Were the Jets Guilty of the Same Thing? (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

I know many people will look at this as sour grapes, but look at this LINK to follow the story. I know people will say, "but it's a Pats message board, of course they'll say that."

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

As I have been saying in all these threads, I suspect that this kind of stuff is more prevelent in the league than many people are considering, and my point was not to stick it to the Jets as payback for the Pats. But you do have to wonder what is going on in the NFL.

And again, this is not to suggest that the Pats should have gotten a free pass and did not deserve punishment. But it's just another piece to at least consider for those that think that the Pats should have had major penalties and that this doesn't happen anywhere else.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

I know many people will look at this as sour grapes, but look at this LINK to follow the story. I know people will say, "but it's a Pats message board, of course they'll say that."

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

As I have been saying in all these threads, I suspect that this kind of stuff is more prevelent in the league than many people are considering, and my point was not to stick it to the Jets as payback for the Pats. But you do have to wonder what is going on in the NFL.

And again, this is not to suggest that the Pats should have gotten a free pass and did not deserve punishment. But it's just another piece to at least consider for those that think that the Pats should have had major penalties and that this doesn't happen anywhere else.

Interesting to say the least.

 

[omally]

 

[yesitsme]

Dan Marino on INSIDE THE NFL on HBO last night basically said he's not giving out names but even in his day, he knew of this kind of stuff going on.

He also mentioned that it's a huge advantage for a QB. The QB still has to make the throws but there's very little surprises that can come your way during the course of a game.

So yes, it does happen. That can be put to rest. The Patriots are the team that got caught and basically the Jets coach set them up. If you're gonna cheat, he probably should have been a little smarter and not tried it again one of his old assistants.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

I would love a reporter to ask Mangini or other former Patriot assistants if this went on when they were still there.

 

[dlos]

As fans, I can't help but think that more eyes will be on the sidelines looking for hidden camermen.

 

[Kiddnets]

Thought I read that teams can have a camerman on their own sideline taping their own team for documentary purposes - obviously this was not the case with the Pats.

Sorry no link - just read in somewhere in all the avalanche!

 

[TheDemon]

I would love a reporter to ask Mangini or other former Patriot assistants if this went on when they were still there.

And if it was, what were they going to say? "Hey boss, quit cheating! Oh hey, I've been meaning to ask you about that raise."

 

[DWidmar]

Thought I read that teams can have a camerman on their own sideline taping their own team for documentary purposes - obviously this was not the case with the Pats.Sorry no link - just read in somewhere in all the avalanche!

I read the same thing. The biggest difference is this guy is on the Jets sideline and the other guy was also on the Jets sideline. Maybe Mangini had this guy there to give further video evidence to support their claim.

 

[Workhorse]

Thought I read that teams can have a camerman on their own sideline taping their own team for documentary purposes - obviously this was not the case with the Pats.Sorry no link - just read in somewhere in all the avalanche!

I read the same thing. The biggest difference is this guy is on the Jets sideline and the other guy was also on the Jets sideline. Maybe Mangini had this guy there to give further video evidence to support their claim.

Gee, I thought the prohibition on videocameras was pretty clear?

 

[mad sweeney]

Thought I read that teams can have a camerman on their own sideline taping their own team for documentary purposes - obviously this was not the case with the Pats.Sorry no link - just read in somewhere in all the avalanche!

I read the same thing. The biggest difference is this guy is on the Jets sideline and the other guy was also on the Jets sideline. Maybe Mangini had this guy there to give further video evidence to support their claim.

The guy that was caught was on the Pat's sideline. The guy in the link above was erroneously identified in the early phases of the scandal as the offending cameraman. But the dude that was caught was caught on the Pat's sideline.

 

[parrot]

Thought I read that teams can have a camerman on their own sideline taping their own team for documentary purposes - obviously this was not the case with the Pats.Sorry no link - just read in somewhere in all the avalanche!

I read the same thing. The biggest difference is this guy is on the Jets sideline and the other guy was also on the Jets sideline. Maybe Mangini had this guy there to give further video evidence to support their claim.

"Patriots video assistant Matt Estrella was stationed on the New England sideline when he was approached by league security officials and had his camera and videotape seized in the middle of the first quarter Sunday."

 

[DWidmar]

Thought I read that teams can have a camerman on their own sideline taping their own team for documentary purposes - obviously this was not the case with the Pats.Sorry no link - just read in somewhere in all the avalanche!

I read the same thing. The biggest difference is this guy is on the Jets sideline and the other guy was also on the Jets sideline. Maybe Mangini had this guy there to give further video evidence to support their claim.

The guy that was caught was on the Pat's sideline. The guy in the link above was erroneously identified in the early phases of the scandal as the offending cameraman. But the dude that was caught was caught on the Pat's sideline.

You are right. I saw the link above when this first came out and that's why I have this stuck in my head that he was on the Jets sideline. Sorry guys I was confused.

 

[[icon]]

BUT THE PATRIOTS ARE THE ONLY CHEATERS IN THE NFL

 

[Brides Maids]

I know many people will look at this as sour grapes, but look at this LINK to follow the story. I know people will say, "but it's a Pats message board, of course they'll say that."

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

As I have been saying in all these threads, I suspect that this kind of stuff is more prevelent in the league than many people are considering, and my point was not to stick it to the Jets as payback for the Pats. But you do have to wonder what is going on in the NFL.

And again, this is not to suggest that the Pats should have gotten a free pass and did not deserve punishment. But it's just another piece to at least consider for those that think that the Pats should have had major penalties and that this doesn't happen anywhere else.

Isn't this the same guy that was supposed to be the spy from NE??LINK

 

[David Yudkin]

I know many people will look at this as sour grapes, but look at this LINK to follow the story. I know people will say, "but it's a Pats message board, of course they'll say that."

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

As I have been saying in all these threads, I suspect that this kind of stuff is more prevelent in the league than many people are considering, and my point was not to stick it to the Jets as payback for the Pats. But you do have to wonder what is going on in the NFL.

And again, this is not to suggest that the Pats should have gotten a free pass and did not deserve punishment. But it's just another piece to at least consider for those that think that the Pats should have had major penalties and that this doesn't happen anywhere else.

Isn't this the same guy that was supposed to be the spy from NE??LINK

Maybe . . . but I thought the spy from N.E. was on the Pats sideline. It's hard to tell because some of the pics on the link I posted are not up at the moment.

 

[The Shizzle]

If you look towards the grassy knoll, he is behind the fence.

 

[Da Masses]

BUT THE PATRIOTS ARE THE ONLY CHEATERS IN THE NFL THAT GOT CAUGHT ON A REGULAR BASIS

fixed....

 

[Bad_Mo]

As fans, I can't help but think that more eyes will be on the sidelines looking for hidden camermen.

My guess is that Waldo's phone is ringing off the hook right about now.THAT guy can never be found in a crowd!

 

[greenline]

As fans, I can't help but think that more eyes will be on the sidelines looking for hidden camermen.

My guess is that Waldo's phone is ringing off the hook right about now.THAT guy can never be found in a crowd!

HAHAHA

 

[conan2]

The precedent has been set. The Jets should be made to explain who those guys are (one with a camera, one with a mic, both clearly wearing Jets polos) and if they are in fact Jets employees, the Jets should be dealt with as harshly as the Pats. The rule is no video cameras on the sidelines. The Pats broke the rule and paid the price. Sure looks like the Jets broke the rule, too.

Of course, we all know no such thing will happen.

 

[Banger]

The precedent has been set. The Jets should be made to explain who those guys are (one with a camera, one with a mic, both clearly wearing Jets polos) and if they are in fact Jets employees, the Jets should be dealt with as harshly as the Pats. The rule is no video cameras on the sidelines. The Pats broke the rule and paid the price. Sure looks like the Jets broke the rule, tof course, we all know no such thing will happen.

Is there a tape focussing on the defensive coordinator's hands?

 

[jonessed]

I know many people will look at this as sour grapes, but look at this LINK to follow the story. I know people will say, "but it's a Pats message board, of course they'll say that."

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

As I have been saying in all these threads, I suspect that this kind of stuff is more prevelent in the league than many people are considering, and my point was not to stick it to the Jets as payback for the Pats. But you do have to wonder what is going on in the NFL.

And again, this is not to suggest that the Pats should have gotten a free pass and did not deserve punishment. But it's just another piece to at least consider for those that think that the Pats should have had major penalties and that this doesn't happen anywhere else.

There are cameramen on the field. You find one with film specifically showcasing a coaches signals and you have yourself a case. Otherwise, this is just Patriots fans blowing smoke.

 

[conan2]

The precedent has been set. The Jets should be made to explain who those guys are (one with a camera, one with a mic, both clearly wearing Jets polos) and if they are in fact Jets employees, the Jets should be dealt with as harshly as the Pats. The rule is no video cameras on the sidelines. The Pats broke the rule and paid the price. Sure looks like the Jets broke the rule, tof course, we all know no such thing will happen.

Is there a tape focussing on the defensive coordinator's hands?

But that's not the rule. The official NFL rule regarding coaching video states, "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game."The league's head of football operations, Ray Anderson, sent a memo to head coaches and general managers last September reiterating the policy and stating that "video taping 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."These guys could have been taping the cheerleaders and it still would have been against the rules.

 

[Banger]

The precedent has been set. The Jets should be made to explain who those guys are (one with a camera, one with a mic, both clearly wearing Jets polos) and if they are in fact Jets employees, the Jets should be dealt with as harshly as the Pats. The rule is no video cameras on the sidelines. The Pats broke the rule and paid the price. Sure looks like the Jets broke the rule, tof course, we all know no such thing will happen.

Is there a tape focussing on the defensive coordinator's hands?

But that's not the rule. The official NFL rule regarding coaching video states, "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game."The league's head of football operations, Ray Anderson, sent a memo to head coaches and general managers last September reiterating the policy and stating that "video taping 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."These guys could have been taping the cheerleaders and it still would have been against the rules.

the Pats should have been smart enough to alert NFL security like the Jets were.....

 

[Buckna]

Straws... grasping....

 

[conan2]

Long live the double standard...

 

[Jetdoc]

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

1. No one can tell if he has Jets garb on. He has a black polo on, but you can't see whether there is a Jets decal or not.2. The guy has a boom microphone guy following him around in every pic. I would guess that he is part of some sort of documentary (or possibly an employee of the NFL or a media outlet). Why on earth would someone stealing hand signals need a boom mic?

 

[NYCGangGreen]

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

1. No one can tell if he has Jets garb on. He has a black polo on, but you can't see whether there is a Jets decal or not.2. The guy has a boom microphone guy following him around in every pic. I would guess that he is part of some sort of documentary (or possibly an employee of the NFL or a media outlet). Why on earth would someone stealing hand signals need a boom mic?

maybe so he can hear the sign language.....duh!!!!

 

[conan2]

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

1. No one can tell if he has Jets garb on. He has a black polo on, but you can't see whether there is a Jets decal or not.2. The guy has a boom microphone guy following him around in every pic. I would guess that he is part of some sort of documentary (or possibly an employee of the NFL or a media outlet). Why on earth would someone stealing hand signals need a boom mic?

1. Certainly true. But, he doesn't appear to be wearing the vest required by official cameramen, either.2. Quite very possibly to steal audibles. One of the pictures in the linked to forum shows the Pats on offense and the recording team seems quite focused on the play.

 

[Jetdoc]

It's certainly not irrefutable evidence, but there certainly appears to be a guy in Jets garb with a camera on the field, and isn't that supposed to be the big no-no that the Commish said is completely off limits?

1. No one can tell if he has Jets garb on. He has a black polo on, but you can't see whether there is a Jets decal or not.2. The guy has a boom microphone guy following him around in every pic. I would guess that he is part of some sort of documentary (or possibly an employee of the NFL or a media outlet). Why on earth would someone stealing hand signals need a boom mic?

1. Certainly true. But, he doesn't appear to be wearing the vest required by official cameramen, either.2. Quite very possibly to steal audibles. One of the pictures in the linked to forum shows the Pats on offense and the recording team seems quite focused on the play.

Boom mics are used for close up sounds to filter out background noise. They are relatively worthless from a distance.You're thinking of a parabolic mic - those are the "satellite dish" looking ones that the NFL uses on the sidelines to capture the "sounds of the game".Boom mics are used primarily in interviews and the like.

 

[Sweeper]

I have said this a few times through these threads, not that the Jets do it but that it is quite possible they do. For several reasons...

1. When Mangini worked with BB, I would believe that he was involved in doing this with and for BB (if it was done way back when)

2. As his protege you have to think that he does this himself

I am also likely to believe that Mangini knew about this because of his history with Belichick.

 

[Banger]

I have said this a few times through these threads, not that the Jets do it but that it is quite possible they do. For several reasons... 1. When Mangini worked with BB, I would believe that he was involved in doing this with and for BB (if it was done way back when)2. As his protege you have thing he does this himself I am also likely to believe that Mangini knew about this because of his history with Belichick.

Knowing that someone cheats is a far departure from actually cheating yourself, especially when it suspected that Mangini and the Jets essentially had a sting operation setup looking for the Pats to do what they'd done in the past. It's brazen enough to break the rule but for Mangini to break the same rule while trying to catch BB breaking the rule is VERY hard to believe. I think Pats fans are looking to point fingers but they are on their own island here....