Roger Goodell clearly wasn't hugged enough as a child...

by Fooch on Mar 25, 2008 8:41 AM PDT in News Comment 41 comments

There can't be any other explanation can there? It seems like Der Kommissar has gone bat-shit crazy with power. I'm glad I was in class and couldn't put together my post when I first heard about the punishment handed down, as I was rather furious about this at that point. However, since then I've had time to reflect on this and try and formulate some sort of coherent thoughts on the 49ers losing their 5th round draft choice and having to swap their 3rd round pick with the Chicago ____ (new, more appropriate name to be decided on tomorrow, but they'll never be referred to by their given team name as long as I'm here).

First off, if the 49ers are guilty of this and McLoughlan's quote is just trying to cover things up, so be it. However, I have several problems with the way things have gone down.

Due Process
The 49ers appeared to be provided a forum to present their side of the issue. However, unless someone proves otherwise, I'm of the opinion that the meeting in NYC was nothing more than a dog and pony show meant to appear fair on the surface. Since Roger Goodell took over for Paul Tagliabue, he has been on a one-man mission to "clean up" the league. Whether you agree with his suspensions of various players or not, it is safe to say he does not quite buy the old innocent until proven guilty line. Even if a person is guilty they deserve a fair trial, but that does not seem to apply so much to the NFL. It's The Commish's way or the highway.

If the NFL was actually a world of innocent until proven guilty and whatnot, this raises some questions as to how the "truth" came out. I've tried to determine the possible scenarios that led to evidence of tampering:

The most basic is the 49ers told the NFL what they did and it turns out it was tampering. If the 49ers did anything wrong, I would think it would inadvertent, but who knows?
Lance Briggs or his agent, Drew Rosenhaus, ratted us out. The 49ers actually have a good relationship with Rosenhaus, seen with the completion of a long-term deal for Frank Gore. Briggs is from Sacramento so I don't see what he has to gain from ratting out the 49ers for contacting him or Rosenhaus.
It goes on all the time and the ____ whining combined with missteps by the 49ers and the fact that this goes on all the time and that was enough to screw us. I'm gonna go with this one as the likely determinant. Tampering has apparently been an issue for some time and the 49ers were the ones without a chair when the music stopped. Combine that with the _____ crying like a bunch of little girls

The picks involved
So, say the 49ers screwed up and tampered, inadvertently or not. If that's the case, taking away a later round draft choice makes sense. A 5th rounder sends a message, but does not cripple a team. HOWEVER, the swapping of the third round picks annoys me more than anything else. Goodell is saying the 49ers tampered with the _____ and Lance Briggs. Briggs remained with the _____ and actually signed a long term deal with them, never even visiting the Bay Area to consider signing with the 49ers. So you punish the 49ers by taking away the 5th rounder. THEN you reward the _____ by moving them up in the third round? Considering the _____ have been trying to succeed with Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton, I think THEY are the ones tampering with their own organization.

Justin Smiley
Considering Justin Smiley signed with the Dolphins so soon after free agency began, can we cry foul? Oh wait, no we won't do that because we're a classy organization not filled with a bunch of rats.

49ers
In the end though, as much as what has happened sucks, the 49ers management has to accept their share of blame. Even if inadvertent, the 49ers had to know they weren't completely playing by the book with Lance Briggs. It's bullshit that they're the ones getting thrown under the bus, but sometimes shit happens. As someone mentioned in the comments in the post below, hopefully this makes people think twice about dealing with the _____ or having no problems throwing them under the bus when this sort of situation occurs on their end. Unfortunately we don't get to play them this year, but next time we're facing the _____, I hope we wipe the floor with them. Consider me a lifetime member of the ____-hater club.

EDITOR'S UPDATE 8:40AM - Thanks to Sven for spotting MM's piece. It seems the league's evidence was two missed phone calls to Drew Rosenhaus's phone (with no voice mails left). Also, according to Maiocco:

Several weeks ago, I learned that the 49ers do not hold Rosenhaus responsible for any of this mess. The 49ers believe the Bears are solely to blame.

This all just sounds like a bunch of he-said/she-said BS.

0 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Fuck goodell

And fuck the bears. This reeks of bullshit.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Mar 24, 2008 7:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Aargh

Mother Fuck 'em, just to see the look on their face.

Merton Hanks, 'nuff said.

by jtoj on Mar 24, 2008 7:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

What the!!!!!!!!!

Seriously this is crap. Let me get this straight the Bears come do the 49ers in the middle of the season to trade. 49ers only want to make sure Briggs stays longer then the end of the season and no trade happens. End of season and the 49ers explore the probabilities of signing Briggs and the Bears cry foul. Now he doesnt sign for what two weeks and Smiley signs what 15 mins into free agency and there is no tampering there. Gee this makes a lot of since the Bears start the ball and decide to cry and Goodell doesnt see any issues with this.

by red49gold on Mar 24, 2008 7:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh man...

I CANNOT WAIT until the 49ers and Bears play again... it's so on.

by jaytierney on Mar 24, 2008 8:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

we should....

totally boycott and walk out the game we play them in the preseason (#3).

I would totally support this.

Merton Hanks, 'nuff said.

by jtoj on Mar 24, 2008 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah!

I say fuck any team with a bear as a mascot! HAHA

nINER REd08

by nINER REd08 on Mar 24, 2008 8:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Hold the mothafuckin phone

Now, I've ALWAYS been one to not care about the Patriot bullshit punishment, but now the bullshit's been infused with added bullshit!

So the Patriots lose a late first round pick and get to keep an early first round pick, but we have to lose a pick AND trade down with another pick?

It's not that I think Roger Goodell is wrong for punishing teams. It's that I think Roger Goodell picks his punishments by rolling a few dice. "Do the Patriots have to swap that pick they got from the Niners? If I roll 16 or higher they don't!"

Roger, you NEED A MOTHERFUCKING SYSTEM! Punishing teams and players based on your current whim is total crap.

You set a "cheating" precedent with the Patriots. Lose a pick and take a fine. That was the god damned precedent. You can't change it now because you feel like it!

I miss Tags. Sure, cheating was a problem, but at least he was consistent and professional about dealing with it.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over....

by howtheyscored on Mar 24, 2008 8:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I

I Goddamn hate derek fisher.
What a bad day.

Merton Hanks, 'nuff said.

by jtoj on Mar 25, 2008 1:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Worst day of the year so far

Roger Goodell. Kevin Frandsen. Derek Fisher. I hate everyone.

www.sfbaywatching.com - daily news & commentary on Niners, Giants, Warriors, & Cardinal!

by sven406 on Mar 25, 2008 8:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seems to me you are more

upset with Goodell and/or Rosenhaus, why you got to be all piss and vinegar to the Bears? They thought the 49ers tampered and asked it to be looked into. Are teams not allowed to express grievances because it is against your team?

If Goodell decided to use the 49ers as an example that is all him. I promise you the Bears don't have a special relationship with the Commish. That relationship is reserved for the Patriots.

On Rosenhaus having a good relationship with you, means nothing. He will do anything to get his client a contract.

by WCG on Mar 25, 2008 5:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Windy City Gridiron

The problem everyone has with the Bears is two fold. First, all of the reports I have heard on the incident claim that the Niners never actually spoke to Rosenhaus about Briggs. They apparanently tried to contact him, but even that is disputed since the Niners claim they wanted to talk to him about another Rosenhaus player. Second, even if the Niners did talk to Rosenhaus so what. Where is the harm to the Bears? They signed Briggs in Free Agency to the terms that they wanted, and the Niners never actively pursued him. If you can show me how the Bears were injured at all through the whole ordeal then maybe the punishment makes sense, but since you can't I think there is a legitimate complaint that the Bears were just being whiny bitches.

Tom will never be as cool as Joe

by wader251 on Mar 25, 2008 6:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

bad precedent

The bears are making a huge mistake. The problem they had is that they feared losing briggs and used this as an excuse to scare the 49ers away. Interesting that they waited six months later to cry foul. I believe turn about is fair play, the bears want to cry foul, then don't complain when some team does the same to you in the future and it will happen. some team some where will come down on the bears about the same thing and I can't wait for this so I can laugh and suggest they don't cry to much. This is just like the poison pill, which I hope the 49ers use against them in the future. No one uses this because it is wrong to one team, but since the bears have shown a willingness to cry and whine, be prepared for the rest of the league to be cruel.

by Gailikk on Mar 25, 2008 7:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dratz!

So someone can steal our OC (Norv) right out from under us, and we can't even talk to a guy?

by jfainsf49 on Mar 25, 2008 6:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

J. Smiley

About Justin Smiley and the Dolphins. I say go back and look at the phone records. Prove they tampered. Hell, they signed Smiley. We didn't even get Briggs and we are taking it in the rear. I say prove the tampering against Miami. Then because the got Smiley fraudulantly, we should get to switch our first round pick with them.

by jfainsf49 on Mar 25, 2008 7:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

read: Then, because they got Smiley....

by jfainsf49 on Mar 25, 2008 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did anybody actually prove that we tampered?

I never heard about anything being proved about us. Was it? Where did I miss that?

I say ths knowing that I easily, easily could have missed it.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over....

by howtheyscored on Mar 25, 2008 8:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know

by jfainsf49 on Mar 25, 2008 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Goodell = sad & lonely

Roger Goodell is starting to resemble an insecure 7th grade teacher who decides to show the class bully he means business by making an example out of a the quiet, defenseless geek in the back of the classroom. After exerting a great deal of energy avoiding any further investigations into the Patriots on-field rule-bending habits, the Commish has decided to ding the Niners (according to Matt Maiocco) because of two missed calls placed by 49ers officials to Drew Rosenhaus around the time the team was discussing a trade with Chicago. That's right, they didn't actually talk to Briggs' agent -- they just tried to talk to him, and that was apparently enough.

Is anyone naive enough to believe that this was the most outrageous tampering that went on over the past several months? Of course not. But it's the Niners who are being used as an example, because punishing a team that seems hapless anyway is the best way to send a message without having to discredit teams that are actually interesting to casual fans across the country. Goodell has used the Briggs tampering case to kickstart his annual "this time I really mean business" tour, as the Washington Post reports that the Commish has sent a league-wide memo announcing his intention to get tough on tampering.

In other NFL power trip news, NFL Network reports that Dear Leader Goodell is considering a ban on long hair. I'm not making this up. This is one sad, lonely man we're dealing with.

www.sfbaywatching.com - daily news & commentary on Niners, Giants, Warriors, & Cardinal!

by sven406 on Mar 25, 2008 8:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Rosenhaus

The 49ers, according to Maiocco, have a VERY good working relationship with Rosenhaus and actually have some of the players he represents on the roster (I think Frank Gore and Moran Norris are both represented by him). Who's to say they weren't just calling to ask about something or someone else?

It's kind of goofy that the league (and whomever was at the hearing) took the circumstantial (at best) evidence and made it enough to punish the 49ers. Either the league front office is THAT vindictive or THAT hell bent on establishing some sort of order, or there's more to the story than people are letting on.

by sfgfan on Mar 25, 2008 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hell-bent

Honestly I think Goodell is trying to lay down the law. I could certainly be wrong on there not being more to the story. However, as he proved with his suspensions of individual players, he has no problem creating his own law. That's why I'm not surprised he bitch-slapped the 49ers on this.

Barrows made a good point in his blog entry on this. McCloughan is a new general manager without much pull in the league. Are we shocked Goodell didn't bust the Dolphins on Smiley with the the Tuna as their main personnel guy?

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Mar 25, 2008 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Uhm, it's not so circumstantial

"Who's to say they weren't just calling to ask about something or someone else"

The Niners own front office, in private emails they sent to each other prior to placing these calls which commissar Goodell managed to get a hold of. Those emails put the missed calls into context, in that they were mentioned specifically as being for the purpose of discussing a future contract with Briggs.

The Niners front office might want to feed the bs line that they're a victim here and all the evidence is circumstantial but it's not and they know it. A lot of other teams tamper, for sure, but like many other things in football they do it a whole lot better than the Niners do, with a whole lot less evidence left for the commish to move on.

Though I'd agree that the Bears didn't deserve to be compensated for this, the Niners did deserve to lose that 5th round pick, and it's just more evidence of how poorly run things are in San Francisco.

by notor on Mar 27, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Confirmation Bias

Look it up.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Mar 27, 2008 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pot. Kettle.....Black?

But really it's not, here's a link for you.

http://www.mercextra.com/blogs/kawakami/2008/03/25/49ers-tampering-story-theres-definitely-more-damn ing-evidence-than-just-2-phone-calls/

by notor on Mar 27, 2008 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah. Good ol' Kawakami.

How nice of him to join into the fray. The entire premise of his blog entry is to blast the 49ers front office, as it seems he's been on some sort of vendetta since sometime last season. I wouldn't put much stock into much of anything Kawakami writes. A part of good "journalism", especially when following a team is about not showing your bias in your reporting. If you read ANY of Kawakami's writing, it sure sounds like some anti-York committee is paying him to write this stuff. Maybe that's why MediaNews doesn't have any solid coverage of the 49ers, they just don't care?

I've been under the assumption that it wasn't the 49ers who brought up the two missed calls. Is that wrong? I thought that "news" leaked from other sources, and that the 49ers are playing it "mum" on the entire thing. To go ahead and stretch it by saying the 49ers are covering up their actions is absurd. They're just not talking about it, much like the league office and the Bears aren't. Who knows where the "two missed calls" idea came from, as the source isn't going to just jump out and say "I started it." Heck, Kawakami doesn't even who (or even remotely WHAT) he's getting this information from. It's not like he EVER scoops anything, so he probably doesn't have very many good sources, if any at all.

by sfgfan on Mar 27, 2008 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

As sfgfan touched on, Kawa is hardly the person you want to use to defend yourself. He is always looking for a reason to slam the Niners.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Mar 27, 2008 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ok

Defend your belief that the totality of the evidence the league had against the Niners was two missed phone calls to Drew Rosenhaus which could have been placed for any number of his clients who are currently members of the 49ers?

Then talk to me about confirmation bias. Kawakami has been right before, there's no reason to think he just made this up even if he does conjecture way too much as to their content, and it seems more likely than not that the league had more than these mere "two missed calls" to go on before they gave out this punishment, so his version makes a lot more sense than yours.

by notor on Mar 29, 2008 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

NFL meetings

Damn it man. I tell you what. I remember Coach Nolan saying that NFL meetings are coming up. When Nolan gets to that meeting, he had better complain about the refs tampering with the outcome of our games. For example, take another look at the Ravens game and that phantom pass interference call.

Sorry for the rant. But I am become more outraged by the minute.

by jfainsf49 on Mar 25, 2008 8:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Not for nothing

But this is the same half-a-tard who destroyed what could have been key evidence in a whole new cheating case against the Pats.

Goodell, I'm calling my senator right now. I want your anti-trust exemption ripped from your girly hands and readministered, rectally.

I guess the only thing we have to do to get ahead in this league is cheat and win.

49er 'til I die! (if they don't kill me first)

by LA49er on Mar 25, 2008 8:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Screw Goodell

Now I'm all for congress going full-court press on the spygate crap... I want them to presss Goodell hard for destroying evidence and trying to sweep it under the rug. 2 attempted phone calls and we get this? What kind of bullshit is that?

by jaytierney on Mar 25, 2008 9:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Laying down the law

I'm a strong believer that our Commish, wants the league to know he's boss... but instead of making that point with the patriots who had tangible evidence he decides to punish a team over 2 phone calls to an agent?!?! WTF.. does not explain my frustration. I think the punishment was too harsh and uncalled for... swap 5th rounders ok... but to essentially lose two players from this year's draft over 2 phone calls is isane... I guess Bush's idiocy over the last 8 years has been past down to the NFL's Commander in Chief

Joe and Steve were under the same system for years... don't expect Smith to be super so soon.

by bayboy on Mar 25, 2008 9:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

they didn't even talk to his agent?!?!

or leave a VM, and are still penalized? How does the league know that they contacted Rosenhaus about Briggs? (unless the 49ers admitted to it, which would be dumb if they weren't under oath.) It could have been about Gore or Taylor Jacobs, as MM says.

this is all a bunch of BS, especially considering that the NFL is covering up the extent of the Patriots malfeasance so it can sweep it under the rug.

For me the bottom line is that Briggs signed with the Bears, the 49ers didn't even go after him, so what's the big deal?

This stinks. Goodell and Bears are in bed together to fuck over the dumb 49ers.

Lott's Prayer: Almost as many words as the Lord's Prayer, but the Lord wouldn't recognize any of them.

by Nosetackle Supreme on Mar 25, 2008 9:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Draft Value

By swapping picks with the Bears in the 3rd we lose 25 "draft value points" and our 5th round pick is valued at 38.5 points. The end result is basically the value of a mid 4th round pick.

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 25, 2008 9:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ugh.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over....

by howtheyscored on Mar 25, 2008 9:57 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Did Goodell not see this coming?

Apparently Herm Edwards think the Rams and Bucs are guilty of tampering as well.

From Rotoworld, via The Kansas City Star:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=2607

What are the odds Goodell turns a blind eye on this?

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 25, 2008 10:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

So here is some of the evidence against the 49er's

http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/default.asp?item=2176340&49ers

From what I can gather, the only solid evidence against the 49ers during the hearing was a phone record of two calls the club placed to agent Drew Rosenhaus, who represents Bears linebacker Lance Briggs.

One story is that there were two "missed calls" with no voice messages. The second version - essentially corroborating the first report - was that there were two "20-second" phone calls. In other words, a 20-second phone call is a "missed call."

When I asked league spokesman Randall Liu for a comment about the evidence against the 49ers, he responded, "The statement is all we are saying regarding this matter."

That part is from the article. If thats the full extent of the damaging evidence the Goodell screwed the pooch. Its a good article and really puts the Bears as huge babies in the whole thing.

by red49gold on Mar 25, 2008 11:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

this is crazy

I think one question that you have to ask in all the weirdness that is Goodellland is: "Does the punishment fit the crime?" Lets see...

The Patriots violate a rule that was underscored during the spring meetings - no videotaping on the field during the game. Bellichick flings his finger in the face of the league, and gets a 'record-setting' fine, and the loss of a first rounder. Without spending too much time on a tired subject, it was a fairly harsh punishment at the time, but as more comes to light, we learn that the league shredded the evidence and that the Pats have been taping for a while now.

On the other hand, the Niners place two calls to an agent that are not even answered and there is no evidence that they ever even talked to Briggs, so they lose a pick AND have to trade down in the third? Let's be honest, the loss of a fifth rounder isn't too drastic, but coupled with a first-day move down...

I am not sure what exactly is going on down at NFL HQ, but it seems to me that punishments aren't being served equally. Players are suspended before even being proved guilty, teams are being punished without any evidence, and evidence is conveniently shredded in other cases.

Its hard to believe that 'tampering' is not widespread, since so many free agents are signed so quickly on the first day. That doesn't say any tampering is excused, a rule is a rule. But to single out the Niners is completely unfair.

by steelerark on Mar 25, 2008 4:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Technically...

Technically, the third round pick is now a "Day 2" pick. But that's beside the point, I suppose.

Either Matt Maiocco or Matt Barrows pointed this out: the 49ers may not be punished because they tampered, in the general sense. It could be that they tampered DURING the season, and that's what drove the NFL (or the Bears) up the wall.

Everyone knows that tampering occurs during the offseason (i.e. leading up to the opening of free agency), but there isn't as much evidence to prove that tampering occurs DURING the season. Tampering in the offseason doesn't appear as "treacherous" as it's quite possible that the player isn't coming back to the team. However, tampering in the middle of the season is a form of undermining the other team's (and the league's) authority, or can be interpreted as such.

I'm not saying the Bears and/or the NFL are correct in the punishment. Heck, I don't think the NFL has anything other than circumstantial evidence against the team. I do, however, see where the Bears and/or the NFL front office can feel this case of tampering is worse than other ones many people assume (i.e. Smiley and the Dolphins agreeing to terms so soon into free agency).

by sfgfan on Mar 25, 2008 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I say we stick it to Goodell and trade for Pacman!

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 25, 2008 4:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

So when Goodell's wife...

... is thinking about another man while in bed, does he divorce her anyway even though she didn't technically cheat on him?

I still don't see enough proof to warrant such a decision.

by jaytierney on Mar 25, 2008 8:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I Take Offense

To that.

The matter is behind us. I've destroyed the episode of "Cheaters" where my wife tells me I'm worthless in bed, and that's that.

However, I believe it is important to point out that her boyfriend did turn on his turn signal indicator to turn left at 7:29am when the left turn is clearly illegal until 7:30am. I expect to persecute this to the fullest extent of the law.

Also, if you are porking my wife, please come forward. I will trade immunity for some pointers- I don't understand why crying after sex is such a turn off.

Signed,
Roger Goodell

49er 'til I die! (if they don't kill me first)

by LA49er on Mar 26, 2008 8:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs