FanNation

I have a few problems about the spygate coverage.I find the coverage of spygate very misleading. Again and again I hear various analysts talking about how big of an advantage this is for the Patriots; how these stolen signals dramatically alter the game. I have no doubt that they are right, stolen signals do indeed alter the way the game is played and I won’t defend how Bill Belichick did this to begin with or has handled this story. My problem, however, lies in this: the rule the Patriot's broke was not about stealing signals, rather it was about the WAY they stole them.

Everyone tries to steals signals, even the most anti-Patriot fan must admit this. What they should be comparing is the advantages taping it offers rather than just scribbling down what the motions are and the time at which they did it. Because to me there is a small advantage at best to this, nowhere near the advantage the analysts are saying. And I'll admit, maybe my view and opinion is biased as a Patriot's fan, but to find absolutely NO analysts explaining this side of the story makes me think of how nearly everyone is following the crowd rather than really analyzing it.

I remember very distinctly the day after spygate broke, in particular the program PTI. What did they say? It’s not a big deal. Patriots won’t be docked more than a second round pick. A 1^st round pick would be ridiculous. The very next day, a complete turnaround. Patriots are disgraced. Belichick is a cheater. Superbowls are going to be tainted. It seemed as if their bosses came up to them, told them “Hey this is a big story, and it seems that people are interested in this. The majority of the country is ready to hate the Patriots (I wonder why…) so keep this going.” It reminded me of a quote from Spiderman (yes, spiderman), paraphrasing “The only thing people like more than a hero (Patriots) is to see hero fall”. Am I exaggerating? Maybe. But just look at TMQ’s article before the Patriots-Colts game this season. Good vs Evil? Can you blame me for thinking that this has turned into a witch hunt of sorts?

Recently though, more and more journalists have taken the opinion that they are “sick of this story” and that it should just go away. This doesn’t satisfy me, I would like to hear an explanation to how taping provides such a big advantage over simply watching and writing the motions down along with the time. And let’s be honest, I have watched the tapes on sportscenter recently, and it’s not as if the signals are elaborate beyond description. They are simple movements such as crossing the arms across the face or waving the right arm up and down. Yet what do I hear? Mark Schlereth and Chris Carter telling me that ordinary people won’t understand why this is a big deal, and how only they could interpret it with their professional experience. They go on to explain how stolen signals help. Again. Never do they discuss the actual issue at hand, the process the Patriots used.

 Recently though, there are a couple ESPN journalists who brings light to this issue. Just recently Colin Cowherd discussed this issue and Sal Paolantonio also echoed this sentiment. I found it very humorous when Colin Cowherd presented Mark Schlereth and Trey Wingo with this view and all they could do was dance around the issue then start repeating the same thing they say daily on tv: Stolen signals dramatically help the Patriots. Mathew Barry also alluded to this view, albeit briefly, in his fantasy column.

                However these voices are a vast minority whose voice is never heard in the mainstream media. The frenzy is too great. Any analyst who voiced this opinion would immediately be at odds with every other analyst on the program. It’s a painfully obvious this reasoning will never be presented on TV seeing as how the majority of viewers have no problem with the Patriots and Belichick being crucified. Still, it’s a shame when popular opinion overrides logic.