IU Stealing Defensive Signals?

Submitted by Everyone Murders on

Angelique Chengelis REPORTS that Coach Mattison believes that IU was using spotters to steal Michigan's defensive signals to gain an unfair advantage. 

"You know what they do? They get up above (in the press box), and they watch you signal, and then when they see you signal, they call on their headset from upstairs over to the other sideline and they tell them what you're going to run.

My understanding is that this is not currently against the NCAA rules unless you deploy an extra coach or assistant (beyond allowable amounts) to do the sign stealing.  If that's right, do the football experts and others here think we should be doing this - or is it too much of a distraction? 

maizenbluenc

November 4th, 2014 at 11:49 AM ^

but my interpretation of Mattison's comments we're "eh - just another day at the office" in nature instead of whining. The press dug in on the subject, and asked more questions for details, but GMatt was like " business as usual - I would love to be Bama and telegraph what I am going to do because I know you can do nothing about it"

treetown

November 4th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^

Is this why there was this team of guys holding up white towels around Mattison during the game?

We saw this up in the stands and thought maybe they were creating a solid background so Mattison's signals could be more clearly seen.

 

XM - Mt 1822

November 4th, 2014 at 10:51 AM ^

you could see assistants holding up towels behind them, blocking the IU view from the press box.  i'm sure there's somebody that's got a picture for that.   then the defensive calls would ripple from the michigan sideline corner and/or safety, to the rest of the defensive backfield.  they used hand signals at that point, signifying of course the coverage.   our d-line was tapping their hips on stunts, which is pretty standard.  

then IU would fake the silent snap, look at the sidelines for a new play, then run it.  

saveferris

November 4th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^

So, based on the results from last Saturday, we can conclude that stealing the opponents defensive signals to adjust their offense pre-snap is another thing we can to the list of things that Indiana sucks at?

BornInA2

November 4th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^

I've been wondering for about six weeks now if teams were onto our offensive signals. I just don't see our offense being as bad as it's looked in some of these games and even marginal opposing defenses seem to be in just the right package or position to stop exactly what we are doing far, far too often.

PGB

November 4th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^

Okay, I'm not sure where you're going with this.

Well, I'm not sure where *you're* going with this.

That's what I said.

That's what I'm saying to *you*.

All right.

...Touché.

 

Perkis-Size Me

November 4th, 2014 at 12:17 PM ^

Nussmeier doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who'd be dumb enough to not know how to mask our play calling. I just think our player development overall is that bad. And it's not something Nuss could've fixed in one year.

And in the situation where he hasn't been able to mask what we're doing on offense, well, then we deserve to lose.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

bronxblue

November 4th, 2014 at 1:08 PM ^

Well, it didn't seem to help them all that much.

I always thought the sign stealing argument was kinda dumb.  You're trying to beat the other team, and they are not trying to hide the signals all that much; I mean, it would be one thing if the other team hacked into the headset mics and listened into that level of communication.  But beyond that, even if you know the play is coming you still have to execute and stop it.

CRISPed in the DIAG

November 4th, 2014 at 1:40 PM ^

An NFL assistant told me that he knew the signals of an opposing coach because they used to work together a few years previous. He said that former players often share signal info and terminology with their new teams.  

I inferred that the on-field signal 'stealing' was pretty common and generally not an open beef as long as teams weren't obvious.  However, players sharing info with their new teams was a bit trickier.

ST3

November 4th, 2014 at 1:58 PM ^

If Mattison believes the purpose of the hurry-up is to get players in position so they can steal your signs, he's missing the whole point. I don't need to steal your signs if I see your CB lined up 10 yards off the LOS. I just look at the field and adjust my playcall accordingly. I don't need to steal your sign to know if you are blitzing. I just do a hard count and see if the LBs are coming. Then I adjust my play call accordingly.

Meanwhile, Michigan calls a bubble screen regardless of how the defense is lined up. We have no concept of how modern offenses work. We never audible into a better play, or out of a poor play. If the CBs are in bump and run, and we've called a bubble screen or quick pass to the WR, we stay with that call. Maybe we haven't had enough time to implement the system, but after 9 games it's just more of the same and it hurts to watch.

True Blue Grit

November 4th, 2014 at 2:37 PM ^

of another team stealing our defensive signals than our offensive one.  So many times it seems like the other team knows what offensive play we're going to run -whether it's because of stealing the signals or us telegraphing what we're going to do, or just running the same plays in the same situations over and over.  Anyway, it didn't seem to help IU that much. 

Muttley

November 4th, 2014 at 3:20 PM ^

"eleven guys tackle Tevin Coleman" signal.

That's why IU coach Kevin Wilson kept Coleman on the bench in the first half.  It took him a while to figure out that we don't  have an "eleven guys tackle Tevin Coleman" play.