Patriots can survive this penalty
John Clayton answers questions about the Patriots' videotaping shenanigans and the penalty the NFL assessed against them.
The decision is in, and the Patriots could lose a first-round draft choice for using a cameraman to steal signals from the New York Jets defensive coaches. If the Patriots make the playoffs, they will give up a first-round pick in 2008. If they don't make the playoffs, they will give up a second- and a third-rounder in '08. Bill Belichick has been fined $500,000, and the team will lose $250,000.
Here are answers to key questions:
Can the Patriots survive the loss of a first-round choice?
Absolutely. They have additional first- and third-round choices next year. They are loaded for the future. They are loaded for the present. Here is the funny part about this story: Belichick is putting everything into this season. He traded for Randy Moss and signed three wide receivers. He spent $7 million a year on Adalius Thomas. For now, he doesn't care about the future. He cares about winning this year. Nothing in this decision affects the Patriots' ability to win this season.
Why did commissioner Roger Goodell rule so quickly?
He had the evidence. A security guard at the Jets game confiscated the camera being used by the Patriots employee, handed it to another Jets employee and found an NFL security person. The tape obviously showed Jets coaches making defensive signals. With that type of evidence, Goodell could make a quick ruling. It took only five days from the time of the game and the recovery of the tape.
What is the reaction around the league?
Some teams are angry because they don't think the Patriots were penalized enough. Many believe Belichick should have been suspended for a game or two. Belichick means everything to this team. He is the best coach in football. He has the best schemes in the league. Losing him for a game or two could be the difference in the Patriots having homefield advantage in the playoffs or maybe even making the playoffs.
What are other teams upset about?
They believe Belichick has been doing this for years. Whether he did or didn't, no one knows for sure. This decision goes to this one incident in the Jets game.
Did the Patriots have an advantage with the information from the videotaped signals?
There is short- and long-term value in getting the signals. A CD of the signals could be made for the second half of the game. Coaches could match the pictures of the blitz alignments with the signals and know what blitzes were being called. If there were a way to get word to quarterback Tom Brady, he could call audibles at the line of scrimmage. That type of information is valuable. If it were done in a divisional game, the Patriots would have a chance to study the signals for the next game and devise a game plan.
Is this practice widespread?
No, but other teams have done it. The Competition Committee understands the technology of the game is good enough to put video with pictures and give a complete look at a team's strategy. The penalty of a first-round choice should cause other teams to stop doing it, but it probably won't completely eliminate it. You certainly won't see the Patriots doing it again.
What will happen next?
Expect the Competition Committee to receive approval on using radio communication systems for defensive players. That eliminates the need for hand signals unless the equipment breaks down. The systems will cost owners several hundred thousand dollars. The last vote for the system failed by two votes. For what it's worth, Belichick voted against using radio communication on defense.
John Clayton is a senior writer for ESPN.com.
MORE NFL HEADLINES
- Sources: Peyton may decide to return soon
- Sources: NFL probes Falcons' fake crowd noise
- Sources: Jets, Bills eye Revis in free agency
- Sources: Lions seen as favorites to keep Suh
MOST SENT STORIES ON ESPN.COM
Former Patriots employee Matt Walsh met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and Sen. Arlen Specter to discuss Patriots' illegal videotaping. Story
More News• Belichick says he made 'mistake'
• Herald reporter: Sources never saw tape
• Walsh admits he knew it was wrong
• Senator wants inquiry | Read it (pdf)
• Fish: Would Congress investigate Pats?
• Boston Herald apologizes for false report
• Clayton: Five things we learned from Spygate
• Walsh sends eight tapes to NFL
• Fish: Pats stole offensive signs | Timeline
• Clayton: Spygate will expire quietly
• Former Pats employee sends tapes to league
• Fish: NFL faces serious questions
• Goodell to punish Pats, depending on evidence
• Walsh, NFL to finally talk | Agreement
• Goodell growing impatient with Walsh stalemate
• Kraft, Belichick apologize to owners
• Walsh still working on deal for testimony
• Rams player, fans withdraw lawsuit
• Spygate revelations might not be imminent
• NFL, Walsh close to deal to turn over tapes
• Report: Specter calls on Goodell to release letters
• Report: Goodell proposes crackdown on cheating
• Specter says Pats 'stonewalling' Spygate probe
• Committee lauds Goodell's handling of Spygate
• Goodell hoping deal to talk to Walsh close to done
• Report: Belichick denies Pats taped Rams' drills
• Walsh's attorney: NFL indemnity offer falls short
• Specter prepared to extend Spygate investigation
• Goodell has no regrets about destroying tapes
• Source: Specter wants NFL indemnity for witness
• Goodell, Specter to discuss Spygate Wednesday
Commentary• Mortensen: What were Rams thinking?
• Yasinskas: Spygate stench won't go away
• Paolantonio: Goodell's Spygate responsibility
• Clayton: Spygate closing with a whimper
At The Pro BowlNews
• Ex-Pats video assistant mum on Spygate probe
At The Super BowlNews
• Goodell willing to give Pats' Walsh indemnification
• Goodell, Specter won't meet until after Pro Bowl
• Vermeil doubts spying made difference for Pats
• Goodell to meet with Sen. Specter about Spygate
• Report: N.E. taped Rams before XXXVI
• Fish: Ex-Ram Warner suspicious of Pats
• Specter to Goodell: Let's talk
• Fish: Possible 'Spygate' witness surfaces
• Once burned, Goodell turns fireman
• Munson: Congressional interest is serious business
• Pasquarelli: Specter should stick with politics
• Clayton: Spy saga won't distract Patriots
• Hashmarks at Goodell's news conference
• Specter to Goodell (.pdf)
• Goodell to Specter (.pdf)
• NFL has all materials from Pats in spying scandal
• NFL reviews how tape leaked to Fox
• Belichick to turn over materials in spying probe
• Pats owner perturbed by Belichick's spy games
• Goodell orders Pats to turn over all video
• Sources: Patriots give Belichick extension
• Wilson spies inconsistencies in Belichick case
• NFL fines Belichick $500K, Pats $250K for spying
• Bill Belichick's apology to Patriots community
• Clayton Q&A: Patriots can survive this penalty
• Two days later, Belichick still won't comment
• Some Eagles question Pats' tactics in Super Bowl
• Belichick issues apology amid accusations
• Sources: Goodell determines Patriots broke rules
• Clayton: NFL penalty for Belichick, Pats too light
• Mosley: Pats lose first-rounder? Roger that
• Scouts Inc.: What the Pats will miss in '08 draft
• Chadiha: Legal spying widespread in NFL
• Sando: What's legal, what's not in spy game
• What they're saying: Players, coaches, pundits
• Luksa: Spy stories once had comedic value
• Bryant: Belichick deserves two-week banishment
• Clayton: Goodell to treat breech seriously
• Simmons: The camera doesn't lie
• Simmons: Cheating not necessary to win opener Video
• What should happen to the Pats?
• Belichick deflects videotape-related questions
• Former Patriot thinks team should be punished
• Reactions from around the league
• Mike Vrabel, Pats linebacker: Don't criticize the players
• Chris Mortensen: Situation might motivate the Patriots
• Keyshawn: It was 'scouting,' not cheating
• Salisbury: Story blown out of proportion SportsNation
• Vote: Was New England's punishment fair?
• Mixed reader results on NFL spying