Pats lose 1st round pick

[Sleeping King]

you've got to be kidding me if you think mangini had nothing to do with it.

 

No I said he absolutely knew it was going on. I am not certain he was the whistle blower. In the back of my mind of course I think he did.

[charty]

...interesting...

 

I hadn't been following it very closely ... but, I do have to admit some of SK's ideas are intriguing (as are some of the others posted).

 

If you were NE, would you rather pay:

 

1) Forfeit next years' first round pick (if in the playoffs)

2) Forfeit next years' second and third round picks (if not in the playoffs)

3) Next years' third through seventh round picks are all given to the Jets

4) Lose franchise tag for two years

5) Suspend Belichick for the next four games

6) Reduce salary cap for next year by 5% (probable NFLPA issues / CBA issues)

7) Next three games against the Jets, no helmet audio between coaches and Tom Brady

 

...etc...

 

The franchise thing isn't a real punishment, so of the 2 options that are currently on the table (based on the ruling), I'd rather give up the (assuming) late 1st Rnd pick.

The Pats really value those 2nd - 5th round picks, they already have San Fran's #1, so they will still have a 1, a 2, and two 3rds.

Edited September 14, 2007 by charty

[Sgt. Ryan]

I had hoped Goodell would not have messed with the 1st round pick. I think he may cause himself problems from the NFLPA now. If Gene Washington does not head the appeal he should be removed as the head of the NFLPA. This is not a homer opnion on the Pats but more so on the players of the NFL. If you dock the Pats a 1st round pick you have now made the 2008 NFL Draft a major problem. The 1st round would now be 31 picks long and one player would be losing out on a 4-6 year deal with a lot of guaranteed money. Not to mention the slotting of salaries would now be knocked out of the loop. Look how long it took Russell to sign because they could not agree on the slotted money. Now take 1/32 of the round out and you could have a ton of problems getting people signed. The 3rd round pick would not cause much problem as you have compensatory picks added every year to the 3rd round making more than 32 players in that round.

 

The 500k fine is a significant amount especially since it has to come from Belichick not Kraft. But in reality, Belichick will get compensated for some of the money in due time from Kraft when they negotiate a contract extension. The 3rd round pick alone would probably not be a suitable penalty but to add the 1st is a little much. What would be acceptable? I don't have a perfect example but maybe the 3rd and the loss of the franchise tag for next year. Or the 3rd and a penalty stating the next time they play the Jets they lose a set number of roster spots for the game, ie they have to play with 40 players for the game. My point is I do not agree that you put the entire team side of the penalty on the draft. In reality the Pats will be fine next year as they will still have SF 1st round pick.

 

Now onto more important things like getting ready for San Diego.

 

 

Why would the NFLPA care about this. This isnt a player fine or penalty, its a team penalty. Please keep your trap shut, you are clueless.

[Sgt. Ryan]

Oh I am sure Goodell thought about it before making a decision, but the fact remains someone will be losing out on that roster spot which is important to the NFLPA.

 

The deserved a penalty no doubt. I just think this was a bit much, but at least it is over and they can get on with the season.

 

One thing I do find a bit of irony in is that Mike Shanahan said this "Our guy keeps a pair of binoculars on their signal-callers every game," says Broncos coach Mike Shanahan. "With any luck, we have their defensive signals figured out by halftime. Sometimes, by the end of the first quarter."

 

So it is acceptable if you have binoculars and you watch the defensive hand calls and write them on a piece of paper. You are vilified if you essentially use the same set of binoculars but you happen to have a record button on them instead of writing it on a piece of paper.

 

What does this have to do with the NFLPA. Its not like the Pats will be forced to only roster 52 now. Each team negotiates off the draft slot the year before, unless its a QB, and they usually get more, if they are picked later than they should. If there are only 31 picks in round 1, the team who wins the SB gets a higher pick than it would have before. Gene "Washington, Im and idiot" Upshaw didnt even stick his nose in the Michael Vick or Pac-man Jones situation, you think he is going to care about this. Completely clueless you are.

[charty]

Why would the NFLPA care about this. This isnt a player fine or penalty, its a team penalty. Please keep your trap shut, you are clueless.

Both the agents (who cares about them) and the NFLPA will have a problem with this. There are now only 31 #1 draft slots available.

One less client will be eligible for 1st round money.

Edited September 14, 2007 by charty

[piratesownninjas]

Why would the NFLPA care about this. This isnt a player fine or penalty, its a team penalty. Please keep your trap shut, you are clueless.

[Sleeping King]

Why would the NFLPA care about this. This isnt a player fine or penalty, its a team penalty. Please keep your trap shut, you are clueless.

 

Sarge you have just overloaded the retard limiter.

 

The NFLPA is in charge of taking care of the players of the NFL. The players in the NFL Draft are very important to the NFLPA. Taking away a 1st round pick means that one player will not be getting a 5-6 year deal. You can not sign anything over a 4 year deal as a 2nd round pick. It also takes that spot out of the draft. Things will not just move up. I'm sure you think the Pats will go 1-15 but for giggles let us say they win the Super Bowl. They would have the 32nd pick in the draft. Last season that was Anthony Gonzalez and he received a 5 year deal worth 10.3 million dollars. That spot will now not be available to someone in this years draft.

 

You can take your hatred for all thing Boston off for at least two seconds and see this point right?

 

I do love you though Sarge. It may be like a teacher loving a retarded student as he gets on the short bus and licks the rear window. But it is still love.

Edited September 14, 2007 by Sleeping King

[The Wolf]

What does this have to do with the NFLPA. Its not like the Pats will be forced to only roster 52 now. Each team negotiates off the draft slot the year before, unless its a QB, and they usually get more, if they are picked later than they should. If there are only 31 picks in round 1, the team who wins the SB gets a higher pick than it would have before. Gene "Washington, Im and idiot" Upshaw didnt even stick his nose in the Michael Vick or Pac-man Jones situation, you think he is going to care about this. Completely clueless you are.

 

Consider an earlier post I had on this Sarge. 1st rounders get paid more than a 2nd...and 2nd more than a 3rd, and so on. One less 1st rounder is a lot of money that isn't being paid to someone. It also means one less player is getting drafted. I'd think the NFLPA would mind that very much.

[piratesownninjas]

as he gets on the short bus and licks the rear window. But it is still love.

[Sgt. Ryan]

Sarge you have just overloaded the retard limiter.

 

The NFLPA is in charge of taking care of the players of the NFL. The players in the NFL Draft are very important to the NFLPA. Taking away a 1st round pick means that one player will not be getting a 5-6 year deal. You can not sign anything over a 4 year deal as a 2nd round pick. It also takes that spot out of the draft. Things will not just move up. I'm sure you think the Pats will go 1-15 but for giggles let us say they win the Super Bowl. They would have the 32nd pick in the draft. Last season that was Anthony Gonzalez and he received a 5 year deal worth 10.3 million dollars. That spot will now not be available to someone in this years draft.

 

You can take your hatred for all thing Boston off for at least two seconds and see this point right?

 

 

So does the Supplemental draft you idiot. When players are taken in round 1 of the Supplemental draft, they lose their spot the next yr. Wasnt Cincinnati docked a pick already due to the BS their players do. The NFLPA didnt so sh*t for Michael Vick or Pac-Man Jones and they certainly wont do anything for a unknown player who wont be drafted in round 1. If you honestly believe this, you are even more clueless than I thought.

[The Wolf]

Sarge you have just overloaded the retard limiter.

 

The NFLPA is in charge of taking care of the players of the NFL. The players in the NFL Draft are very important to the NFLPA. Taking away a 1st round pick means that one player will not be getting a 5-6 year deal. You can not sign anything over a 4 year deal as a 2nd round pick. It also takes that spot out of the draft. Things will not just move up. I'm sure you think the Pats will go 1-15 but for giggles let us say they win the Super Bowl. They would have the 32nd pick in the draft. Last season that was Anthony Gonzalez and he received a 5 year deal worth 10.3 million dollars. That spot will now not be available to someone in this years draft.

 

You can take your hatred for all thing Boston off for at least two seconds and see this point right?

 

I do love you though Sarge. It may be like a teacher loving a retarded student as he gets on the short bus and licks the rear window. But it is still love.

 

+1

 

What I was trying to say but written in a much more knowledgable way with fact.

 

 

 

 

Except I never mentioned retard or the short bus...or loving Sarge.

[Jumbie]

I had hoped Goodell would not have messed with the 1st round pick. I think he may cause himself problems from the NFLPA now. If Gene Washington does not head the appeal he should be removed as the head of the NFLPA. This is not a homer opnion on the Pats but more so on the players of the NFL. If you dock the Pats a 1st round pick you have now made the 2008 NFL Draft a major problem. The 1st round would now be 31 picks long and one player would be losing out on a 4-6 year deal with a lot of guaranteed money. Not to mention the slotting of salaries would now be knocked out of the loop. Look how long it took Russell to sign because they could not agree on the slotted money. Now take 1/32 of the round out and you could have a ton of problems getting people signed. The 3rd round pick would not cause much problem as you have compensatory picks added every year to the 3rd round making more than 32 players in that round.

 

The 500k fine is a significant amount especially since it has to come from Belichick not Kraft. But in reality, Belichick will get compensated for some of the money in due time from Kraft when they negotiate a contract extension. The 3rd round pick alone would probably not be a suitable penalty but to add the 1st is a little much. What would be acceptable? I don't have a perfect example but maybe the 3rd and the loss of the franchise tag for next year. Or the 3rd and a penalty stating the next time they play the Jets they lose a set number of roster spots for the game, ie they have to play with 40 players for the game. My point is I do not agree that you put the entire team side of the penalty on the draft. In reality the Pats will be fine next year as they will still have SF 1st round pick.

 

Now onto more important things like getting ready for San Diego.

 

From a basic labor law standpoint, I don't see how the NLFPA would have standing to challenge this. The union, obviously, does not represent Belicheat...he's management. They also don't represent college players hoping to get in the league. If you've ever worked in a union environment, you know that the union doesn't represent people who are applying for jobs...they only represent those who actually get hired.

 

I think that Upshaw already has his hands full with the retiree health insurance issue.

[Sgt. Ryan]

From a basic labor law standpoint, I don't see how the NLFPA would have standing to challenge this. The union, obviously, does not represent Belicheat...he's management. They also don't represent college players hoping to get in the league. If you've ever worked in a union environment, you know that the union doesn't represent people who are applying for jobs...they only represent those who actually get hired.

 

I think that Upshaw already has his hands full with the retiree health insurance issue.

 

 

exactly.

[Sleeping King]

+1

 

What I was trying to say but written in a much more knowledgable way with fact.

Except I never mentioned retard or the short bus...or loving Sarge.

 

Sarge just reminds me of that ESPN commercial about sports talking out your ass. I usually get a good laugh out of every post.

[Jumbie]

Um, the Packers were the ones that were originally victimized - we lost 35-0. That pick is ours!

 

Except your team didn't have the sac to stand up for itself. You get nothing...and you will like it!

[Sleeping King]

From a basic labor law standpoint, I don't see how the NLFPA would have standing to challenge this. The union, obviously, does not represent Belicheat...he's management. They also don't represent college players hoping to get in the league. If you've ever worked in a union environment, you know that the union doesn't represent people who are applying for jobs...they only represent those who actually get hired.

 

I think that Upshaw already has his hands full with the retiree health insurance issue.

 

That is a decent point, but you have to remember that the 32 1st Round picks are not applied for. They are guaranteed job opportunities. You fill out a resume, ie the combine, but they are going to give those 32 jobs out.

[piratesownninjas]

Except your team didn't have the sac to stand up for itself. You get nothing...and you will like it!

Except my team handled it in private, like a class organization did. They didn't raise a stink. They took their bumps and learned from it.

[Sgt. Ryan]

Sarge just reminds me of that ESPN commercial about sports talking out your ass. I usually get a good laugh out of every post.

 

 

 

 

Whats sad is so how a matter of fact you come across, yet your opinions are always so far off base, and when questioned you resort to this spew above. Bottom line, you were schooled again, and you are too stupid to even know it. If you had a clue, Id continue arguing with you, but its like every time you post, I or someone has to correct you. You have been corrected yet again. Carry on with your nonsense.

[Sgt. Ryan]

That is a decent point, but you have to remember that the 32 1st Round picks are not applied for. They are guaranteed job opportunities. You fill out a resume, ie the combine, but they are going to give those 32 jobs out.

 

Guaranteed, Oh boy, here we go again. Nothing is guaranteed. Didnt a celtic player drafted in round 1 die before he ever recevied a red cent. The Celtics also didnt get any compensation. Do I have to continue embarassing you, or will you finally shut up.

 

And you obviously dont have a clue about unions. That much is obviously clear.

[Outshined]

Sarge you have just overloaded the retard limiter.

 

The NFLPA is in charge of taking care of the players of the NFL. The players in the NFL Draft are very important to the NFLPA. Taking away a 1st round pick means that one player will not be getting a 5-6 year deal. You can not sign anything over a 4 year deal as a 2nd round pick. It also takes that spot out of the draft. Things will not just move up. I'm sure you think the Pats will go 1-15 but for giggles let us say they win the Super Bowl. They would have the 32nd pick in the draft. Last season that was Anthony Gonzalez and he received a 5 year deal worth 10.3 million dollars. That spot will now not be available to someone in this years draft.

 

You can take your hatred for all thing Boston off for at least two seconds and see this point right?

 

I do love you though Sarge. It may be like a teacher loving a retarded student as he gets on the short bus and licks the rear window. But it is still love.

 

 

The union does not like 5-6 year deals. They would prefer 4 year deals. More contract renewels and more bonuses paid out through the life of the player. A 5-6 year deal is in the favor of Managment.

Edited September 14, 2007 by Outshined

[Sleeping King]

So does the Supplemental draft you idiot. When players are taken in round 1 of the Supplemental draft, they lose their spot the next yr. Wasnt Cincinnati docked a pick already due to the BS their players do. The NFLPA didnt so sh*t for Michael Vick or Pac-Man Jones and they certainly wont do anything for a unknown player who wont be drafted in round 1. If you honestly believe this, you are even more clueless than I thought.

 

The NFLPA does not pitch a fit about the supplemental draft because the slotted position is taken by someone. There is not a loss of a job.

The Bengals were not docked a draft pick.

 

Who has been correcting who?

[Sleeping King]

Guaranteed, Oh boy, here we go again. Nothing is guaranteed. Didnt a celtic player drafted in round 1 die before he ever recevied a red cent. The Celtics also didnt get any compensation. Do I have to continue embarassing you, or will you finally shut up.

 

And you obviously dont have a clue about unions. That much is obviously clear.

 

What?

Did you just compare Len Bias to this? I can not believe I have to argue this but the Celtics made the pick. We are not talking about a do over we are talking about if Len Bias were never chosen.

[Jumbie]

That is a decent point, but you have to remember that the 32 1st Round picks are not applied for. They are guaranteed job opportunities. You fill out a resume, ie the combine, but they are going to give those 32 jobs out.

 

I've been a labor lawyer for over 20 years. The union can't challenge this and they won't.

 

The league (management) has the right to impose the disciplinary action that they did. The impact of the discipline is on the coach and the team...both of whom also are management and unrepresented by the union. It is like an owner of a company disciplining a supervisor. Even if the company is unionized, the union can't do anything about it because the discipline has nothing to do with the unionized rank and file employees.

 

I appreciate the argument about the potential first round pick who now may slide to the second round, but, again, the union doesn't represent those college kids until they actually sign with the pro team.

 

With all of that said, there is the law and there is real life. Do you really think that the Godell imposed this penalty without first getting a buy-in from the union? He, legally, didn't need to do so. But, he would've been wise to do so in order to avoid any adverse, public reaction from the union.

[Sgt. Ryan]

I've been a labor lawyer for over 20 years. The union can't challenge this and they won't.

 

The league (management) has the right to impose the disciplinary action that they did. The impact of the discipline is on the coach and the team...both of whom also are management and unrepresented by the union. It is like an owner of a company disciplining a supervisor. Even if the company is unionized, the union can't do anything about it because the discipline has nothing to do with the unionized rank and file employees.

 

I appreciate the argument about the potential first round pick who now may slide to the second round, but, again, the union doesn't represent those college kids until they actually sign with the pro team.

 

With all of that said, there is the law and there is real life. Do you really think that the Godell imposed this penalty without first getting a buy-in from the union? He, legally, didn't need to do so. But, he would've been wise to do so in order to avoid any adverse, public reaction from the union.

 

 

Bingo. Thanks for the clarification.

[Menudo]

Wow... that's a bit more stiff than I thought it would end up being.

 

That's what she said................