Patriots Success Not Because of Spygate

The New England Patriots have been the model of consistent success for more than a decade now. They have captured three Super Bowl titles, been to another two, and also been in 3 additional conference championship games.

However, back in Week 1 of the 2007 regular season, the Patriots were caught videotaping signals from their opponents, the New York Jets, who were coached by a Bill Belichick disciple, Eric Mangini. Following the investigation, the Patriots were fined 250,000 dollars and Belichick was personally fined 500,000 and the team was also docked a first round draft choice.

Many fans of other teams want to point to this incident and invalidate the Patriots success prior to 2007. Doing so would be quite foolish on their part because their is plenty of evidence suggesting Spygate did not have as big of an impact as many football fans want to believe it did.

First of all, Belichick has conceded his actions of videotaping were a misinterpretation of the rules. A very key thing to remember is that videotaping was not against the rules in the NFL until September of 2006, one year before the Patriots were caught. Also, the tapes that were turned in were: 

• One tape from the Miami Dolphins game on September 24, 2000
• Two tapes, one offensive signals and one defensive signals, from the Dolphins game on October 7, 2001
• One tape from the Buffalo Bills game on November 11, 2001
• One tape from the Cleveland Browns game on December 9, 2001
• Two tapes from the January 27, 2002, AFC Championship Game against the Pittsburgh Steelers
• One tape, from a "third camera", from the San Diego Chargers game on September 29, 2002

One thing to keep in mind with these tapes is that it was proven that these tapes were not processed at half time to give the Patriots an advantage in the second half of the same game, instead they were used for a future game.

Also, Belichick had taped a few games from the 2000 season, in which the Patriots actually went 5-11 with a legitimate franchise quarterback at the helm in Drew Bledsoe. Also, there were games from the 2002 season, the only season in Tom Brady's career he failed to make the playoffs. So clearly, the tapes were not that huge of an advantage. 

Now, when people point to the fact that the Patriots have not won a Super Bowl since Spygate, that is just foolish. The Patriots have been MORE SUCCESSFUL after Spygate than before it. Since the start of the 2007 season, the Patriots have been 88-24, dominating the league with the best record through that time period of any team. They have appeared in two Super Bowls, and lost in two additional AFC Championship game appearances. Prior to Spygate, the Patriots had a 70-26 record, losing 2 more games and winning 18 more. So before Spygate, their win percentage was 0.729 and after it has been 0.786, including the only perfect regular season in NFL history. So again, obviously the cameras were not that big of an aid. 

Also, the Patriots were taping opponents defensive signals. If they had been such an advantage, would Tom Brady not have been more dominant over that time? Instead, the Patriots rode strong defenses and quality offensive play to the three Super Bowl titles. Before Spygate, Brady had 0 season MVP awards. After, he has two, including the only unanimous one in NFL history.

Now when it comes to Super Bowls, which is where most Patriots haters love to bring it "(3-0 with Spygate, 0-2 without")". Here is why that is a foolish argument to make. Every team that wins a Super Bowl usually gets a few breaks along the way. Even though the 2001 Super Bowl was in the Spygate era, they would have never won the title that year had it not been for the "Tuck Rule". In 2003, when the Patriots defeated the Panthers, the Patriots would have not got out of the first round had Drew Bennett not dropped Steve McNair's 4th down pass. So the Patriots got the breaks those years, and won the titles. 

However, after Spygate, the breaks have just gone against the Patriots. It is not that they are less prepared or anything of that sort. In 2007, David Tyree makes a once in a lifetime catch, after a once in a lifetime escape by Eli Manning. Without that, the Patriots most likely would have won that year. Then, in 2011, the sure-handed All-Pro wide receiver Wes Welker drops a ball that would have helped milk the clock. Also, prior to that game, superstar tight end Rob Gronkowski suffered an ankle injury that had him limited. Additionally, Eli Manning had a magnificent throw to Mario Manningham. Had the Patriots been videotaping, would Tyree have not caught the ball on his helmet? Would Welker have caught the pass? Obviously not. 

This just goes to show how little impact those tapes truly had. Commissioner Roger Goodell even said in his press conference that would "taint their accomplishments". Goodell also said that, "The actual effectiveness of taping and taking of signals from opponents - it is something done widely in many sports. I think it probably had limited, if any effect, on the outcome of games." With that, not only did Goodell say it did not have a huge impact, but also acknowledged that it is something done by many people. The Patriots simply crossed the line of the rule that was set a year ago. Actually just three years ago, the Jets had a fishy camera on the sidelines vs. the Patriots in a 2011 loss (http://sportsofboston.com/2011/10/12/jets-caught-with-sideline-camera-after-loss-to-patriots/.) The league did not investigate.

Here are some comments from respected league members:

Dallas Cowboys Super Bowl winniing coach and now analyst Jimmy Johnson- 

On September 16, former Dallas Cowboys head coach Jimmy Johnson claimed, "This is exactly how I was told to do it 18 years ago by a Kansas City Chiefs scout. I tried it, but I didn't think it helped us." Johnson also said, "Bill Belichick was wrong because he videotaped signals after a memo was sent out to all of the teams saying not to do it. But what irritates me is hearing some reactions from players and coaches. These players don't know what their coaches are doing. And some of the coaches have selective amnesia because I know for a fact there were various teams doing this. That's why the memo was sent to everybody. That doesn't make [Belichick] right, but a lot of teams are doing this."

Super Bowl winning coach Bill Cowher, who was also defeated by the Patriots twice in the postseason during the Spygate era-

“We didn’t lose the game because of any 'Spygate,' because of them having any additional things. If they’re guilty of anything they’re guilty of arrogance because they were told not to do something but it was something everybody does. They got caught doing it with a camera. Stealing someone’s signals was a part of the game and everybody attempted to do that. We had people that always tried to steal signals,” said Cowher, whose 2004 team won 16 consecutive games before losing to the Patriots in the AFC title game. “What happened when we lost that game is they outplayed us. It had nothing to do with stealing signals or cheating or anything else.” 

As I said before, if people dismiss the Patriots early success because of Spygate, they are overlooking too much evidence to prove other wise. Haters will always hate, but the facts don't change. In order to silence all the haters once and for all, the Patriots just need to win a Super Bowl. 

And they embark on that journey once again in 2014