Chiefs/colts Tampering? [Merge]

[King Colt]

Small fine then all move on.

[hawkeyes]

Small fine then all move on.

IMO, if they actually did something wrong, they should get more than a small fine. Course prooving they did anything wrong would likely be pretty tough.

[ruksak]

IMO, if they actually did something wrong, they should get more than a small fine. Course prooving they did anything wrong would likely be pretty tough.

It's been proven. The Chiefs did the same thing the Lions did to them. That is, they mentioned interest in a player that is currently under contract with another team. If the Lions held them liable for the same infraction, why wouldn't we?

[hawkeyes]

It's been proven. The Chiefs did the same thing the Lions did to them. That is, they mentioned interest in a player that is currently under contract with another team. If the Lions held them liable for the same infraction, why wouldn't we?

I didn't know something so simple as saying something like that was considered tampering ... If a previous team was penalized for the same actions, then this team should be penalized as well, it should be league enforced not a choice of the teams to press charges if you will.

[braveheartcolt]

Well, at least we know that the Colts wont face a tampering charge for talking to Peyton's agent......

[JoKeR]

It's been proven. The Chiefs did the same thing the Lions did to them. That is, they mentioned interest in a player that is currently under contract with another team. If the Lions held them liable for the same infraction, why wouldn't we?

Interesting. So other teams literally can not say they are interested in another player under contract?

[bayone]

Interesting. So other teams literally can not say they are interested in another player under contract?

supposedly Codon was contacted twice, he refused to deny it, thats what has to be proven

[pac2]

Give us Charles, or Flowers. We'll call it even.

Heck with that. Give us Eric Berry.