Due diligence blurs line of ethical behavior

[BrownIndian]

In the wider scope of the NFL draft process, the league’s nitpicking into a prospect’s subconscious is hardly the most Orwellian tactic employed. Indeed, as guaranteed money continues to rocket upward and personal conduct remains a primary focus by commissioner Roger Goodell, the probing nature of the NFL has seemed to intensify – if not push the boundaries of ethical behavior.

 

Earlier this year, executives of three NFL teams admitted to Yahoo! Sports that they had used fake information to gain access to the personal pages of draft prospects on social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace. Meanwhile, the use of psychologists gained more attention after former Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford met with the 49ers and took exception to some prying questions about his parents’ divorce.

 

All of this comes only two years after one of the most eye-opening allegations in draft history. JaMarcus Russell, the 2007 No. 1 overall pick of the Oakland Raiders, claimed he was tailed for at least two weeks by a man he believed was doing work for an NFL team. Russell said his uncle had gotten a tip that the former LSU quarterback had been followed for a sustained period of time, including from a trip from Baton Rouge, La., to his hometown of Mobile, Ala., and back again. At first, Russell said he had a hard time believing it, but then the source described places Russell had been and the frequency.

 

In the wider scope of the NFL draft process, the league’s nitpicking into a prospect’s subconscious is hardly the most Orwellian tactic employed. Indeed, as guaranteed money continues to rocket upward and personal conduct remains a primary focus by commissioner Roger Goodell, the probing nature of the NFL has seemed to intensify – if not push the boundaries of ethical behavior.

 

Earlier this year, executives of three NFL teams admitted to Yahoo! Sports that they had used fake information to gain access to the personal pages of draft prospects on social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace. Meanwhile, the use of psychologists gained more attention after former Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford met with the 49ers and took exception to some prying questions about his parents’ divorce.

 

All of this comes only two years after one of the most eye-opening allegations in draft history. JaMarcus Russell, the 2007 No. 1 overall pick of the Oakland Raiders, claimed he was tailed for at least two weeks by a man he believed was doing work for an NFL team. Russell said his uncle had gotten a tip that the former LSU quarterback had been followed for a sustained period of time, including from a trip from Baton Rouge, La., to his hometown of Mobile, Ala., and back again. At first, Russell said he had a hard time believing it, but then the source described places Russell had been and the frequency.

 

But if that story is indeed true – and it has never been revealed which team might have employed that tactic – is it acceptable?

 

 

[BrownIndian]

LINK: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Avd4...o&type=lgns

 

So what do you guys think about such scrutiny ? Is it justified considering the amount of money at stake or is it simply not acceptable ?

[BrownIndian]

Maybe have the amount at stake for such high draft picks get reduced ? it would be beneficial on different levels

[Earl34]

Teams who don't do enough homework get burned. At these prices, that won't do. (See Bengals, Cincinnati)

[Solon16]

civil rights be damned

 

[Guest Aloysius]

Being followed or having teams hack into your myspace account sends a message that you are suspect and the team looking to draft you already doesn't trust you. It starts the relationship out on the wrong foot and puts a bad taste into the mouth of said player.

Could be wrong, but isn't "hack" too strong a word here?

 

To use the Facebook example, my guess is that teams are creating dummy student accounts so that they can access players' profile pages. But as long as their pages aren't restricted only to their friends, that's borderline public information. As the "White Nation" semi-scandal proves, that sort of info might technically be private, but it's bound to eventually become public.

 

It may be more troublesome if the teams are sending friend requests to get access to restricted pages, but the players then bear some responsibility for allowing teams to access their pages. If the player's dumb enough to allow a fake student with a hot blond profile pic access their private page, their claim to have had their privacy violated becomes a lot less credible.

 

In the end, any info posted on a social networking site's bound to become public, so I understand why teams looking to draft a player would want to get it now rather than later.

[Oldcrow1945]

Poor players.....I guess if it's too much they could just go get a real job. I really feel bad for them.

 

I read this stuff and all I can think of is, pampered prima donnas.

 

Follow me around all you want....You'd get more rest than you've had in a long time because it would be boring as hell.

[osusev]

Whatever what a bunch of crap that russel is complaining.

 

1. YOU DONT HAVE TO PLAY IN THE NFL IT IS A PERSONAL OPTION

 

2. ANY OTHER JOB THAT WOULD PAY THAT KIND OF MONEY (CIA PAYS A LOT LESS) PRIVATE COMPANIES CAN DO ANYTHING THAT DOES NOT VIOLATE THE LAW

 

3. IF YOU DONT LIKE THE SCRUTINY THAN BEHAVE OR SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT AFTER ALL IT IS YOUR INTERVIEW.

 

Facebook/Myspace are not protected private information, they are FREE SOCIAL PUBLIC NON SUBSCRIPTION networks... As for as I know WWW stands for WORLD WIDE WEB......

 

Prima donna whiners.