scribo Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 From the NY Times today: Because McGahee is under contract, it is considered tampering for other teams to talk publicly about him. Reese continued to discuss McGahee with reporters after the formal interview ended. NY Times linky So if that is true, and I would think it is, what will the NFL do about it? A trade almost has to happen now because McGahee is going to be pissed, and the team thought he wasn't studying enough before... Likewise, this hurts McGahee's value, as teams know the Bills' need to trade him just went up in a big way. Really, Jerry Reese screwed up and now owes the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 If either team contacted the other before Reese spoke, it really can't be called tampering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted February 25, 2007 Author Share Posted February 25, 2007 If either team contacted the other before Reese spoke, it really can't be called tampering. That is not what the article stated. From what I am now reading in a few different places is that the Bills are the only ones allowed to publicly break the news that they are shopping one of their players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 That seems odd. But hey, if they can get something from it, great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted February 25, 2007 Author Share Posted February 25, 2007 That seems odd. But hey, if they can get something from it, great! It appears it is also against the rules to talk about interest in another player when that player is under contract with another team. That is supposedly enforced much more often. Either way, Reese screwed up, showing his inexperience in running a team. But "innocent mistakes" or "not knowing better" won't cut it. I would guess the Bills would have to file a complaint to get any compensation. Maybe Marv can use that threat as leverage. Reese would get eaten up in the NYC media if he lost a pick for being unfamiliar with the tampering rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 It appears it is also against the rules to talk about interest in another player when that player is under contract with another team. That is supposedly enforced much more often. Either way, Reese screwed up, showing his inexperience in running a team. But "innocent mistakes" or "not knowing better" won't cut it. I would guess the Bills would have to file a complaint to get any compensation. Maybe Marv can use that threat as leverage. Reese would get eaten up in the NYC media if he lost a pick for being unfamiliar with the tampering rules. Interesting scenario being cooked up. What's this business about threatening a hold out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 don't get too excited, at best we'd get a compensatory 7th rounder in 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 does anyone know what the nfl will do about it??? And what do we get for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanGuzman Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Tampering Jerry New Giants GM Jerry Reese picked up that tagline when he revealed that “there is Willis McGahee talk out there” when he was being asked about a potential new running back to take Tiki Barber’s spot on the Giants’ roster. Yes, it’s tampering to be discussing another team’s player who is under contract at any time. You could blame it on first-day jitters for a new general manager. “We will investigate any such trade talks,” Reese said, referring to McGahee. Will Reese be fined? Who knows, but he is right in that there have been rumors of the Bills trading McGahee, who wants a new contract and has mentioned a holdout as a means to that end. McGahee is represented by Drew Rosenhaus. Titans were warned Tampering Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted February 25, 2007 Author Share Posted February 25, 2007 Tampering Jerry I don't want him to get a stinking fine! The Bills have a legit beef here. Tampering Jerry may very well have cause the Bills damage today. At the very least, it is now crystal clear that the Bills are unhappy with McGahee, thus pushing his value down. I want a draft pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I don't want him to get a stinking fine! The Bills have a legit beef here. Tampering Jerry may very well have cause the Bills damage today. At the very least, it is now crystal clear that the Bills are unhappy with McGahee, thus pushing his value down. I want a draft pick. Why is that? Based on what Reese said, all talk could have been initiated by the Giants, and Buffalo may not have even responded in any way. It didn't come out until later that the Bills were "actively shopping" McGahee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted February 25, 2007 Author Share Posted February 25, 2007 Why is that? Based on what Reese said, all talk could have been initiated by the Giants, and Buffalo may not have even responded in any way. It didn't come out until later that the Bills were "actively shopping" McGahee. Yes, based on what Reese said, as his words tipped the press off so they started digging, and his words motivated others to speak on background about the situation. The fact of the matter is the news came out because of Reese's careless words. The NFL must take action, and the Bills must benefit from said action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I don't see that there's any way to prove that Reese saying the Giants had interest in McGahee lead to the news breaking that the Bills were actively trying to trade him. There's a significant difference, and in my opinion there's a reasonable chance that those two things are unrelated. You may be right and this may be cause and effect, but I don't see enough facts to go on in terms of the Bills getting compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted February 25, 2007 Author Share Posted February 25, 2007 I don't see that there's any way to prove that Reese saying the Giants had interest in McGahee lead to the news breaking that the Bills were actively trying to trade him. There's a significant difference, and in my opinion there's a reasonable chance that those two things are unrelated. You may be right and this may be cause and effect, but I don't see enough facts to go on in terms of the Bills getting compensation. The only thing that needs to be proved is that Reese spoke about his team's interest in another team's player. There is no question that happened, so by rule, tampering occured. I am just explainging why I feel the rule is a good one and one that needs to be enforced. You are correct that this news may very well have made its way to reporters in other ways, as it did back when the Jags' intent to trade Mark Brunell was leaked. The Jags were pissed then, but there was nothing that could be done because the media reported their info based on nameless sources. Of course, stories from nameless sources give the team the option to deny the claim, as someone would have to go on the record to beat the denial. But Reese is already on the record in this case, so the Bills are screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 does anyone know what the nfl will do about it??? And what do we get for it? We get a Tiki Barber autographed game jersey AND two 8 x 10 glossy photographs of Michael Strahan french-kissing Coach Coughlin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 We get a Tiki Barber autographed game jersey AND two 8 x 10 glossy photographs of Michael Strahan french-kissing Coach Coughlin. DEAL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 does anyone know what the nfl will do about it??? And what do we get for it? After all the 'first black GM' hype last month? The answers to your questions are: Nothing and nothing. Move on folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 does anyone know what the nfl will do about it??? And what do we get for it? After all the 'first black GM' hype last month? The answers to your questions are: Nothing and nothing. Move on folks. Then Marv should announce an definite interest in signing Peyton Manning, LaDainian Tomlinson, Marvin Harrison and Rusty Jones. He'll be forgiven because he's inexperienced and senile. There's a special exemption from the rules for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In space no one can hear Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 We get a Tiki Barber autographed game jersey AND two 8 x 10 glossy photographs of Michael Strahan french-kissing Coach Coughlin. I think you nailed it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Reese also said that the Bills never once talked price. I don't know either way, but I would think that a tampering charge would have to reach that level, as in what are you asking for him, in order for it to be tampering with a contract. Just saying, nod nod, wink wink, is Willis available I wouldn't think passes that threshold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts