Niners Busted for Tampering

[steelerfan513]

I don't want to get into another Pats cheating debate either (I hate the term Spygate and will avoid it at all costs), but it does merit comparison to this situation.

The Niners talk to Briggs before the FA deadline, something that may or may not harm the Bears, and as a result, the Bears get a better draft pick. The Patriots get caught cheating against the Jets, something that pretty blatantly affects the Jets, and the Jets get absolutely nothing in return. Not a draft pick, not a victory, nothing.

The Patriots cheating is blatantly more hurtful to the Jets than the Niners' actions are to the Bears, yet the Bears get compensation and the Jets don't. How does that make any sense whatsoever?

[Munboy]

I like how they always fall back on the old "we had a different interpretation of the rules" line...

[eaglesrule]

I like how they always fall back on the old "we had a different interpretation of the rules" line...

what is the point of that argument? There is only one interpretation that matters, and your's wasn't it--hence the penalty.

[Kilroy]

I like how they always fall back on the old "we had a different interpretation of the rules" line...

what is the point of that argument? There is only one interpretation that matters, and your's wasn't it--hence the penalty.

Any excuse is better than none.

[beanoX3]

I thought there already was precedent for awarding the team that got tampered with getting a draft pick? Something in the 80's or 60's. I think I read about it somewhere....

Anyways, I've read several articles about this and it sounds to me that the NFL had their own evidence that the 49ers tampered on top of what the Bears provided. I can see tampering accusations skyrocketing next year, but I don't think we're gonna see anything more than vague hints and stuff unless a team can provide proof.

Something else I read (Peter King article, I think) said that this decision was made deliberately by Goodell to send a message to the rest of the league, that he is going to crack down on tampering.

[moochman]

I thought there already was precedent for awarding the team that got tampered with getting a draft pick? Something in the 80's or 60's. I think I read about it somewhere....

Anyways, I've read several articles about this and it sounds to me that the NFL had their own evidence that the 49ers tampered on top of what the Bears provided. I can see tampering accusations skyrocketing next year, but I don't think we're gonna see anything more than vague hints and stuff unless a team can provide proof.

Something else I read (Peter King article, I think) said that this decision was made deliberately by Goodell to send a message to the rest of the league, that he is going to crack down on tampering.

No question that Goodell wants to appear to be looking into tampering in football, and giving draft picks may have been done in the past. But the concern should really be in Goodell's arbitrary decisions and the NFL's history of favoring some franchises, while others not so much. The 9ers, for example, have been on the NFL short list since some crap that DeBartolo(???) was pulling years ago. The NFL FO are a bunch of grumpy old men for the most part, and holding grudges wouldn't be unexpected. It is the offspring of a country club or old boy network. Nod and a wink, they all knew what was going on and that nobody could say boo. So they never bothered setting up a policies on so many things. Spygate, players after hour habits, tampering on FAs. So they have a commish who has nothing to follow. They would have been much better served to set in stone punishments for crimes, and even clearly defined articles concerning what is punishable. Instead we have the Goodell Boys punishing randomly and destroying evidence. They are raising more questions than they were trying to aleve.

[Munboy]

I like how they always fall back on the old "we had a different interpretation of the rules" line...

what is the point of that argument? There is only one interpretation that matters, and your's wasn't it--hence the penalty.

Any excuse is better than none.

Yeah, but the rules are pretty clear, and they end up just looking silly. An organization cannot contact a player or coach or any representive of that person during the season without the consent of the team. Pretty cut and dry....Like the rule that says a team cannot use recording devices to record another teams signals.

[A Fleshner Fantasy]

The fifth-rounder I'm fine with, but the third round "switch" sets a shaky precedent. What's to stop everyone and their mother from crying "tampering" in an effort to improve draft position?

It makes it a bigger deterrent, because since the teams have something to gain by reporting it, you can be certain that any tampering that happens is almost guaranteed to be reported. It's not cheating if you don't get caught, but rewarding the team whose player is being tampered with puts 32 policemen out there with an itch to report something.

By that then the Jets should be wondering where their reward is for calling the Patriots on Spygate. I agree with Kilroy that this sets a precedence that will certainly lead to other teams wondering why they didn't get compensated. Hell, one could argue that there is no certainty that the Jets would have lost that game (far stretch, but there is no way of being 100% certain regardless of how outclassed they were) and that they were not compensated appropriately for receiving a loss. I still think to this day that the Patriots should have had to forfeit that game and if they weren't on the verge of a perfect season they probably would have been fined as such.

I don't think you fully understand what the Patriots were doing in Spygate. They were taping the signals for future games, but they were caught and the tapes confiscated before they had the opportunity to use them. The Patriots didn't gain anything from spygate because of how early it was caught, and so that game was actually no different because of it.

[steelerfan513]

It makes it a bigger deterrent, because since the teams have something to gain by reporting it, you can be certain that any tampering that happens is almost guaranteed to be reported. It's not cheating if you don't get caught, but rewarding the team whose player is being tampered with puts 32 policemen out there with an itch to report something.

By that then the Jets should be wondering where their reward is for calling the Patriots on Spygate. I agree with Kilroy that this sets a precedence that will certainly lead to other teams wondering why they didn't get compensated. Hell, one could argue that there is no certainty that the Jets would have lost that game (far stretch, but there is no way of being 100% certain regardless of how outclassed they were) and that they were not compensated appropriately for receiving a loss. I still think to this day that the Patriots should have had to forfeit that game and if they weren't on the verge of a perfect season they probably would have been fined as such.

I don't think you fully understand what the Patriots were doing in Spygate. They were taping the signals for future games, but they were caught and the tapes confiscated before they had the opportunity to use them. The Patriots didn't gain anything from spygate because of how early it was caught, and so that game was actually no different because of it.

San Fran's tampering didn't hurt the Bears because the Bears were able to sign Briggs to a long-term contract that wasn't overly expensive, yet the Bears still got compensation. Forfeiting the game probably wouldn't have been the right reward to the Jets, but a draft pick would've been good.

On a separate note, I'm still confused as to why people are saying that the only reason the Patriots didn't have to forfeit was because of their perfect season. The Jets game was the season opener. How on Earth could Goodell have predicted that the Patriots were going to win all their games after one game?

[A Fleshner Fantasy]

By that then the Jets should be wondering where their reward is for calling the Patriots on Spygate. I agree with Kilroy that this sets a precedence that will certainly lead to other teams wondering why they didn't get compensated. Hell, one could argue that there is no certainty that the Jets would have lost that game (far stretch, but there is no way of being 100% certain regardless of how outclassed they were) and that they were not compensated appropriately for receiving a loss. I still think to this day that the Patriots should have had to forfeit that game and if they weren't on the verge of a perfect season they probably would have been fined as such.

I don't think you fully understand what the Patriots were doing in Spygate. They were taping the signals for future games, but they were caught and the tapes confiscated before they had the opportunity to use them. The Patriots didn't gain anything from spygate because of how early it was caught, and so that game was actually no different because of it.

San Fran's tampering didn't hurt the Bears because the Bears were able to sign Briggs to a long-term contract that wasn't overly expensive, yet the Bears still got compensation. Forfeiting the game probably wouldn't have been the right reward to the Jets, but a draft pick would've been good.

On a separate note, I'm still confused as to why people are saying that the only reason the Patriots didn't have to forfeit was because of their perfect season. The Jets game was the season opener. How on Earth could Goodell have predicted that the Patriots were going to win all their games after one game?

Steelerfan, I'm kind of confused about your views right now. You said in a previous post that the Patriots cheating blatantly effected the Jets, yet you quote my post in which I say the exact opposite and you don't bother to refute it.

Do you mind clearing up for me whether or not you think the Jets should have been compensated?