After declaring Belicheck’s taping “disappointing” and “stupid,” Dean Barnett finally gets angry… at New York Jets’ coach Eric Mangini:

“If Belichick has been doing this for several years, Eric Mangini knew about it for several years.  Obviously his conscience didn’t overwhelm him while he was collecting Super Bowl rings at Belichick’s side.  Nor did his commitment to truth, justice and the American way manifest itself immediately when he donned the cleansing green and white of the New York Jets.  Strangely, Mangini only entered high dudgeon mode when the chance to do real damage to the Patriots presented itself after the commissioner had promised strong penalties if teams brought video cameras to the sidelines.”

That “if” in the first sentence assumes facts not in evidence. As it is, we know of two instances where somebody complained about the Patriots’ taping: the Green Bay game last year and the Jets game this year. (And as somebody else noted, if there’s no in-game advantage, why did the Patriots record the Packers, a team they won’t play again for another four years? The only reason you would do that is to use what you learned from recording the signals during that game.) So let’s drop the argument that recording the signals doesn’t have any effect on the game during which it occurs.

As for why Mangini would report Belichick as a rival but not as an employee, I can’t believe Barnett is asking the question. He’d lose his job. And as for why Belichick didn’t complain during last year’s games, well, we don’t know for certain that the Patriots did it in last year’s games, or that the Jets noticed it. Or perhaps the Jets decided it was unwise to complain to the Commish until they had hard evidence, the confiscated videotape.

One last point: Mangini was a defensive coach under Belichick; the Patriots were recording the Jets’ defensive signals, information that would only be of use to the Patriots’ offensive unit. It is not a given that Mangini would know the offensive unit’s secret recording efforts.

By the way, if Brian Billick’s complaint is accurate– that Jets defensive players were barking out signals to simulate snap counts and draw the offense offsides in Sunday’s game in Baltimore – I’m disappointed in my team, and Commissioner Goodell ought to punish the Jets organization however he sees fit. This whole how-can-we-work-around-the-rules mentality grates at fans’ hearts; whatever happened to just going out and beating somebody? What, trick plays aren’t enough anymore?

(My only quibble with Billick’s complaint is wondering how he can be certain that the Jets’s defenders were yelling out signals that deliberately mimicked the Ravens’ offensive signals. Isn’t it possible that the teams just have similar terminology? Does either team have a copyright on yelling out “Red 22″ or whatever?)

I also note the classy way Mangini attempted to deal with the situation:

Billick and Mangini spoke yesterday - Mangini placed the first call - and Billick made it sound like the conversation ended on good terms. He insisted he wasn’t thinking about the Jets-Patriots video scandal when he made his comments on Monday, which sparked a firestorm. “This isn’t New England, Part II,” he said from the Ravens’ offices.

Evidently, Billick’s original remarks struck a nerve with Mangini, who is being painted as the bad guy for reporting Belichick’s blatant disregard for league rules. Mangini phoned Billick to let him know the Jets “weren’t trying to pull anything illegal or duplicitous,” Billick said. “He called to make sure I knew it was nothing by design,” Billick said. “Halfheartedly, I said, ‘You’re better than me.’ I coach it. Frankly, we don’t get away with it that often. That’s gamesmanship.”

UPDATE: In the comments, John wants evidence that taping can be used in a game, citing “intense time constraints.” I’m not so sure the constraints are so overwhelming. Even if, say, three coaches are sending in signals, on the first play, you know those three signs (A, B, or C) are the sign for the defense in the first play. Any time the defense re-uses that play or package, you can eliminate any coach’s signal that contradicted the first sign as a decoy; whichever coach gave the same signal is the real signal. Also, on each subsequent play, any repeated signal by the same coach that precedes a different strategy or arrangement by the defense can also be discarded as a fake. (Keeping all of these signs straight probably requires great concentration and an eye for detail, which is why the taping provides such an advantage.) It’s not like you need an Enigma codebreaker here; it’s simply a matter of observing the signs and the defensive plays and seeing which pairs match up consistently.

By the second or third drive (unless it was a 3-and-out, atypical for the Jets’ defense), you start accumulating enough evidence to see which signals are predictive (i.e., which signal always shows up when there’s a safety blitz on the right side). Even if the analysis took an hour (and I’ll bet someone prepared can do it in less time), footage recorded in the first quarter can easily be ready for usage in the fourth quarter.

As for the argument that Belichick’s recording represented “data collection for its own sake,” it seems like an enormous risk (particularly after the warning from the Green Bay game), for no discernable advantage. If Belichick chose to do something that he knew the League had banned, and warned him about  (and ultimately could cost him a $500,000 fine, cost the organization a $250,000 fine, and possibly a first round draft choice), just for the sake of his urge to collect information, he’s beyond obsessed to reckless.