So The Superbowl is Over (Unofficial 2007 NFL Draft/Free Agency Thread)

[Butter]

Hope you like drops over the middle, poor route running, and a bad attitude! Otherwise, Washington will be great for you.

[gstelmack]

The key is that, like the Stallworth signing, it's low risk. If he plays well, they've got a bigger payday lined up for him next season. If not, they can cut him and not be out too much.

[Arles]

Maybe we should start calling them the New England Redskins with all this FA activity

[molson]

Originally Posted by Arles

Maybe we should start calling them the New England Redskins with all this FA activity

It's really stunning - certainly the first offseason like this the Bellicheck era.

I'm happy with the moves, and I love to see them aggressively fill holes - but it seems so "unpatriotic".

[beargrowlz]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

The key is that, like the Stallworth signing, it's low risk. If he plays well, they've got a bigger payday lined up for him next season. If not, they can cut him and not be out too much.

I guess BB is hoping he can get this kid to return to the explosiveness he had at U-Tennessee as he only played in 12 games and caught 19 balls over the past two years.

Not sure he'd beat out Reche or Gaffney, especially as they're only paying him a 300k bonus. Sounds like he'll have to compete for a job as a #3 or #4 guy.

I'll admit though, I'm looking solely at the stats and what I just read about him - don't recall ever seeing him play.



Cheers.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Arles

Maybe we should start calling them the New England Redskins with all this FA activity

Nah, they still have cap room left, can't be the 'skins

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Arles

Maybe we should start calling them the New England Redskins with all this FA activity

You do know the 'skins started in Boston, right?

[st.cronin]

I had never heard of Kelly Washington until today.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I had never heard of Kelly Washington until today.

That's because it's Kelley Washington, you moron.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Nah, they still have cap room left, can't be the 'skins

I agree. If it were the 'Skins, Stallworth and Washington would have gotten 10-15 million upfront. Adam Archuleta, anyone?

Man, I never got that Archuleta one. Anyone who saw a couple of Rams games from their couch knew he was nothing special.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

That's because it's Kelley Washington, you moron.

Oh, THAT GUY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by beargrowlz

I guess BB is hoping he can get this kid to return to the explosiveness he had at U-Tennessee as he only played in 12 games and caught 19 balls over the past two years.

Not sure he'd beat out Reche or Gaffney, especially as they're only paying him a 300k bonus. Sounds like he'll have to compete for a job as a #3 or #4 guy.

Well, they didn't send a 2nd rounder and pay Welker all that money to not be the #2 WR to start the season. I agree that Washington will fight for the #3 spot, but it will be with Reche and Gaffney. But suffice it to say, Reche will not be catching 60 balls next season. It also looks like with his torn ACL and past performance, the Pats are expecting ABSOLUTELY NOTHING from Chad Jackson this season.

As for his stats, Washington was buried down the depth chart in Cincinnati. Now that doesn't mean he's going to light it up, it's a nice low risk investment in a guy with an upside.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

Hope you like drops over the middle, poor route running, and a bad attitude! Otherwise, Washington will be great for you.

Don't you know it's all about coaching?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Ok, enough already with the frickin' Pats free agency news. There are other teams in the damn league you know? Hey, where'd I leave my beer . . . .

[beargrowlz]

but it will be with Reche and Gaffney

Agreed.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Ok, enough already with the frickin' Pats free agency news. There are other teams in the damn league you know? Hey, where'd I leave my beer . . . .

Well, if anyone else would sign someone of note, we'd be able to talk about them.

According to Peter King, apparently Tennessee was real interested in Donte Stallworth and was who they'd targeted as their key receiver. Unfortunately some other much more successful team who shall rename nameless offered him less money (both guaranteed and per year), and Stallworth could not refuse the opportunity to go to a winner.

[wade moore]

When did the Patriots become the post-college home for SEC Wide Receivers?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Well, if anyone else would sign someone of note, we'd be able to talk about them.

According to Peter King, apparently Tennessee was real interested in Donte Stallworth and was who they'd targeted as their key receiver. Unfortunately some other much more successful team who shall rename nameless offered him less money (both guaranteed and per year), and Stallworth could not refuse the opportunity to go to a winner.

Hmm, I thougth David Givens was their key receiver?

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Hmm, I thougth David Givens was their key receiver?

Whoa Prez keep the gloves up or the ref will take a point away next time

[Galaril]

Samuels agent has said he is holding out and won't play without a new deal. There is a rumor if the Pats don't sign him they will trade him on draft day.

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/pat...ticleid=187915

[FrogMan]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Samuels agent has said he is holding out and won't play without a new deal. There is a rumor if the Pats don't sign him they will trade him on draft day.

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/pat...ticleid=187915

hrm, you do know the difference between "holds out hope of a new deal" and is "holding out for a new deal", right?

I saw nothing about a hold out in that article. I did read somewhere else that he will not report to the team's offseason training program, but that's a whole other thing...

FM

[stevew]

On the Stallworth contract, 6m is due Feb 26th, which would be on this fiscal year i think? How is this thing counted against the cap. Obviously they won't (edit:Probably wont) pay that bonus, but do they have to carry it against the cap this whole season, or not. Anyone have any info on the matter?

[jeff061]

I think Galaril got his info from make believe land. Unless that's some odd form of sarcasm. From his linked article:
“I’m not going to talk too much about (the negotiations),” Samuel said. “But they’re happy, I’m happy, so everybody else should be happy too.”

“Like I said, everything’s looking good,” he responded after briefly pausing to consider the question. “We’ll have to see what happens.”


“I talked to (the Patriots [team stats]) right before they did it,” he continued. “And under the circumstances, no, I’m not upset about it at all.”

Not to say things won't change, but come on.

[stevew]

Lance Briggs is now says he wants to be traded or released. Poor Baby.

[Julio Riddols]

Kelley Washington has talent and potential, and should do well in the Pats offense, but there is one big issue I have as far as why New England would sign him.. He has a dance called "The Squirrel" and he insists on making an ass of himself every time he makes any kind of play. This seems like a signing very atypical of New England's usual "character player".

He reminds me of Freddie Mitchell with a bit more talent.

Low risk deal for sure, I highly doubt he sticks more than a year there.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xMuvjLcuvTI

Theres the dance. He usually makes it last WAY longer than that.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Samuels agent has said he is holding out and won't play without a new deal. There is a rumor if the Pats don't sign him they will trade him on draft day.

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/pat...ticleid=187915

I didn't get that at all from the article when I read it earlier today. It seems to say that everything is progressing fine at the moment. The holdout is with regards to the offseason conditioning program, not the regular season. And I'm not aware of any trade rumor on draft day.

[albionmoonlight]

Though it is probably water under the bridge right now, Washington and Stallworth don't like each other.

When they were juniors at Tennessee, Washington told Stallworth that he was going pro, and convinced Stallworth to do the same. Then, after Stallworth had signed with an agent (or done something else to destroy his eligibility), Washington told him that he was actually planning to stay at Tennessee.

Stallworth believed that Washington tricked him into going pro just so Washington could be The Man at Tennessee and not have competition for the #1 WR spot. And Stallworth was pretty pissed about that, if I recall.

It's interesting to see them on the same team after that history.

All that said, I know nothing about Washington, but Stallworth is a good guy and a class act. I'm happy that he landed on a good team with a great quarterback. Hopefully he catches 100 balls this year and gets a mega-payday next offseason.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

He has a dance called "The Squirrel"

I didn't know he had named it.

[stevew]

I've heard of the kellley washington guy, but I don't really remember him doing anything vs Pitts. Seems like TJ Douche is the guy I can't stand cause he always seems to kill us.

[Coffee Warlord]

I really, really, *really* hope the Bears stand firm with Briggs and force him to sit out the entire season unpaid.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

I really, really, *really* hope the Bears stand firm with Briggs and force him to sit out the entire season unpaid.

You realize this won't happen right? If they do that they save his salary but they get nothing for him in return. his trade value FAR outweighs anything they gain by making him sit.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by RendeR

You realize this won't happen right? If they do that they save his salary but they get nothing for him in return. his trade value FAR outweighs anything they gain by making him sit.

Prolly won't happen, but it's the principle of the thing. I'd be thrilled if the whiny little bastard was forced to sit on his ass and watch all year.

[Kodos]

I was sad to see one of the few Dolphins I like (Welker) go to the hated Patriots.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Prolly won't happen, but it's the principle of the thing. I'd be thrilled if the whiny little bastard was forced to sit on his ass and watch all year.

No argument there, i wish some team really would do as you say. I was hoping the eagles would do it to TO.

Ahh well, we live in a business sports world.

[RendeR]

Yeah Kodos, I'm actually looking at the pats as a front runner this coming year. They've gone out and gotten cheap players that fill roles again. Its sick and disgusting, but the pats are gonna be good this year.

[miked]

I don't understand why people think Briggs is a whiny bitch. He's played Pro-Bowl caliber defense for the past few years at a rather nice discount. His turn for free agency finally comes up (when people with much less talent are getting bank), and the Bears decide to slap him with a franchise tag. It's no risk for the Bears, they have 0 to lose. Sure, the front office can say he's getting paid well because the franchise number is 7M or so, but Briggs has everything to lose. I don't feel bad for guys like Branch who are holding out, but here Briggs has satisfied his contract and the Bears want him to risk his body for another year at little cost to them.

Imagine if you were in a business that relied on your hands, but each time you worked, you risk losing them. Your employer says you can prove yourself for a few years at a low salary, then you're free to go elsewhere. If you do well, you'll have tons of offers for money that may make you secure for life. Instead, at the end of your contract, your boss decides he likes you so much, he'll evoke a clause enacted by somebody you don't even know and they get to keep you for another year, risking your livelihood and maybe after that you can look elsewhere. Whether you're making 50k or 5M, it still sucks to be screwed.

[Logan]

This isn't necessarily my viewpoint, but I think the argument against what you said is that Briggs turned down a large extension, either recently or earlier in the season. Maybe it wouldn't have gotten him top dollar, but he turned it down knowing that there was a chance it could backfire with a franchise tag.

[rkmsuf]

Lance is a really crappy name for a linebacker.

[gottimd]

Lance is a gay name for a pop star.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by miked

Instead, at the end of your contract, your boss decides he likes you so much, he'll evoke a clause enacted by somebody you don't even know and they get to keep you for another year, risking your livelihood and maybe after that you can look elsewhere. Whether you're making 50k or 5M, it still sucks to be screwed.

Your beef, then, is with the Union that negotiated that clause on your behalf, not with your boss.

It's a tit for tat thing. Had the owners not been given the franchise tag, then perhaps the players would be getting a smaller percentage of revenues. Or maybe it would take longer to reach free agency. Or maybe they would get worse health care in retirement.

The alternative to the current situation is not, as most of these players implicitly assume, that they would have all of the same benefits that they do now and no tag. The alternative is that they would have no tag and some other benefit would be cut. That's how negotiations between good negotiators work.

If enough players don't like the tag, then they can make sure to tell their union to get rid of it the next time the collective bargaining agreement is up for renewal.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Theres the dance. He usually makes it last WAY longer than that.

That's what he always says :o

[Kodos]

hxxp://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/football/pro/dolphins/sfl-spdolphins13mar13,0,659267.story?coll=sfla-dolphins-front

More on Welker from the Sun-Sentinel. The Pats are jerks.


NFLPA wants inquiry on Welker deal to Pats

By Harvey Fialkov
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Posted March 13 2007


The NFL Players Association is concerned that the Patriots and Dolphins violated the Collective Bargaining Agreement while putting together the recent trade of receiver Wes Welker and has asked the NFL Management Council for an explanation, according to a source.

"They may have violated the CBA rule that says one club can't offer the player's former team anything that would [sway] that team from matching their offer," the source said. "Anti-collusion [rule], that's another thing that may come into play."

The source added that the NFLPA's interest in the matter stemmed from complaints made by Welker's agent, Vann McElroy, regarding the devaluation of his client because of possible violations.

The inquiry was also based on a series of newspaper and Internet reports leading up to the trade that indicated that the Patriots were set to give Welker, then a restricted free agent, an offer sheet worth $38.5 million over seven years on March 3.

An NFL.com report said the Patriots were going to include a "poison pill" that said if Welker played four games in Florida, his contract would become fully guaranteed.

No offer sheet was tendered by the Patriots and on March 5, the Dolphins traded Welker, their leading receiver in 2006, to New England for a second- and seventh-round draft pick.

Because the Dolphins offered Welker the mid-level $1.3 million tender on March 2, the Patriots only had to surrender a second-round pick if the Dolphins chose not to match. By sweetening the pot with the seventh-round pick, the Patriots avoided the offer sheet and averted the possibility that the Dolphins would've matched the offer.

The Patriots then signed Welker to a five-year deal worth $18.1 million, with $9 million guaranteed, approximately half the value of the original offer.

The NFL Management Council represents all 32 teams, so in effect the NFLPA is asking the Dolphins and Patriots for an explanation of how the trade went down. The Dolphins chose not to comment on the matter. The Patriots and McElroy didn't return messages.

One agent said that these inquiries generally "go nowhere."

"When it comes to anti-tampering and collusion in regards to players, generally the league looks the other way and hands out a slap on the wrist unless the player's agent gets all frustrated and thinks their player has been devalued," the agent said. "If the player's happy with the offer and the teams are happy, the league's stance is, `Let's move on.''

[wade moore]

How is this different than the poison pills over the last few years that went nowhere? At least the Dolphins got some extra value out of this one.

[rkmsuf]

that's just sour grapes by the agent

[flere-imsaho]

Did I read that correctly that Welker's agent is trying to build a case based, essentially, on Internet rumor? Good luck with that.

As for the use of the poison pill - if it offends the NFL, the owners, and/or the NFLPA so much, then they should get off their butts and write up a rule about it. Sheesh.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Did I read that correctly that Welker's agent is trying to build a case based, essentially, on Internet rumor? Good luck with that.

As for the use of the poison pill - if it offends the NFL, the owners, and/or the NFLPA so much, then they should get off their butts and write up a rule about it. Sheesh.

The bitching about creative contracts is stupid. If the Dolphins don't want to reup Welker and only tender him then they should be prepared to lose him for the compensation. That's the purpose of restricted free agency. They tender at a level they feel is fair. Otherwise they reup the guy to begin with.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

The bitching about creative contracts is stupid. If the Dolphins don't want to reup Welker and only tender him then they should be prepared to lose him for the compensation. That's the purpose of restricted free agency. They tender at a level they feel is fair. Otherwise they reup the guy to begin with.

It's not the Dolphins that are complaining. It's Welker's agent.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Your beef, then, is with the Union that negotiated that clause on your behalf, not with your boss.

It's a tit for tat thing. Had the owners not been given the franchise tag, then perhaps the players would be getting a smaller percentage of revenues. Or maybe it would take longer to reach free agency. Or maybe they would get worse health care in retirement.

The alternative to the current situation is not, as most of these players implicitly assume, that they would have all of the same benefits that they do now and no tag. The alternative is that they would have no tag and some other benefit would be cut. That's how negotiations between good negotiators work.

If enough players don't like the tag, then they can make sure to tell their union to get rid of it the next time the collective bargaining agreement is up for renewal.

Yep. That is spot one. What Briggs fails to realize is that if there was no franchise tag, he either (1) wouldn't even be a FA right now (because contracts would be longer or FA status would depend on age); or (2) would be getting a lot less in FA than is out there now (smaller share of revenues).

So, STFU Briggs. Take your 7 million dollars, buy and insurance policy, and hit the field you whiny bitch.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Logan

This isn't necessarily my viewpoint, but I think the argument against what you said is that Briggs turned down a large extension, either recently or earlier in the season. Maybe it wouldn't have gotten him top dollar, but he turned it down knowing that there was a chance it could backfire with a franchise tag.

Peter King said it best in MMQB:

Originally Posted by Peter King

Every year, two or three players go nuts about being franchised. This year it's Briggs. It's like I say every year when this happens: If players are mad about the franchise tag (and Briggs is, because he sees stiffs like Leonard Davis getting huge signing bonuses when he gets zero to sign and a salary of $7.8 million), then he should get active in the union and try to repeal it. Or he should take the six-year, $35-million deal he was offered by the Bears, with lots more guaranteed money, and just deal with it.

He had his shot at a decent signing bonus, he just wants the truly monstrous payday. This is like the Pats and Deion Branch last year: the player is not ticked off because the team is offering them junk, but rather that they aren't getting the biggest contract ever at their position.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

It's not the Dolphins that are complaining. It's Welker's agent.

Nice to see the boot on the other foot - agents unsettle players and force trades, wokring in effect the teams to whom they are under contract - when two teams, divisional rivals no less (although I use the term rivals loosely given the last few years) work together for each others benefit, screwing the agent.

Tough titties the way I see it. Welker's getting $18m over over 5 years, with $9m guaranteed? That means the agent is only getting $900k, with the potential of $1.8m? My heart bleeds...