Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Explaining Jeremy Lin's Early, Surprising Success

Rock talks about Knowing ('kind of') Haynesworth was a Skin pre-Free Agency

Rock Cartwright obviously doesn't understand the tampering rule in the NFL, but I'm sure he does now. Luckily for Skins fans, and Dan Snyder, Rock's exacting word left in subjective tones. Thanks to the Titans SBNation blog for emailing me this article. I'll quote their blog post:

"The morning free agency started, Redskins RB Rock Cartwright went on ESPN 980 in D.C. to talk about the Albert Haynesworth signing:"

Host: At what time did you learn Albert Haynesworth was going to be a teammate, Rock?

Rock Cartwright:  This morning when I woke up I put it on NFL network and breaking news went across the screen saying he had signed for $100 million, but I kind of had an idea they were going to sign him anyways because one of my teammates said they have same agent* and he said that they had been talking.

(ed. note: WR Malcolm Kelley is also represented by Albert's agent, Chad Speck)

Come on people!! THINK!! It may be a non-issue since Rock specifically said, "[I] kind of had an idea". There certainly is some wiggle room here. We all "kind of had an idea" since it was public that Dan Snyder and Chad Speck had dinner before Free Agency started. Rock, please stay quiet from now on.

In regards to the penalty, August continues:

The Bears got a pick from the 49ers for tampering with Lance Briggs, and they seemed to have much less evidence.  Plus they didn't even lose Briggs, whereas out attempts to re-sign Albert were blown to bits once that crazy offer hit the papers.  

This is tampering at its worst, and Snyder should be hammered by the Commissioner for this.  The Bears got a 5th round pick and a swap in the 3rd rounded, so anything less than a 3rd or multiple late picks from the Redskins would be an insult.

Source: Music City Miracles

Comment 15 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Music City Musicals missing a very valid point
The Bears got a pick from the 49ers for tampering with Lance Briggs, and they seemed to have much less evidence. Plus they didn’t even lose Briggs, whereas out attempts to re-sign Albert were blown to bits once that crazy offer hit the papers.

If the offer was so crazy from the Redskins, but that was not the BEST offer on the table according to reports.

The 6-6, 320-pounder cost the Redskins $100 million-$115 million over seven years with $41 million guaranteed. In an interview on “The Michael Irvin Radio Show” in Dallas on Friday night, Haynesworth said he also had a $100 million offer from the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and he added, "I had another $80-something million deal from the Giants

From WUSA9

The Titans were interested in re-signing Haynesworth, but in the end refused to get into a bidding war with other teams for his services. Agent Chad Speck negotiated the deal, and also talked to a number of other teams, with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers also being involved until the end.
The Titans final offer was in the $11 million per year range, according to sources, which would have made him the NFL’s highest paid defensive tackle.

If tampering existed, prior to it becoming a bidding war, it should have been noted. With other teams NY 80M, Tampa and Redskins 100M it’ll be hard to prove any tampering.
SF was the only team involved with Briggs at the time.

by dr WNC on Mar 11, 2009 4:30 PM EDT reply actions  

A good point....also seems...

Titans fans are still pretty sore about losing Albert. The thing is, with or without the tampering, the Titans would have lost Albert anyway. So what’s the big deal to TEN?

by Kevin Ewoldt on Mar 11, 2009 4:54 PM EDT reply actions  

A possible extra draft pick

Note, this is coming mostly from fans, even though the front office said maybe but no more quotes are coming from the ones and only ones who must make a complaint for anything to happen.

by dr WNC on Mar 11, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

The rule explained

per Mark Maske from WaPo:
“Under anti-tampering rules, a player eligible for free agency is supposed to negotiate only with his most recent team until the opening of the free agent market, when he is permitted to begin negotiating with any team. But in practice, said several agents and front-office executives from NFL teams who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they didn’t want to implicate themselves or their clients, many agents go to the NFL scouting combine in Indianapolis before the opening of free agency to begin negotiating with new teams on behalf of clients eligible for free agency. Those deals cannot become official until the opening of the free agent market and sometimes fall through, according to the agents and executives, but many translate into signed contracts.”

by artmonk4ever on Mar 11, 2009 5:09 PM EDT reply actions  

Which means...

…that whether or not AH ultimately signed with the Skins or had other offers on the table is somewhat irrelevant bc the rule prohibits negotiations prior to the opening of free agency, and it seems clear from RC’s comments that negotiations occurred before they were permitted under league rules.

I wonder if negotiations were also ongoing with the Bucs and if the Titans could received compensatory picks from both the Skins and the Bucs?

by artmonk4ever on Mar 11, 2009 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Tampering often blurred

Jason Cole at Yahoo Sports has a good break down and some quotes:

As agents such as Rosenhaus have pointed out time and again, there are no rules that bar agents from talking to teams about players. The rules only apply the other way. It is only tampering if teams talk to agents about players.

.

by dr WNC on Mar 11, 2009 5:22 PM EDT reply actions  

The Rules changed...made clearer

Changes and clarifications to the rule could occur this year, as noted by The Washington Post
Goodell wants Rule on Free Agent Tampering to be enforced
It’s very difficult to prove, and less likely to occur as the “Tampered” team must provide request the investigation.

by dr WNC on Mar 11, 2009 5:29 PM EDT reply actions  

I just can't see anything coming of this

The 49ers admitted to contacting Briggs after contacting the Bears concerning a trade for Briggs. The Redskins haven’t admitted to anything.

So if what Jason Cole and dr WNC are saying is true, nothing will come of it unless the Skins or Haynesworth (or his agent) say that the Skins initiated contact, nothing will come of this.

by superjuan on Mar 11, 2009 7:05 PM EDT reply actions  

Why does all of this seem inevitable?

Some of you guys are talking like this is already a forgone conclusion that this is tampering.. where is the evidence besides a current player with no involvement saying something like this?

Who's world is it? It's yours.

by BlackOps on Mar 11, 2009 8:33 PM EDT reply actions  

Well,

there’s the fact that some details of his contract were leaked before FA began? As well as the circumstantial evidence that Snyder had dinner with the agent earlier that week.

We are truly in the presense of greatness here…-- unnamedDBacksfan

by DbacksSkins on Mar 12, 2009 2:53 AM EDT up reply actions  

Were details of the actual contract “leaked” or are you talking about the “He wants $100M over 4-6 years” talk that was rampant prior to free agency? Not only was Haynesworth reported as wanting those kinds of figures, the Redskins were among, at least, 10 teams ready to bid on him. So you don’t have to be Inspector Gadget to realized that if the Redskins were going to be involved in a bidding war, they were very likely going to win. Likewise, you’re not exactly groundbreaking by starting an online rumor that the Redskins had/were going to sign Haynesworth.

Second, not only is a Snyder/Speck meeting horribly circumstantial they would need to have specific proof that Snyder spoke to Speck about Haynesworth since it, ridiculously, is okay if Speck spoke to Snyder about him.

The problem here is obviously that the no-tampering rule is a joke. No conversations should be allowed either way. Granted that still allows for circumvention (for example in this case, Snyder and Speck could just claim they were talking about Kelly or one of Speck’s clients in the draft) but at least it makes the rule slightly less of the joke that it currently is.

by superjuan on Mar 12, 2009 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yep

“The problem here is obviously that the no-tampering rule is a joke.”

+1

by Kevin Ewoldt on Mar 12, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

which will be changed

While no tampering charges will happen, the NFL will redefine the tampering rules this year.

by dr WNC on Mar 12, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed.

It’s about the right time for Goodell to make another flashy show of force to assert himself and his ginger iron fist.

We are truly in the presense of greatness here…-- unnamedDBacksfan

by DbacksSkins on Mar 13, 2009 2:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

Hail Haynesworth!!!!

Just what the doctor ordered. I believe that he will have a major impact on the defense. Now if we can get a reciever?!?!?!

Scott Darrohn
Rapid Recovery Solution, Inc.

Bad Debt Collection

by RRSSCOTT on Mar 12, 2009 5:55 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Media Requests please email hogshaven@gmail.com

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Arnold-schwarzenegger-kindergarten-cop_small
Trading Up Is Not The Solution. Here's why.
Super_47_small
I Ran Into Jim Haslett and We Talked QB Draft, Manning, Trading Up
Images_small
SB Nation 2012 NFL Mock Draft

Recent FanPosts

Small
Best Team for Jason Campbell?
Small
Peyton Manning...
Small
Where's your cut off
Small
Some clarity on Peyton's injury
Small
General Manager Me
Small
So here's the thing about Peyton Manning...
Small
Trading Back
Paterno_tribute_small
How Stupid Giants Fans Are

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Superbowl_small Kevin Ewoldt

Riggins_small Ken Meringolo

Editors

Fb_small Parks Smith

Chalkboard_football-opt403x300o00s403x300_small UkRedskin

Washington_redskins_helmet_small Redskins News

Authors

Badshirt2__2__small fatpickle

Paterno_tribute_small Tiller56

Small Steve Shoup

Defaukt_small HTTR4LIFE

Hh_small Ronnie Adkins