Given that the tampering rules prohibit at page 3 “[a]ny public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media,” and that the NFL’s anti-tampering policy provides as an example a very similar remark (“He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”), the Colts could make a tampering claim, if the Colts choose to make a tampering claim.
Bob Glauber of Newsday reported on Monday via Twitter that the Colts are “not inclined” to pursue tampering charges against the Chiefs. As Glauber points out, the league can pursue the matter on its own, if the league so chooses. (As we pointed out in an earlier item, that’s precisely what the NFL did after Albert Haynesworth signed as a free agent with the Redskins.)
The league won’t comment, and its precedent of investigation and enforcement in past situations sheds no light on whether action will be taken.