IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I don't see why this would affect Philly's ability to sign professionals in the future. It might, however, impact their ability to sign selfish, childish cancers. Not sure that that's a bad thing.
True, like Hugh Douglas attacking him. TO - - such a tool.There are many other reasons TO was suspended other than dissing team members in the media.True, but it is the league allowing it to happen.Again, I am fine with suspending him. I just don't see how one team can suspend a player for dissing team members in the media, but a woman beater can play on. Makes no sense....The NFL didn't suspend TO, The Eagles did.Man, the NFL is one twisted, hypocritical league. If you wanna suspend TO for dissing his team...fine. But please don't allow some coach to tell us it don't matter if his team (that I PAY to see) don't win games, or allow folks that beat their wives to play, etc.
Bull####....
I don't see why this would affect Philly's ability to sign professionals in the future. It might, however, impact their ability to sign selfish, childish cancers. Not sure that that's a bad thing.
Why wouldn’t the organization be true to themselves by standing firmly against liabilities to their business? It shows other teams and players that they don’t screw around with malcontents – they want players that produce and enhance the synergy of the team.If we were talking about you and your job...I believe other FAs will view the hard stance as a negative thing, and hurt the Eagles chances in landing future FAs.
I don't see why this would affect Philly's ability to sign professionals in the future. It might, however, impact their ability to sign selfish, childish cancers. Not sure that that's a bad thing.
Right...but most things most definitely aren't equal. How many teams have more money (short term or long term) to spend?Most things being equal between the Eagles and another franchise, that player might choose the other franchise.Dodds tried to make this point a week or two ago and I just don't get it...
Players choose their FA destinations largely on some combination of the following factors:
Amount of $$$ being offered
Potential for the team to contend
Quality of the facilities
Quality of the coaches
System
Playing timeThe Eagles are a model franchise, they have had and will continue to have $$$ to spend on players they covet. The coaching staff remains among the league's best and the facilities are brand new and state of the art. The core of the team both offensively and defensive is under long-term contract.
I think players will look at how guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Hugh Douglass came back for veteran minimums to the team even though they weren't retained previously as an indication of the quality situation.
Also, I think players and agents will notice that the Eagles proactively locked up guys like McNabb, Akers, Westbrook, G. Lewis, Dawkins, Sheppard, Brown, Thomas, Hicks, Rayburn and Adams to LONG TERM deals.
I also think they'll look at the Eagles willingness to break the bank for guys like Kearse and Owens in free agency and not shy away.
LOL at this somehow HURTING the Eagles chances in free agency.
$15mm-$20mm under the cap + Reid + the Linc + a core locked up to long-term contracts = free agents more than willing to come aboard.
What are you laughing at? You're the one that thinks this will hurt the Eagles.I don't see why this would affect Philly's ability to sign professionals in the future. It might, however, impact their ability to sign selfish, childish cancers. Not sure that that's a bad thing.
They would fire my #### and I would go find another job. The same should be true for TO. There is no law that says that an employer can send me home for calling my boss a jerk, pay me, and refuse to let me go get another job.Why wouldn’t the organization be true to themselves by standing firmly against liabilities to their business? It shows other teams and players that they don’t screw around with malcontents – they want players that produce and enhance the synergy of the team.If we were talking about you and your job...I believe other FAs will view the hard stance as a negative thing, and hurt the Eagles chances in landing future FAs.
Would you expect to keep a job where you show up every day and ##### at your coworkers and superiors?
How bad do you think they would want you if you do the equivalent of taking out full page ads in industry trade media that say how ####ty the organization, its management, and many prominent workers are?
Why in the #### would they want anything to do with you?
If not solely for selfish reasons alone, why would you want to be there if you’re so damned miserable?
To take your words and amend them to how I see it:I think players will look at how guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Hugh Douglass came back for veteran minimums to the team even though they weren't retained previously and realize the Eagles will almost never pay market value for free agents.Dodds tried to make this point a week or two ago and I just don't get it...
Players choose their FA destinations largely on some combination of the following factors:
Amount of $$$ being offered
Potential for the team to contend
Quality of the facilities
Quality of the coaches
System
Playing timeThe Eagles are a model franchise, they have had and will continue to have $$$ to spend on players they covet. The coaching staff remains among the league's best and the facilities are brand new and state of the art. The core of the team both offensively and defensive is under long-term contract.
I think players will look at how guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Hugh Douglass came back for veteran minimums to the team even though they weren't retained previously as an indication of the quality situation.
Also, I think players and agents will notice that the Eagles proactively locked up guys like McNabb, Akers, Westbrook, G. Lewis, Dawkins, Sheppard, Brown, Thomas, Hicks, Rayburn and Adams to LONG TERM deals.
I also think they'll look at the Eagles willingness to break the bank for guys like Kearse and Owens in free agency and not shy away.
LOL at this somehow HURTING the Eagles chances in free agency.
$15mm-$20mm under the cap + Reid + the Linc + a core locked up to long-term contracts = free agents more than willing to come aboard.
A bit vindictive, maybe. But warranted in my opinion. As crazy as this may seem, T.O. may actually learn something from all of this. Not very likely, but I guess there is an outside chance.I don't understand why they won't release him - seems unprofessional to me. I imagine this is being discussed in one of the many other TO threads theads.
I'm laughing at your usual emoticon only response.What are you laughing at? You're the one that thinks this will hurt the Eagles.I don't see why this would affect Philly's ability to sign professionals in the future. It might, however, impact their ability to sign selfish, childish cancers. Not sure that that's a bad thing.
I have no idea why someone would think this would hurt the Eagles? The vast majority of players in the NFL know what a tool TO is and don't blame the Eagles for what they did.Right...but most things most definitely aren't equal. How many teams have more money (short term or long term) to spend?Most things being equal between the Eagles and another franchise, that player might choose the other franchise.Dodds tried to make this point a week or two ago and I just don't get it...
Players choose their FA destinations largely on some combination of the following factors:
Amount of $$$ being offered
Potential for the team to contend
Quality of the facilities
Quality of the coaches
System
Playing timeThe Eagles are a model franchise, they have had and will continue to have $$$ to spend on players they covet. The coaching staff remains among the league's best and the facilities are brand new and state of the art. The core of the team both offensively and defensive is under long-term contract.
I think players will look at how guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Hugh Douglass came back for veteran minimums to the team even though they weren't retained previously as an indication of the quality situation.
Also, I think players and agents will notice that the Eagles proactively locked up guys like McNabb, Akers, Westbrook, G. Lewis, Dawkins, Sheppard, Brown, Thomas, Hicks, Rayburn and Adams to LONG TERM deals.
I also think they'll look at the Eagles willingness to break the bank for guys like Kearse and Owens in free agency and not shy away.
LOL at this somehow HURTING the Eagles chances in free agency.
$15mm-$20mm under the cap + Reid + the Linc + a core locked up to long-term contracts = free agents more than willing to come aboard.
How many teams have better facilities?
How many teams have better coaches?
How many teams have the history of locking up core players?
NOW, how many have the COMBINATION?
If the choice is between New England and Philly, I can see your point. Most other teams?
Are you suggesting the league shouldn't allow the Eagles to suspend TO?I understand you think Randy McMichael should be told to sit but it really doesn't have much to do with this issue, if anything at all.True, but it is the league allowing it to happen.Again, I am fine with suspending him. I just don't see how one team can suspend a player for dissing team members in the media, but a woman beater can play on. Makes no sense....The NFL didn't suspend TO, The Eagles did.Man, the NFL is one twisted, hypocritical league. If you wanna suspend TO for dissing his team...fine. But please don't allow some coach to tell us it don't matter if his team (that I PAY to see) don't win games, or allow folks that beat their wives to play, etc.
Bull####....
If you are under contract, they could keep you, pay you, and give you no work to do until the end of your contract.They would fire my #### and I would go find another job. The same should be true for TO. There is no law that says that an employer can send me home for calling my boss a jerk, pay me, and refuse to let me go get another job.Why wouldn’t the organization be true to themselves by standing firmly against liabilities to their business? It shows other teams and players that they don’t screw around with malcontents – they want players that produce and enhance the synergy of the team.If we were talking about you and your job...I believe other FAs will view the hard stance as a negative thing, and hurt the Eagles chances in landing future FAs.
Would you expect to keep a job where you show up every day and ##### at your coworkers and superiors?
How bad do you think they would want you if you do the equivalent of taking out full page ads in industry trade media that say how ####ty the organization, its management, and many prominent workers are?
Why in the #### would they want anything to do with you?
If not solely for selfish reasons alone, why would you want to be there if you’re so damned miserable?
I'm laughing at your usual emoticon only response.What are you laughing at? You're the one that thinks this will hurt the Eagles.I don't see why this would affect Philly's ability to sign professionals in the future. It might, however, impact their ability to sign selfish, childish cancers. Not sure that that's a bad thing.
Great win for the Eagles. They can continue losing games and get the pleasure of paying their most talented player to sit and home and laugh at them, but they do get to save 4 games' salary. That'll show him for saying their quarterback who's out for the rest of the season is hypothetically worse for their team than a guy that hasn't missed a game in forever.
Those guys were playing at the top of their game, ready to make a big contract, and the Eagles let them walk instead. They had to go somewhere else to get paid, ended up getting cut, and when they came back, they were offered the veteran minimum. The fact that they took it is not really the advertisement for the Eagles you seem to think it is. From a player's perspective, this franchise hasn't been treating its stars well financially for a long time. Owens is another example of this.I think players will look at how guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Hugh Douglass came back for veteran minimums to the team even though they weren't retained previously as an indication of the quality situation.
Beat me to it.To take your words and amend them to how I see it:
I think players will look at how guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Hugh Douglass came back for veteran minimums to the team even though they weren't retained previously and realize the Eagles will almost never pay market value for free agents.
Let's be honest about it. That's the reason the Eagles are in such good cap situation. Same thing with the Pats. With only a few exceptions (McNabb, maybe Westbrook), they cut guys who won't play for less than they could get elsewhere. This works for the Eagles, as it does for the Pats, because they do a fantastic job in drafting and always seem to have a backup who is capable of stepping into the starting job. How many free agents have they actually given a market-worthy contract to? Jevon Kearse. TO's contract was low enough the NFLPA told him he shouldn't sign it. Have they had any other major free agents join the team in recent history?
I agree. Terrible job by the Eagles all around. This should of been done in the summer, not when their QB rips his groin and the team tanks. TO sits and gets to sign with Dallas next year, smooth. Giants and Dallas will dominate the East for years while Eagles are also rans. If the "not playing for a divison rival" was ever an issue, TO would of been waived and given a chance to sign with a scrub team like Texans or GB. Still not sure what benefit it is holding on to him? Possible 3rd rounder? Will teams really want a trade when the Eagles have announced no intention of continuing the contract? It will be hilarious to see TO stomping on the Eagle head in the endzone next year as a member of the Giants or big D.It's still going to mean a second messy arbitration hearing and a second bout of media attention on this. Three straight losses to division rivals, an even bigger circus than if they'd just let him continue playing or cut him outright, and now they're going to extend the messy arbitration by another couple weeks. Way to get rid of the distraction, Andy, you did a great job handling this.There is absolutely zero chance that any arbitrator will rule that the Eagles have to make TO active.Don't you think things will go differently in another grievance, if the Eagles inactivate him? Wouldn't the 2 punishment thing apply more in a 2nd grievance after inactivation? In other words, if that grievance goes TO's way, wouldn't the Eagles be more inclined to release him, rather than have him as a distraction? I don't think this thing is over by a long shot.
The only agent who could possibly use this against the Eagles is Rosenhaus. Other agents will almost certainly look to capitalize on the situation and guide their players to the Eagles by selling them as strong team players and guys "who aren't like TO." That will serve to undercut Rosenhaus which you can rest assured is one of the top agendas for all NFL agents right now. More importantly, agents will guide their players to where the money is. If the Eagles demonstrate a willigness to pay then agends will guide their players to them. No agent is going to give a rat's ### what happened to TO if it means getting a nice chunk of salary from their player's new contract with the Eagles.agents certainly won't want to guide their players to the Eagles.
Different penalties and I know it's not related. I just think it is dumb as hell for the player committing a horrid act to get no suspension AT ALL while someone who disses someone to reporters is gone for the yr...in the same league. No positive way to spin "he talked about his qb and we gave him the boot, but he beat his wife and it's cool".Are you suggesting the league shouldn't allow the Eagles to suspend TO?I understand you think Randy McMichael should be told to sit but it really doesn't have much to do with this issue, if anything at all.True, but it is the league allowing it to happen.Again, I am fine with suspending him. I just don't see how one team can suspend a player for dissing team members in the media, but a woman beater can play on. Makes no sense....The NFL didn't suspend TO, The Eagles did.Man, the NFL is one twisted, hypocritical league. If you wanna suspend TO for dissing his team...fine. But please don't allow some coach to tell us it don't matter if his team (that I PAY to see) don't win games, or allow folks that beat their wives to play, etc.
Bull####....
Ok, thanks Jason and Nigel Tufnel.Actually they've now got it right...ESPN ran with the erroneous Newsday story initially...http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2234459Sirrius reported the same thing, HOWEVER, ESPN reported that he may be released and go on the waiver wire
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=2234460
=============================
Report: Eagles WR Owens suspension to be reduced
SportsTicker
National Football League News Wire
NEW YORK - Terrell Owens may get his wish after all.
According to a report in Newsday, arbitrator Richard Bloch is expected to reduce the controversial wide receiver's four-game suspension by the Philadelphia Eagles.
The arbitration hearing for Owens was held last Friday and lasted 14 hours. A decision is expected to be announced on Wednesday.
Owens was suspended by Eagles coach Andy Reid for conduct detrimental to the team and has already missed three games. The NFL Players Association is seeking to have the suspension reduced and wants the Eagles to cut Owens if they have no intention of playing him again.
The report indicates that the Eagles, who planned to deactivate Owens for the remainder of the season, will release the mercurial superstar receiver instead. Philadelphia is concerned that Owens will cause a distraction if the ruling allows him to return to the Eagles' practice facility.
Owens has stated all along that he wants to return to the Eagles, but would want to be released if Philadelphia didn't plan to play him. If released, Owens would go through the league's waiver system, with the worst team getting the first shot of claiming him.
Owens is making a base salary of $3.75 million this season.
And hopefully I'll get a pony for Xmas. Neither are going to happen.Hopefully this will be the last thread on him.
First, I think this is a brilliant job by Reid to keep the spotlight off the terrible year they're having-instead of attacking him, the media has latched onto TO. Second, I could see a team trading for TO before next year if they wouldn't have a chance at grabbing him off the waiver. Or since it's before the deadline and he has more than four years would he not be subjected to that?I agree. Terrible job by the Eagles all around. This should of been done in the summer, not when their QB rips his groin and the team tanks. TO sits and gets to sign with Dallas next year, smooth. Giants and Dallas will dominate the East for years while Eagles are also rans. If the "not playing for a divison rival" was ever an issue, TO would of been waived and given a chance to sign with a scrub team like Texans or GB. Still not sure what benefit it is holding on to him? Possible 3rd rounder? Will teams really want a trade when the Eagles have announced no intention of continuing the contract? It will be hilarious to see TO stomping on the Eagle head in the endzone next year as a member of the Giants or big D.It's still going to mean a second messy arbitration hearing and a second bout of media attention on this. Three straight losses to division rivals, an even bigger circus than if they'd just let him continue playing or cut him outright, and now they're going to extend the messy arbitration by another couple weeks. Way to get rid of the distraction, Andy, you did a great job handling this.There is absolutely zero chance that any arbitrator will rule that the Eagles have to make TO active.Don't you think things will go differently in another grievance, if the Eagles inactivate him? Wouldn't the 2 punishment thing apply more in a 2nd grievance after inactivation? In other words, if that grievance goes TO's way, wouldn't the Eagles be more inclined to release him, rather than have him as a distraction? I don't think this thing is over by a long shot.
"The finding is that the club has shouldered its burden of proof of clear and convincing evidence of play misconduct in that the four-week suspension was for just cause," Bloch wrote in his decision. "Additionally, there was no inherent violation of the labor agreement in the club's decision to pay Owens but not practice or play him due to the nature of the player's conduct and its destructive and continuing threat to the team."source: philly.comI think this only covers the 4 games suspension and not the deactivation. The 1st grievance was to reduce the 4 games suspension only or get paid for those games.
It ain't over till its over.
Great Posting!!!!!! not justDodds tried to make this point a week or two ago and I just don't get it...
Players choose their FA destinations largely on some combination of the following factors:
Amount of $$$ being offered
Potential for the team to contend
Quality of the facilities
Quality of the coaches
System
Playing timeThe Eagles are a model franchise, they have had and will continue to have $$$ to spend on players they covet. The coaching staff remains among the league's best and the facilities are brand new and state of the art. The core of the team both offensively and defensive is under long-term contract.
I think players will look at how guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Hugh Douglass came back for veteran minimums to the team even though they weren't retained previously as an indication of the quality situation.
Also, I think players and agents will notice that the Eagles proactively locked up guys like McNabb, Akers, Westbrook, G. Lewis, Dawkins, Sheppard, Brown, Thomas, Hicks, Rayburn and Adams to LONG TERM deals.
I also think they'll look at the Eagles willingness to break the bank for guys like Kearse and Owens in free agency and not shy away.
LOL at this somehow HURTING the Eagles chances in free agency.
$15mm-$20mm under the cap + Reid + the Linc + a core locked up to long-term contracts = free agents more than willing to come aboard.
They were above .500 and in second place in their division with Owens. They're winless without him and in last place in their division. Suspending Owens caused the terrible year they're having.First, I think this is a brilliant job by Reid to keep the spotlight off the terrible year they're having
Exactly.All the posters that are complaining that TO should be released now are obvious FFL TO owners nothing more nothing less.This is not a win for the Eagles. It is a win for the NFL as a whole. A TO victory would have been a disaster.
and someone could argue that keeping Owens caused them to have the season the terrible year they're having.without Owens: competitive vs. the Cowboys.They were above .500 and in second place in their division with Owens. They're winless without him and in last place in their division. Suspending Owens caused the terrible year they're having.First, I think this is a brilliant job by Reid to keep the spotlight off the terrible year they're having
Losing McNabb hurts them more than losing Owens does.They were above .500 and in second place in their division with Owens. They're winless without him and in last place in their division. Suspending Owens caused the terrible year they're having.First, I think this is a brilliant job by Reid to keep the spotlight off the terrible year they're having
Please make that argument.and someone could argue that keeping Owens caused them to have the season the terrible year they're having.without Owens: competitive vs. the Cowboys.They were above .500 and in second place in their division with Owens. They're winless without him and in last place in their division. Suspending Owens caused the terrible year they're having.First, I think this is a brilliant job by Reid to keep the spotlight off the terrible year they're having
with Owens: blown out and thoroughly embarrassed vs. the Cowboys.
Really?
Criminal law? I would agree, no such law.Civil (contractual) law. I would disagree.They would fire my #### and I would go find another job. The same should be true for TO. There is no law that says that an employer can send me home for calling my boss a jerk, pay me, and refuse to let me go get another job.Why wouldn’t the organization be true to themselves by standing firmly against liabilities to their business? It shows other teams and players that they don’t screw around with malcontents – they want players that produce and enhance the synergy of the team.If we were talking about you and your job...I believe other FAs will view the hard stance as a negative thing, and hurt the Eagles chances in landing future FAs.
Would you expect to keep a job where you show up every day and ##### at your coworkers and superiors?
How bad do you think they would want you if you do the equivalent of taking out full page ads in industry trade media that say how ####ty the organization, its management, and many prominent workers are?
Why in the #### would they want anything to do with you?
If not solely for selfish reasons alone, why would you want to be there if you’re so damned miserable?
I agree with bfred.The Eagles were at least a wild card with TO. Now they are (or soon will be) a bottom feeder.Please make that argument.and someone could argue that keeping Owens caused them to have the season the terrible year they're having.without Owens: competitive vs. the Cowboys.They were above .500 and in second place in their division with Owens. They're winless without him and in last place in their division. Suspending Owens caused the terrible year they're having.First, I think this is a brilliant job by Reid to keep the spotlight off the terrible year they're having
with Owens: blown out and thoroughly embarrassed vs. the Cowboys.
I don't think any of them have any altruistic interest in what happens to Owens or any other specific player. The players are little more than products in inventory for the agents. But I do think that the Eagles' continued stance does make it more difficult for agents to deal with them, and I think that this is the hardest stance they've taken yet. Imagine if you were a real estate agent selling a house, and you had two potential buyers. One of them has generally been willing to buy houses for fair market value, and sometimes seems to overpay. The other one plays a hard line, always tries to underbid, and if you find anything during the home inspection, they take a hard line on it and tell you to find another house if you want it fixed. All of that is within this buyer's rights, mind you, but as a seller, you'd be more likely to guide your client towards the soft case whenever possible.The only agent who could possibly use this against the Eagles is Rosenhaus. Other agents will almost certainly look to capitalize on the situation and guide their players to the Eagles by selling them as strong team players and guys "who aren't like TO." That will serve to undercut Rosenhaus which you can rest assured is one of the top agendas for all NFL agents right now. More importantly, agents will guide their players to where the money is. If the Eagles demonstrate a willigness to pay then agends will guide their players to them. No agent is going to give a rat's ### what happened to TO if it means getting a nice chunk of salary from their player's new contract with the Eagles.agents certainly won't want to guide their players to the Eagles.