NFL Offseason 2012: Because contract negotiations are part of the excitement

Started by CountDeMoney, March 01, 2012, 01:55:25 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

CountDeMoney

And so the yearly tradition of "The Raidin' O' The Ravens" begins.

Jarrett Johnson, gone.  San Diego.
Cory Redding, gone.  Indianapolis.
Ben Grubbs, gone.  New Orleans.




CountDeMoney


CountDeMoney

Poor Brownies.  Just plain ol' snakebit.

Of course, expect the Redskins to be a player somewhere in this drama.  Can't be satisfied with ruining their own franchise, have to help ruin somebody else's as well. Naturally.

QuoteThe general perception is that the Cleveland Browns failed to move up in the draft to get quarterback Robert Griffin III because they didn't offer enough to the St. Louis Rams for the second overall pick.

Browns general manager Mike Holmgren believes Cleveland had no shot at making the trade.

In a conference call with Browns season-ticket holders today, Holmgren said "a very close relationship" between the Rams and Redskins prevented Cleveland from moving two spots up in the draft. Holmgren didn't go into specifics about the relationship, but it's well-known that Rams coach Jeff Fisher and Redskins coach Mike Shanahan are close friends.

This is a very serious accusation from Holmgren, and he wouldn't speak publicly about this if he didn't feel strongly about its validity. If you doubt the closeness of Shanahan and Fisher, there's an article in USA Today from five years ago about the NFL's version of bosom buddies. Fisher and Shanahan bonded in the 1990s in San Francisco, where Fisher was the 49ers' defensive backs coach for two years (1992-93) while Shanahan served as the offensive coordinator for three (1992-94).

Let's be clear about this: If this is true, Shanahan and Fisher didn't violate any NFL rule that I know about. But they are guilty of poor sportsmanship. I could understand a team trying to avoid helping out a division rival. But if the Browns gave the best offer, they deserved the pick.

The Redskins moved into the No. 2 spot by sending the Rams this year's picks in the first round (sixth overall) and second round as well as first-rounders in 2013 and 2014. There were reports that the Browns offered three first-round picks but not this year's second-round one. Holmgren said the reports about the Browns' offer were incorrect, saying Cleveland made "every bit the offer" as the Redskins.

While no one knows whether those future first-round picks would be better from the Redskins or Browns, a similar offer would favor the Browns because they were offering the fourth overall pick while the Redskins could only give the No. 6 pick.

"Honestly, when it didn't happen -- I think there are reasons that I can't go into right now -- but there is a very close relationship between the people getting the deal done and the people who offered," Holmgren said in the conference call. "And I'm not sure anything we offered would have been good enough. We were very, very aggressive and it didn't work."

In other words, Holmgren says don't blame the Browns for failing to get RG3. You can point the finger -- or Dawg bone, if you prefer -- squarely at Shanahan and Fisher.

Valmy

Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 16, 2012, 05:53:25 AM
Poor Brownies.  Just plain ol' snakebit.

Of course, expect the Redskins to be a player somewhere in this drama.  Can't be satisfied with ruining their own franchise, have to help ruin somebody else's as well. Naturally.

Didn't you just explain to me how the Redskins shouldn't have given all that away to trade up?  How is saving Cleveland from doing so ruining them?  Because from the article they seem to be suggesting they were going to give up even more than the Skins did.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

CountDeMoney

Quote from: Valmy on March 16, 2012, 08:06:49 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 16, 2012, 05:53:25 AM
Poor Brownies.  Just plain ol' snakebit.

Of course, expect the Redskins to be a player somewhere in this drama.  Can't be satisfied with ruining their own franchise, have to help ruin somebody else's as well. Naturally.

Didn't you just explain to me how the Redskins shouldn't have given all that away to trade up?  How is saving Cleveland from doing so ruining them?  Because from the article they seem to be suggesting they were going to give up even more than the Skins did.

The Foreskins can give away their entire draft Ditka-style all they want, fuck their future;  the fact that unsportsmanlike play in cockblocking a team on purpose makes it easier to hate them.  And the Browns needed RG3 more than the Foreskins.

So stop defending them.  They're as defensible as Marty's pedophile buddies.  Find another team.

Valmy

Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 16, 2012, 08:14:39 AM
The Foreskins can give away their entire draft Ditka-style all they want, fuck their future;  the fact that unsportsmanlike play in cockblocking a team on purpose makes it easier to hate them.  And the Browns needed RG3 more than the Foreskins.

So stop defending them.  They're as defensible as Marty's pedophile buddies.  Find another team.

I only defend them when they do something right which is not very often.

And seriously?  How would giving up more than the Redskins give up help the Browns more?  The Browns have an even less talented roster than the Skins they need depth more.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

CountDeMoney

Quote from: Valmy on March 16, 2012, 08:16:43 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 16, 2012, 08:14:39 AM
The Foreskins can give away their entire draft Ditka-style all they want, fuck their future;  the fact that unsportsmanlike play in cockblocking a team on purpose makes it easier to hate them.  And the Browns needed RG3 more than the Foreskins.

So stop defending them.  They're as defensible as Marty's pedophile buddies.  Find another team.

I only defend them when they do something right which is not very often.

And seriously?  How would giving up more than the Redskins give up help the Browns more?  The Browns have an even less talented roster than the Skins they need depth more.

As MIM said, you don't need RG3 to run that Foreskins offense.  And the fact the Foreskins gave up so much when they have less holes to fill than the Browns, shows how poorly managed they actually are. 

The Foreskins could've been a major force the next 3 years, but they gave up several potential starters over the next several drafts, which would have at least mitigated their salary cap bullshit.  So suck on that.

Longhorns Spring practice starts less than a month from now, Mack.

Valmy

Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 16, 2012, 08:30:15 AM
As MIM said, you don't need RG3 to run that Foreskins offense.  And the fact the Foreskins gave up so much when they have less holes to fill than the Browns, shows how poorly managed they actually are.

That seems assbackwards to me.  If you have more holes you should not be giving up picks, not the other way around.

In anycase we are already at the halfway point of Longhorn Spring practice.  It is practically all they are talking about around here.  I do my best to tune it out, the hypemachine can sometimes get pretty crazy so long as Texas only has to play each other (Wow the defense is amazing!....of course that just means the offense is garbage)
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."



MadBurgerMaker

Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 16, 2012, 01:55:07 PM
Well, you know. Dammit.

Eh. Whateva.  I just felt like posting, and that was the most convenient response.

I have actual content now though:

The Broncos have made an offer to Manning. $60 million over 5 years with $30 million guaranteed.  Guy said he was mistaken or whatever.  Should be 5 years, $90 million.

sbr


CountDeMoney

Quote from: sbr on March 16, 2012, 02:54:15 PM
Holy shit, that is way too much money for him.

No shit.  They should conduct a Haloti Ngata stress test on his neck prior to signing.

MadBurgerMaker

The 9ers are getting in on it too. 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/clark-judge/17841995/threes-company-for-manning-49ers-enter-picture

Here's a CBS blurb repeating what the Denver Post guy was saying:  http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/17841949/report-broncos-titans-offering-peyton-manning-5-years60-mil

They also crossed out the 60.  :P  The link to the Post article is in there.

As far as the Titans go, they don't have as much $$ as the Broncos, but Bud "Dickhead" Adams seems to have offered Manning a contract + a position in the Titans organization for the rest of his life or something.

MadBurgerMaker

Well I guess Chris Myer's look around at what he was going to get in free agency brought him back down to Earth. 

He will reportedly be resigning with the Texans for 4 years $25 million and $14 million guaranteed.  They lost that RG of theirs though to the Raiders, who signed him for 5/$20.