Goodell wants existing rule on FA tampering enforced

[Deus Irae]

I submit that there are very few rules that are "unenforceable" in the NFL. If there are unenforceable rules then they can be changed to be enforceable or more limiting as to the ability of teams to circumvent them. Otherwise what would you suggest? Just let teams do whatever the hell they want? That's not good enough for me.

You pass 2 types of laws, and only 2 types of laws, if you want your law enforcement system to be taken seriously. The first type is the serious laws (no murder, etc...) which attempt to limit the instances of truly bad behavior, even if enforcement is difficult. The second is the lesser law which you can, and will, enforce. By not holding to those restrictions, you make system of law and enforcement a joke. You know, like the one in the United States, and most nations throughout the western world. That also applies to 'rules' of companies, leagues, etc. It's better to have a few laws enforced aggressively than it is to have a myriad unenforceable laws paid lip service.

So do you think that he should just step back and let teams do whatever they feel like? Not me, my friend, not me. If you are right and they are unenforceable then change it to be more easily enforced. One of your Patriot fan brothers had a good idea in another thread about how to make FA tampering more dificult if not more enforceable. Simply make it against the rules to sign a FA until 72 hours (or whatever) after the FA signing period has started. That way, even though it may still be tough to enforce, it will give teams that do not participate in tampering a chance to contact players and their agents before they sign with a team that has tampered with them. Beside that this is a VERY narrow example within the broad spectrum of rules. I am talking about enforcing all the rules. Enforce the rules so that it's man on man, my team against yours.May the best organisation win, not the best organisation to get around or break the rules.

pao

The tampering policy in the NBA is idiotic in the first place, for multiple reasons. The NBA system is much smarter, and it's got more than a 72 hour signing moratorium. As for enforcing the rules, what part of 'unenforceable' are you failing to grasp?

P.S. I assume that you never jaywalk, speed, fail to signal prior to a turn, etc. , right?

 

[pao]

I don't think I'm misunderstanding anything, although you seem to be missing something. What New England did was within the rules (as practiced for years and, at least in practice, as interpreted by the prior Commissioner), but they were punished for it anyway. Stealing signs is within the rules.

What you miss, in this case, is that I am not talking about Spygate. As I said before that is done and over. While I think it is debateable whether what you say is true it doesn't matter, it's done and irrelevent. I am talking about cheating in general going forward. I want a strong commissioner to direct his office to actively look for it and eliminate it to the best of his, and by extension the league's, ability.

The tampering rules are unenforceable except in the most obvious of cases.

Change the rule then, or allow it. And, for the good of the league, do something about the "most obvious cases".

This notion that teams aren't acting within the rules and are doing things which Commissioner Clouseau will be able to stop is simply not backed up by the current publicly known data.

If teams aren't aren't acting within the rules I want it stopped. Whether Goodell will be able to stop the teams doing it is unknown. We'll see going forward though. He's making the right noises, whatever the reason.

sdfan

 

[pao]

You pass 2 types of laws, and only 2 types of laws, if you want your law enforcement system to be taken seriously. The first type is the serious laws (no murder, etc...) which attempt to limit the instances of truly bad behavior, even if enforcement is difficult. The second is the lesser law which you can, and will, enforce. By not holding to those restrictions, you make system of law and enforcement a joke. You know, like the one in the United States, and most nations throughout the western world. That also applies to 'rules' of companies, leagues, etc. It's better to have a few laws enforced aggressively than it is to have a myriad unenforceable laws paid lip service.

Actually, ironically, we agree on this and is what I have been saying all along. Enforce the rules. I guess an additional caveat would be if you can't enforce them because it is impossible, change them.

The tampering policy in the NBA is idiotic in the first place, for multiple reasons. The NBA system is much smarter, and it's got more than a 72 hour signing moratorium.

Er, what? Did you mean the NFL tampering policy is idiotic? And the NBA's is better? I think we agree that the NFL tampering rule needs to be changed. Because they are "unenforceable except in the most obvious cases" doesn't mean they can't be changed to be, as I said, more easily enforceable or at least more difficult for teams to circumvent.

P.S. I assume that you never jaywalk, speed, fail to signal prior to a turn, etc. , right?

Oh, I do indeed. What does that have to do with what I want to see in the NFL? Nothing, that's what. Having said that, if I jaywalk, speed or fail to signal prior to a turn I have nothing to complain about if caught and disciplined (and I'm not talking about Spygate! That is done and done).

Thanks for participating. It has been a great conversation. I took the time to look at some of your past posts. You are obviously an excellent writer and very intelligent, if a bit condescending and I have learned some things from you. Good luck next year.

sdfan

 

[BPF]

I think you misunderstand what I am saying. I am against a team gaining a competitive advantage due to breaking rules, i.e. cheating. I am not against teams gaining a competitive advantage through hard work, efficiency, or being smarter than other teams WITHIN THE RULES. See the differerance? I'm pretty sure you agree with me in that regard.

sdfan

Yes. Why doesn't the league start taking away 3rd Rd picks for holding, 2nd Rd picks for clipping and unsportsmanlike fouls and 1st Rounders for roughing the passer, we wouldn't want a competitive advantage to be yielded due to breaking rules, i.e. cheating.

Seriously though, what you fail to understand is that "cheating" has been going on in sports forever and is an NFL tradition. It's ok if the league wants to come clean but it's not ok if the Patriots or any other team for that matter is scapegoated and branded as "cheaters." Here is an example of "cheating" from recent history that went unpunished. Former 49er coach Bill Walsh used to script his first 20 offensive plays. Coincidentally or not, there were often communication failures at Candlestick Park at the beginning of games and subsoquently the sideline communications for both teams would have to be restricted. Now for the 49ers that wasn't a problem because they already knew what plays were going to be run. To the other team it was a BIG problem. At Candelstick teams would somehow suffer those communication malfunctions where it would benefit the 49ers and they gained a competitive advantage by breaking the rules but I don't remember this matter ever being investigated. Do you? Walsh is a legend but Belichick a cheater? I don't think so.

We also all know of the stories of Al Davis bugging locker rooms or George Halas spying on practices but they are legends of the game. This part of football has been going on for a long time but it seems only recently has a team and coach been branded "cheaters," why is that?? Dislike for BB?? Goodell making the matter more of any issue than it should be??

We know what the Patriots were caught doing and we all know that the Pats aren't the only team that has pushed the limits of scouting opponents because we are not that naive. In Football an important facet of the game is information. In the past, teams would steal playbooks or notes and tape/decipher signals from the coaches booth or pressbox. So what the Patriots are guilty of is using technology to perfect the process. Let's not be naive and believe that as technology improved BB was the only coach to realize it's benefits. The NFL has always been a cutting edge league looking for advantages. Modern technology has allowed coaches to do much more than in the past. Don't tell me that BB only realized the advantage of gathering intelligence beyond the common method of scouting an opponent in games. With the ease of the flow of info there is a bigger vulnerability than ever to "cheating, spying, etc" and the league understands this and is looking to put an end to it. But Commish Goodell went about it the wrong way by coming down extremely hard on the Patriots causing the general public to believe they are the only offenders, but we all know gaining competitive advantages is a league wide issue (in addition to "spying," there is tampering, pumped in crowd noise, etc.) and we all know that it's also ingrained in football culture.

 

[Deus Irae]

What you miss, in this case, is that I am not talking about Spygate. As I said before that is done and over. While I think it is debateable whether what you say is true it doesn't matter, it's done and irrelevent. I am talking about cheating in general going forward. I want a strong commissioner to direct his office to actively look for it and eliminate it to the best of his, and by extension the league's, ability.

I understand that you claim your argument is not about spygate. However, it's neither done nor irrelevant, nor is my point about it. It is, in fact, what got the ball rolling on all of this, and it colors everything people are now saying. That's what I mean when I say that you're missing something. I want the same type of leadership/rulership from every organization. I want minimum rules with maximum enforcement. Unfortunately, as our State and Federal governments are proving, along with the NCAA, NFL, MLB, etc... this nation is trending more towards the monitoring and legislating of every single move an individual makes.

 

[PAPatsjunkie]

I don't agreee with this. Send out a memo, ala the memo the NFL sent out regarding taping other team signals, then if anyone gets caught tampering hit them with a hammer (take away draft picks).
Great point. The NFL needs to penalize teams that do that more harshly.

pao

Just to be clear, the NFL did already send out a memo this year regarding tampering, per Peter King's article.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I see your point. But what I want from the commisioner, whether it be Goodell or someone else, is a force against breaking the rules set up to keep one team from gaining a competitive advantage over another. We'll see if Goodell is the guy or not going forward. Until it is history we won't know. Until now the guy has made many missteps for whatever reason. We'll see how he does from here on, and he will be judged on that.

sdfan

I think what everyone can agree upon is that they want an even playing field.

I think everyone can also agree that there are some rules that are unenforceable.

By allowing videotaping of coaches signal calling - but just not blatantly from the sidelines (this is in effect what Goodell has established re: Spygate, since he allows teams to tape games and does not police what they tape) Goodell has implemented an unenforceable rule against the taping of coaches signal and playcalling.

By allowing tampering - but just not blatantly when players, agents or GMs make revealing statements or sign at 1 minute after midnight, Goodell creates another unenforceable rule.

In my opinion, selectively enforcing unenforceable rules itself, CREATES AN UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD. And as tough as that is to swallow, along with the fact that the Patriots have been made a scapegoat, I think we're all smart enough to see that Goodell's actions are for PUBLIC RELATIONS purposes only - and likely Kraft is willing to suck it up and accept the unjust punishment for the good of the league as a whole, ensuring that the PERCEPTION that everyone abides by the rules is established.

Just to be clear, the NFL did already send out a memo this year regarding tampering, per Peter King's article.

People will minimize tampering as a joke of a rule, as its largely unenforceable - but in playing along with Goodell's ruse, this is a SERIOUS violation. As with the Broncos salary cap shenanigans, allowing them to add additional player or players by circumventing the cap, tampering allows teams to unjustly sign marquee free agents, circumventing a fair process by which all teams have equal opportunity.

Allowing a team time in advance to lock up free agents is as serious a violation - if not more - of fair play than taping signals are... especially since the taping of signals continues in the stands even today.

As such, Goodell MUST deal with this as harshly as Spygate.

Overall, I think its all a joke - but the only fair thing to do is treat everyone the same.

 

[BPF]

We will soon find out if the league is serious about cracking down on other forms of "cheating" like tampering. Florio says "the league office is getting anxious to make an example out of someone, given the rampant tampering that occurs every February." Just like "spygate," we know everyone does it, now we get to find out if others will also pay as steep a price.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/03/17/even-if-bears-didnt-ask-for-hearing-theyre-getting-one/

EVEN IF BEARS DIDN’T ASK FOR HEARING, THEY’RE GETTING ONE
Posted by Mike Florio on March 17, 2008, 8:52 a.m.
The recent report from Jay Glazer of FOXSports.com that a hearing will occur on Monday regarding the Bears’ claim of tampering against the 49ers has prompted some league insiders to conclude that the Bears specifically requested a hearing.

Not so, says one league source. The hearing was called by the league, and it wasn’t specifically requested by the Bears.

Still, it’s a matter of semantics, in our view. The Bears filed the charges; a hearing is the natural consequence. So the notion that the Bears didn’t ask for a hearing is no different than a person who files a civil lawsuit claiming that he didn’t ask for the eventual trial.

Clearly, the Bears are taking this matter seriously. Glazer reported that G.M. Jerry Angelo, coach Lovie Smith, and team president Ted Phillips will be attending the hearing in New York.

But whether the issue results in the imposition of penalties against the 49ers remains to be seen. The specific contention is that the 49ers engaged in unauthorized contract negotiations with agent Drew Rosenhaus regarding linebacker Lance Briggs while the Niners and the Bears were discussing a possible trade. It eventually was confirmed that Briggs couldn’t sign a new deal, because he’d inked his one-year franchise tender after the July 15 deadline for doing a multi-year deal.

Still, if unauthorized discussions occurred, the discussions potentially undermined the Bears’ ability to sign Briggs to a long-term contract at the outset of the 2008 league year, since the discussions gave Briggs’ agent an idea as to what else might be out there.

Some league observers believe that the Bears cried foul primarily to ensure that the Niners would back off. And if that was the goal, it might have worked; once Briggs hit the market, the 49ers were nowhere to be seen.

The broader reality here could be that the league office is getting anxious to make an example out of someone, given the rampant tampering that occurs every February, if not earlier, as players prepare to hit the market.

And it’s possible that the Niners won’t be the only team to face scrutiny. As one league source explained it to us, Commissioner Roger Goodell’s recently-launched effort to crack down on cheating likely includes a desire to stamp out tampering. Per the source, Goodell’s desire to reduce the standard of proof necessary for establishing rules violations would make it easier to establish that tampering has occurred, since such cases routinely rely on circumstantial evidence of impermissible discussions.

 

[pao]

Yes. Why doesn't the league start taking away 3rd Rd picks for holding, 2nd Rd picks for clipping and unsportsmanlike fouls and 1st Rounders for roughing the passer, we wouldn't want a competitive advantage to be yielded due to breaking rules, i.e. cheating.

No, I think cutting off their supply of HGH would be a more fitting consequence.

Seriously though, what you fail to understand is that "cheating" has been going on in sports forever and is an NFL tradition.

Oh I undertsand it, I just don't like it when it is carried to it's present extremes.

It's ok if the league wants to come clean but it's not ok if the Patriots or any other team for that matter is scapegoated and branded as "cheaters."

I have a hard time with this one. If you're cheating aren't you a cheater? If I, as a league member, choose to break the rules to gain a competitive advantage (not talking about the Patriots. I agree, now, that the Patriots did not "cheat" if they did not gain a competitive advantage in the game they videotaped) I am cheating and should be branded a cheater if caught.

Here is an example of "cheating" from recent history that went unpunished. Former 49er coach Bill Walsh used to script his first 20 offensive plays. Coincidentally or not, there were often communication failures at Candlestick Park at the beginning of games and subsoquently the sideline communications for both teams would have to be restricted. Now for the 49ers that wasn't a problem because they already knew what plays were going to be run. To the other team it was a BIG problem. At Candelstick teams would somehow suffer those communication malfunctions where it would benefit the 49ers and they gained a competitive advantage by breaking the rules but I don't remember this matter ever being investigated. Do you? Walsh is a legend but Belichick a cheater? I don't think so.

That's my point! If Walsh was indeed doing what you claim then he was cheating and was a cheate and should have been branded as such. Unfortunately we will never know (unless someone comes forward). This is the kind of thing I am AGAINST. This is an unfair advantage that takes away from the competition on the field. Someone working outside the rules fo the game to gain a competitive advantage. It is REPREHENSIBLE. If that is the way the league is going to be then I will find somewhere else to spend my entertainment dollar. Maybe the WWF.

We also all know of the stories of Al Davis bugging locker rooms or George Halas spying on practices but they are legends of the game. This part of football has been going on for a long time but it seems only recently has a team and coach been branded "cheaters," why is that?? Dislike for BB?? Goodell making the matter more of any issue than it should be??

Well in this case BB was actually caught and was turned in by Mangini. Al Davis and George Halas weren't "caught". That is DEFINITELY something I think should NOT be allowed and IS CHEATING!

We know what the Patriots were caught doing and we all know that the Pats aren't the only team that has pushed the limits of scouting opponents because we are not that naive. In Football an important facet of the game is information. In the past, teams would steal playbooks or notes and tape/decipher signals from the coaches booth or pressbox. So what the Patriots are guilty of is using technology to perfect the process. Let's not be naive and believe that as technology improved BB was the only coach to realize it's benefits. The NFL has always been a cutting edge league looking for advantages. Modern technology has allowed coaches to do much more than in the past. Don't tell me that BB only realized the advantage of gathering intelligence beyond the common method of scouting an opponent in games. With the ease of the flow of info there is a bigger vulnerability than ever to "cheating, spying, etc" and the league understands this and is looking to put an end to it. But Commish Goodell went about it the wrong way by coming down extremely hard on the Patriots causing the general public to believe they are the only offenders, but we all know gaining competitive advantages is a league wide issue (in addition to "spying," there is tampering, pumped in crowd noise, etc.) and we all know that it's also ingrained in football culture.

It may be ingrained but most of the public does NOT want to just allow it. Let's hope, as you say, that "the league understands this and is looking to put an end to it." Great post by the way. I am definitely more educated to the Patriots fan's POV of this whole Spygate thing and actually have been swayed from my original harsh reaction to the first announcements of it. I do wish they would stop talking about it, it is done as far as I am concerned. Time to let it fade into oblivion.

sdfan

 

[pao]

I understand that you claim your argument is not about spygate. However, it's neither done nor irrelevant, nor is my point about it. It is, in fact, what got the ball rolling on all of this, and it colors everything people are now saying. That's what I mean when I say that you're missing something. I want the same type of leadership/rulership from every organization. I want minimum rules with maximum enforcement. Unfortunately, as our State and Federal governments are proving, along with the NCAA, NFL, MLB, etc... this nation is trending more towards the monitoring and legislating of every single move an individual makes.

Another excellent post. I appreciate your efforts to help me understand. Now I have a few difficult questions for you. What few rules would you enact to ensure that no team would gain a competitive advantage over another? Would you allow tampering? Would you allow radio signal shinanigans (ala BWalsh and the 49ers)? How about piped in noise?

sdfan

 

[pao]

I think what everyone can agree upon is that they want an even playing field.

I think everyone can also agree that there are some rules that are unenforceable.

By allowing videotaping of coaches signal calling - but just not blatantly from the sidelines (this is in effect what Goodell has established re: Spygate, since he allows teams to tape games and does not police what they tape) Goodell has implemented an unenforceable rule against the taping of coaches signal and playcalling.

By allowing tampering - but just not blatantly when players, agents or GMs make revealing statements or sign at 1 minute after midnight, Goodell creates another unenforceable rule.

In my opinion, selectively enforcing unenforceable rules itself, CREATES AN UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD. And as tough as that is to swallow, along with the fact that the Patriots have been made a scapegoat, I think we're all smart enough to see that Goodell's actions are for PUBLIC RELATIONS purposes only - and likely Kraft is willing to suck it up and accept the unjust punishment for the good of the league as a whole, ensuring that the PERCEPTION that everyone abides by the rules is established.



People will minimize tampering as a joke of a rule, as its largely unenforceable - but in playing along with Goodell's ruse, this is a SERIOUS violation. As with the Broncos salary cap shenanigans, allowing them to add additional player or players by circumventing the cap, tampering allows teams to unjustly sign marquee free agents, circumventing a fair process by which all teams have equal opportunity.

Allowing a team time in advance to lock up free agents is as serious a violation - if not more - of fair play than taping signals are... especially since the taping of signals continues in the stands even today.

As such, Goodell MUST deal with this as harshly as Spygate.

Overall, I think its all a joke - but the only fair thing to do is treat everyone the same.

Wow, great post. Well put.

pao

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

"The broader reality here could be that the league office is getting anxious to make an example out of someone, given the rampant tampering that occurs every February, if not earlier, as players prepare to hit the market.

And it’s possible that the Niners won’t be the only team to face scrutiny. As one league source explained it to us, Commissioner Roger Goodell’s recently-launched effort to crack down on cheating likely includes a desire to stamp out tampering. Per the source, Goodell’s desire to reduce the standard of proof necessary for establishing rules violations would make it easier to establish that tampering has occurred, since such cases routinely rely on circumstantial evidence of impermissible discussions."


Knowing THIS Commisioner and his talent for ineptness, expect him to revoke the Niners 1st round pick, thereby depriving the Patriots of the 7th pick in the draft!

 

[Deus Irae]

Another excellent post. I appreciate your efforts to help me understand. Now I have a few difficult questions for you. What few rules would you enact to ensure that no team would gain a competitive advantage over another? Would you allow tampering? Would you allow radio signal shinanigans (ala BWalsh and the 49ers)? How about piped in noise?

sdfan

Well, the radio signal 'problems' are solved easily enough by putting all such communications under the control of the league. Then, if the signals go down, the league can quickly trace the problem and deal with any cheating that might have been done.

Piped in noise is a bit more difficult because it's the teams that are running that stuff. However, this would be an investigation that the league would be able to easily make and punish or clear teams about, since not all teams have domes.

And, just as an aside, I'd solve the free agency issue by doing something more similar to what the NBA does.

1.) Have a moratorium on all roster moves for a period of time following the end of the season (Super Bowl or Pro Bowl). This will give almost everyone a built-in vacation. Maybe some coaches will even be able to visit their families.

2.) Allow free agency to begin, but don't allow any signings for at least a week after it begins.

The current system, keeping some players off limits while allowing those who get released after the Super Bowl to be contacted and work out deals, is tailor made to allow an agent to discuss one client while ostensibly on a call about another.

3.) Any agent found 'aiding' in negotiations outside that window should be decertified, and any team found tampering should automatically lose a 1st round pick. Any player who knowingly participates in such activity should be banned from the league for a season.

Do that and I'm pretty sure that tampering would all but end.

 

[pao]

We will soon find out if the league is serious about cracking down on other forms of "cheating" like tampering. Florio says "the league office is getting anxious to make an example out of someone, given the rampant tampering that occurs every February." Just like "spygate," we know everyone does it, now we get to find out if others will also pay as steep a price.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/03/17/even-if-bears-didnt-ask-for-hearing-theyre-getting-one/

Yes, it will be interesting.

pao

 

[pao]

Well, the radio signal 'problems' are solved easily enough by putting all such communications under the control of the league. Then, if the signals go down, the league can quickly trace the problem and deal with any cheating that might have been done.

Piped in noise is a bit more difficult because it's the teams that are running that stuff. However, this would be an investigation that the league would be able to easily make and punish or clear teams about, since not all teams have domes.

And, just as an aside, I'd solve the free agency issue by doing something more similar to what the NBA does.

1.) Have a moratorium on all roster moves for a period of time following the end of the season (Super Bowl or Pro Bowl). This will give almost everyone a built-in vacation. Maybe some coaches will even be able to visit their families.

2.) Allow free agency to begin, but don't allow any signings for at least a week after it begins.

The current system, keeping some players off limits while allowing those who get released after the Super Bowl to be contacted and work out deals, is tailor made to allow an agent to discuss one client while ostensibly on a call about another.

3.) Any agent found 'aiding' in negotiations outside that window should be decertified, and any team found tampering should automatically lose a 1st round pick. Any player who knowingly participates in such activity should be banned from the league for a season.

Do that and I'm pretty sure that tampering would all but end.

Great! I would love those suggestions being implemented. YOU should be commissioner! A little tongue in cheek but, really, I think, from reading your posts, you have the logic, intelligence, common sense required of the postition. I like your "minimum rules, maximum enforcement" too. It begs the question if someone like you, and other posters here, can be so logical, why is it so tough for the league to do so?

sdfan

 

[Deus Irae]

Another excellent post. I appreciate your efforts to help me understand. Now I have a few difficult questions for you. What few rules would you enact to ensure that no team would gain a competitive advantage over another? Would you allow tampering? Would you allow radio signal shinanigans (ala BWalsh and the 49ers)? How about piped in noise?

sdfan

Oh, I forgot one. Stealing signals should not be against the rules. If teams don't want defensive signals stolen because they feel it's unfair, they can simply pass a rule putting a microphone into the helmet of one player on the defense and use it in a manner similar to the way that teams use the microphone in the QB's helmet.

 

[pao]

Oh, I forgot one. Stealing signals should not be against the rules. If teams don't want defensive signals stolen because they feel it's unfair, they can simply pass a rule putting a microphone into the helmet of one player on the defense and use it in a manner similar to the way that teams use the microphone in the QB's helmet.

Logical. Are you Spock by any chance?

sdfan

 

[Deus Irae]

Great! I would love those suggestions being implemented. YOU should be commissioner! A little tongue in cheek but, really, I think, from reading your posts, you have the logic, intelligence, common sense required of the postition. I like your "minimum rules, maximum enforcement" too. It begs the question if someone like you, and other posters here, can be so logical, why is it so tough for the league to do so?

sdfan

Thank you for the compliment. As for why this stuff doesn't get done, it's always easier to maintain the status quo than to change it. Plus, you have 4 groups involved (agents, players, owners, front office) and they all have different agendas.

As a fan, I don't want Commissioner Clouseau having any more power than is absolutely necessary, because I truly think that the man is a danger to the sport. He's already managed to infuriate most of the fans of the league's most successful team while showing a clear willingness to use double standards when it comes to both investigation and enforcement. Furthermore, people who want additional power when they don't need it, and who want to lower evidentiary thresholds while concentrating the roles of judge, jury and executioner in their own hands scare the hell out of me. I've seen those patterns before and they are very rarely a positive development.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Great! I would love those suggestions being implemented. YOU should be commissioner! A little tongue in cheek but, really, I think, from reading your posts, you have the logic, intelligence, common sense required of the postition. I like your "minimum rules, maximum enforcement" too. It begs the question if someone like you, and other posters here, can be so logical, why is it so tough for the league to do so?

sdfan

FWIW, here's a couple of possibilities:

(A) Before a club may sign a UFA who was with another team at the end of the preceding season, they must file a proposed contract with the player's previous team (and maybe the league as well), AND wait 48 hours before signing the player; they then must sign the player to that exact contract. Any modifications require a new submission and a new 48-hour window. Any contract found in violation of this rule is immediately voided, and said club may not sign that player for the original duration of the voided contract, including any options (e.g., if Nate Clements' contract were deemed illegal, the Niners would lose the right to sign him until after the 2014 season).

(B) If you sign a player who was previously signed by another club within 5 business days of that player's release/availability, you owe a draft pick to that team: a one-year deal costs a fifth-rounder, a two-year deal costs a fourth-rounder, up to a first-rounder for a deal of five years or longer. [Obviously, such a player would not be eligible for compensatory picks.]

 

[JoeSixPat]

Oh, I forgot one. Stealing signals should not be against the rules. If teams don't want defensive signals stolen because they feel it's unfair, they can simply pass a rule putting a microphone into the helmet of one player on the defense and use it in a manner similar to the way that teams use the microphone in the QB's helmet.

and in fact, stealing signals is NOT currently against the rules...

that hasn't changed has it? THAT'S the most hypocritical element of Spygate. i.e. Stealing Signals is ok but the way in which you steal them is the more important thing... oh and by the way, we're going to allow teams to videotape but we're not going to bother checking whether or not they are taping signal calling...

So just as long as you don't videotape from the sidelines, we're not going to even randomly check whether or not you're taping signals... but we ARE going to dock the Patriots their #31 pick this year just so the rest of the world THINKS we take cheating seriously.