Comments on: New NFL memo contradicts plain language of revised rules http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/ ProFootballTalk on NBCSports.com Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:44:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: dwnhillwhaler http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377556 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 18:55:03 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377556 Who is surprised by this absurdity from a league who still wants to underplay the importance of gambling to their popularity (see article on PFT re. gambling struck down by league and Jersey’s supreme court)

]]> By: Dave61548 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377481 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 18:23:51 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377481 Florio states “The NFL doesn’t pursue tampering cases in part because everyone does it. So now, out of the blue, the NFL threatens a tampering investigation against any team that reaches a tentative agreement during a period expressly allowing everything short of a signed contract? Really?” Yes really – ask the Saints about arbitrary “investigations” for something that all teams do.

Some team is likely to get hammered for a perceived tampering infraction (real or imagined). And Goodell will triumphantly claim the punishment is all in the name of “player safety”.

]]> By: CKL http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377226 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:06:53 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377226 lostsok,

I came to this topic just so say that same thing. Well done. If the new league year and FA starts the day after the SB, it takes all this garbage away. They’d just have to adjust when teams have to be under the cap. Make that a couple weeks before the draft or something. Boom…done.

]]> By: cincyorangenblack http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377185 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:37:45 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377185 This is clearly Goodell laying he groundwork for an “NFL free agent signing day” next year or the year after…how do you not see that?

]]> By: demolition510 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377168 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:28:38 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377168 TL;DR

]]> By: immafubared http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377163 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:25:37 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377163 The NFL has seen the success of signing day for college and is obviously trying to build the so called mystery up, hey wait till Tuesday, wow will you be surprised but dam if anyone breaks with ranks and spills the beans before then. Childish.

All I know is Tuesday is my birthday and he better not screw it up.

]]> By: immafubared http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377155 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:22:27 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377155 This is a confusing mess. First my read the league assumes a player will discuss things with one team only? Duh. In order for said player to shop around, someone in the process has to ‘orally’ state what they will pay the guy if he signs. But the Commissioners edict says no deal can be orally agreed upon.

All I know of sure if that WHO is on first.

]]> By: jetsjetsjetsnow http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377128 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:06:30 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377128 At least they are consistent with the constancy of stupidity…

]]> By: larryboodry http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377110 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 14:59:32 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377110 So much for a bunch of signings announced at 4:01 pm. Tuesday.

]]> By: sampulls http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377086 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 14:46:43 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377086 NFL biased? Who cares….players making more money than ever.

If we are talking biased…..talked about Florio….100′s of articles basing Goodell. How many commending him?

]]> By: tincansailor981 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2377002 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 13:38:42 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2377002 More of Goody’s crap. He’s just looking for a way to a) stuff more money into the owners pockets b) further morph the game into a clone of the NCAA c) keep the biggest revenue generating teams competitive, thus stuffing more money into the owners pocket. This guy is a joke.

]]> By: bartlettruss http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376956 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 12:42:53 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376956 I wonder if fans would pay $25 each to hear about the agreements in principle…

]]> By: kelvinmchale http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376955 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 12:42:32 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376955 Sports were so much more fun before the lawyers took over.

]]> By: patsbbfan http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376941 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 12:22:24 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376941 This is as stupid as first marijuana laws. Legal to buy and posses, not legal to grow and sell. Kinda of trying to have it both ways.

You can negotiate and agree to and outline/do the contract but you can not tell anyone about it or say you have an agreement in principal to 4 PM on Monday…. Huh?

More importantly why? Does it really change what is already happening in the media with all the reports/speculation on who will sign where and so on and so forth.

NFL stop treating us like we are stupid. There are already “agreements” in principal just like there were last year and the year before that and ….

How could they ever enforce this? or that’s right Goodwell can do whatever he wants…

]]> By: computojon http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376935 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 12:10:57 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376935 “It means it’s a great-idea-but-possibly-not-and-I’m-not-being-indecisive!”

]]> By: nickster31 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376903 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 10:29:40 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376903 Come on now everyone, be fair.

If Goodell wants to punish ANY player / team he has every right.

Patriots cheat (Spygate) they get a slap on the wrist. Saints cheat (Bountygate) their entire coaching staff gets suspended and so do players.

The Redskins and Cowboys (fan of neither) treat the uncapped year like an uncapped year and lose MILLIONS of their salary in a capped year.

Come on people, stop looking for common sense. This is the NFL.

]]> By: ron69 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376862 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:38:26 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376862 Not agreement in principle? what is the point to negotiate then? or aren’t they allowed to?
Or it could be interest means agreement? this is so confusing, what a hell am i doing here in the first place if there are not agreements i hope to get a sleep cause i drank too much coffee.

]]> By: lostsok http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376835 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:02:18 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376835 In the age of Twitter keeping these agreements secret is both unrealistic and unnecessary.

Frankly, it would make more sense for these players to become free agent the moment the Super Bowl ends.

]]> By: randylaheytpb http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376819 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 06:34:19 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376819 Sure a signing day would be cool, (actually, no it wouldn’t) but it is impractical and dumb. College recruiting teams put the wheels on recruits but there are no negotiations (well, in theory). There have to be negotiations for an NFL contracts and usually thorough and in depth ones at that, even for the most hastily signed contracts. Players don’t just simply “sign for a team” like the Signing Day notion implies.

Stupid gimmick. I’m a Giants fan but am proud to say that I give the NFL no money besides 2 t shirts bought in the last two years and the portion of my cable bill that goes to them.

I’ll consume your damn product, but I will Not admit how much I like it.

]]> By: msclemons67 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376808 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 06:21:42 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376808 All of these new rules and interpretations of old rules in one of the worst free agent classes I can remember.

]]> By: pppath http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376796 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:51:45 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376796 I think I’m the only one who stayed up all night for this.

]]> By: pppath http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376792 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:47:22 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376792 I want my “Agreement in Principle.”

]]> By: pppath http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376783 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:39:00 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376783 Kinda ruins your midnight madness stay up all night for the twitter feed thing.

]]> By: thestrategyexpert http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376779 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:33:03 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376779 Wow the NFL sure did release a lot of complicated information for the people that are apparently to stupid to figure out how to determine when midnight has arrived. Thanks NFL for looking out and educating us on these complex cycles of space-time.

So where is the literature that explains the process for determining gray area tampering situations that might occur after 11:59:59 but before 12:00? I just found a loophole in the language. Also they say “for example”, so what are other example times that qualify here? Surely not 11:59:58 right? Why is it that it’s ok to infringe 1 second before midnight but not 2? Why not just make it 0 seconds? They sure went out of their way with a lot of extra language to describe the process of how to tamper in that particular 1 second window.

Oh and I did look up the actual rules to see if that parentheses portion was actually included because I couldn’t believe that it was. Sure enough it is in there.

]]> By: ygkr85 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376777 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:29:58 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376777 Well said, right in your wheelhouse Mike! One of your best in a while!

]]> By: silverhornet http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376776 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:29:45 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376776 looks like the NFL doesn’t want us (the public) to know. This is them having their cake and eating it too.

]]> By: mazblast http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376771 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:24:32 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376771 The Great Roger Goodell Himself Live And In Person is just setting up another rule-that-isn’t-really-a-rule-except-that-I-want-to-take-action-against-teams-not-on-my-A-list. Expect just about any team to be arbitrarily subject to this non-rule, fined, and perhaps stripped of draft picks; any team, that is, not owned by someone named Kraft or Mara.

]]> By: heeeeelzfan http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376767 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:22:17 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376767 Tampering? In the NFL? No way.

]]> By: mikelitoris1 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/09/new-nfl-memo-contradicts-plain-language-of-revised-rules/#comment-2376758 Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:18:41 +0000 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1807994#comment-2376758 Why can’t we just start free agency today?

]]>