Tampering Charges

[gspdark1]

The Titans are claiming the 'Skins tampered with Haynesworth. Truth or sour grapes?

[CanesSkins26]

The Titans are claiming the 'Skins tampered with Haynesworth. Truth or sour grapes?

Probably true. You don't complete a $100 million deal in 5 hours. However, if what we did was tampering then the Bucs tampered too. Haynesworth talked about how he became really comfortable with Tampa Bay's new head coach. How does that happen in the five hours from when he became a free agent to when he signed with us? Tampering happens all the time, it's just very hard to prove.

[SkinsSince96]

The Titans are claiming the 'Skins tampered with Haynesworth. Truth or sour grapes?

Its true. No doubt in my mind. Can anyone prove it though? Thats the real question.

If they can and we lose a draft pick im going to be really upset.

if what we did was tampering then the Bucs tampered too. Haynesworth talked about how he became really comfortable with Tampa Bay's new head coach.

I could be wrong but I dont think the Bucs tampered. This is just my opinion but I think the Skins had contact with Haynesworth's agent about Haynesworth before the start of the FA signing period. I think the Bucs just called up after the FA period started and gave out some huge offers.

[Cooter]

There's plenty of opinions here:

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31180

[JansenFan]

I think its tampering AND sour grapes. Its not like they were going to outbid anyone, anyway. They could have matched our offer. The didn't and instead, are trying to get our draft pick as compensation for their cheapness.

[SkinsJock]

I just do not see how they can prove anything - Haynesworth should not have qualified the topic that was "discussed" and by exagerating how good Kelly might become he did make it look like there was 'tampering' but proving it is a whole other deal.

[SkinsSince96]

There's plenty of opinions here:

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31180

This thread is different. Even though it isnt in the OP. The Titans have asked the NFL to look into it. The thread should probably be merged but I understand why he made the thread.

The Titans have asked the league to investigate the Redskins' February 27 signing of Albert Haynesworth for tampering.

Tennessee claims it has evidence that Washington negotiated with Haynesworth before the official start of free agency. The Titans turned over audio and newspaper articles they deemed incriminating of a Redskins official. The Skins have a close relationship with Haynesworth's agent, Chad Speck, however. It's hard to say if anything will come of this.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&line=141950&id=2636

[Cooter]

This thread is different. Even though it isnt in the OP. The Titans have asked the NFL to look into it. The thread should probably be merged but I understand why he made the thread.

I wasn't questioning the creation of the thread (not my job), just simply letting everyone know there are more opinions in another thread.

[SkinsSince96]

This thread is different. Even though it isnt in the OP. The Titans have asked the NFL to look into it. The thread should probably be merged but I understand why he made the thread.

I wasn't questioning the creation of the thread (not my job), just simply letting everyone know there are more opinions in another thread.

Ah I thought you wanted it merged. I didnt mean anything by my post. I just didnt see the rotoworld post in the thread so I wasnt sure if you or others knew about the latest info.

[CanesSkins26]

I think its tampering AND sour grapes. Its not like they were going to outbid anyone, anyway. They could have matched our offer. The didn't and instead, are trying to get our draft pick as compensation for their cheapness.

Is it sour grapes or good business on the part of the Titans? If they can get something out of this why not. I think that when the 49ers were found to have tampered with Lance Briggs, the NFL made them switch 3rd round picks with the Bears. So the Bears got a better 3rd rounder.

[VetSkinsFan]

Basically it's put up or shut up. We'll see how it pans out. I believe most tampering is treated like jaywalking, it's illegal, but no one really worries about it. He's a big name so they are making a stink.

[Bob 0119]

I posted this in another thread but it goes well here too.

For every story, there is a counter story. Try this one from SI:

link

There is enough rule breaking in the free-agency chase to write three books, but I can tell you that the time on the screen of my MacBook Air was 12:00:06 (six seconds after midnight) when the phone rang in the Back Bay condo of agent Brad Blank Friday morning. I was in the upscale downtown Boston neighborhood with Blank, and on the other end of the phone was Washington vice president of player personnel Vinny Cerrato. The subject was Blank's client, defensive end Chris Canty, who'd been a free agent for all of six seconds.

"Hey, Brad,'' Cerrato said, eschewing pleasantries, "I need to get what you're thinking of numbers-wise so I can go in and talk to [owner] Dan [Snyder] and see if it fits us.''

"It's eight, Vinny, and I don't really care how it's structured if we get to eight,'' Blank said, meaning $8 million per year for a four-, five-, six- or seven-year contract. "You know the deal. I'd like to get him somewhere on a plane tomorrow. You interested?''

"Let me get back to you,'' Cerrato said, and just like that he was gone.

In his living room, Blank, the preppy 48-year-old former Brown roommate of John F. Kennedy Jr., alternated between ESPN and NFL Network on the TV as free agency dawned. On a legal pad he had sketched out the teams he felt were the best shot for Canty. In order, they were:

1. Washington, 2. Tennessee, 3. San Francisco, 4. Seattle, 5. Denver, 6. Dallas, 7. Miami, 8. Green Bay, 9. New York Giants.

The ideal trip, Blank thought, would be Friday in Washington, Saturday in Tennessee and Monday in Seattle. Washington wouldn't be interested if the 'Skins signed defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, the prize of the crop. And Blank waited. And Canty, sitting home in Charlotte, waited. And his dad, Joe, who was going to take the recruiting trips with his son, waited.

And nothing.

At the scouting combine the previous week, when it's supposed to be against NFL rules for teams to have discussions with agents for soon-to-be free agents, Blank had spoken to a number of teams about Canty, a 6-7 defensive end in a 3-4 defense who some teams thought could play defensive tackle in the 4-3. The teams, ostensibly, were feeling out the agents, and vice versa, about what level of compensation the player might get and what other teams might be interested.

One of the parties interested in Canty was Washington. Blank thought San Francisco, Tennessee and Seattle would also want in. There were others. Teams are smart enough not to blatantly offer contracts at the combine, but some of them come close. In this case, Blank made it clear to anyone asking that he expected the money to come in between $6 million and $8 million a year, hopefully closer to eight.

"Football is a game of supply and demand,'' Blank said. "Chris is a 3-4 end and a lot of teams are going to the 3-4, and there aren't enough good ends out there. So he should be in demand.''

1:08 a.m.: Cerrato rang to ask if Canty would come in for a visit later that day. "Does he like basketball?'' Cerrato said. "The Wizards are in town playing Chicago. I think Obama's going to the game.''

He likes basketball, Blank said, but more to the point, Blank asked if all the rumors were true about the Redskins and Haynesworth.

"We're out,'' said Cerrato. "He's too expensive.''

"Do our numbers make sense?" Blank asked.

Pause. One second, maybe two seconds. "I'll get Eric [negotiator Eric Schaffer] with you in the morning,'' Cerrato said.

Hmmmm. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. But Cerrato said the Redskins would send a private plane to pick up Chris and Joe Canty at the Charlotte airport at 1 p.m., and he'd get back to him with details.

Based on this EYEWITNESS account it would seem that the team didn't start working on Haeynesworth until after midnight. If they had been talking to the agent beforehand, it would seem that AH would've been locked up at 12:01

but that's just my take on it...

[MDSKINSFAN]

I'm sure it is true. Fortunately, I don't think they can prove it. The radio interviews that the Titans claim they have as evidence really don't prove anything at all and Snyder can just say that he was talking to his agent about Malcolm Kelly or any other player he might represent on the current roster.

[VetSkinsFan]

I posted this in another thread but it goes well here too.

For every story, there is a counter story. Try this one from SI:

link

There is enough rule breaking in the free-agency chase to write three books, but I can tell you that the time on the screen of my MacBook Air was 12:00:06 (six seconds after midnight) when the phone rang in the Back Bay condo of agent Brad Blank Friday morning. I was in the upscale downtown Boston neighborhood with Blank, and on the other end of the phone was Washington vice president of player personnel Vinny Cerrato. The subject was Blank's client, defensive end Chris Canty, who'd been a free agent for all of six seconds.

"Hey, Brad,'' Cerrato said, eschewing pleasantries, "I need to get what you're thinking of numbers-wise so I can go in and talk to [owner] Dan [Snyder] and see if it fits us.''

"It's eight, Vinny, and I don't really care how it's structured if we get to eight,'' Blank said, meaning $8 million per year for a four-, five-, six- or seven-year contract. "You know the deal. I'd like to get him somewhere on a plane tomorrow. You interested?''

"Let me get back to you,'' Cerrato said, and just like that he was gone.

In his living room, Blank, the preppy 48-year-old former Brown roommate of John F. Kennedy Jr., alternated between ESPN and NFL Network on the TV as free agency dawned. On a legal pad he had sketched out the teams he felt were the best shot for Canty. In order, they were:

1. Washington, 2. Tennessee, 3. San Francisco, 4. Seattle, 5. Denver, 6. Dallas, 7. Miami, 8. Green Bay, 9. New York Giants.

The ideal trip, Blank thought, would be Friday in Washington, Saturday in Tennessee and Monday in Seattle. Washington wouldn't be interested if the 'Skins signed defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, the prize of the crop. And Blank waited. And Canty, sitting home in Charlotte, waited. And his dad, Joe, who was going to take the recruiting trips with his son, waited.

And nothing.

At the scouting combine the previous week, when it's supposed to be against NFL rules for teams to have discussions with agents for soon-to-be free agents, Blank had spoken to a number of teams about Canty, a 6-7 defensive end in a 3-4 defense who some teams thought could play defensive tackle in the 4-3. The teams, ostensibly, were feeling out the agents, and vice versa, about what level of compensation the player might get and what other teams might be interested.

One of the parties interested in Canty was Washington. Blank thought San Francisco, Tennessee and Seattle would also want in. There were others. Teams are smart enough not to blatantly offer contracts at the combine, but some of them come close. In this case, Blank made it clear to anyone asking that he expected the money to come in between $6 million and $8 million a year, hopefully closer to eight.

"Football is a game of supply and demand,'' Blank said. "Chris is a 3-4 end and a lot of teams are going to the 3-4, and there aren't enough good ends out there. So he should be in demand.''

1:08 a.m.: Cerrato rang to ask if Canty would come in for a visit later that day. "Does he like basketball?'' Cerrato said. "The Wizards are in town playing Chicago. I think Obama's going to the game.''

He likes basketball, Blank said, but more to the point, Blank asked if all the rumors were true about the Redskins and Haynesworth.

"We're out,'' said Cerrato. "He's too expensive.''

"Do our numbers make sense?" Blank asked.

Pause. One second, maybe two seconds. "I'll get Eric [negotiator Eric Schaffer] with you in the morning,'' Cerrato said.

Hmmmm. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. But Cerrato said the Redskins would send a private plane to pick up Chris and Joe Canty at the Charlotte airport at 1 p.m., and he'd get back to him with details.

Based on this EYEWITNESS account it would seem that the team didn't start working on Haeynesworth until after midnight. If they had been talking to the agent beforehand, it would seem that AH would've been locked up at 12:01

but that's just my take on it...

I read this article, too. It's always good practice to research from more than 1 article before forming an opinion IMO.

[SkinsJock]

I think that most NFL people think that the Titans do not have anything because the agent is Kelly's agent - the 49er/Bears deal is NOT the same = nothing happening and we are not going to give up another pick.

the way Snyder feels about draft picks we might not have any anyway

[JansenFan]

I think its tampering AND sour grapes. Its not like they were going to outbid anyone, anyway. They could have matched our offer. The didn't and instead, are trying to get our draft pick as compensation for their cheapness.

Is it sour grapes or good business on the part of the Titans? If they can get something out of this why not. I think that when the 49ers were found to have tampered with Lance Briggs, the NFL made them switch 3rd round picks with the Bears. So the Bears got a better 3rd rounder.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. Getting extra picks for a guy you were going to lose anyway is good business, but ratting out another team for something I would wager everyone -- including the Titans -- have done before is a bit of sour grapes, as well.

[Irn-Bru]

I think its tampering AND sour grapes. Its not like they were going to outbid anyone, anyway. They could have matched our offer. The didn't and instead, are trying to get our draft pick as compensation for their cheapness.

Is it sour grapes or good business on the part of the Titans? If they can get something out of this why not. I think that when the 49ers were found to have tampered with Lance Briggs, the NFL made them switch 3rd round picks with the Bears. So the Bears got a better 3rd rounder.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. Getting extra picks for a guy you were going to lose anyway is good business, but ratting out another team for something I would wager everyone -- including the Titans -- have done before is a bit of sour grapes, as well.

That's why, IMO, if a team accuses another of tampering with the expectation of getting a better draft pick, they should be punished should the allegations turn out to be false. E.g., we switch 3rd rounders (or whatever) to the advantage of the Skins, rather than switching draft picks to the advantage of the Titans.

No team, just as no person, should get a free shot at trying to sucker-punch another team with no good reason. If you want to make a serious accusation like that, be prepared to receive punishment if it turns out you were just doing it for kicks.

[Bob 0119]

I read this article, too. It's always good practice to research from more than 1 article before forming an opinion IMO.

See, I agree with that, but this article was the closest one to a non-biased accounting of what the 'Skins were doing from midnight to 5am that I could find.

All the other things I've read that are directly addressing the tampering charge are people's thoughts and conjectures.

stuff like:

"Dan Snyder was seen talking to Haynesworths agent"

You could imply that they were talking about Haynesworth, but it doesn't mean anything. They could have been talking about any number of things including other players the agent represents. They do represent more than one player usually.

"It's impossible to wrap up a hundred million dollar deal in five hours."

Anybody in business will tell you that's only partially true. Most of the work on the offer would have been prepared beforehand, but if the offer isn't made until after midnight, it's not tampering. Negotiating the offer certainly could have been done in less than five hours. It's only a matter of changing the details on the original offer.

Most of the stories I see refer to "sources" with fuzzy details ("I heard from a guy who said he saw/heard..." etc.)

And even if the 'Skins did talk with the agent before-hand, the Titans certainly had much better access to Haynesworth and his agent than the 'Skins ever could have. They should have known what it would take to keep him. It's not like Tennessee was a bad team last year.

They CHOSE not to keep him. Whether they could afford him or not, makes no difference, the outcome would have been the same.

[jeremyroyce]

You know if the Titans really wanted him they all that time to get signed before the season was over. I think it's sour grapes and If I was the commissioner I would tell the owner of the Titans to take a hike

[CanesSkins26]

I think its tampering AND sour grapes. Its not like they were going to outbid anyone, anyway. They could have matched our offer. The didn't and instead, are trying to get our draft pick as compensation for their cheapness.

Is it sour grapes or good business on the part of the Titans? If they can get something out of this why not. I think that when the 49ers were found to have tampered with Lance Briggs, the NFL made them switch 3rd round picks with the Bears. So the Bears got a better 3rd rounder.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. Getting extra picks for a guy you were going to lose anyway is good business, but ratting out another team for something I would wager everyone -- including the Titans -- have done before is a bit of sour grapes, as well.

That's why, IMO, if a team accuses another of tampering with the expectation of getting a better draft pick, they should be punished should the allegations turn out to be false. E.g., we switch 3rd rounders (or whatever) to the advantage of the Skins, rather than switching draft picks to the advantage of the Titans.

No team, just as no person, should get a free shot at trying to sucker-punch another team with no good reason. If you want to make a serious accusation like that, be prepared to receive punishment if it turns out you were just doing it for kicks.

The problem there is how do you prove that the allegations were false? Just because there isn't enough evidence for the NFL to determine that a violation of the rules took place doesn't mean that there wasn't in fact a violation.

[Bob 0119]

The problem there is how do you prove that the allegations were false? Just because there isn't enough evidence for the NFL to determine that a violation of the rules took place doesn't mean that there wasn't in fact a violation.

The burden of proof should always fall on the accuser. If you don't have enough evidence to prove your allegation than maybe you think twice before unfairly accusing someone just so you can see where the chips fall.

Really that's all this is for the Titans. They are hoping the NFL will find some evidence that they don't have and they'll luck into a draft pick. If the NFL doesn't find anything, than it's no skin off their nose.

Meanwhile, the media gets to hypothesize about the hows, and whys with limitless conjecture until the Redskins are finally, and unceremonously cleared of any wrong-doing.

Endless weeks of stories about what the Redskins "might have" done culminating in a two paragraph article that lasts half a day about how there was no evidence of any tampering.

[CanesSkins26]

The problem there is how do you prove that the allegations were false? Just because there isn't enough evidence for the NFL to determine that a violation of the rules took place doesn't mean that there wasn't in fact a violation.

The burden of proof should always fall on the accuser. If you don't have enough evidence to prove your allegation than maybe you think twice before unfairly accusing someone just so you can see where the chips fall.

Really that's all this is for the Titans. They are hoping the NFL will find some evidence that they don't have and they'll luck into a draft pick. If the NFL doesn't find anything, than it's no skin off their nose.

Meanwhile, the media gets to hypothesize about the hows, and whys with limitless conjecture until the Redskins are finally, and unceremonously cleared of any wrong-doing.

Endless weeks of stories about what the Redskins "might have" done culminating in a two paragraph article that lasts half a day about how there was no evidence of any tampering.

Of course the burden of proof should fall on the accuser. But you can't punish someone for not meeting that burden, it makes no sense. Otherwise you would never have teams coming forward and that would defeat the purpose of the role. With something like tampering it's always going to be difficult to prove and will most like always rely on circumstantial evidence. The Bears didn't have much evidence to support their claim that the 49ers tampered with Lance Briggs yet the NFL found that San Fran had tampered and docked them a pick and made them switch third rounders with the Bears. That was a rather thin case and if there was a threat of being punished if they couldn't prove their case I doubt that the Bears would have pursued that claim against the Niners.

[Irn-Bru]

The problem there is how do you prove that the allegations were false? Just because there isn't enough evidence for the NFL to determine that a violation of the rules took place doesn't mean that there wasn't in fact a violation.

How do you prove that the Redskins tampered? Sufficient evidence. How can you show that the Titans are liable for making frivolous accusations? A sufficient lack of evidence. There is a grey area in between but if the Titans were clearly making the case just on the off-chance it went through (i.e., as purely a "good business" move), then that's worth investigating IMO.

[Irn-Bru]

The problem there is how do you prove that the allegations were false? Just because there isn't enough evidence for the NFL to determine that a violation of the rules took place doesn't mean that there wasn't in fact a violation.

The burden of proof should always fall on the accuser. If you don't have enough evidence to prove your allegation than maybe you think twice before unfairly accusing someone just so you can see where the chips fall.

Really that's all this is for the Titans. They are hoping the NFL will find some evidence that they don't have and they'll luck into a draft pick. If the NFL doesn't find anything, than it's no skin off their nose.

Meanwhile, the media gets to hypothesize about the hows, and whys with limitless conjecture until the Redskins are finally, and unceremonously cleared of any wrong-doing.

Endless weeks of stories about what the Redskins "might have" done culminating in a two paragraph article that lasts half a day about how there was no evidence of any tampering.

Of course the burden of proof should fall on the accuser. But you can't punish someone for not meeting that burden, it makes no sense. Otherwise you would never have teams coming forward and that would defeat the purpose of the role.

No, it means teams will only come forward when they are confident they can show their case. What's wrong with that?

When you remove the penalties for bringing a suit against someone, accusers get reckless and are damaging to the whole process—be it the NFL's rules or even the U.S. court system.

With something like tampering it's always going to be difficult to prove and will most like always rely on circumstantial evidence. The Bears didn't have much evidence to support their claim that the 49ers tampered with Lance Briggs yet the NFL found that San Fran had tampered and docked them a pick and made them switch third rounders with the Bears. That was a rather thin case and if there was a threat of being punished if they couldn't prove their case I doubt that the Bears would have pursued that claim against the Niners.

Maybe you only need a certain level of evidence to show reasonably well that a team tampered (you're calling that "thin," but can it really be that thin if it was convincing for the NFL?). But it doesn't follow that anyone making an accusation ought to have full immunity to make it, for the reasons cited above.

[Deadskins]

Actually I think the 49ers admitted it. Not what I would call "thin."