Mariotti calling for Goodell to investigate "sweetheart" KC trade

[dhamz]

Goodell can rescind the deal if he feels that it damages the integrity of the league by being too one-sided. He can tell the parties to go back and adjust the deal. All it takes is a call to the Broncos and to the Bucs to find out if there was any substance to the rumor of the 3 way. If there was, and it involved the #12 pick, then Goodell has grounds to rescind the deal because the #12 pick would be worth two 2nd rounders.

Now, I am NOT saying that this is true. I am just saying what can happen.

That would be deal that Tampa reportedly offerred AFTER the Pats/Chiefs filed the paperwork on their trade and that Denver has publicly said they wouldn't make?

 

[blackglass3]

:disagreement::steamed::bricks:
please not another 'spygate' saga..iam sick of this .haynesworth signs 100 mil the first hr of free agency. no investigation for tampering but this is fishy ?

IMHO, there will be no "TradeGate"...Sypgate was NY media fueled and they are still too busy cleaning up the mess in thier own backyard and crucifying A-Rod. They don't have time to go after BB right now.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

IMHO, there will be no "TradeGate"...Sypgate was NY media fueled and they are still too busy cleaning up the mess in thier own backyard and crucifying A-Rod. They don't have time to go after BB right now.

Very true on that. Also their own sports teams are leading the news with their own failures. So I agree, we are in the clear here for this one.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Here's another question--is it clear that TB/DET actually contacted New England at all?

 

[DaBruinz]

That would be deal that Tampa reportedly offerred AFTER the Pats/Chiefs filed the paperwork on their trade and that Denver has publicly said they wouldn't make?

If it was offered AFTER, then there isn't an issue. The time stamp on the NFL office Fax machine will clear that up.

 

[shmessy]

And in other news, Eastabrook is calling on Goodell to investigate why the Indians sold Manhattan for $24 of beads.

Manhattan had a huge escalator clause and was killing their cap.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Manhattan had a huge escalator clause and was killing their cap.

Yeah, Brooklyn was their established starter.

 

[VJCPatriot]

DUMB DA DUMB DUMB DUMB!!! Theres absolutely no substance to Mariotti's blowhard stance. The Pats could have traded Cassel away for a 7th round pick if they really wanted to. There's no reason for Goodell to even pick up the phone. And if Mariottio is on the line, he should hang it up after oh.. 10 seconds.

Goodell can rescind the deal if he feels that it damages the integrity of the league by being too one-sided. He can tell the parties to go back and adjust the deal. All it takes is a call to the Broncos and to the Bucs to find out if there was any substance to the rumor of the 3 way. If there was, and it involved the #12 pick, then Goodell has grounds to rescind the deal because the #12 pick would be worth two 2nd rounders.

Now, I am NOT saying that this is true. I am just saying what can happen.

No he can't. He'd have to find some wrongdoing to be able to rescind the deal. The Pats don't have to make the BEST deal available for the deal to be legit.

 

[dhamz]

Goddell can't do anything. There is no rule saying you have to take the best deal offerred. Most teams don't trade players within the division even if they could get more. Teams that don't like each other don't trade with each other.

And if he did call which he won't, the Pats reason for not trading with Tampa and Denver and going with KC instead could be explained to Goodell as simply as they didn't want to trade Cassel to a team on their 2009 schedule.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Here's another question--is it clear that TB/DET actually contacted New England at all?

According to Felger on WEEI late this morning, TD contacted the Patriots on mid week but did not offer a 1st rounder.

 

[Rob0729]

Where was the investigation of the Packers last year? The Vikings were offering more than the Jets gave up for Favre yet the Packers took the Jets offer and put a poison pill in the deal to not allow the Jets to trade Favre to the Vikes either. Wouldn't that be more illegal than if the Pats really did give the Chiefs a sweetheart deal?

The fact is both cases are legal in the NFL.

 

[dtbrks]

I'm sure it's already been said in this thread (haven't read it all) but Mariotti is a tool. He is all about drama and provides no real journalism (ala borges) IMO.

 

[DaBruinz]

DUMB DA DUMB DUMB DUMB!!! Theres absolutely no substance to Mariotti's blowhard stance. The Pats could have traded Cassel away for a 7th round pick if they really wanted to. There's no reason for Goodell to even pick up the phone. And if Mariottio is on the line, he should hang it up after oh.. 10 seconds.

Would you stop putting words in my mouth? Please show me, in my post, where I said there was any substance to Mariotti's blathering. Guess what. You can't. All I did was point out what Goodell CAN do.

No he can't. He'd have to find some wrongdoing to be able to rescind the deal. The Pats don't have to make the BEST deal available for the deal to be legit.

And, yes, Goodell CAN rescind the deal if he feels that it damages the integrity of the league. Since you aren't able to put 2 and 2 together to get 4, let me explain it to you. The "damaging the integrity of the league" would be the wrong-doing. It has nothing to do with the "best deal available". It has to do with what Goodell feels about the deal.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Goodell can rescind the deal if he feels that it damages the integrity of the league by being too one-sided. He can tell the parties to go back and adjust the deal. All it takes is a call to the Broncos and to the Bucs to find out if there was any substance to the rumor of the 3 way. If there was, and it involved the #12 pick, then Goodell has grounds to rescind the deal because the #12 pick would be worth two 2nd rounders.

Now, I am NOT saying that this is true. I am just saying what can happen.

I'll take your word for it that such an action is technically within Goodell's purview. If so, it's hard to imagine a (realistic) situation in which it would come into play. Teams make dumb deals all the time (not saying that this is a dumb deal BTW). That would put Goodell in the positiion of being the effective GM of every team in the NFL, second guessing every deal that he thinks might be "too one-sided." If he indeed has that right, it's the sort of power he would only exercise in absurd situations. In this case the Pats received a Draft Pick two away from Round One and offloaded $20+MM of cap room.

Teams choose to deal or not deal with other teams for a wide range of reasons ranging from personal history to competitive dynamics. The Pats have every right to say that they want to deal with one team rather than another as long as the deal itself is reasonable, which this one is.

 

[DaBruinz]

Goddell can't do anything. There is no rule saying you have to take the best deal offerred. Most teams don't trade players within the division even if they could get more. Teams that don't like each other don't trade with each other.

And if he did call which he won't, the Pats reason for not trading with Tampa and Denver and going with KC instead could be explained to Goodell as simply as they didn't want to trade Cassel to a team on their 2009 schedule.

Sorry, DHamz, but that is where you are wrong. Its not about taking the "best deal offered." Its about perceived impropriety. If Goodell feels that allowing the deal to stand would damage the integrity of the league, then its his right as Commissioner to rescind the deal. And there are rules about that.

 

[DaBruinz]

Where was the investigation of the Packers last year? The Vikings were offering more than the Jets gave up for Favre yet the Packers took the Jets offer and put a poison pill in the deal to not allow the Jets to trade Favre to the Vikes either. Wouldn't that be more illegal than if the Pats really did give the Chiefs a sweetheart deal?

The fact is both cases are legal in the NFL.

I don't believe that there was any "investigation" because you are talking a different scenario. You can't compare one to the other and claim they are the same. If you will remember, there were claims that the Vikings had tampered with Favre. And I wouldn't put it past Goodell to have allowed the deal the Packers made as a sort of "punishment" to the Vikings. And, while Favre did initiate the calls, the Vikings staff should have hung up on him immediately saying that they weren't allowed to talk to him. Instead, they talked for quite some time amongst with several different coaches speaking to Favre.

So, instead of penalizing the Vikings with a pick, Goodell penalized them with allowing the Packers deal to go through.

 

[Patriot Missile]

I wouldn't mind Goodell stepping in on this one and forcing KC to throw in next years 2nd. .001% chance of that happening.

 

[dhamz]

Sorry, DHamz, but that is where you are wrong. Its not about taking the "best deal offered." Its about perceived impropriety. If Goodell feels that allowing the deal to stand would damage the integrity of the league, then its his right as Commissioner to rescind the deal. And there are rules about that.

The only basis for a claim of impropriety is that they took less from Pioli because he was Pioli, he is a close friend of BB, and he used to work for the Pats until a month ago. Unless you think the same whispers would be made if this was Detroit and their 2nd round pick, that is the only basis for it.

If there was a percieved "better offer" on the table and the Pats didn't take it for any legitimate reasons then what exactly is the impropriety? There would be none.

 

[VJCPatriot]

And, yes, Goodell CAN rescind the deal if he feels that it damages the integrity of the league. Since you aren't able to put 2 and 2 together to get 4, let me explain it to you. The "damaging the integrity of the league" would be the wrong-doing. It has nothing to do with the "best deal available". It has to do with what Goodell feels about the deal.

You are incorrect. There has to be some tangible proof of wrongdoing to justify Goodell rescinding the deal. If in fact another team offered a 1st and the Pats accepted a 2nd from KC does not mean that the trade was not legitimate. There would still have to be some proof to indicate that the deal was not on the up and up.

Example - BB's personal bank account mysteriously inflates by 2 million dollars after the KC deal. Or something of that nature. The Pats ACCEPTING a lesser offer from the Chiefs than another team supposedly offered does not make the deal illegitimate.

It is NOT the commissioner's job to set the appropriate value of trades. After all it's not like Randy Moss was traded for a 4th round pick. Ooops, actually that DID happen. And not a peep from the commissioner about it. Case closed. There is none.

 

[Kontradiction]

Investigate what again?

So we're not even allowed to cheat our OWN team?

This is why it makes me angry that the differently able/mentally challenged sect of our society still struggle to find work when these ******s get serious coin to publish the first thing that comes into their heads.

Mariotti should call for someone to investigate his butthole and see if his brain is in there.

No, something else is already blocking up that orphus.