PDA

View Full Version : Profootballtalk rumors (they actually sound legit this time)


Mr. Laz
02-10-2006, 11:44 AM
Posted 10:51 a.m. EST, February 10, 2006

SHELL BACK IN OAKLAND FOR SECOND INTERVIEW

A league source tells us that former Raiders head coach Art Shell is back in Oakland for a second interview to fill the job he once held.

Though a hiring is not imminent, we're told that both sides are very interested in working something out, and that Shell very likely could end up with the position in the near future.

Shell was 54-38 in his prior stint with the team, and was fired after a 9-7 record in 1994.

Shell spent the next six seasons as an assistant, and he joined the league office in 2001. He has interviewed for several head coaching positions over the past few hiring cycles.

Shell first interviewed with the Raiders last week. Based on what we're hearing, Friday's session between the Hall of Fame offensive lineman and owner Al Davis sounds a lot more like a process of confirmation than a process of elimination.

Left in the cold, if/when Shell gets the job, is Ravens offensive coordinator Jim Fassel, who believed (as we reported) that he'd be the next coach of the Raiders if Steelers offensive coordinator Ken Whisenhunt didn't receive and accept an offer.

POSTED 9:15 a.m. EST, February 10, 2006

"SMALL POSSIBILITY" OF FREE AGENCY DELAY

Word is that a series of meetings between representatives of the NFL and the NFLPA has created progress toward an agreement on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. We're told that these talks have given rise to a "small possibility" that the free agency signing period will be delayed this year from March 3 until early April.

The mere talk of bumping back the opening of free agency confirms that the recent efforts to iron out the issues between management and labor are aimed at getting a new deal in place before the annual shopping spree commences. As it now stands, signing boni can be spread over only four years, and any incentives earned in 2006 automatically count against the salary cap in 2006. This will make it harder for teams to add new players and, in turn, less lucrative for the players.

A new deal also would undoubtedly increase the salary cap for 2006, giving teams more money to spend on their rosters. This is good news for teams like the Redskins and Jets, who reportedly are facing some tough salary-trimming decisions under the current '06 cap.

But even if the free agency period is pushed back by a month, there still will be some intrigue come March. For example, Terrell Owens' contract must be terminated by the Eagles on or before March 5. So if the free agency launch is bumped to April and no new CBA is in place before Owens is released, he'll have to decide whether to take any offers that might be on the table under the current CBA -- or whether to wait until a new deal is in place.



TEXANS KEEP CARR

The Houston Texans have exercised an $8 million option payment that will extend quarterback David Carr's contract through 2008.

Although, on the surface, the move indicates that the Texans will not select Texas quarterback Vince Young with the No. 1 overall pick in the April draft, John McClain of The Houston Chronicle reports that the decision to keep Carr "has nothing to do with the top pick in the draft."

Um, John. The team's official logo is a starry-eyed bull -- not a steaming pile of bullsh-t. Of course the move has something to do with the top pick in the draft. If the Texans were thinking of trading Carr and taking Young, the Texans would have at least tried to re-work Carr's deal in order to make it more tradeable and/or to avoid handing $8 million to a guy who might not take another snap with the team.

But we likewise don't think that the move means that the Texans are certain to draft USC running back Reggie Bush with the top pick. They could still slide down in round one, stockpiling some extra picks and still getting a guy who could help the offense tremendously, such as Virginia tackle D'Brickashaw Ferguson.


CHARGERS MAKE OFFER TO BREES

According to The San Diego Union-Tribune, the Chargers have made an initial offer on a long-term contract to quarterback Drew Brees. The offer was sent on Monday, and the team has yet to receive a response.

Brees' rookie contract expired in 2005. The team applied the franchise tag, which extended his stay for a year. He again is scheduled to become an unrestricted free agent, but the team likely will not apply the franchise tag this time around. Given a shoulder injury suffered on January 1, Brees undoubtedly would sign the franchise tender as soon as it is extended, guaranteeing nearly $10 million in 2006 pay.

Instead, the Chargers (we think) will apply the transition tag. The amount of the one-year tender is the same, but the tender can be revoked at any time prior to the start of the 2006 regular season. Also, the Chargers would have the right to match any long-term offer made to Brees by another team.

If Brees' shoulder injury does not fully heal by training camp, for example, the Chargers could revoke the transition tender and then negotiate a long-term deal that takes into consideration his physical condition. With the other 31 teams at that point set at the quarterback position, Brees would have little or no leverage.

Rain Man
02-10-2006, 12:02 PM
No good. Shell was my first choice for Kansas City.

foxman
02-10-2006, 12:05 PM
"TEXANS KEEP CARR"

So far that makes sense to me. Now if they will realize they need more than a Brian Westbrook type of player and actually surround Carr with a Line they might start to reap some benefits of his ability.

Dunit35
02-10-2006, 12:07 PM
Move free agency to April. No way..free agency sometimes determines drafts and other things. I don't like that.

milkman
02-10-2006, 12:07 PM
"TEXANS KEEP CARR"

So far that makes sense to me. Now if they will realize they need more than a Brian Westbrook type of player and actually surround Carr with a Line they might start to reap some benefits of his ability.

I agree with the idea of getting an O-Line in front of him, but he still holds the ball too long, and as a result, will still take a lot of sacks.

milkman
02-10-2006, 12:09 PM
Move free agency to April. No way..free agency sometimes determines drafts and other things. I don't like that.

So do it in reverse.

Draft players that you hope can help your team, then sign FAs that fill needs.

foxman
02-10-2006, 12:12 PM
he still holds the ball too long,

Thats true, but how much of that is just him trying to make a play because he is desperate to show he can is debatable. If his team had more success he might not press as much. I think a good example of this type of maturity can be seen with Matt Hassalbeck. For whatever reason there are a lot of QB's who take it upon themselves to shoulder the need to make every play. As bad as the Texans have been I suspect Carr blames himself for a lot of that and does what he can to get off the snyde so to speak.

Dunit35
02-10-2006, 12:19 PM
So do it in reverse.

Draft players that you hope can help your team, then sign FAs that fill needs.


You could. But who would you trust more a FA that has proven himself already or a rookie who has no experience at all? I mean their both coming into brand new systems. Either way I wouldn't really care what comes first.

milkman
02-10-2006, 12:22 PM
Thats true, but how much of that is just him trying to make a play because he is desperate to show he can is debatable. If his team had more success he might not press as much. I think a good example of this type of maturity can be seen with Matt Hassalbeck. For whatever reason there are a lot of QB's who take it upon themselves to shoulder the need to make every play. As bad as the Texans have been I suspect Carr blames himself for a lot of that and does what he can to get off the snyde so to speak.

Holding the ball too long was one of the negatives that was raised in his scouting reports coming out of college.

I saw this same propensity to hold it too long in the Texans games i've watched over the last 3 years, and debated Carr's talent with Johnson&Johnson.

I didn't read those scouting reports until after debating Carr's strengths and weaknesses with J&J.

Point being, this isn't the same issue as a Hasselbeck trying to make plays.

He holds the ball too long because he doesn't read the defense quickly enough.

KCChiefsFan88
02-10-2006, 12:30 PM
Posted 10:51 a.m. EST, February 10, 2006



Word is that a series of meetings between representatives of the NFL and the NFLPA has created progress toward an agreement on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. We're told that these talks have given rise to a "small possibility" that the free agency signing period will be delayed this year from March 3 until early April.



This is bullshit. What the hell do all those NFL execs. do all day??? They've had a few years now to get this thing worked out and delaying the free agency signing period is going to create major havoc with the rest of the offseason. It is going to affect teams ability to prepare for the draft, intregrate new players onto new teams, etc.

Memo to Tags, Upshaw and the rest of the stiffs at the NFL... get off your lazy asses, stop laying around the beach in Hawaii enjoying the Pro Bowl, stop worrying about censoring the Rolling Stones to appeal to religious fanatics in Red States, stop worrying about player's uniforms, socks, shoes, etc... and get a damn CBA worked out already.

milkman
02-10-2006, 12:34 PM
You could. But who would you trust more a FA that has proven himself already or a rookie who has no experience at all? I mean their both coming into brand new systems. Either way I wouldn't really care what comes first.

We've seen over the years, most recently with Bell, that signing FAs is nearly as much a crapshoot as the draft.

In the end, I think it makes little difference, though one could argue that moving the FA signing period after the draft would give a team more options in the draft, and that drafting the best athlete available would be an easier route to take, because there would be more perceived holes.

Dunit35
02-10-2006, 12:41 PM
We've seen over the years, most recently with Bell, that signing FAs is nearly as much a crapshoot as the draft.

In the end, I think it makes little difference, though one could argue that moving the FA signing period after the draft would give a team more options in the draft, and that drafting the best athlete available would be an easier route to take, because there would be more perceived holes.


It would cost a lot less to sign a draft pick than some big name FA who turns out to be a waste. Either way the rewards of drafting someone who turns out to be a surprise or picking up a FA who turns out to be what a team needed are the same thing. It's just cheaper going the draft way.