If someone has a video camera on the sidelines aimed at the opposing team, how can the information be used in a timely manner?
Is it more useful as a tool of distraction to get into the opposing team's heads (a certain NFL head coach has been known to do this to his opponents) or can it actually have some dynamic benefit in the 15-20 seconds between the signals being given and the play starting?
If it can have some benefit in that limited time, why bother with a camera and slow down the decision making further?
They only were doing what every other team was doing that is why no other coaches but whiny boy Mangini has complained.
I think calling a TO as they snap the ball for a FG is worse than filming.
In theory you could do some analysis of the tape while your defense is on the field (since you’re only filming defensive calls, offensive calls go over the radio), then of course there’s the half time break. The real benefit, if there is one at all, would be in the rematch. The big goal is to be able to figure out from their signal if they’re going to blitz, whether or not the defense is blitzing is probably the single most important piece of information that exists, #2 would be where the blitz is coming from (strong side, weak side, middle) because that’s where you want your hot read to go.
All that being said I think this whole thing is a bi-product of the way the NFL has become obsessed with over planning and secrets. These days it’s all about gigantic playbooks and complex schemes. Lombardi used to install about 2 dozen plays a game plus some audibled variations, he believed that you could tell the other team exactly what you were going to do and if you executed properly it wouldn’t matter.