NFL Statement on Chicago-San Francisco Tampering Matter

[joelbolt]

Following a detailed investigation and a hearing, Commissioner Roger Goodell has determined that the San Francisco 49ers violated the NFL Anti-Tampering Policy by contacting the agent for Chicago Bears linebacker Lance Briggs during the 2007 season without the Bears’ permission.

The Bears had filed tampering charges against the 49ers to initiate the proceeding. The Bears re-signed Lance Briggs at the beginning of this year’s veteran free agency signing period.

Commissioner Goodell decided on the following disciplinary action to resolve the matter:

San Francisco will forfeit its fifth-round selection in the 2008 NFL Draft.
Chicago and San Francisco will switch third-round selections in the 2008 Draft. As a result, Chicago now will have the seventh selection of the third round and San Francisco will have the 12th selection of the third round.
Commissioner Goodell noted that both the 49ers and Bears fully cooperated with his investigation and hearing.

Via NFL

[Late Hit]

Seems adequate punishment. Fits the crime.

Somehow, that's not true with other matters around the league. Suspending an unconvicted man for an entire season seems overly harsh, while the laughable punishment on a team that's been cheating for 6 years was far too lenient.

[Al "T.D." Bundy]

I can understand punishing the 49ers but why do the Bears get rewarded, they didn't do anything?

Yeah technically they were the "victim" but it's not like they suffered any ill effects as a result of what the 49ers did, why should they get bumped up in the draft order? That I don't get.

[Bolt Cola]

hmmm...seems like the NFL didn't drag its feet in settling this...now on to the pats Mr. Goodell

[JoeMcRugby]

Seems adequate punishment. Fits the crime.

Somehow, that's not true with other matters around the league. Suspending an unconvicted man for an entire season seems overly harsh, while the laughable punishment on a team that's been cheating for 6 years was far too lenient.

The "unconvicted man" has pled guilty to two of the offenses.

He deserved to be suspended for that long and more after violating the terms of his NFL player's contract which specifically empowers the commissioner to take such action.

If the player doesn't like the contract term, he can refuse to sign the contract and find another line of work. That shouldn't be difficult with his educational background and extracurricular activities. ;)

[Blue Bolt]

NFL NAILS NINERS FOR TAMPERING
Posted by Mike Florio on March 24, 2008, 6:39 p.m.

In what is believed (by us) to be the first finding of tampering against an NFL franchise since the Miami Dolphins lost a first-round pick in connection with its hiring of coach Don Shula, the league office has announced a finding that the San Francisco 49ers tampered with Chicago Bears linebacker Lance Briggs during the 2007 regular season.

Specifically, the NFL found that the 49ers contacted Briggs’ agent, Drew Rosenhaus, without permission from the Bears.

As a penalty for its conduct, the Niners have been stripped of a fifth-round pick, and the Niners and the Bears will flip-flop third-round selections, upgrading the Bears from No. 12 overall in round three to No. 7, and dropping the 49ers to No. 12 from No. 7.

[Chargers_Saints]

This is what happens when they TAMPER!!?? And the Pats lose a first for CHEATING?!!? Goodell, I'm sorry that's ridiculous, way too harsh on the 49ers or too easy on the Pats.

[Late Hit]

The "unconvicted man" has pled guilty to two of the offenses.

He deserved to be suspended for that long and more after violating the terms of his NFL player's contract which specifically empowers the commissioner to take such action.

If the player doesn't like the contract term, he can refuse to sign the contract and find another line of work. That shouldn't be difficult with his educational background and extracurricular activities. ;)

Looking at a timeline of events, it wasn't the NFL's jurisdiction until Goodell made it so. Following quotes direct from wikipedia:

On September 1, 2006, just days prior to the start of the 2006 NFL season, Roger Goodell assumed the office of Commissioner of the National Football League. Goodell was met with expectations of enforcing the National Football League's image to the media. ...Goodell and the National Football League Players Association decided that teams will be responsible for the conduct of their employees, and will be subject to discipline for any transgressions.

So in September, player conduct was made a team's responsibility to enforce. But wait!

On April 3, 2007 Jones met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell to discuss his future and the future of Cincinnati Bengals' receiver Chris Henry.

What has the Commish got to do with this? It's down to the Titans and the Bengals, respectively.

On Tuesday, April 10, 2007, the National Football League introduced a new conduct policy to help control off-field behavior by its players and preserve the league's public image.

So one week later, they introduced a new policy. A good idea, I'm sure everyone will agree. But coincedentally...

On April 10, 2007 the NFL announced that Jones would be suspended for the entire 2007 season

So they acted retrospectively, as soon as the new policy was introduced. So he never contravened any conduct he had from the NFL itself. If anyone was to punish him, it should have been the Titans. They didn't, so the NFL should have punished them, as per the end of my first wikiquote.

[Charger Dave]

What has the Commish got to do with this? It's down to the Titans and the Bengals, respectively.What falls under the purview of the NFL Commissioner is defined by the NFL Owners... They may look at things a bit differently than someone on the eastern side of the big pond. ;)

[JoeMcRugby]

Looking at a timeline of events, it wasn't the NFL's jurisdiction until Goodell made it so. Following quotes direct from wikipedia:



So in September, player conduct was made a team's responsibility to enforce. But wait!



What has the Commish got to do with this? It's down to the Titans and the Bengals, respectively.



So one week later, they introduced a new policy. A good idea, I'm sure everyone will agree. But coincedentally...



So they acted retrospectively, as soon as the new policy was introduced. So he never contravened any conduct he had from the NFL itself. If anyone was to punish him, it should have been the Titans. They didn't, so the NFL should have punished them, as per the end of my first wikiquote.

The Commissioner has always had the power to suspend players for off-the-field conduct deemed detrimental to the league - in the NFL dating back to at least 1963 when brand-spanking new commissioner Pete Rozelle suspended Paul Hornung and Alex Karaas for the entire 1963 season for conduct in which no criminal charges were filed, let alone convictions / guilty pleas.

It's the same in every US professional sports league.

If an individual doesn't like it, then they are free to go elsewhere for employment. Nobody is holding a gun to Pacman's head that he be enslaved to the NFL.

[JoeMcRugby]

What falls under the purview of the NFL Commissioner is defined by the NFL Owners... They may look at things a bit differently than someone on the eastern side of the big pond. ;)

Precisely.

[Late Hit]

That's fair enough then, it's not that my knowledge of the game was out, just my knowledge of America :p

Dave, honestly, I've met a larger percentage of people who can hold intelligent football conversation (out of those that try) in England than I've seen on these boards. At least none of them want to move Jammer to safety! That said, most people I've met here that like football, play football.

a :logo to all, and to all a :Cheers:

[Charger Dave]

That's fair enough then, it's not that my knowledge of the game was out, just my knowledge of America :p

Dave, honestly, I've met a larger percentage of people who can hold intelligent football conversation (out of those that try) in England than I've seen on these boards. At least none of them want to move Jammer to safety! That said, most people I've met here that like football, play football.

a :logo to all, and to all a :Cheers:I would be willing to bet that, when it comes to the game itself, we are far more alike than different!

Shoot, it we were talking in Edinburgh rather than Norwich or El Cajon, I'd be hoisting my glass and blathering on about "lang may yer lum reek!". :D

[Late Hit]

Er, I don't speak Scottish!