As Patriots head coach Bill Belichick confirmed that he had talked with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell about the allegations regarding his team and the video capture of hand signals going from the bench to players on the field, the issue continued to be as engrossing as a spy thriller.
All that’s missing is the romantic subplot.
“Someone said, ‘If you’re not cheating, you’re not trying.’ Someone was just joking in the dining hall that maybe that’s how they won all those Super Bowls,” Denver safety Nick Ferguson said. “I don’t know. I’m just here to see what you guys report.”
And those of us in the laptop-and-notepad set went right for the one Broncos player who might understand the situation best — tight end Daniel Graham, a veteran of five campaigns with the New Englanders.
“He would be the person to ask about that,” Ferguson said.
So the horde collectively swarmed around Graham. The affable Coloradoan — or is it Coloradan? — however, kept his mouth shut. Unlike the brothers Gibb, Graham wouldn’t go back to Massachusetts.
“I’m not sure about what was going on when I was up there, but I’m here in Denver now, so it’s nothing I have to worry about,” Graham said. “It’s something I’m not even worried about. I don’t have to deal with that. If they were doing that, they have to deal with it.”
Broncos sssistant head coach/defense Jim Bates said that he takes steps to avoid any interception of signals.
“Well, it’s notorious that it goes on in the league, either people stealing from the sidelines or they’ve got a coach assigned as far as trying to steal signals,” he said. “We’re awfully guarded. We’re really guarded, as far as people stealing signals.”
That means occasionally using dummy signals to deceive any potential poachers.
“Oh yes, it’s part of it,” he said. “You use two or three different guys as far as giving signals, and we try to disguise as much as possible so people can’t get our signals.”
Of course, there’s an easy solution to all this — to have one defensive player wear a radio receiver, thus balancing the edge the offense has by having its quarterback equipped (which is symbolized by the green dot on the back of the helmet).
“I think it would neutralize the game for us, as far as us giving some heads up,” he said. “Because they can talk to the quarterback, the offensive coordinator or whoever is talking to the quarterback, they can give him some added advice that we cannot give our defense.
“So it’s definitely an advantage for the offense and we should have that. We should have the headsets or the communication skills that they have on offense.”
That would be the easy solution. But few spy novels have such an obvious resolution.
Tags: Bill Belichick, Daniel Graham, Jim Bates, New England Patriots, NFL, Nick Ferguson, Roger Goodell
I like the idea of a defenseman having a radio receiver, but I wonder about its durability. A quarterback (in theory) doesn’t get hit too often so his headset is likely to remain intact. A defenseman is always laying the Big Hurt on somebody and those repeated jarring impacts might prove too tough for fragile electronics.
Ian
I think they could probably design electronics to withstand the shock. My big issue (and I thin the thing that has prevented this from being implemented) is that a quarterback is on the field every offensive play, and in a position (huddle) to pass info to everyone.
On defense, there are too many substitutions, and rarely a “huddle” that all the db’s are included in. So if you give the radio to Lynch, the linemen don’t get the calls. If you give it to D.J., the db’s don’t always get the calls. Then when you sub, you either have to trade helmets, or have other “greendot” helmets for the possible sub players, but if that’s the case they can’t sub except with the primary greendot is off the field . . . . .
It’s just a logistical problem, that I’m sure could be worked out, but would be a nuisance for the officials, and distract them from other responsibilities.
I’m not saying I don’t want it to happen, because it would definitely make things easier, but there are too many ?’s right now.
Durability isn’t the issue. And if it breaks, pop out the equipment and put in another one. QB’s take some serious hits. The equipment will hold up.
The main issue has been the defensive rotation and controlling who and how many people have the radio equipment. People rotate in and out of the linebacker position a lot more than the QB. Whereas a team may have two or three QB’s they have a lot more linebackers. Different packages and different schemes for different teams; the middle linebacker may not always be in.
That’s been the control issue. They talked about it on NFL Network last night. Supposedly that was the reason they shot the idea down in the owners meetings this previous summer.
They’ll review it more and come up with some sort of solution especially after the Patriots fiasco.
My understanding is that the players headsets have encryption in them; probably a good idea. In a perfect world, you would have enough radio spectrum for say five defensive receivers and switch channels as players rotate; however, I’m not sure there is that much radio spectrum available at all the fields.
Another possibility is that they could use different encryption sets for the various defensive headsets, so they are selectively broadcasting commands to the individual players on the field… the downside is that those guys not on the field would want to turn their radios off to avoid the static.
No way. Everyone getting radio signals would not ever happen. At least not for a long time. Way too much to regulate. Remember the coaches can only communicate with the player for a certain amount of time after a play is called dead.
The argument is based around only ONE player on each side of the ball having a headset. Such is the quarterback on offense. Same rule would apply on defense. Only one defensive player would have a headset.
Green Dots: That’s the reason for the green dots this year. If you notice the QB has a green dot on the back of his helmet to specify to the refs that he has the radio equipment. Atlanta was said to run certain formations where Matt Schaub would line up as a receiver and Michael Vick was the QB or vice-vursa. Well, there’s your problem. You have two headsets on the field at the same time which now is a violation and may have been then as well but how are the refs supposed to tell? They can’t just stop everything and tell everyone to take off their helmets.
It sounded like the solutions were getting way to complicated to solve at the owners meetings and there were a few people that weren’t about to just let it fly. So, they voted it down.
We’ll have to see what happens in the offseason.
Andrew, you might have a lot more insight to the matter and could possibly comment? Maybe we’re way off base but that seems like part of the issue.
OK, here’s the skinny on radio communication, headsets and other such matters …
Right now, as yardo mentions, you’re only allowed to have one player on the field with a radio receiver. And ianthealy mentions the durability … that is actually an issue that has been the subject of discussion. Quarterbacks do get hit, but if it’s a linebacker or a defensive lineman, you’re talking collisions every play. If a guy like Nate Webster has the in-helmet radio, then the damn thing is falling to the ground entirely every now and then. But here’s the thing — it doesn’t necessarily have to be a front-seven guy with the receiver. Everyone huddles up, so why couldn’t it be a cornerback who has less contact? Certainly Champ Bailey possesses more than enough acumen and leadership gravitas to be the man relaying the call from the sidelines or booth, and he’s on the field enough.
Yes, the radios can be replaced. But it’s not as simple as popping one receiver back out and another in … sometimes the whole wiring system has to be redone, which is more than could be fixed between plays.
Frankly, though, I’m with Bates … the defense ought to have radios. And if they can’t have them, then the offense shouldn’t. I know the reality of the situation, that rules and legislation will always favor the offense, because people want touchdowns, high scores, fireworks, seashells, balloons and pretty plays to market. To me, though, it’s an issue of fairness … and the only way to ensure that is by balance. Today it’s a radio transmitter for offensive players; tomorrow it’s 12 men on offense versus 11 on defense. Sure, that’s an exaggeration, but it’s only to make a point.
And I wonder what Paul Brown would think of all this? He, of course, was the man who first installed a radio receiver in a player’s helmet, some 51 years ago.
There are security issues with radio frequencies, as well. My thought is to emulate baseball. Assume you’re watched, disguise the signals, and if you think their stealing them, wait for the game changing moment, send a false sign, and burn ‘em… bad. Just heard they got fines and lost a #1 pick. Good.
That is why players sub in and out of the game. Before radio headsets, the players coming in from the sidelines would relay the plays. If stealing signs is such an issue, sub in players in key situations to give the next set of plays.
Thanks for the info Andrew. From what I had heard it seemed like the major issue was more about personnel on the field than the equipment holding up.
I agree, they need to figure something out.