip up a frenzy when it desires.

BTW, the Insane Skunks sounds like some Japanese punk-pop band to me.