NFL • GOING VIRAL
The Patriots' Strange Kicking Trick Was Legal. Now the NFL Has Changed the Rule.
A viral analysis found that visiting kickers at Gillette Stadium could see what looked like a second set of goalposts. The NFL has now changed its video-board policy. Here's what was actually happening.
WHAT HAPPENED
Former NFL strategy and analytics coach Ryan Paganetti went through more than a decade of Patriots television broadcasts looking at something most fans probably never noticed: the giant video board behind the goalposts.
When some opposing kickers attempted field goals at Gillette Stadium, the board behind the real goalposts showed an All-22 camera view from the opposite direction.
The result could be visually bizarre. A second set of yellow uprights appeared on the video board behind the actual uprights, creating what looked like four goalposts in the kicker's line of sight.
The remarkable part wasn't simply that the display existed. It was when Paganetti says it appeared.
In the games he examined, Paganetti reviewed 52 Patriots field-goal attempts and reported finding no instances in that sample in which New England's own kicker faced the same reverse-angle display.
WAS IT CHEATING?
Based on the league's interpretation at the time: no.
When the story first surfaced, the NFL said the video-board practice complied with its existing policy.
The rules allowed video and ribbon boards during field goals and extra points to show permitted static imagery or an All-22 view while restricting distracting visual effects.
But there was an important opening in the policy: teams were not required to use the same permitted display for both kicking teams.
That meant one legal display could be used when the opponent kicked and another legal display when the home team kicked.
THEN THE NFL CHANGED THE POLICY
The league has now addressed that difference.
According to a September 7 NFL memo reported by Reuters, teams must now apply their permitted video-board treatment consistently to both kicking teams.
The NFL said the change was intended to ensure "competitive equity."
The league did not say that the Patriots' practice caused the policy change, an important distinction when looking at the timing of the two events.
DID THE VIDEO BOARD ACTUALLY CAUSE MISSED KICKS?
That's where the story requires some restraint.
The broadcast analysis can show what appeared on the video board and when it appeared. It does not prove that the display caused a particular kicker to miss.
Field goals can be affected by distance, wind, weather, the snap, the hold, protection, pressure and the kicker himself.
There is a significant difference between saying the display may have created a visual distraction and saying it caused missed kicks.
The available evidence does not establish the latter.
THE EDUCATED TAKE
This is what makes the story more interesting than another argument about whether the Patriots were "cheating."
The NFL had a policy.
The Patriots' display fit within that policy.
But the policy apparently allowed home and visiting kickers to face different visual environments during the same game.
Someone found an edge inside the rules.
Now the NFL has decided that particular edge shouldn't exist.
Sports leagues deal with this constantly. Rules don't anticipate every possible use of technology, strategy or stadium design. Teams discover advantages. Other teams notice them. Eventually the league decides where gamesmanship ends and competitive uniformity should begin.
In this case, the NFL's answer is now straightforward:
Whatever permitted treatment the kicker sees on the video board, both teams have to get the same treatment.