How is the notion of no value that Loomis, the GM of the New Orleans Saints, had electronic access to the real-time, in-game conversations of rival coaching staffs? Ask the NFL why it has rules to prevent that kind of stuff in the first place. It is because such access would be of incredible value.
How is it that so many rush forward so quickly to explain that Loomis wouldn't understand the lexicon of coaching well enough to help the Saints gain an edge in a game? The Saints play their divisional opponents twice a season, every season. Every scrap of information is critical. The edge is so obvious, you'd have to be willfully ignorant not to see it.
Of course the Saints would benefit from such a system. Of course it's against the rules.
And as much as commissioner Roger Goodell may wish he could avoid picking up the phone for another uncomfortable conversation with Saints owner Tom Benson, that's not possible. Kill the messenger all you want, but where the Saints are concerned right now, there is no benefit of the doubt.
As is the case with any of the potentially toxic events that have wafted in sports' general direction lately, it's probably helpful in the Loomis imbroglio to sort fact from conjecture. Beyond that, hyperventilate at will.
It is a fact, because it was confirmed by the U.S. attorney's office in Louisiana, that the office was informed Friday of the allegations against Loomis and the Saints specifically, that Loomis had the ability to electronically eavesdrop on opposing coaches for three seasons in the 2000s. It is conjecture as to whether those allegations will stick or whether the system, even if it existed, was ever used.
It is a fact that such electronic monitoring could have violated both federal law (subject to a statute of limitations) and the rules of the NFL. It is conjecture as to whether either body will move to enforce its rules, since no one knows the full scope of what they're dealing with yet.