September 19, 2007

“Cheaters” always win
Bill Belichick and the big todo about nothing

Bill O'Connor | managing editor
woconnor@smcvt.edu

Think back to high school. Algebra class.

Your ancient professor creaks from his desk to the front of the room with a stack of papers clutched between his underarm and his red cardigan sweater. Kids in the back row frantically leaf through their textbooks, searching for anything that might help them in their hour of need.

Bill O'Connor, photo

You, in contrast, sit calmly waiting at your desk. You’ve done everything you need to do to prepare. You reviewed your notes, you looked over your quizzes, you’ve got your two No. 2 pencils and your calculator… and every formula you need to have memorized is scrawled on the piece of paper taped to the bottom of your shoe.

Cheating has been around for as long as men and women have engaged in large-scale competition. It comes in multiple forms and varying degrees, but it is omnipresent almost anywhere a sporting event is taking place.

 As the old NASCAR mantra goes, “If you ain’t cheatin’, you ain’t tryin’.”

Last week the New England Patriots and head coach Bill Belichick were accused and found guilty of “cheating.” The Patriots were partaking in the age-old NFL practice of stealing an opponent’s defensive play calling signs during their week-one victory over the New York Jets.

Since then, there has been much discussion in the sports world concerning whether or not the Patriots cheated, and if they did, whether it tarnishes Belichick’s reputation as one of the best coaches in the league or cheapens the three Super Bowls his team won in the early part of the decade.

The answer to all questions is a simple and resounding NO.

When I asked a Belichick detractor last week to define cheating, he responded, “violating or breaking the established rules in order to gain an unfair advantage,” a solid definition that I would tend to agree with.

So, let’s analyze the elements of what the media has dubbed “Spygate” in accordance with this definition, given by an avid anti-Belichick activist.

First, consider the fact that many former NFL players have testified that the advantage that a tactic such as videotaping defensive signals would give is markedly miniscule. If a team doesn’t have the talent to handle what a defense is throwing at them, it wouldn’t matter if they had the opposing team’s entire defensive playbook as required bathroom reading.  Just the same way that your cheat sheet of algebra formulas isn’t going to score you an A on that exam if you can’t add to begin with.

There's also the inconvenient truth that there were so many teams reputedly practicing this form of espionage last season that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell was forced to take action. Goodell had to send memos out over the summer to each head coach stating that the NFL would be cracking down on all forms of sign-stealing in the upcoming season.

As Gregg Easterbrook writes in his Sept. 18 ESPN.com column, “The situation with the National Football League is a lot worse than people realize, and the only one who seems to grasp this fully is commissioner Roger Goodell.”

And in case you don’t believe Easterbrook, Washington Redskins assistant Gregg Williams has said in multiple interviews this past week that not only has he been videotaped while calling signs by organizations other than the Patriots, but he has accidentally been sent those tapes of himself on more than one occasion.

How much of an “unfair” advantage would Belichick and his Patriots really have had if so many NFL franchises were engaging in the same practices? Not so much at all.

Disagree? Read another view here.