Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

So like I just stated…if a player gets accused of a crime. Doesn’t get found guilty. Can and does the league punish players over the optics?

Just like the Penn St coach created bad optics over Barkley.

League image is everything to them

Zay Jones. Accused of a crime. Charges were dropped. NFL suspended him five games. Not guilty…but NFL still punished.

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

They just created that rule a bit over a decade ago…the ‘legal tampering period.’ 
Before they had tgat period allowed players were still having negotiating with all 32 teams agreeing on their contracts by the first minute of free agency. Laughable. Everybody was breaking the rules. So they crafted a new rule to at least make it plausible  teams were following  the rules.

They made the rule so that teams know what's going on.

You announce a deal... now a team can go after another player.  It gives teams a better opportunity to plan.  With nothing being official... it also gives the players a little more power in they can change their mind. 

It helps teams plan with getting under the cap the minute the league starts.

Not simply any look or optics.  It's functional for better business for all involved when everyone knows what's going to happen. 

But you still can't talk directly to a player until the league year starts.

Franklin making his statement...and Cousins saying he spoke to a trainer... that caused investigations of violating the direct contact rule.

What about players NFL puts on the Commish list that can’t play because they were accused of something? Nothing found of guilt…yet still punished immediately….before they even had trial. 
 

 

OPTICS

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

What about players NFL puts on the Commish list that can’t play because they were accused of something? Nothing found of guilt…yet still punished immediately….before they even had trial. 
 

 

OPTICS

There is no " optics" in Cousins or Barkley....very black and white...no direct communication until league year. Cousin did...Barkley didn't.  No optics...it was reality. 

That other stuff....I agree optics.  This one was all procedure...not optics

So are you saying the NFL doesn’t punish anybody not guilty? Or that they even need proof. They do what they won’t. Only thing to do is fight them after they do it. Which in the best scenarios only usually equates to agreeing upon lowering the penalty leveled 

Just now, joemas6 said:

There is no " optics" in Cousins or Barkley....very black and white...no direct communication until league year. Cousin did...Barkley didn't.  No optics...it was reality. 

That other stuff....I agree optics.  This one was all procedure...not optics

Oh there were optics alright. Only reason the NFL got involved starting an investigation.

 Only reason I think they created this tampering window now. Optics. Created a plausible way all these negotiations happened above board with teams following the rules.

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

What about players NFL puts on the Commish list that can’t play because they were accused of something? Nothing found of guilt…yet still punished immediately….before they even had trial. 
 

 

OPTICS

Can I say I agree 1000 percent on all the other stuff.... but in this specific situation it was all about black and white procedures.

There was no optics that Atlanta did anything to get an advantage before the Cousins deal was " reported "  never the case....maybe you interpreted that way because of the word " tampering " .. again bad term.   

But it was always procedure.  Same with Barkley.

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So are you saying the NFL doesn’t punish anybody not guilty? Or that they even need proof. They do what they won’t. Only thing to do is fight them after they do it. Which in the best scenarios only usually equates to agreeing upon lowering the penalty leveled 

I'm saying you are going off subject.  I'm saying I agree 100% with everything you are saying that isn't about Barkley or Cousins investigations.

 

You are actually trying to suggest there are zero optics involved about whether the league has control over the owners and teams? That’s what it’s about more than anything else

The optics of whether teams are following the rules or cheating. They’re all cheating…according to the rules for years. NFL cares about the optics. You flat admitted everybody knows every team is cheating and not following the rules.

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Oh there were optics alright. Only reason the NFL got involved starting an investigation.

 Only reason I think they created this tampering window now. Optics. Created a plausible way all these negotiations happened above board with teams following the rules.

Ham...at what point was there an idea that Atlanta used an advantage or illegal tactic before the Cousins deal was announced?  There never was. It was all procedure.

If anything was a bad optic...it was a player openly admitting that he spoke with the trainer yesterday. The league had no choice there.

Same with Franklin saying that. But it should have been obvious Atlanta was going to get penalized but the Eagles were not.

NFL cares…it’s not about money. The NFL is striving hard to create a much better world. That’s what they are up to…not trying to rake billions.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

NFL cares…it’s not about money. The NFL is striving hard to create a much better world. That’s what they are up to…not trying to rake billions.

Ok...you preached well...hope you got it off your chest 

Now if you calm down ....very simple 

What was

the illegal action that got Atlanta penalized?  I'll answer.   Cousins spoke to a trainer on Tuesday,  in between when his deal was announced... and when the league year started. 

Am I right or wrong? 

It’s all procedure…charges were dropped..player isn’t guilty…NFL-Punish. Doesn’t add up. Sorry No Mas. There are sides of this whole situation. Tamper…everybody does. Your point is actually trying to not talk tamper as much as will the league punish this tamper. But that side of the argument isn’t so straight forward with the NFL either. Franklin’s statement…was bad optics. Players get archived of crimes…they get dropped…still punished by the NFL.

Cousins and several others…a fifth round pick…oh no…so terrible. What was it Mooney and some other guys Cousins was trying to line up with him to come?

8 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Ham...at what point was there an idea that Atlanta used an advantage or illegal tactic before the Cousins deal was announced?  There never was. It was all procedure.

If anything was a bad optic...it was a player openly admitting that he spoke with the trainer yesterday. The league had no choice there.

Same with Franklin saying that. But it should have been obvious Atlanta was going to get penalized but the Eagles were not.

Are you suggesting the league hasn’t punished for bad optics?

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

It’s all procedure…charges were dropped..player isn’t guilty…NFL-Punish. Doesn’t add up. Sorry No Mas. There are sides of this whole situation. Tamper…everybody does. Your point is actually trying to not talk tamper as much as will the league punish this tamper. But that side of the argument isn’t so straight forward with the NFL either. Franklin’s statement…was bad optics. Players get archived of crimes…they get dropped…still punished by the NFL.

Ok...easy big fella.  Strictly with Cousins... deal was announced Monday. .on Wednesday at his press conference on day 1 of the league year... he admitted to speaking with the trainer yesterday. 

Illegal...so Atlanta penalized

Zero to do with any idea that Cousins was illegally recruited to Atlanta...nobody thought that ever.  The stupid money they gave him makes it obvious they didn't need anything else to recruit him. 

The penalty came afterwards. 

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

Ok...easy big fella.  Strictly with Cousins... deal was announced Monday. .on Wednesday at his press conference on day 1 of the league year... he admitted to speaking with the trainer yesterday. 

Illegal...so Atlanta penalized

Zero to do with any idea that Cousins was illegally recruited to Atlanta...nobody thought that ever.  The stupid money they gave him makes it obvious they didn't need anything else to recruit him. 

The penalty came afterwards. 

I thought there were several players. Think you might need to go check your facts.

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Are you suggesting the league hasn’t punished for bad optics?

Focus!!!

I agree with everything you ever said in your life. ..now can we focus on this ONE THING!

On Monday Cousins deal was announced 

Wednesday press conference..where he said Tuesday he spoke to a trainer. 

That's why he was fined

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I thought there were several players. Think you might need to go check your facts.

Mooney contacted the team himself to get the flight plans

Lol...was never about any advantage recruiting him.  Come on 

Your whole argument is stemming from calling me clueless because I stated the league is investigating us..we might lose a pick. You need to really bring much more than you have so far….if you believe you’re coming out on top anywhere with this. Especially digging it up ten months later. You’re drowning….or staying on the Titanic playing the cello more accurately.

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Mooney contacted the team himself to get the flight plans

Lol...was never about any advantage recruiting him.  Come on 

quarterback Kirk Cousins, wide receiver Darnell Mooney and tight end Charlie Woerner.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

quarterback Kirk Cousins, wide receiver Darnell Mooney and tight end Charlie Woerner.

You still haven’t even got that part right yet