ESPN NFL

INDIANAPOLIS — The Seattle Seahawks and Arizona Cardinals have avoided showing interest in quarterback Peyton Manning for fear of tampering charges.

Kansas City Chiefs coach Romeo Crennel caught my attention at the NFL scouting combine Saturday when he expressed interest in Manning despite alluding to the tampering policy's prohibition of such comments.

"I’m not supposed to talk about anybody else’s players, and he’s still a player with Indianapolis," Crennel said, "but with a talent like that, I would be crazy not to consider it, if he were available. So I'll leave it at that."

Was that tampering? Read this passage from the NFL anti-tampering policy and decide for yourself:

Any public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media, is a violation of this Anti-Tampering Policy. (Example of a prohibited comment: "He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.")

The Chiefs accused the Detroit Lions of tampering. Tis best for teams to err on the side of safety.

"We really can't talk about it," Seahawks coach Pete Carroll said Friday when asked about Manning. "He's on somebody else's team. So we're not part of that discussion right now."

Several have periodically asked about the tampering charges San Francisco filed against the Jets over Michael Crabtree.

Those have been dropped.

Why? The charges served their purpose, which was to remove the Jets as a possible destination for Crabtree back when the 49ers and Crabtree's agent could not agree on a deal.

Crabtree signed with the 49ers after the tampering charges made it clear San Francisco wasn't interested in eventually trading him or relinquishing rights to him.

Posted by ESPN.com's Mike Sando

The 49ers have not said much regarding the tampering charges they filed against the Jets regarding first-round draft choice Michael Crabtree. They've generally fallen back on the familiar "it's a league matter" line.

Team president Jed York would not go into details during his recent interview with KNBR radio in San Francisco, but he did say more than I had heard the 49ers say previously:

I think it was clear there was some evidence that the Jets talked to him and as a group we decided this is something that is very serious and we wanted to make sure it was brought to the league's attention. Scot, Paraag and I discussed it and we moved forward from there.

'Scot' is general manager Scot McCloughan. 'Paraag' is salary vice president of football operations Paraag Marathe.

This is the strongest and most specific statement I have seen from the 49ers regarding this ongoing case. York did not mention anything about Deion Sanders' potential role, which could also be of interest.

(Read full post)

Posted by ESPN.com's Mike Sando

A quick look at highlights from the NFL's anti-tampering policy while the 49ers' charges against the Jets are pending:

No club, nor any person employed by or otherwise affiliated with a club, is permitted to tamper with a player who is under contract to or whose exclusive negotiating rights are held by another club. ...

The following chain of events is enumerated here as one example of a violation of the policy against tampering with another club's players:

1. A club's representative, or a third-party intermediary of that club (Club A), is involved in a private meeting or conversation with a player (or his representative) who is under contract to, or whose negotiating rights are held by, another club (Club B); and

2. The League obtains substantiation that after or during the above contact with the player, Club A has stated, publicly or privately, its interest in obtaining his services (see 'Public/Private Statements' below); and

3. Contract problems or other disputes subsequently arise between the player and Club B (for example, the player’s failure to report on time to Club B).

In circumstances like those of the example above, tampering will be found even in the absence of a demonstrated cause-and-effect relationship between the player’s contract problems and his prior involvement with the other club. In other words, a club will not be able to defend a tampering charge in these circumstances by asserting that its private contact with a player (or the player’s representative) did not involve any expression of interest in the player or was not related in any way to the player’s subsequent contract problem with his club.

The policy concludes by warning teams that they will be subject to "severe disciplinary action by the commissioner" for violations. The policy sets no guidelines for punishment. The league can presumably act as it sees fit.