Absurdly Metro
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2007
- Messages
- 580
- Reaction score
- 173
Link
I found this interesting in that it brings to light a delicious moral dilemma for us Patriot's fans...
Question #1: IF this tampering charge proves to be true, and NFL owners consider it to be worse than Spygate, what do you think should be the penalty for such malfeasance?
Question #2: SO, IF the Jesters are found guilty of this tampering charge BUT it is also found to be a widespread practice around the NFL (much like videotaping was where you had several coaches--including Jimmy Johnson-- admitting as such), would you, as a Patriots fan, embrace the obvious double standard and clamor for the max penalty to be levied against the Jets anyway or would you remain consistent and cut them some slack seeing they would be being treated the same way the Pats were (being singled out for something everyone else is doing anyway)?
Rules: Please don't let facts get in the way of a good moral dilemma here. No arguing that tampering is not widespread or that only the Jets would have been caught tampering with a first round draft pick etc. According to the article, tampering is a serious issue with implications far worse than Spygate AND it is known to be a fairly common practice around the league.
With those things in mind, should the Jets be found guilty, would you advocate throwing the book at them or cutting them some slack?
I found this interesting in that it brings to light a delicious moral dilemma for us Patriot's fans...
“[Spygate] was limited,” said a high-ranking NFC executive. “That’s something where – that information or competitive edge or whatever you want to call it, was limited to one team gaining an advantage over another team. But that’s just two teams. … We all have first-round picks – 32 teams have first-round picks.
“It’s hard to prove if it did happen. But if it did, it’s cheating the whole draft. You shouldn’t even be thinking about someone else’s pick. When the draft is over, that’s their deal and you have your own [selections] to worry about. It’s none of your business what is happening in someone else’s [negotiations]. If that [tampering with draft picks] flies, we might as well just make all the college players free agents.”
Question #1: IF this tampering charge proves to be true, and NFL owners consider it to be worse than Spygate, what do you think should be the penalty for such malfeasance?
The crux of the 49ers’ tampering charge still hasn’t been fleshed out publicly. But NFL security officials have already been tasked with the investigation, and three league sources told Yahoo! Sports the 49ers believe the Jets were in contact with Crabtree’s agent, Eugene Parker, to talk about the former Texas Tech wideout after he had already been selected in the draft...
...While it’s not known if San Francisco is alleging negotiations took place between Parker and the Jets, it’s worth noting that Deion Sanders, a former Parker client and self-described occasional “counselor” to Crabtree, insinuated in an interview with the NFL Network that Crabtree believes he can get “$40 million” from an NFL team.
Said Sanders in that interview, “Why would you settle for $20 million [from San Francisco] when you feel like you can get $40 million? That’s the problem.”
Sanders also reiterated that Crabtree would be willing to re-enter the 2010 draft, further fueling speculation the rookie has some kind of salary guarantee from another team. Theoretically, Crabtree could secure the contract he desires from another NFL team and then hold out the entire season, forcing the 49ers to eventually trade his rights – ideally to the team which has already hammered out the contract he desires...
...Barring the discovery of some significant evidence, the tampering charge will be difficult to prove. Many NFL front-office executives consider tampering to be a consistent league problem, whether it’s occurring with potential free agents or disgruntled stars looking for an exit strategy from a franchise. And it’s not uncommon for executives who have been long removed from the NFL to admit to some form of tampering (though they typically don’t name specific incidents).
Interestingly, former NFL executive Michael Lombardi told Showtime’s “Inside the NFL” this week that he took part in tampering during the course of his NFL career, which included stints in the front offices of the Cleveland Browns and Oakland Raiders.
“It’s very difficult to prove,” Lombardi said. “Trust me, I’ve been a tamperer. I’ve been in the NFL for over 20 years, so I have tampered my fair share of times.”
But rarely does a charge involve one team accusing another of undermining its negotiations with a draft pick. And that’s what makes the latest charge a hot-button issue in other league corners.
Question #2: SO, IF the Jesters are found guilty of this tampering charge BUT it is also found to be a widespread practice around the NFL (much like videotaping was where you had several coaches--including Jimmy Johnson-- admitting as such), would you, as a Patriots fan, embrace the obvious double standard and clamor for the max penalty to be levied against the Jets anyway or would you remain consistent and cut them some slack seeing they would be being treated the same way the Pats were (being singled out for something everyone else is doing anyway)?
Rules: Please don't let facts get in the way of a good moral dilemma here. No arguing that tampering is not widespread or that only the Jets would have been caught tampering with a first round draft pick etc. According to the article, tampering is a serious issue with implications far worse than Spygate AND it is known to be a fairly common practice around the league.
With those things in mind, should the Jets be found guilty, would you advocate throwing the book at them or cutting them some slack?