Can NFL* dock traded for draft picks?

[The Gr8est]

In looking back at Defamegate, the concensus is that it was instigated, at least in part, because some owners felt the Pats hadn't been hobbled, er I mean punished enough during CameraPlacementGate.

Some felt the Pats should have lost the higher of the 1st round pick, which they had traded for the year before.

I can't think of a previous instance where a team was docked a draft pick that originally belonged to another team, and I wonder if that is even legal for the NFL* to do.

What is next if Defamegate fails to stop the Pats from winning?

Lowering their cap and forcing them to release players?


Oh, almost forgot, **** the NFL* !

 

[Galeb]

Draft picks are a currency that the NFL produces. It appears that they can do whatever they want with them as long as they're not Jet's picks. For the NFL to explicitly state that the highest pick in the 1st will be taken, someone in the NFL office musta been pretty pissed when the Patriots picked 10th in 2008, a year where the NFL stole a 1st rounder.

 

[VectorPrime]

The NFL literally makes up the rules as they go along so sure, why not?

 

[IllegalContact]

not only can they do that, but they can dock you of picks you might be thinking about getting

the funny thing about the NFL punishment of the Pats is the fear the league has to make as part of the punishment, the removal of any pick the Pats might trade for ahead of their own

that tells me that the league (most likely through the other owners) wanted to make sure the pats don't go off and get a top prospect

 

[doesntmatter1]

Brady, Gronk, and Edelman= playoffs. If BB had to, he could put together a team with at least 30 undrafted rookies and make it work. I truly believe that.

 

[The Gr8est]

The Pats trade player X to the Browns for their #1 pick. This is a pick that belonged to the Browns who gave the rights to it to the Pats.

The NFL* decides the Pats' latest offense will require them to forfeit this acquired draft pick.

Isn't that equivalent to forcing the Pats to remove a player from their roster?

That pick is an asset they would not have if they kept player X, while their own 1st round pick is an asset that has not been determined yet, and has never been on the Pats' roster.

 

[jah]

There literally are no rules for the people who make the rules in the NFL. We can't ask things like "can they do that?" because the answer is always yes.

 

[woolster22]

Have you seen their court arguments? "Goodell can do whatever he wants because article 40."

Goodell will do as he pleases. I'm surprised he didn't void the Bennet trade yet, in the interest of parity and the integrity of the game.

 

[Danger Zone]

I have to say, I was greatly surprised at how much I (or we) are in the minority over this issue of YoureWinningTooMuchAndWeCantStandItGate.

It's one thing to [unjustly] fine a person or franchise, but this "We will take away every pick below the 29th spot no matter what you do" is just draconian in my opinion.

We are fining you 1 million dollars, but you aren't allowed to make any income this year while you pay it off. Seriously, who does this? Well, we know who. Cry baby billionaires and a corrupt, hyper-sensitive, dont-make-me-look-bad Commissioner.

- No matter how you slice it, the Patriots have picked on average, last of all other teams in the NFL over the past 16 years. Period.

- No other team has lost 3 first round picks during that time.

And now, the Commissioner makes up a rule to keep us from trading up into the First Round?

Its weird, but this little caveat burns me more than anything else for some reason.

 

[PlainOldEd]

The Pats trade player X to the Browns for their #1 pick. This is a pick that belonged to the Browns who gave the rights to it to the Pats.

The NFL* decides the Pats' latest offense will require them to forfeit this acquired draft pick.

Isn't that equivalent to forcing the Pats to remove a player from their roster?

That pick is an asset they would not have if they kept player X, while their own 1st round pick is an asset that has not been determined yet, and has never been on the Pats' roster.

I'd like to see them make a trade for a player drafted before 29 for picks and players, and see what Roger does about that. Where does New Orleans pick? They'd probably like to stick it to Rog, provided the deal worked for both sides.

 

[NoESPNzone]

How about having Cleveland draft the player we want and then trading our player(s) for that player after the draft is over? Didn't that sort of happen with Elway?

 

[jboston19]

I believe the way rookies deals work with a set amount of cap space assigned effectively prevents them from trading for a players rights like that.

 

[Gumby]

There is right (or righteous/moral) and wrong (or unrighteous and despicable/immoral).

Then there is legal and illegal, (as well as illegal but never enforced).

And then there is contolled and uncontrolled (parallel to the unenforced).

How the Patriots have been treated in camera-placement-gate and defame-gate is immoral, IMO illegal (but IANAL and plenty who are have argued differently), but sadly enough at the end of day, the NYJFL is UNCONTROLLED !! So it just doesnt matter. They and go-to-hell do what they want.

My only question is how come 1 PA senator of a 2 senator State with 2 Teams and 3-4 allegiances can cause a political tumult and threaten the league over placement-gate, yet the Pats with a 6-state region (12 senators) and only one team cant get a Single one of them to threaten go-to-hell and scare the crap out of owners losing their precious exemptions so that they finally deal with issue on the up and up???

 

[Mack Herron]

It seems to me the NFL thinks it can do whatever it wants, and is setting all kinds of precedence with the Patriots, including this new gimmick of stealing our highest first round pick no matter how we get it.

 

[XLIX]

They can pretty much do anything they want, especially when you have an owner who will bend over and "take one for the league."

However, it is worth noting that the Spygate punishment was not purely a 1st rounder. It was a first rounder contingent on NE making the playoffs. If they missed the playoffs and picked in the top-20, they would have lost a 2nd and 3rd rounder instead. So there was not really any threat to take the higher draft pick which they got from Oakland.

 

[IllegalContact]

In the days of a hard cap, sound management can negate the effect of a lost pick...add to that the variability of success in drafting and a 53 man roster, the 29th pick is just a small bump in the reload....more symbolic than anything

 

[Mack Herron]

In the days of a hard cap, sound management can negate the effect of a lost pick...add to that the variability of success in drafting and a 53 man roster, the 29th pick is just a small bump in the reload....more symbolic than anything

Symbolic like Brown, Easley, Hightower, Jones, and Solder?

 

[Dr Pain]

I believe as part of the defamegate punishment they wrote it that they would take the Patriots lowest 1st round pick, whether theirs or a lower one if they trade for it.

 

[IllegalContact]

Symbolic like Brown, Easley, Hightower, Jones, and Solder?

Easley? Worth a 1st rounder? Not yet

They did more than offset losing a 1st rounder this year.....losing that pick will not change their fortunes

 

[ausbacker]

I believe as part of the defamegate punishment they wrote it that they would take the Patriots lowest 1st round pick, whether theirs or a lower one if they trade for it.

As frustrating as it is, the ****heads over at the NFL clearly didn't consider the brilliance of the Patriots coaching staff given the offseason the team has put together. I wonder if not having that draft pick and the associated financial commitment that comes along with it has been redistributed to act in Free Agency and trade for Bennett? Whatever the case, Belichick and Caserio make one hell of a team.