The Kansas City Chiefs reportedly filed tampering charges against the Detroit Lions and it seems that most everyone is being quiet on the matter. The league issued me a no comment when I sought clarification on previous Gunther Cunningham comments they had previously said were not on the league's radar.
Now Lions head coach Jim Schwartz is (predictably) declining comment.
Surprised? We're not. Don't expect to hear much more about this. The Lions likely know even the most obvious tampering cases -- Albert Haynesworth, for example -- rarely result in punishment. So why would they say anything to potentially indicate guilt on their end or draw any more attention to this than they need to?
Some have asked why tampering cases rarely get punished. I'll use another story to help explain this one. On Thursday night, the Kansas Jayhawks played UCLA and at the end of the game, there was a controversial foul call that put KU at the line and ultimately won them the game. With plenty of folks upset about the call, the head of NCAA officiating came out the next day and said the official made the correct call. Well, duh. You expected the head of NCAA officiating to admit that one of his own guys blew the call?
It's sort of like that. The league likely doesn't want to go around busting teams for tampering because they'd essentially be admitting (to the public) that their teams cheat....a lot. So instead they apparently act as if tampering doesn't exist. In some ways, it's probably best we're not exposed to the back door deals that go on around the league.