eaglesrule wrote:It is "their own." Once it switched hands, it became the Pats. This was an unprecedented offense. You can argue specifics, but the default problem is that a team who was caught cheating could also have a top five pick, and this makes sense how?
The Patriots made a specific transaction to get that pick back in April. Taking that pick away would be nullifying half of a trade. The NFL can't punish the Patriots for correctly predicting that the 49ers would suck this year by taking away a pick that they fairly traded for. They CAN punish them by taking away a draft pick they have always owned and that has never been through any transactions.
Basically you're condoning the nullification of half of a trade just for the fairness of the league. Should teams be punished for being too good or having good foresight to predict that another team will be bad?
Sorry to bring this back up, but you guys are forgetting one very important point. The suspension was handed down after week one! I mean sure any reasonable person would assume that the Pats would finish higher than the 49ers, but this is the NFL where teams like the Browns and Lions can make runs, so you never know who is going to end up where. Another wrinkle is that the pick could have been a 2nd rounder, and I haven't looked but I don't think the Patriots have the 49ers second pick. So now it is just a question of consistency. If the Pats miss the playoffs they lose their own pick, but if they make the playoffs they lose the 9ers pick? Ya that makes perfect sense.