Titans ask NFL to consider tampering charges against Redskins (1 Viewer)

[GregR_2]

I've thought a few times over the last couple of weeks... it sometimes strains believability that a team and a player's agent could reach agreement on a contract fast enough to make these announcements minutes or hours after free agency starts. I've been surprised we haven't seen more tampering charges come of it. Maybe now we will...

Report: Titans ask NFL to probe signingESPN.com news servicesThe Tennessee Titans have asked the NFL to consider tampering charges against the Washington Redskins in the signing of free agent defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, The (Nashville) Tennessean reported, citing unnamed sources familiar with the situation.According to the report, the Titans did not file a formal grievance with the NFL over the Redskins' quick agreement with Haynesworth, which was reached just hours after the league's free agent period began. Instead, the team provided the league with newspaper articles and audio from a Washington, D.C.-area radio station -- evidence the Titans say implies Washington had improper contact with Haynesworth before free agency began at 12 a.m. on Feb. 27.The NFL indicated to the Titans that it planned to look into the allegations, according to the report.The Titans declined to comment on Wednesday, while NFL spokesman Greg Aiello would neither confirm nor deny that the team had contacted the league, according to The Tennessean. Haynesworth's agent, Chad Speck, could not be reached for comment, the newspaper reported."There are issues of tampering that come up from time to time and if we need to take some action then of course we announce that," Aiello said, according to the report. "Until then we don't comment on it.''Haynesworth, considered the prize of the 2009 free agent class, agreed to a $100 million contract with the Redskins five hours into free agency.Haynesworth said last month that he didn't think the Redskins were guilty of tampering, according to the newspaper. He said a meeting between his agent and Redskins owner Daniel Snyder at the scouting combine a week before free agency began was about wide receiver Malcolm Kelly, another of Speck's clients."All I know is the Redskins called my agent at 11:04 p.m. Nashville time [12:04 a.m. ET] and they started negotiating then,'' he said, according to The Tennessean. "They weren't anywhere close in the first couple of hours and then they got serious. Chad worked the deal then and it worked out.''

 

[Matt Waldman]

Yeah, I kind of find it stretching the bounds of believability that in this league an 11pm phone call began a five-hour discussion that hammered things out this quickly.

 

[SuperJohn96]

Yeah, I kind of find it stretching the bounds of believability that in this league an 11pm phone call began a five-hour discussion that hammered things out this quickly.

I can't think of too many $100 million dollar deals for ANYthing are hammered out in five hours from start to finish.

 

[T Bell]

There wasn't much to hammer out. The Redskins offer impressed Haynesworth and his agent from the get-go, and while this deal has been reported as "a $100M deal", the contract is effectively a four-year, ~$55M contract with the remaining contractual value and term fully expected to be meaningless because Haynesworth would be cut or renegotiate before ever getting to that portion of the contract due to the exorbitant cap value of those later years.

 

[buster c]

there does not appear to be any evidence beyond the agent having dinner with little danny. as the agent also represents at least one other redskin, how could a tampering allegation arise unless the agent of little danny confesses?

 

[dgreen]

I don't think this is the first time a FA agreed to sign with a team by 5 AM. For their sake, I hope they have more evidence than that.

 

[GregR_2]

I don't think this is the first time a FA agreed to sign with a team by 5 AM. For their sake, I hope they have more evidence than that.

I think they may be alright because it is 5 hours as opposed to shorter. Which I still think is awful short to sound out all the teams interested in Haynesworth, see who has the best offer, and then get a contract down on paper enough to be able to say they've agreed to terms.But I seem to recall that in past years there have been cases of players signing more like an hour after FA started.

 

[Bankerguy]

I'm sure there was no funny business there. :rollseyes:

 

[T Bell]

I don't think this is the first time a FA agreed to sign with a team by 5 AM. For their sake, I hope they have more evidence than that.

I think they may be alright because it is 5 hours as opposed to shorter. Which I still think is awful short to sound out all the teams interested in Haynesworth, see who has the best offer, and then get a contract down on paper enough to be able to say they've agreed to terms.But I seem to recall that in past years there have been cases of players signing more like an hour after FA started.

They didn't even get that far because the Redskins' offer was so far beyond what they'd expected. Read the quotes at the time. The Redskins, whose reputation preceded them of course, shocked them with their offer and that important, ego-feeding $100M number.

 

[Zoomanji]

I know a bunch of you are Redskins fans but do you really think they got it done in 5 hours?

Happens every year with 1 or 2 guys. Those deals are set-up days ahead of time. Of course there is tampering. As long as agents have more than 1 client there will be tampering and it can never be proven.

Cheaters!

 

[fatness]

The Redskins' initial offer was more than Haynesworth's agent thought any team would offer. The agent called Haynesworth, told him of the offer, and Haynesworth was very surprised. Since the demands they were going to make were already met, Haynesworth and his agent went for a quick signing before the deal disappeared.

That story appeared in print right after the signing. I don't have the link (perhaps someone else does; it might have been in Haynesworth's press conference).

The Titans can't ask the NFL to just check out whether any tampering took place. They have to submit evidence that it has taken place. Does anyone know what evidence they submitted to the NFL? If all it is is a claim that Snyder talked to Haynesworth's agent, and that therefore tampering must have occurred, they'll lose.

edited to add the quote above from T Bell, who also remembers the story at the time:

They didn't even get that far because the Redskins' offer was so far beyond what they'd expected. Read the quotes at the time. The Redskins, whose reputation preceded them of course, shocked them with their offer and that important, ego-feeding $100M number.

 

[T Man]

The Redskins' initial offer was more than Haynesworth's agent thought any team would offer. The agent called Haynesworth, told him of the offer, and Haynesworth was very surprised. Since the demands they were going to make were already met, Haynesworth and his agent went for a quick signing before the deal disappeared.

That story appeared in print right after the signing. I don't have the link (perhaps someone else does; it might have been in Haynesworth's press conference).

The Titans can't ask the NFL to just check out whether any tampering took place. They have to submit evidence that it has taken place. Does anyone know what evidence they submitted to the NFL? If all it is is a claim that Snyder talked to Haynesworth's agent, and that therefore tampering must have occurred, they'll lose.

edited to add the quote above from T Bell, who also remembers the story at the time:

They didn't even get that far because the Redskins' offer was so far beyond what they'd expected. Read the quotes at the time. The Redskins, whose reputation preceded them of course, shocked them with their offer and that important, ego-feeding $100M number.

The Titans may lose and they may not be able to "prove" that tampering occurred, but face facts tampering occurred. Any attempt to talk to a player or an agent about signing a contract before midnight would be tampering. It happens all the time -- which is why there is talk in some league circles that the league should adopt the NBA "dead period" where teams can negotiate a deal with players, but contracts cannot be signed until after the "dead period".If I recall, the Dolphins signed a guard a few years ago minutes after the clock struck midnight. No tampering occurred there either I assume.

 

[fatness]

The Titans may lose and they may not be able to "prove" that tampering occurred, but face facts tampering occurred.

You're confusing suspicion with facts.

 

[T Bell]

I know a bunch of you are Redskins fans but do you really think they got it done in 5 hours?

Happens every year with 1 or 2 guys. Those deals are set-up days ahead of time. Of course there is tampering. As long as agents have more than 1 client there will be tampering and it can never be proven.

Cheaters!

The Redskins' initial offer was more than Haynesworth's agent thought any team would offer. The agent called Haynesworth, told him of the offer, and Haynesworth was very surprised. Since the demands they were going to make were already met, Haynesworth and his agent went for a quick signing before the deal disappeared.

That story appeared in print right after the signing. I don't have the link (perhaps someone else does; it might have been in Haynesworth's press conference).

The Titans can't ask the NFL to just check out whether any tampering took place. They have to submit evidence that it has taken place. Does anyone know what evidence they submitted to the NFL? If all it is is a claim that Snyder talked to Haynesworth's agent, and that therefore tampering must have occurred, they'll lose.

edited to add the quote above from T Bell, who also remembers the story at the time:

They didn't even get that far because the Redskins' offer was so far beyond what they'd expected. Read the quotes at the time. The Redskins, whose reputation preceded them of course, shocked them with their offer and that important, ego-feeding $100M number.

The Titans may lose and they may not be able to "prove" that tampering occurred, but face facts tampering occurred. Any attempt to talk to a player or an agent about signing a contract before midnight would be tampering. It happens all the time -- which is why there is talk in some league circles that the league should adopt the NBA "dead period" where teams can negotiate a deal with players, but contracts cannot be signed until after the "dead period".If I recall, the Dolphins signed a guard a few years ago minutes after the clock struck midnight. No tampering occurred there either I assume.

I'm 100% sure tampering occurs, and I can't rule out that it occurred here, but to say you're sure that it happened in any given case is silly. How complex is it to "hammer out" details that include one number for a signing bonus, and one additional number for each year of the contract.

You're kidding yourself if you think that both players and teams don't go into this process, particularly referring to high profile players that are being targeted, without a very highly developed set of contractual specifications ready to go. Haynesworth and his agent likely worked out over many weeks what they were looking for and would accept in terms of guaranteed money, length of contract (de facto and de jure), total value of contract (the ego pleasing part of this), and the favored teams.

It doesn't take long to transmit by fax or email an offer sheet that's been written up in advance, nor does it take long for the agent to know whether it fits within his client's parameters of acceptance. It doesn't take very long to decide if you have a deal or not under those circumstances.

 

[T Man]

The Titans may lose and they may not be able to "prove" that tampering occurred, but face facts tampering occurred.

You're confusing suspicion with facts.

Not necessarily. Not everything can actually be "proven". What occurs in a conversation between two people can only be "proven" by the two people in that conversation. In this case, the Redskins and Haynesworth. But oftentimes circumstantial evidence is sufficent. Does it necessarily prove the conversation no; but what occurs avter the conversation may lead a reasonable person to concur that the conversation is what it was purported to be.

 

[T Bell]

The Titans may lose and they may not be able to "prove" that tampering occurred, but face facts tampering occurred.

You're confusing suspicion with facts.

Not necessarily. Not everything can actually be "proven". What occurs in a conversation between two people can only be "proven" by the two people in that conversation. In this case, the Redskins and Haynesworth. But oftentimes circumstantial evidence is sufficent. Does it necessarily prove the conversation no; but what occurs avter the conversation may lead a reasonable person to concur that the conversation is what it was purported to be.

Yes or no- is it possible for the Redskins to have negotiated that contract with Haynesworth and his agent within five hours?

 

[T Man]

The Titans may lose and they may not be able to "prove" that tampering occurred, but face facts tampering occurred.

You're confusing suspicion with facts.

Not necessarily. Not everything can actually be "proven". What occurs in a conversation between two people can only be "proven" by the two people in that conversation. In this case, the Redskins and Haynesworth. But oftentimes circumstantial evidence is sufficent. Does it necessarily prove the conversation no; but what occurs avter the conversation may lead a reasonable person to concur that the conversation is what it was purported to be.

Yes or no- is it possible for the Redskins to have negotiated that contract with Haynesworth and his agent within five hours?

Anything is possible. Given the fact that other teams were calling, the magnitude of the deal, and the fact that this type of tampering is a way of life in the NFL, it is Highly Unlikely.

 

[T Bell]

The Titans may lose and they may not be able to "prove" that tampering occurred, but face facts tampering occurred.

You're confusing suspicion with facts.

Not necessarily. Not everything can actually be "proven". What occurs in a conversation between two people can only be "proven" by the two people in that conversation. In this case, the Redskins and Haynesworth. But oftentimes circumstantial evidence is sufficent. Does it necessarily prove the conversation no; but what occurs avter the conversation may lead a reasonable person to concur that the conversation is what it was purported to be.

Yes or no- is it possible for the Redskins to have negotiated that contract with Haynesworth and his agent within five hours?

Anything is possible. Given the fact that other teams were calling, the magnitude of the deal, and the fact that this type of tampering is a way of life in the NFL, it is Highly Unlikely.

So, yes, you acknowledge it's possible (albeit trying to disguise it by being dismissive with your "anything is possible" response). You're confusing suspicion with facts.

 

[Bri]

The Redskins' initial offer was more than Haynesworth's agent thought any team would offer. The agent called Haynesworth, told him of the offer, and Haynesworth was very surprised. Since the demands they were going to make were already met, Haynesworth and his agent went for a quick signing before the deal disappeared.

That story appeared in print right after the signing. I don't have the link (perhaps someone else does; it might have been in Haynesworth's press conference).

The Titans can't ask the NFL to just check out whether any tampering took place. They have to submit evidence that it has taken place. Does anyone know what evidence they submitted to the NFL? If all it is is a claim that Snyder talked to Haynesworth's agent, and that therefore tampering must have occurred, they'll lose.

Guilty of not reading OP myself, did you? Article appeared yesterday not right after signing.

(IIRC)At the Tennessean, some Redskins personnel guy said on the radio and TV how he chatted with Haynesworth's agent and the dope was bragging that after those conversations he knew they'd sign him. The Titans sent the recordings to the NFL and didn't feel they even needed to bother with an official tamperring complaint as once the NFL hears it they'll go after the Redskins.

"Redskins personnel guy"'s name has been curiously omitted from what I saw. I'd like to know who and if he even has a job this morning. That was a really dopey thing to do.

 

[Bri]

T Bell-from OP-Instead, the team provided the league with newspaper articles and audio from a Washington, D.C.-area radio station -- evidence the Titans say implies Washington had improper contact with Haynesworth before free agency began at 12 a.m. on Feb. 27.

fatness, radio and newspaper not TV and radio. I mis-stated in previous

 

[T Bell]

The Redskins' initial offer was more than Haynesworth's agent thought any team would offer. The agent called Haynesworth, told him of the offer, and Haynesworth was very surprised. Since the demands they were going to make were already met, Haynesworth and his agent went for a quick signing before the deal disappeared.

That story appeared in print right after the signing. I don't have the link (perhaps someone else does; it might have been in Haynesworth's press conference).

The Titans can't ask the NFL to just check out whether any tampering took place. They have to submit evidence that it has taken place. Does anyone know what evidence they submitted to the NFL? If all it is is a claim that Snyder talked to Haynesworth's agent, and that therefore tampering must have occurred, they'll lose.

Guilty of not reading OP myself, did you? Article appeared yesterday not right after signing.

(IIRC)At the Tennessean, some Redskins personnel guy said on the radio and TV how he chatted with Haynesworth's agent and the dope was bragging that after those conversations he knew they'd sign him. The Titans sent the recordings to the NFL and didn't feel they even needed to bother with an official tamperring complaint as once the NFL hears it they'll go after the Redskins.

"Redskins personnel guy"'s name has been curiously omitted from what I saw. I'd like to know who and if he even has a job this morning. That was a really dopey thing to do.

Can you identify this "personnel guy"?

 

[-baller]

any win the redskins get this year has an asterisk.

cheaters.

 

[ImTheScientist]

lol Redskins

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Haynesworth's agent, Chad Speck, could not be reached for comment, the newspaper reported.

How many agents do you know that aren't available for comment to the press, unless there's a reason for the silence.Yes. it is possible that there was no tampering. But it does smell like courtney love weekend bender fishy...

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

related but not the article referred to

Titans seek tampering evidence against Redskins

By Jim Wyatt • THE TENNESSEAN • March 7, 2009

* Read Comments(17)

* Recommend

* Print this page

* E-mail this article

* Share

o Del.icio.us

o Facebook

o Digg

o Reddit

o Newsvine

o Buzz up!

o Twitter

* What’s this?

There's no question the Titans are interested in pursuing tampering charges against the Washington Redskins, who agreed to terms with defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth just five hours into the NFL free agency period.

Advertisement

Can the Titans come up with enough evidence against the Redskins to make a good case to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell? That's the big question.

Long before Haynesworth signed the $100 million contract there was rampant speculation he'd end up in Washington.

One blogger forecast a $100 million deal and much was made of a meeting between Redskins owner Daniel Snyder and agent Chad Speck, who represents Haynesworth, at the NFL Combine in Indianapolis a week before free agency, which began Feb. 16 at 11 p.m. Central.

NFL rules prohibit teams from contacting agents for players still under contract, but such cases are hard to prove. As Haynesworth pointed out, Speck also represents Redskins receiver Malcolm Kelly.

Asked if the Redskins tampered, Haynesworth said: "I don't think so. Yeah, Chad told me he met with the Redskins at the combine, but they were talking about Malcolm and how he could become the next Andre Johnson and stuff like that.

"All I know is the Redskins called my agent at 11:04 Nashville time and they started negotiating then. They weren't anywhere close in the first couple of hours and then they got serious. Chad worked the deal then and it worked out.''

Speck could not be reached for comment Friday. Recently he said he negotiated four to five hours, and while numbers were agreed upon in the early morning of Feb. 27 the contract wasn't finalized until around 4 p.m., shortly before Haynesworth's press conference in Washington.

It is common for contracts to be hammered out in a matter of hours.

As for tampering, agents and players aren't subject to penalties, just teams.

Last March Goodell ruled that the San Francisco 49ers tampered with Chicago Bears linebacker Lance Briggs the previous offseason by contacting the player's agent, Drew Rosenhaus. The 49ers had to forfeit their fifth-round pick last year and the Bears and 49ers also switched third-round picks.

Earlier this week the Titans didn't rule out the possibility of pursuing tampering charges against the Redskins.

"We were interested in signing Albert," Titans general manager Mike Reinfeldt said. "It's always something we can address with the league.''

Greg Aiello, senior vice president of public relations for the NFL, said he was unaware of any complaint filed by the Titans and declined further comment.

It's safe to say there was no way the Titans would've re-signed Haynesworth, not with the money the Redskins were offering. It's also safe to say the Titans would like nothing more than to stick it to the Redskins as some form of payback.

But they'd better come up with some concrete evidence first.

 

[Ripleys]

anyone here that waaaaaambulance go by?

 

[fatness]

Here's the audio.

It's not a Redskin personnel guy. It's a Redskin player, Rock Cartwright, talking after Haynesworth was signed. Cartwright says "I kind of had an idea they were going to sign [Haynesworth] anyways. One of my teammates said they had the same agent and ... he said they had been talking."

I can't find any audio or transcript of a Redskins personnel guy (this likely would be Cerrato) saying anything on air --- just reports that he "said something".

So this is what this is all based on? Rock Cartwright talking to Malcolm Kelly? Dan Snyder having dinner with Malcolm Kelly's agent?

 

[fatness]

According to the report, the Titans did not file a formal grievance with the NFL over the Redskins' quick agreement with Haynesworth, which was reached just hours after the league's free-agent period began. Instead, the team provided the league with newspaper articles and audio from a Washington, D.C.-area radio station -- evidence the Titans say implies Washington had improper contact with Haynesworth before free agency began at 12 a.m. on Feb. 27.

ESPNThat's weak. No formal complaint. Newspaper clippings and radio audio? "Implies" there was improper contact? If it was so convincing this would be a formal grievance. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Packers submit a formal grievance against the Vikings for tampering with Favre, said they had the phone records, and the grievance wasn't upheld?

 

[Bri]

Cartwright says "I kind of had an idea they were going to sign [Haynesworth] anyways. One of my teammates said they had the same agent and ... he said they had been talking."

rule is pretty clear about not being able to talk to a player's agent while under contract with another club.I'll agree if you want to say it's petty but the originating team should not have to worry about other teams while he's under contract with them.Yep I agree too the Titans likely wouldn't have signed him especially how those December charges came out just after he signed with Washington. That seemed quite odd too.rule's a rule though. If petty than they "have to" give them a 7th then and not make it as if a team gets away with it.

 

[Bri]

The Redskins' initial offer was more than Haynesworth's agent thought any team would offer. The agent called Haynesworth, told him of the offer, and Haynesworth was very surprised. Since the demands they were going to make were already met, Haynesworth and his agent went for a quick signing before the deal disappeared.

That story appeared in print right after the signing. I don't have the link (perhaps someone else does; it might have been in Haynesworth's press conference).

The Titans can't ask the NFL to just check out whether any tampering took place. They have to submit evidence that it has taken place. Does anyone know what evidence they submitted to the NFL? If all it is is a claim that Snyder talked to Haynesworth's agent, and that therefore tampering must have occurred, they'll lose.

Guilty of not reading OP myself, did you? Article appeared yesterday not right after signing.

(IIRC)At the Tennessean, some Redskins personnel guy said on the radio and TV how he chatted with Haynesworth's agent and the dope was bragging that after those conversations he knew they'd sign him. The Titans sent the recordings to the NFL and didn't feel they even needed to bother with an official tamperring complaint as once the NFL hears it they'll go after the Redskins.

"Redskins personnel guy"'s name has been curiously omitted from what I saw. I'd like to know who and if he even has a job this morning. That was a really dopey thing to do.

Can you identify this "personnel guy"?

fatness already replied clarifying this but, if you get to the Tennessean I'm confident you'll find something along the lines of personnel guy in the initial report. I was just relaying what I read

 

[fatness]

fatness already replied clarifying this but, if you get to the Tennessean I'm confident you'll find something along the lines of personnel guy in the initial report. I was just relaying what I read

You're right Bri. "Redskin personnel guy" is reported in multiple articles (all based on the same initial article apparently). But there's no particular personnel guy identified anywhere that I've seen. And regarding talking to agents, the agent Snyder talked to is also Malcolm Kelly's agent, so that's certainly allowed.

 

[Jason Wood]

The problem with tampering is that most agents represent a lot of players and could easily say a preemptive meeting was related to their players already on a team's roster. And really what incentive does either the team ownership, team management or the agent have to incriminate themselves beyond that? The Redskins have been notorious for this for ages. Remember when they flew Cornelius Griffin in on a plane at 12:01 and had him signed by the morning?

Thing is, I really don't see the gripe though. Haynesworth couldn't be tagged, but Tennessee agreed to that clause last year. They still had a window to negotiate with him exclusively, and it was totally Haynesworth's call/right to give Tennessee a chance to match, or not.

Just seems like really sour grapes by Tennessee b/c I can't see how, even if they did have pre-preliminary conversations before the clock started officially, how it would've changed the outcome.

 

[-baller]

if it wouldn't have changed the outcome then why can't the redskins wait to negotiate their deal like the rules say they should?

maybe some other teams in the league would've liked to pitch a deal, but unlike the redskins, actually honor that rule, or just don't happen to have the excuse the redskins have.

if they did it this once, you know snyder's probably got a long history of circumventing the rules.

I don't know how any self respecting fan could continue to root for those cheaters ---- every one of their .500 seasons is now in doubt.

 

[T Bell]

Cartwright says "I kind of had an idea they were going to sign [Haynesworth] anyways. One of my teammates said they had the same agent and ... he said they had been talking."

rule is pretty clear about not being able to talk to a player's agent while under contract with another club.

Malcolm Kelly also has the same agent.

 

[T Bell]

if it wouldn't have changed the outcome then why can't the redskins wait to negotiate their deal like the rules say they should?maybe some other teams in the league would've liked to pitch a deal, but unlike the redskins, actually honor that rule, or just don't happen to have the excuse the redskins have.if they did it this once, you know snyder's probably got a long history of circumventing the rules.I don't know how any self respecting fan could continue to root for those cheaters ---- every one of their .500 seasons is now in doubt.

Gotta love how the whiners automatically assume the worst to enable themselves to whine, all over a player who was signed to a large contract that was so big it both was ridiculed at the time and also couldn't/wouldn't have been matched by any other team (especially the penurious Titans) anyway.

 

[-baller]

sounds like a lot of rationalization to assuage a guilty conscience to me.

we all know the truth of the matter here -- some of us just aren't honest enough to own up to it.

 

[T Bell]

sounds like a lot of rationalization to assuage a guilty conscience to me.we all know the truth of the matter here -- some of us just aren't honest enough to own up to it.

Funny how you confuse suspicion with knowledge to be able to perpetuate your witch hunt. I'm the one who said earlier in this thread that I couldn't rule tampering in our out. I'm afraid you're the one who's looking foolish jumping to conclusions here.

 

[-baller]

hey, I like science fiction as much as the next guy --- go ahead and tell us your story.

the team called the agent at midnight and dumped a ton of money on him w/no negotiations --- is that about right?

agent then calls haynesworth at 1 am, or did he wait 'til 4 am?

if you want to bs yourself, that's certainly your choice, but don't think you're bs'ing anybody w/any common sense.

from now on they'll be known as the washington tamperers.

 

[fatness]

if it wouldn't have changed the outcome then why can't the redskins wait to negotiate their deal like the rules say they should?maybe some other teams in the league would've liked to pitch a deal, but unlike the redskins, actually honor that rule, or just don't happen to have the excuse the redskins have.if they did it this once, you know snyder's probably got a long history of circumventing the rules.

That's some rock-solid reasoning there. It looks suspicious, therefore they've done it this time and all the time. I'm totally convinced.

 

[Bri]

The problem with tampering is that most agents represent a lot of players and could easily say a preemptive meeting was related to their players already on a team's roster. And really what incentive does either the team ownership, team management or the agent have to incriminate themselves beyond that? The Redskins have been notorious for this for ages. Remember when they flew Cornelius Griffin in on a plane at 12:01 and had him signed by the morning? Thing is, I really don't see the gripe though. Haynesworth couldn't be tagged, but Tennessee agreed to that clause last year. They still had a window to negotiate with him exclusively, and it was totally Haynesworth's call/right to give Tennessee a chance to match, or not. Just seems like really sour grapes by Tennessee b/c I can't see how, even if they did have pre-preliminary conversations before the clock started officially, how it would've changed the outcome.

It's not wrong for a team to hold out hope of a last minute deal with their best player. It can't be, maybe that's what's missed here. Fans, teammates, the whole organization almost needs that hope even if it's fruitless. It's not supposed to be that "it's just business" attitude til the time comes.As fatness pointed out, a player came forward as saying he knew Haynesworth was coming or somesuch. I imagine if any of the 32 teams here an inadvertent confession of tamperring, they're going to try to get the accompanying pick. It's like a freebie. The way the Titans sent it off to the NFL but didn't make an official complaint, it doesn't seem like sour grapes to me.

 

[Bri]

Cartwright says "I kind of had an idea they were going to sign [Haynesworth] anyways. One of my teammates said they had the same agent and ... he said they had been talking."

rule is pretty clear about not being able to talk to a player's agent while under contract with another club.

Malcolm Kelly also has the same agent.

aren't you a lawyer?"I can't comment on that" is a common enough phrase, it's not like Snyder had dinner with his brother and over dinner the conversation just came up. No one on this earth spends 100 million(except Obama) without putting much thought into it. Cmon now.

 

[AB in DC]

Gotta love how the whiners automatically assume the worst to enable themselves to whine, all over a player who was signed to a large contract that was so big it both was ridiculed at the time and also couldn't/wouldn't have been matched by any other team (especially the penurious Titans) anyway.

 

[pollardsvision]

Sure, it's possible. If we were talking about any other owner, it wouldn't be, but this is Snyder.

High-priced guy who underachieves until it's time to play for a contract, who can never stay healthy for a full season, and who's always a high-risk to get in trouble with the league or with the law? Sign Snyder up.

It's not like Snyder's negotiating style is very time consuming.

For all we know, Snyder could've just thrown in an extra $10 mill. just to get the deal done in time for the morning edition of Sportscenter.

 

[-baller]

No one on this earth spends 100 million(except Obama) without putting much thought into it.

zing!haha...double lol.

what I would like explained to me, is if the washington crooks had prepared to shock and awe haynesworth w/this jumbo contract that couldn't/wouldn't be matched by any other team, why would they need to call his agent up at midnight?

why not just wait 'til 8 am, or whatever?

is malcolm kelly such a name that snyder needs to personally have dinner w/his agent?

and during this whole dinner snyder doesn't bring up the 100 million dollars he's going to drop on that other client?

he doesn't say --- 'hey, bud, I'll have a nice offer for one of your guys on day one, so don't jump at anything 'til you hear from us.'

instead, the homers would have us believe that the washington crooks called up at midnight w/a a fairly intricate contract that they cooked up entirely on their own, so tremendous that it was already over and above anything haynesworth could have hoped for, so he rushed right over to sign at 5 am.

let me see if I can find a pic of some crooks fans............

http://www.pensionriskmatters.com/wildlife...eak-no-evil.jpg

 

[fatness]

instead, the homers would have us believe that the washington crooks called up at midnight w/a a fairly intricate contract that they cooked up entirely on their own, so tremendous that it was already over and above anything haynesworth could have hoped for, so he rushed right over to sign at 5 am.

That's been Snyder's style for years with free agents he wanted --- be the first to contact them and sign them before they talk to anyone else. I realize this won't make any difference to your argument but to some who read this thread and who don't follow the Redskins it will be informative.

 

[-baller]

instead, the homers would have us believe that the washington crooks called up at midnight w/a a fairly intricate contract that they cooked up entirely on their own, so tremendous that it was already over and above anything haynesworth could have hoped for, so he rushed right over to sign at 5 am.

That's been Snyder's style for years with free agents he wanted --- be the first to contact them and sign them before they talk to anyone else.

haha....and that's EXACTLY what I've been saying........the washington crooks.

 

[Chase Stuart]

How many pages is the contract? Personally, I would find it odd to assume that Haynesworth didn't read every word of the contract, but I'm sure the agent read every word. Is five hours even enough time to do that?

 

[-baller]

to actually physically read it --- yeah, probably.

to consider all the terms between the hours of 12 am and 5 am......



I guess it would be crazy to expect the agent to go to sleep, look it over, and get back to them later in the day.

maybe the crooks gave him a 5 am deadline......

 

[GregR_2]

I went out looking for articles to see if the Redskins and Haynesworth only "agreed to terms" or actually drew up and signed a contract in those 5 hours. Not exactly what I was looking for but of interest, I came across this blog, from 3 days before he signed about whether there was already evidence of tampering. Which references this article from a more legitimate media outlet (Houston Chronicle) that NFL sources already knew where Haynesworth would land and what the contract would be.

Chronicle:

February 24, 2009

Albert Haynesworth will be a Washington Redskin

Remember back on December 23rd when I told you guys that Scott Pioli would be the GM for the Kansas City Chiefs before anyone had it? I got it from a very well-connected league source. That source is talking (actually texting) again.

This time around he tells me that the Washington Redskins will break the bank to sign Albert Haynesworth. The Titans could come over the top of the Redskins deal as well, but my guess is that the Redskins will let Haynesworth get the best offer possible from the Titans and then "better deal" it. My source tells me to look for a contract that could break $100 million with an average of $15 million to $16 million per. My guy is almost never wrong and Dan Snyder gets what he wants. As a Texan fan, I would really be devastated to see Haynesworth leave the division ... only, no I wouldn't. Beat it, Haynesworth.

Fanhouse blog:

Report: Redskins Will Land Haynesworth; Is This Tampering?

Posted Feb 24, 2009 2:05PM By Bruce Ciskie (RSS feed)

Filed Under: Redskins, Titans, AFC South, NFC East, NFL Free Agency

NFL free agency doesn't begin until Friday. That said, anyone who has followed the NFL knows that there will likely be some huge signings on the first day. Surely, you don't believe those contracts were negotiated in the few hours from the start of the signing period until the announcement of the signing, right?

I'm pretty sure that negotiating with a player under contract is generally considered "tampering." If I were Titans head coach Jeff Fisher or Tennessee general manager Mike Reinfeldt, I'd be looking very carefully at the news that broke Tuesday.

The Houston Chronicle's Lance Zierlein reports that Titans defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth will join the Washington Redskins once he's able to sign with them. That would be Friday.

Furthermore, Sports Illustrated's Peter King reported Monday that he expected Haynesworth to land in Washington.

I wonder why Redskins owner Dan Snyder was having dinner with the agent for Haynesworth, Chad Speck, at Morton's here Saturday night. I'm sure they were just talking about how it was colder here than at the Arctic Circle.

Hmm, tamper much?

Sure, everyone does it. Well, not everyone. A good number of NFL teams tamper, simply by talking to guys who aren't free agents yet. That's how so many signings are announced on the first day of free agency. Complicated contract negotiations don't get wrapped up in two hours unless the framework of a deal was already in place.

It's a pretty ballsy move by Snyder. It's one thing to dine with the agent of a guy like Haynesworth, who is set to make a bunch of money on the open market sometime soon. It's another thing to dine with said player when that player's team is coached by a prominent and long-time member of the NFL's Competition Committee.

Fisher has to say something, right? A big-name sportswriter reports that one of his players was potentially being tampered with, and there is already a report stating where that player will sign once he's actually a free agent.

Doesn't this justify an investigation?

I get that "everyone does it." Even if that statement isn't literally true, there are plenty of teams who engage in tampering. And it's not like the Titans made a serious push to re-sign Haynesworth this week. They've already taken their shot, and it was simply a matter of waiting to see what offers he got.

Perhaps the idea that "everyone does it" is the reason no one ever gets turned in for it (well, almost no one). If the Titans want to slam the Redskins and get an extra draft pick, they need to be prepared to get caught by the Redskins or someone else. Then again, if more teams got caught, perhaps fewer would try it, figuring it isn't worth losing a draft pick or two just to gain an advantage on a free agent.

That said, if the league wants its rules to be taken seriously, it's high time it makes more of an effort to enforce them.

I don't think what Zierlein said in the Chron is necessarily evidence of tampering. Knowing a team's offer doesn't necessarily mean the team already made that offer to the agent. Though I'm also have to speculate that if a team doesn't want the player to re-sign with his club before hearing their offer, a really good way to inform the player of their offer without meeting with them directly (in violation of the rules) would be to leak it to the media and let them be the ones to inform the player what he may get if he waits.

On a different note, could we lower the insult factor a bit? It isn't really conducive to discussion to be calling others whiners, or to be continually needling a team's fans by refering to them as crooks, etc. I think this thread has a lot of examples of what the staff were talking about trying to eliminate from the Shark Pool, and I imagine it's probably already driven away some people who might have posted views in here but won't bother now because of the direction it has taken.

 

[TitusIII]

The Titans had plenty of time to negotiate, errr "tamper" while the Redskins, among other teams, were doing the same thing.