Tampering double standard?

[SackExchange]

Sack you know well there is a difference and so do I. What you probably should be more concerned with is the fact that Woody is concerned enough with the tampering charges against the Jets that he's desperately trying to deflect attention away from it. Personally I believe he's trying to insert himself into the situation to try and manipulate the outcome as "offsetting fouls", this isn't going to work. The Jets will end up paying the Pats something, better to just do it and move on with the offseason.

PLEASE!!!

Give it a damn rest. You are incredible. I can admit when the Jets do something wrong. Before you chimed in on Woody, I said what he did was tampering.

Why are you so GD delusional that you can't even admit that your precious Pats have ever done anything wrong, yet everything the Jets do is wrong?

Get over yourself.

 

[Old#15]

or maybe kraft is so worried about deflate gate that he cried to his best buddy goodell about an off-hand comment woody made.

I think that is the ploy, and I also think that there is something foul in the Blount signing.

 

[SackExchange]

You are CLUELESS

He is. He's pathetic, actually. Just a homer, like every media outlet in Boston.

Neither comment was that conniving, honestly. Yet both are, by the strict interpretation of league rules, tampering. Had Kraft not been such a stickler over Woody's dumb comment, he wouldn't be facing this charge.

If nothing else, Woody has played this well. If the Jets get sanctioned for tampering, while the Pats get away with both deflategate AND Kraft's comments, it will have all the appearances of league favoritism, of Goodell looking out for his buddy Kraft. Whether that is what it is or not is irrelevant. It will look like it is.

 

[grogan14]

You are CLUELESS

CLUELESS? No, I actually judge things based on facts, dispassionately regardless of the team I root for. You see the NFL has these "tampering rules" you can look them up, and in them it describes the NFL's criteria for what they consider tampering. Then it's pretty simple, you see you read the quotes, and then compare them to the stated criteria for tampering and see if they fit or not. Hope this helps.

 

[SackExchange]

CLUELESS? No, I actually judge things based on facts, dispassionately regardless of the team I root for. You see the NFL has these "tampering rules" you can look them up, and in them it describes the NFL's criteria for what they consider tampering. Then it's pretty simple, you see you read the quotes, and then compare them to the stated criteria for tampering and see if they fit or not. Hope this helps.

Thank you for that very, very good laugh.

It's incredible how the "facts" always seem to go the Pats' way, isn't it? You might have some credibility if you ever showed yourself to be the slightest bit impartial. But you're not.

 

[SackExchange]

The league rules are crystal clear on this. It's quite simple. Either both cases are tampering, or neither is. It all depends on whether you go by the letter of the rule, or the spirit.

If you go by the letter of the rule, both are tampering.

If you go by the spirit of the rule, neither are tampering.

If you try to contend that one is tampering and the other isn't, then you are applying one standard to one team, and the other to the other team. That's what the patsie in here is doing. He is holding Woody to the strict letter of the rule, while letting Kraft off by the spirit of the rule.

 

[ucrenegade]

Attention Woody,

What you did here was so @#$%@# MONEY!!

You are now officially the guy, behind the guy, behind the guy.

one of my fav movies of all time

 

[jetfandreamer]

The league rules are crystal clear on this. It's quite simple. Either both cases are tampering, or neither is. It all depends on whether you go by the letter of the rule, or the spirit.

If you go by the letter of the rule, both are tampering.

If you go by the spirit of the rule, neither are tampering.

If you try to contend that one is tampering and the other isn't, then you are applying one standard to one team, and the other to the other team. That's what the patsie in here is doing. He is holding Woody to the strict letter of the rule, while letting Kraft off by the spirit of the rule.

Very true....I dont think you can make any "degree of tampering " difference

 

[grogan14]

PLEASE!!!

Give it a damn rest. You are incredible. I can admit when the Jets do something wrong. Before you chimed in on Woody, I said what he did was tampering.

Why are you so GD delusional that you can't even admit that your precious Pats have ever done anything wrong, yet everything the Jets do is wrong?

Get over yourself.

The Pats have done wrong, they just didn't do anything wrong here. Look, you have this weird projection thing going on were somehow I'm the embodiment of all the Patriots fans you ever dealt with, I'm not, I have my own opinions. You act like you have this history with me and place all your Patriot biases on me for things I've never said. Don't assume you know my stance on every topic or issues on subjects we've never discussed.

 

[jetfandreamer]

CLUELESS? No, I actually judge things based on facts, dispassionately regardless of the team I root for. You see the NFL has these "tampering rules" you can look them up, and in them it describes the NFL's criteria for what they consider tampering. Then it's pretty simple, you see you read the quotes, and then compare them to the stated criteria for tampering and see if they fit or not. Hope this helps.

Read SACKEXCHANGE above

 

[maxmet]

grogan - please explain specifically how Kraft comments do not fall within the rule

“[a]ny public or private statement of interest, qualified orunqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media.” The rule includes this example of prohibited statements: “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”

 

[SackExchange]

Very true....I dont think you can make any "degree of tampering " difference

Quite true. And it doesn't matter whether a guy's contract is up in four minutes or four years. If you comment about him, you are tampering.

What is Revis plays out his entire five years, and is still an elite CB? He would certainly be beating the odds, based on his age. But what if he did? And then the media, which they would, remind Revis of the comments Kraft made this week? Wouldn't that make it identical to any "advantage" Woody's comments gave the Jets?

It doesn't matter how soon or how long before a guy under contract is available. If you express interest in him, in having him or having kept him, you're tampering, by the letter of the rule.

 

[grogan14]

The league rules are crystal clear on this. It's quite simple. Either both cases are tampering, or neither is. It all depends on whether you go by the letter of the rule, or the spirit.

If you go by the letter of the rule, both are tampering.

If you go by the spirit of the rule, neither are tampering.

If you try to contend that one is tampering and the other isn't, then you are applying one standard to one team, and the other to the other team. That's what the patsie in here is doing. He is holding Woody to the strict letter of the rule, while letting Kraft off by the spirit of the rule.

Sorry sack but have you even read the rule? If you take the green glasses off and just read the "actual rule" not the one you made up in your head, you can clearly see that what Woody said is tampering and fits the NFL criteria for tampering to a "T", what Kraft said does not.

 

[SackExchange]

The Pats have done wrong, they just didn't do anything wrong here. Look, you have this weird projection thing going on were somehow I'm the embodiment of all the Patriots fans you ever dealt with, I'm not, I have my own opinions. You act like you have this history with me and place all your Patriot biases on me for things I've never said. Don't assume you know my stance on every topic or issues on subjects we've never discussed.

So every single topic we're discussed on this board, you've bashed the Jets and exonerated the Pats.

Woody tampering
Kraft tampering
Deflated footballs
Blount tampering

Somehow, in all those cases, you have sided with the Pats and/or against the Jets, but I am supposed to presume that you really are a fair and reasonable fan who is truly unbiased, and doesn't even consider the team when making judgments about such issues.

Please.

 

[SackExchange]

Sorry sack but have you even read the rule? If you take the green glasses off and just read the "actual rule" not the one you made up in your head, you can clearly see that what Woody said is tampering and fits the NFL criteria for tampering to a "T", what Kraft said does not.

No, you absolutely cannot see that.

You can see that BOTH are tampering by the letter of the rule.

But you seem to hold the Pats to a far lower standard than you hold the Jets. Good for you.

 

[SackExchange]

Read SACKEXCHANGE above

He doesn't bother. He reads what suits him, and ignores what doesn't.

But he's unbiased, remember? He doesn't consider the team when he makes his judgments. It's just an astronomical coincidence that he always sees things the Pats' way and against the Jets, despite not taking the teams into account.

 

[grogan14]

grogan - please explain specifically how Kraft comments do not fall within the rule

“[a]ny public or private statement of interest, qualified orunqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media.” The rule includes this example of prohibited statements: “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”

Kraft- “We thought we made a very competitive offer,” Kraft said yesterday from the league meetings at the Arizona Biltmore. “I speak as a fan of the New England Patriots — we wanted to keep him. We wanted him in our system, and we have certain disciplines. We had hoped it worked out. It didn’t."


There are two things that are key here and you don't have to believe me, NFL annalists are all over this but, the first is that Kraft's quotes speak in the past tense, specifically about what happened, not any future intention of signing him. Second in the NFL criteria you have to be able to show that the remarks in question, "could" detrimentally effect the players relationship with the team he is with. Those are the key differences, where Kraft expressed regret publically that it didn't work out, Woody stated both intent at acquiring Revis and wanting him back while he was under contract with another team. The perceived harm here is that "suppose the Patriots were working on a new deal with Revis and he or his agent suddenly hear the Jets are interested and rather than sign a deal with the Pats they decide to play it out and see how high the Jets are wiling to go. That's tampering, and that's being able to show the potential of harm. Look Jet fans can believe what they want, they always do, but they are going to lose this one.

 

[jetfandreamer]

Kraft- “We thought we made a very competitive offer,” Kraft said yesterday from the league meetings at the Arizona Biltmore. “I speak as a fan of the New England Patriots — we wanted to keep him. We wanted him in our system, and we have certain disciplines. We had hoped it worked out. It didn’t."


There are two things that are key here and you don't have to believe me, NFL annalists are all over this but, the first is that Kraft's quotes speak in the past tense, specifically about what happened, not any future intention of signing him. Second in the NFL criteria you have to be able to show that the remarks in question, "could" detrimentally effect the players relationship with the team he is with. Those are the key differences, where Kraft expressed regret publically that it didn't work out, Woody stated both intent at acquiring Revis and wanting him back while he was under contract with another team. The perceived harm here is that "suppose the Patriots were working on a new deal with Revis and he or his agent suddenly hear the Jets are interested and rather than sign a deal with the Pats they decide to play it out and see how high the Jets are wiling to go. That's tampering, and that's being able to show the potential of harm. Look Jet fans can believe what they want, they always do, but they are going to lose this one.

If they do lose it..it will be another example of Goodell kissing the asshole Krafts ass

 

[jetfandreamer]

I heard the X files are coming back...maybe they should have an episode at Foxboro for all the strange things that happen there that are "unexplained"

 

[SackExchange]

Woody's comments were based on the past tense, as well. It was premised on the question, which had to do with Revis signing with the Pats in March 2014. The only perceived difference is that it was expected Revis would be on the market in either 3 or 15 months, not in 60 months. And that does not, and should not, matter when taking a strict view of the rule.

I'm sorry, but that's just verbal gymnastics to try to provide cover for being exposed as the biased, one-sided sycophant you claimed not to be. Claim the moral high ground all you want, but you have nobody here fooled.