PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Mort: Bucs offered FIRST and THIRD for Cassel


doomy3
03-01-2009, 09:50 AM
Sorry, didn't see this posted anywhere, although it could be in one of the long threads. I thought this was interesting enough for its own thread. This trade is so bizarre that we only gave up a second for both Cassel and Vrabel when everything that is coming out is that there were much better offers out there for him. Thanks Bill!

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&line=140417&id=3237


Matt Cassel-QB- Chiefs Mar. 1 - 1:40 am et

ESPN's Chris Mortensen reports that the Patriots turned down a package from the Bucs in a possible three-way Matt Cassel deal that included a first- and third-round pick.
In this scenario, the Patriots would have received the picks, Denver would get Matt Cassel, and Tampa would get Jay Cutler. But there has to be more to the story. Why would the Patriots turn down better picks? One admittedly speculative guess is that the deal with the Chiefs was already verbally agreed to at this point, and the Patriots couldn't back out. Mike Vrabel, after all, was in Kansas City Friday.
Source: ESPn.com
Related: Broncos, Patriots, Buccaneers

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 09:52 AM
Let's assume the above is true. How much weight does a verbal agreement hold in the NFL?

I just find it very, very hard to believe this.

wazu
03-01-2009, 09:54 AM
When Schefter says it, I'll believe it.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 09:56 AM
I'm a genius.

Iowanian
03-01-2009, 09:57 AM
If its true, maybe they should call the Chiefs and see if they'd take a 1st and 3rd for Cassel's rights.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 09:59 AM
If its true, maybe they should call the Chiefs and see if they'd take a 1st and 3rd for Cassel's rights.

This.

wild1
03-01-2009, 10:00 AM
Someone reported that the Chiefs had been negotiation with Cassel's agent some time on an extension.

Or, maybe Cassel had some say into where he wanted to go, and he wanted to go work with Haley and Pioli.

rad
03-01-2009, 10:00 AM
Sorry, didn't see this posted anywhere, although it could be in one of the long threads. I thought this was interesting enough for its own thread. This trade is so bizarre that we only gave up a second for both Cassel and Vrabel when everything that is coming out is that there were much better offers out there for him. Thanks Bill!

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&line=140417&id=3237


Matt Cassel-QB- Chiefs Mar. 1 - 1:40 am et

ESPN's Chris Mortensen reports that the Patriots turned down a package from the Bucs in a possible three-way Matt Cassel deal that included a first- and third-round pick.
In this scenario, the Patriots would have received the picks, Denver would get Matt Cassel, and Tampa would get Jay Cutler. But there has to be more to the story. Why would the Patriots turn down better picks? One admittedly speculative guess is that the deal with the Chiefs was already verbally agreed to at this point, and the Patriots couldn't back out. Mike Vrabel, after all, was in Kansas City Friday.
Source: ESPn.com
Related: Broncos, Patriots, Buccaneers

Because in order for the trade to work, Denver would have to be willing to trade Cutler, and they weren't?

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:00 AM
I'm telling you...Cassel was a Pioli pick...something Bill didn't want at the time but Pioli pleaded with him and Bill let him spend the 7th on the QB...so now that Pioli has moved on after 3 Super Bowl's...he called Bill about that QB and Bill gave him a nice little starter kit at a discount price for all the years of loyalty...a one last time doing business with ya, bud! kind of thing...this just confirms it.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 10:00 AM
I'm telling you...Cassel was a Pioli pick...something Bill didn't want at the time but Pioli pleaded with him and Bill let him spend the 7th on the QB...so now that Pioli has moved on after 3 Super Bowl's...he called Bill about that QB and Bill gave him a nice little starter kit at a discount price for all the years of loyalty...a one last time doing business with ya, bud! kind of thing...this just confirms it.

Have any more bullshit yarns to spin about the Easter Bunny or the Chupacabra?

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 10:02 AM
Does anyone know whether or not a verbal agreement can be considered binding, when discussing NFL transactions?

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:02 AM
I say this trade was proposed last minute...and Belichick felt to loyal to Pioli to essentially use him as leverage to get a better deal for Cassel...he'd do it to anybody else, but not Pioli.

They are essentially losing nothing and gaining the #34 overall...so it's not like he's hurting the organization helping a friend one last time...even Bill Belichick has a soft side I guess.

That's the only thing that makes sense.

Thanks for the $0.60 on the $1 acquisition, though...I don't hate Boston nearly as much today as I did yesterday.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 10:02 AM
Someone reported that the Chiefs had been negotiation with Cassel's agent some time on an extension.

Or, maybe Cassel had some say into where he wanted to go, and he wanted to go work with Haley and Pioli.

If this were true, the Chiefs would be pretty stupid to not trade Cassel to TB. They'd be moving up 15 spots in the draft, Mike Vrabel, and getting an extra third rounder for nothing.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 10:02 AM
Does anyone know whether or not a verbal agreement can be considered binding, when discussing NFL transactions?

Hell no. You have to file paperwork with the league and it has to be approved.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:03 AM
Have any more bullshit yarns to spin about the Easter Bunny or the Chupacabra?
That's what happened...

They verbally agreed...last minute offer...Belichick wouldn't back out because he has too much respect for Pioli...

Guarantee it.

ArrowheadHawk
03-01-2009, 10:03 AM
Have any more bullshit yarns to spin about the Easter Bunny or the Chupacabra?http://paranormaland.com/pics/chupacabra22.jpg

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 10:03 AM
Thanks for the $0.60 on the $1 acquisition.

If you post it one more time, it might start to become true.

It takes 9 reposts to make something completely made up to become valid.

milkman
03-01-2009, 10:03 AM
Does anyone know whether or not a verbal agreement can be considered binding, when discussing NFL transactions?

No it's not.

DMAC
03-01-2009, 10:04 AM
Pioli has some inside Pats cheating information.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:04 AM
If this were true, the Chiefs would be pretty stupid to not trade Cassel to TB. They'd be moving up 15 spots in the draft, Mike Vrabel, and getting an extra third rounder for nothing.

Pioli wouldn't do that, either...

Why would he screw over the Patriots after they gave him a discount?

This was Belichick hooking up his boy one last time, plain and simple...

1st and 3rd...yet they settle for the #34...

Stop being an idiot. You know what I'm saying is probably pretty close to what happened.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:05 AM
If you post it one more time, it might start to become true.

It takes 9 reposts to make something completely made up to become valid.
If people keep talking about it, I can keep posting it...maybe you should spend less time than me on ChiefsPlanet and you wouldn't have to read my takes.

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 10:05 AM
Hell no. You have to file paperwork with the league and it has to be approved.

That's what I thought.

I'm calling bullshit on the content of the OP. BB hasn't been successful because he's a "nice guy."

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 10:06 AM
If people keep talking about it, I can keep posting it...maybe you should spend less time than me on ChiefsPlanet and you wouldn't have to read my takes.

Then vary your numerical value.

.60 one time. .57 the next.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:06 AM
That's what I thought.

I'm calling bullshit on the content of the OP. BB hasn't been successful because he's a "nice guy."
and he's never had to deal with his former executive who had a big hand in those Super Bowls and who he had worked with 100 hours a week for a decade straight...

rad
03-01-2009, 10:06 AM
I'm telling you...Cassel was a Pioli pick...something Bill didn't want at the time but Pioli pleaded with him and Bill let him spend the 7th on the QB...so now that Pioli has moved on after 3 Super Bowl's...he called Bill about that QB and Bill gave him a nice little starter kit at a discount price for all the years of loyalty...a one last time doing business with ya, bud! kind of thing...this just confirms it.

The more I see this view around here, the more I realize that this is the NFL, not UNICEF. No way would BB "hook up" an AFC team. I don't care who's in charge.

In addition, the trade to KC happened because when TB called Denver about the Cutler/Cassell thing, Denver said no. So then TB figured Cassell wasn't worth it by himself and pulled out, then NE settled with KC.

How's my aim?

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 10:06 AM
No it's not.

Thanks.

wazu
03-01-2009, 10:06 AM
If its true, maybe they should call the Chiefs and see if they'd take a 1st and 3rd for Cassel's rights.

KC Pick #3 - Sanchez
KC Pick #19 - Maualuga

Mecca would be happy.

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 10:07 AM
and he's never had to deal with his former executive who had a big hand in those Super Bowls and who he had worked with 100 hours a week for a decade straight...

Who would have to have a desk drawer full of naked pictures to make him turn down a 1st PLUS more.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 10:08 AM
Pioli wouldn't do that, either...

Why would he screw over the Patriots after they gave him a discount?

This was Belichick hooking up his boy one last time, plain and simple...

1st and 3rd...yet they settle for the #34...

Stop being an idiot. You know what I'm saying is probably pretty close to what happened.

Yes. Bill Belichick, the most ruthless motherfucker in the NFL, the guy who cut Troy Brown the year after he played two ways for him, would accept compensation equivalent of the #34 pick alone, when from Tampa, by taking that deal, he'd be getting the equivalent of #34 and #40 (Tampa's two picks are worth 500 more points).

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:08 AM
The more I see this view around here, the more I realize that this is the NFL, not UNICEF. No way would BB "hook up" an AFC team. I don't care who's in charge.

In addition, the trade to KC happened because when TB called Denver about the Cutler/Cassell thing, Denver said no. So then TB figured Cassell wasn't worth it by himself and pulled out, then NE settled with KC.

How's my aim?

Obviously there was interest for Matt Cassel...I don't think anyone expected this guy to be traded this early...if the Pats waited until draft day I bet they could have easily gotten a much better deal. MUCH better deal.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:09 AM
Yes. Bill Belichick, the most ruthless mother****er in the NFL, the guy who cut Troy Brown the year after he played two ways for him, would accept compensation equivalent of the #34 pick alone, when from Tampa, by taking that deal, he'd be getting the equivalent of #34 and #40 (Tampa's two picks are worth 500 more points).

Yep.

Guess it speaks for the respect he had for Pioli over the years. One last thank you. But hey, Pioli is already dead to you...three strikes in one month...you should start calling him Carl v2.0!

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 10:11 AM
Who would have to have a desk drawer full of naked pictures to make him turn down a 1st PLUS more.

Or a drawer full of tapes of other teams' defenses...including SB tapes.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:11 AM
A source with knowledge of the situation tells Profootballtalk.com that Jay Cutler was at one point as good as "gone" during three-team trade talks that ultimately fell through Saturday.
It appears Josh McDaniels wanted Matt Cassel bad and either the Lions or Bucs were ready to fork over a first-round pick plus for Cutler. Cutler's agent, Bus Cook, says the Broncos "just told me that only inquiries were being made." "Jay Cutler is pissed, no doubt about it," Cook added. "I wouldn't blame him. Cutler is the best young quarterback in the entire league." Mar. 1 - 8:50 am et

Interesting. So the Pats take the #34 for what reason? Oh yeah, because they had a verbal agreement with Scott Pioli and Belichick has too much respect for the guy to go back on his word...

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 10:11 AM
Obviously there was interest for Matt Cassel...I don't think anyone expected this guy to be traded this early...if the Pats waited until draft day I bet they could have easily gotten a much better deal. MUCH better deal.

...

Not more than 12 hours ago, you were saying they were being held hostage by the league:

I'm sorry, I think the league was holding out to hold the Patriots hostage around draft day...everyone knows they can't spend $30M on QB's...so they were going to try and leverage the Pats...who they figured were going to want multiple picks...

JFC.

jAZ
03-01-2009, 10:12 AM
Let's assume the above is true. How much weight does a verbal agreement hold in the NFL?

I just find it very, very hard to believe this.

As I said before, it makes far more sense that Denver wanted more for their Pro-Bowl QB than Matt Cassel and they weren't willing to pull the trigger on the deal.

munkey
03-01-2009, 10:13 AM
KC Pick #3 - Sanchez
KC Pick #19 - Maualuga

Mecca would be happy.

:Lin:

Whats with the boner for Sanchez???? Good lord.

He's never played a down in the NFL and some think he's the next coming of Joe Montana....sheeessshh.

milkman
03-01-2009, 10:13 AM
The fact that the Chiefs were the only team willing to take on that 14.65 mil and worry about renegotiating after the deal was done was the only reason that the deal got done this quickly.

If these rumors about the Bucs and Donkeys are true, and I highly doubt it, then the only reason that BB would have moved as quickly on the deal with the Chiefs is because he wanted ot free up cap space so he could persue other free agents.

I guarantee it wasn't out of the goodness of his black heart.

unlurking
03-01-2009, 10:13 AM
http://paranormaland.com/pics/chupacabra22.jpg
I always wondered what the Easter Bunny looked like!

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:15 AM
...

Not more than 12 hours ago, you were saying they were being held hostage by the league:



JFC.
True. Everyone knew they were going to have to unload Matt Cassel...which is sort of why I never figured they'd get a 1st in return...I guess I didn't realize how much interest there really was.

Apparently he's more valuable (to some) than Jay Cutler. Score 1 for the Chiefs.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:16 AM
The fact that the Chiefs were the only team willing to take on that 14.65 mil and worry about renegotiating after the deal was done was the only reason that the deal got done this quickly.

If these rumors about the Bucs and Donkeys are true, and I highly doubt it, then the only reason that BB would have moved as quickly on the deal with the Chiefs is because he wanted ot free up cap space so he could persue other free agents.

I guarantee it wasn't out of the goodness of his black heart.
You don't technically have to be under the salary cap right now, do you? Isn't there a certain date?

unlurking
03-01-2009, 10:17 AM
The fact that the Chiefs were the only team willing to take on that 14.65 mil and worry about renegotiating after the deal was done was the only reason that the deal got done this quickly.

If these rumors about the Bucs and Donkeys are true, and I highly doubt it, then the only reason that BB would have moved as quickly on the deal with the Chiefs is because he wanted ot free up cap space so he could persue other free agents.

I guarantee it wasn't out of the goodness of his black heart.
Completely agree. Although I think the Chiefs could and should simply ride him through the season without signing him to a new contract right away.

unlurking
03-01-2009, 10:17 AM
You don't technically have to be under the salary cap right now, do you? Isn't there a certain date?
They were less than $5 mill short of the cap. No way to make FA moves like that.

eazyb81
03-01-2009, 10:18 AM
Interesting story, but Mort has lost so much credibility over the last year or two that I have a really hard time believing this. I think his sources have dried up and he has to try and piece stories together, which doesn't end up well for him.

Yes, Belichick and Pioli are great friends, but you'd have to be a moron to think Belichick would turn down a 1st round pick and take a 2nd rounder from Pioli. That makes no sense.

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 10:18 AM
Completely agree. Although I think the Chiefs could and should simply ride him through the season without signing him to a new contract right away.
I think that's a bad idea...I agreed with this take at first...but then I decided they might as well just lock him up.

kstater
03-01-2009, 10:19 AM
You don't technically have to be under the salary cap right now, do you? Isn't there a certain date?

IIRC, you had to be under the cap sometime last week.

unlurking
03-01-2009, 10:20 AM
I think that's a bad idea...I agreed with this take at first...but then I decided they might as well just lock him up.
I can understand that take, and if I were completely sold that Cassel was the guy, I would agree with you. Since I'm not, I'm all for the wait and see approach since we can afford it.

whoman69
03-01-2009, 10:22 AM
You don't technically have to be under the salary cap right now, do you? Isn't there a certain date?

You always have to be under the cap, but some of the numbers don't hit yet, so at this time they were under. Later in the year they may not have been.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 10:24 AM
I think that's a bad idea...I agreed with this take at first...but then I decided they might as well just lock him up.

If the CBA expires, he can't be a UFA after next year. We own his rights for two years. With the amount of cap room we have, we'd be stupid to tie him up to a long term deal right now. If he flops next year, we have some insurance on him by not being tied to a long term deal with a shitty QB when we need a lot of parts, like Jax or St.L.

If he plays like a Pro Bowl QB, pay him like one, but I don't think we should be myopic enough to not hedge our bets with a guy who has started 15 games in the last 9 years.

Brock
03-01-2009, 10:25 AM
Pioli's no doubt sold on him, he'll get locked up for 5 years pretty soon.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 10:27 AM
Pioli's no doubt sold on him, he'll get locked up for 5 years pretty soon.

I don't doubt this.

JASONSAUTO
03-01-2009, 10:27 AM
When Schefter says it, I'll believe it.

He has said that there were better offers

unlurking
03-01-2009, 10:29 AM
You always have to be under the cap, but some of the numbers don't hit yet, so at this time they were under. Later in the year they may not have been.
They also had to pay Vrabel a $1 mill roster bonus March 2nd. That would have put them around $3.5 mill below their cap. This move allowed them to play in FA.

unlurking
03-01-2009, 10:30 AM
If the CBA expires, he can't be a UFA after next year. We own his rights for two years. With the amount of cap room we have, we'd be stupid to tie him up to a long term deal right now. If he flops next year, we have some insurance on him by not being tied to a long term deal with a shitty QB when we need a lot of parts, like Jax or St.L.

If he plays like a Pro Bowl QB, pay him like one, but I don't think we should be myopic enough to not hedge our bets with a guy who has started 15 games in the last 9 years.
Haven't agreed with most of your takes lately, but I do with this one.

58-4ever
03-01-2009, 10:40 AM
You always have to be under the cap, but some of the numbers don't hit yet, so at this time they were under. Later in the year they may not have been.

Tell this to Daniel Snyder.

Manila-Chief
03-01-2009, 10:57 AM
... then the only reason that BB would have moved as quickly on the deal with the Chiefs is because he wanted ot free up cap space so he could persue other free agents.

I guarantee it wasn't out of the goodness of his black heart.

This

Also, Just maybe the reason N.E. took our deal is because we took Vrabel off their hands ... 2 reasons ... 1. N.E. is in the habit of getting rid of their older players before they get stale; 2. and more importantly, they got rid of his salary cap numbers.

Just Passin' By
03-01-2009, 11:03 AM
Broncos fans are now questioning whether or not McDaniels was the right choice because of this:

http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34126

Chiefless
03-01-2009, 11:07 AM
Let's assume the above is true. How much weight does a verbal agreement hold in the NFL?

I just find it very, very hard to believe this.

Same as it does in the real world. A deal's a deal. Gotta stick to your word.

Basileus777
03-01-2009, 11:10 AM
They were less than $5 mill short of the cap. No way to make FA moves like that.

Cassel doesn't count against the cap until a certain date, so they technically had more money to work with than that.

doomy3
03-01-2009, 11:10 AM
Sounds like Pioli just beat everyone else to the punch and the other teams who wanted him were waiting around. Once Vrabel was in KC for his physical, that's when the other teams started calling and it was too late.

JMO

DaWolf
03-01-2009, 11:12 AM
I read somewhere else that the Donx backed out in the end, so maybe that's what happened. Otherwise BB would have made that deal in a heartbeat. He could have gone back to Pioli and said hey man, I have a better offer on the table, take Vrabes for a seventh.

The other possibility I think Clark Judge mentioned is that maybe there's a bit of BB/Mangino stuff going on with McDaniels. Or, perhaps Brian Xanders and/or Mark Dominik are idiots...

wild1
03-01-2009, 11:12 AM
If this were true, the Chiefs would be pretty stupid to not trade Cassel to TB. They'd be moving up 15 spots in the draft, Mike Vrabel, and getting an extra third rounder for nothing.

except maybe they feel they don't want to let the franchise idle another year waiting for a QB, that Cassel is definitely their guy, that Stafford/Sanchez/others are not, or all of the above

Chiefless
03-01-2009, 11:13 AM
That's what I thought.

I'm calling bullshit on the content of the OP. BB hasn't been successful because he's a "nice guy."

Yea but if you get a reputation for not negotiating in good faith, won't other teams stop dealing with you?

:shrug:

wild1
03-01-2009, 11:14 AM
and he's never had to deal with his former executive who had a big hand in those Super Bowls and who he had worked with 100 hours a week for a decade straight...

you're nuts if you think belichick is giving players out at a discount just for fun. that is not how he got where he is

highBOLTage
03-01-2009, 11:19 AM
This

Also, Just maybe the reason N.E. took our deal is because we took Vrabel off their hands ... 2 reasons ... 1. N.E. is in the habit of getting rid of their older players before they get stale; 2. and more importantly, they got rid of his salary cap numbers.

Cutting him and trading him both effect the cap the same. If there was a "nice factor" in the decision it was probably this. Just throwing in Vrabel for Pioli so Vrabel didnt get to decide which team he wanted after getting cut.

BigRock
03-01-2009, 11:58 AM
I posted this in another thread yesterday, but from what I heard Mort say, the Bucs offered a 1st and 3rd to Denver for Cutler, and Denver offered their first to the Pats for Cassel. (None of this "Denver backed out" stuff -- they were offering up a pick.)

So at the end of the trade, Denver would have come away with Cassell, a 1st round pick 6-7 spots lower than their current one, and an extra 3rd. Not bad, especially considering they'd end up with the QB they wanted.

But Belichick took the KC 2nd rounder, as opposed to getting Denver's 1st, and Mort speculated it was a way of Bill telling McDaniels to go f himself.

blueballs
03-01-2009, 12:02 PM
I highly doubt they could have traded Cutler without Bowlen's approval
Hootie is off his meds or resorting to HUard love attention whoring

doomy3
03-01-2009, 12:29 PM
This is going to be interesting if the NFL starts investigating this stuff...

BradyFTW!
03-01-2009, 12:45 PM
What's there to investigate? The Pats can trade Cassel to whoever the hell they want for whatever the hell they want. They're not in any way obligated to trade him to whoever's offering the most. Should there have been a probe last year when the Packers refused to trade Favre to Minnesota?

It's just dumb, but you guys should probably get used to it. The blind, irrational Patriots hate is going to start coming your way too, now.

The Bad Guy
03-01-2009, 12:50 PM
The Bucs could have easily taken on Cassel's contract.

MahiMike
03-01-2009, 12:51 PM
http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/

ESPN’s Chris Mortensen has reported, with excellent elaboration via ESPN.com’s Tim Graham, that the Buccaneers offered a first-round and a third-round pick for quarterback Matt Cassel as part of the menage-a-trade that would have sent quarterback Matt Cassel to the Broncos and quarterback Jay Cutler to Tampa.

So why did the Pats pass?

A reader has shared with us this nugget from Michael Felger of WEEI. Put simply, the Bucs arrived at the party too late (and possibly with a cinnamon bobka).

If that’s the case, then it all makes sense.

But Mort says (via Graham) that the Broncos were willing to give up their own first-round pick — No. 12 overall in the draft — for Cassel. Under those circumstances, why didn’t Belichick bite?

We agree with Mortensen’s suggestion that Belichick would be less willing to help a former assistant coach than to help the front-office guy who helped set the table for those three Super Bowl victories in four year.

Mort also suggests that the Pats leaked word of the Broncos’ effort to trade Cutler to the Boston Globe as a way to mess with the Broncos.

Um, wow.

We only wish that the Broncos and Pats played each other twice per year. As a consolation, the Broncos and Chiefs still do.

UPDATE: Tom Curran also reports that the Bucs and Broncos showed up after Pats coach Bill Belichick had decided to pull the trigger on the trade with the Chiefs. Credit Chiefs G.M. Scott Pioli for: (1) knowing that the Patriots were ready to do something right away with Cassel; and (2) getting a number and placing his order while the other teams were still loitering in the lobby of Schnitzer’s.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:54 PM
I posted this in another thread yesterday, but from what I heard Mort say, the Bucs offered a 1st and 3rd to Denver for Cutler, and Denver offered their first to the Pats for Cassel. (None of this "Denver backed out" stuff -- they were offering up a pick.)

So at the end of the trade, Denver would have come away with Cassell, a 1st round pick 6-7 spots lower than their current one, and an extra 3rd. Not bad, especially considering they'd end up with the QB they wanted.

But Belichick took the KC 2nd rounder, as opposed to getting Denver's 1st, and Mort speculated it was a way of Bill telling McDaniels to go f himself.

Belichick had nothing but glowing things to say about McDaniels when he left. This is totally off base. It's not a Mangini situation. They don't have any bad blood at all. And what makes you think that Belichick is stupid enough to screw himself out of a higher draft pick for a grudge?

blueballs
03-01-2009, 12:54 PM
See Brian Waters
secrecy has it's rewards
now get Todd a diet coke

BigRock
03-01-2009, 12:56 PM
Belichick had nothing but glowing things to say about McDaniels when he left. This is totally off base. It's not a Mangini situation. They don't have any bad blood at all. And what makes you think that Belichick is stupid enough to screw himself out of a higher draft pick for a grudge?

It's not my interpretation, it's ESPN's. Ask them.

Just to add, though, there's now talk that the Denver/Cutler trade story was first leaked by the Pats. If that's true, Belichick is definitely telling McDaniels to piss off, regardless of what he said when McDaniels left.

orange
03-01-2009, 01:05 PM
It's not my interpretation, it's ESPN's. Ask them.

Just to add, though, there's now talk that the Denver/Cutler trade story was first leaked by the Pats. If that's true, Belichick is definitely telling McDaniels to piss off, regardless of what he said when McDaniels left.

Here's Mortensen's ACTUAL words. It's really funny how mangled this story has gotten. It's like the old school game where a secret is passed around a circle.

http://videos.espn.com/m/video/21937778/broncos_tried_to_trade_jay_cutler.htm?col=en-vid-espnvideo_1-ep&q=patriots

orange
03-01-2009, 01:09 PM
Belichick had nothing but glowing things to say about McDaniels when he left. This is totally off base. It's not a Mangini situation. They don't have any bad blood at all. And what makes you think that Belichick is stupid enough to screw himself out of a higher draft pick for a grudge?

It's not my interpretation, it's ESPN's. Ask them.

Just to add, though, there's now talk that the Denver/Cutler trade story was first leaked by the Pats. If that's true, Belichick is definitely telling McDaniels to piss off, regardless of what he said when McDaniels left.

It's Chris Mortensen stirring the pot.

How's Coach Shanahan working out for you guys? I haven't heard much from him this off-season.

Pioli Zombie
03-01-2009, 01:13 PM
Someone reported that the Chiefs had been negotiation with Cassel's agent some time on an extension.

Or, maybe Cassel had some say into where he wanted to go, and he wanted to go work with Haley and Pioli.

This
Posted via Mobile Device

allen_kcCard
03-01-2009, 01:14 PM
It's Chris Mortensen stirring the pot.

How's Coach Shanahan working out for you guys? I haven't heard much from him this off-season.

The absence of him here seems to be far batter than the presence of McDaniels there at this point.

orange
03-01-2009, 01:15 PM
The absence of him here seems to be far batter than the presence of McDaniels there at this point.

I have to agree with that at this time.

Rookies. :doh!:

BigRock
03-01-2009, 01:18 PM
Here's Mortensen's ACTUAL words. It's really funny how mangled this story has gotten. It's like the old school game where a secret is passed around a circle.

http://videos.espn.com/m/video/21937778/broncos_tried_to_trade_jay_cutler.htm?col=en-vid-espnvideo_1-ep&q=patriots

What is mangled? Everything I said is on that video.

Pioli Zombie
03-01-2009, 01:18 PM
That's what I thought.

I'm calling bullshit on the content of the OP. BB hasn't been successful because he's a "nice guy."

Agreed. For the 5,000th time NOBODY was hosed in this deal Belichick and Pioli both know value and both teams made out great. Chiefs get their qb without giving up #3 and Patriots get 20 million cap space and #34 for a qb who would never play and a LB they were going to release within a year
Posted via Mobile Device

orange
03-01-2009, 01:19 PM
What is mangled? Everything I said is on that video.

Everything YOU said was. The original post has Rotoworld's mangled interpretation which is then further mangled by Profootballtalk in another post.

I was backing you up, man!

BigRock
03-01-2009, 01:22 PM
My most sincere apologies for the misunderstanding.

orange
03-01-2009, 01:29 PM
Here's another:

"I'm not in the habit of linking to ESPN videos, but the Chris Mortensen video posted tonight is too stunning to miss. (The information is stunning, not Mort's visage.)
Mort reports that the Patriots turned down a first- and third-round pick from the Bucs in a potential three-way trade that would have sent Matt Cassel to Denver and Jay Cutler to the Bucs. Instead, the Patriots chose a second-round pick from the Chiefs."

Gregg Rosenthal
NBC Sports Blogs
http://blogs.nbcsports.com/home/archives/2009/03/did-the-patriots-turn-down-a-f-1.html

Does anybody in the freakin' media actually listen to what's said before they spout off?!?

Just Passin' By
03-01-2009, 01:34 PM
Here's another:

"I'm not in the habit of linking to ESPN videos, but the Chris Mortensen video posted tonight is too stunning to miss. (The information is stunning, not Mort's visage.)
Mort reports that the Patriots turned down a first- and third-round pick from the Bucs in a potential three-way trade that would have sent Matt Cassel to Denver and Jay Cutler to the Bucs. Instead, the Patriots chose a second-round pick from the Chiefs."

Gregg Rosenthal
NBC Sports Blogs
http://blogs.nbcsports.com/home/archives/2009/03/did-the-patriots-turn-down-a-f-1.html

Does anybody in the freakin' media actually listen to what's said before they spout off?!?

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=203416

Pioli Zombie
03-01-2009, 01:37 PM
Chris mortenson is pretty much laughed off in Boston as a bonehead who has it out for the Patriots. So do what you will with that.
Posted via Mobile Device

PastorMikH
03-01-2009, 02:24 PM
Like I said in a thread yesterday, it is possible that the Pats made the deal like they did with the Chiefs as a favor to Pioli for all he had done for the Pats.

I also wonder if the Cutler speculation could have been Denver doing what they could to try and run up the price for the Chiefs.

Bowser
03-01-2009, 02:30 PM
Like I said in a thread yesterday, it is possible that the Pats made the deal like they did with the Chiefs as a favor to Pioli for all he had done for the Pats.

I also wonder if the Cutler speculation could have been Denver doing what they could to try and run up the price for the Chiefs.

Though that would be nice of them, couldn't that be considered collusion? Not sure how you would go about proving it, I'm just sayin'....

Maybe Denver was trying to screw with our chacnes of getting Cassel, but whatever they were thinking blew up in their faces, heh.

tk13
03-01-2009, 02:31 PM
Everybody assumes that he was trying to help out Pioli... I don't think that's very Belichick-like.

But, if you're going to at least make that argument, then maybe he was trying to help out Cassel, who was a good soldier all these years for Belichick and stepped in when needed. Maybe Cassel wanted to go where Pioli (the one guy in the NFL who believed in him) now works... and he preferred to play in Todd Haley's offense.

bowener
03-01-2009, 03:04 PM
I would say that the TB-DEN-NE trade would have taken for-fucking-ever to finalize. The Pats wanted cap space immediately. Plus, perhaps Cassell did not want to go to Denver, and I doubt Cutler wanted to go to TB. Dont players have a right to refuse trades?

Mr. Flopnuts
03-01-2009, 03:15 PM
What's there to investigate? The Pats can trade Cassel to whoever the hell they want for whatever the hell they want. They're not in any way obligated to trade him to whoever's offering the most. Should there have been a probe last year when the Packers refused to trade Favre to Minnesota?

It's just dumb, but you guys should probably get used to it. The blind, irrational Patriots hate is going to start coming your way too, now.

I agree. Entitlement minded Americans need to STFU and STFD. The Pats can trade any of their players they want for whatever compensation they choose. Period.

wild1
03-01-2009, 03:19 PM
i do not believe this stuff in the first post.

brandon
03-01-2009, 03:19 PM
Need your random laugh of the day:

mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=115&f=1837&t=4010432

So if it goes down, you heard it there first.

orange
03-01-2009, 03:26 PM
Dont players have a right to refuse trades?

No, not unless they got that worked into their contract. That almost never happens in the NFL.

doomy3
03-01-2009, 05:09 PM
No, not unless they got that worked into their contract. That almost never happens in the NFL.

Would be classic to see Cutler get dumped for Detroit's #20, and you end up with Freeman. ROFL

Iowanian
03-01-2009, 05:49 PM
The dumbshit people are stepping in on this one is hilarious.

Teams don't have to take the highest compensation, and it wouldn't be the first time.

Teams take lower compensation from a non-rival or team out of their division all of the time.

You think Denver would take a higher 3rd round pick from KC for a player or a little lower 3rd round pick from an NFC non-rival?

doomy3
03-01-2009, 05:53 PM
The dumbshit people are stepping in on this one is hilarious.

Teams don't have to take the highest compensation, and it wouldn't be the first time.

Teams take lower compensation from a non-rival or team out of their division all of the time.

You think Denver would take a higher 3rd round pick from KC for a player or a little lower 3rd round pick from an NFC non-rival?

But who was the divisional rival in this scenario?
If these reports are true that the Pats passed up better deals from 2 NFC teams, the Bucs and Lions, to take a deal with an AFC team, what is the rationalization there. I'm not suggesting that these reports are true, but if they are, that doesn't add up...

Silock
03-01-2009, 05:55 PM
The dumbshit people are stepping in on this one is hilarious.

Teams don't have to take the highest compensation, and it wouldn't be the first time.

Teams take lower compensation from a non-rival or team out of their division all of the time.

You think Denver would take a higher 3rd round pick from KC for a player or a little lower 3rd round pick from an NFC non-rival?

wat

FAX
03-01-2009, 06:37 PM
Mr. Iowanian is merely stating that it is not unusual for a team to take a lesser offer. The inter-divisional example is simply that - an example.

Besides, the sasquatch mask deprives him of oxygen.

FAX

Short Leash Hootie
03-01-2009, 06:54 PM
The dumbshit people are stepping in on this one is hilarious.

Teams don't have to take the highest compensation, and it wouldn't be the first time.

Teams take lower compensation from a non-rival or team out of their division all of the time.

You think Denver would take a higher 3rd round pick from KC for a player or a little lower 3rd round pick from an NFC non-rival?

what's the difference between Denver and KC to New England?

Nothing.

FAX
03-01-2009, 06:57 PM
Denver is the mile-high city. KC is just the high city.

FAX

RedNeckRaider
03-01-2009, 06:59 PM
what's the difference between Denver and KC to New England?

Nothing.

Good question

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:10 PM
I'm telling you...Cassel was a Pioli pick...something Bill didn't want at the time but Pioli pleaded with him and Bill let him spend the 7th on the QB...so now that Pioli has moved on after 3 Super Bowl's...he called Bill about that QB and Bill gave him a nice little starter kit at a discount price for all the years of loyalty...a one last time doing business with ya, bud! kind of thing...this just confirms it.

I find this pretty damn unlikely. You're telling me that Belichick feels like he OWES Pioli something ... for doing the job that he was well paid for? It's silly.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:13 PM
and he's never had to deal with his former executive who had a big hand in those Super Bowls and who he had worked with 100 hours a week for a decade straight...

Because Pioli wasn't paid for doing his job? Because Pioli wasn't given his break in the NFL by Belichick? Because Bill didn't bring him to New England? Because Bill didn't do his fair share of work?

It makes NO sense. Why in hell would Belichick feel that he owes his protege anything? Why isn't he giving Brady to McDaniels for a 3rd then?

Seriously -- it makes no sense.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:18 PM
Obviously there was interest for Matt Cassel...I don't think anyone expected this guy to be traded this early...if the Pats waited until draft day I bet they could have easily gotten a much better deal. MUCH better deal.

That is not what Mike Reiss, the best connected Patriots reporter, is saying. He is basically saying that there wasn't a very strong market for Cassell, and they did about the best they could to make sure they traded him instead of being stuck with the franchise tag and constrained by the salary cap.

He's suggesitng that Pioli leveraged Vrabel out of the Patriots to make the deal work, in part because the Chiefs need Vrabel more than the Pats, and in part because teh Pats needed to get rid of Cassell to give themselves the necessary cap room.

What is clear to me is that Belichick would NOT give Pioli a "sweetheart" deal if he had a better deal on the table. How in hell would that make sense? How could he even justify it to the owners? It's just silly.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:20 PM
They were less than $5 mill short of the cap. No way to make FA moves like that.

Right, we were 3MM under the cap. 2nd worst in the league.

And there are rumors we might get Peppers and we need to extend Wilfork, and we had to resign our starting safety -- Sanders -- which we did today -- and we signed Fred Taylor already, etc.

Operating with just $3MM of cap room was NOT good. It would screw up our entire offseason to wait until draft day to move Cassell.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:23 PM
I read somewhere else that the Donx backed out in the end, so maybe that's what happened. Otherwise BB would have made that deal in a heartbeat. He could have gone back to Pioli and said hey man, I have a better offer on the table, take Vrabes for a seventh.

The other possibility I think Clark Judge mentioned is that maybe there's a bit of BB/Mangino stuff going on with McDaniels. Or, perhaps Brian Xanders and/or Mark Dominik are idiots...

No. Everything I've heard is that McDaniels left "clean" and is still part of the family as much as Romeo, Dimitroff and Pioli.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:25 PM
But Belichick took the KC 2nd rounder, as opposed to getting Denver's 1st, and Mort speculated it was a way of Bill telling McDaniels to go f himself.

I just can't see it. McDaniels left on good terms. I don't see Belichick telling him to screw hmself. Maybe if he was in teh AFC East, but they're both AFC West, so it makes no sense to give up a higher pick.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:28 PM
UPDATE: Tom Curran also reports that the Bucs and Broncos showed up after Pats coach Bill Belichick had decided to pull the trigger on the trade with the Chiefs. Credit Chiefs G.M. Scott Pioli for: (1) knowing that the Patriots were ready to do something right away with Cassel; and (2) getting a number and placing his order while the other teams were still loitering in the lobby of Schnitzerís.

If BB felt he had COMMITTED to the deal, then I can understand that alot better than giving up a better deal because he liked one guy more than another, or because he didn't like McDaniels, which by all reports isn't true.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:30 PM
Like I said in a thread yesterday, it is possible that the Pats made the deal like they did with the Chiefs as a favor to Pioli for all he had done for the Pats.

I also wonder if the Cutler speculation could have been Denver doing what they could to try and run up the price for the Chiefs.

You're mistakenly assuming that Belichick mixes his personal feelings for business.

Amnorix
03-01-2009, 08:31 PM
Everybody assumes that he was trying to help out Pioli... I don't think that's very Belichick-like.

But, if you're going to at least make that argument, then maybe he was trying to help out Cassel, who was a good soldier all these years for Belichick and stepped in when needed. Maybe Cassel wanted to go where Pioli (the one guy in the NFL who believed in him) now works... and he preferred to play in Todd Haley's offense.

Doesn't make much sense since he succeeded in McDaniels' offense.

That said, Cassell had some degree of control over his life -- if he said he would NOT sign a long term contract with Team X, that would put a serious damper on Team X's willingness to trade a high pick for him.

Iowanian
03-01-2009, 08:34 PM
Does it matter?

I know in my industry, I have companies that are technically competition, that I have working relationships with. Some of the big boys are assholes to me, I'm an asshole back, while others invite an amicable relationship. We talk once in a while, give each other heads up when things are coming down the pipe of interest. If I need something done, I'll call them to see if they want in on the action first, they'll send people to me with smaller projects they think are more appropriate for me.


Maybe, it IS that they know Pioli and Haley. Maybe Denver has screwed them in the past? Maybe they have other reasons not to deal with the Bucs or the Lions? Maybe most of this is bullshit speculation?


I'm just saying, its not uncommon in business for people to give better deals to those who work with them better and more often. I know I'll give a company that works well with me all of the time a better rate than one thats tried to screw me in the past.


Maybe the Chiefs were the only one with a serious, legit offer on the table and the only ones they believed Cassel would sign with to complete the deal.

MAYBE....just MAYBE something else is going on and there is more action pending....



But who was the divisional rival in this scenario?
If these reports are true that the Pats passed up better deals from 2 NFC teams, the Bucs and Lions, to take a deal with an AFC team, what is the rationalization there. I'm not suggesting that these reports are true, but if they are, that doesn't add up...

Iowanian
03-01-2009, 08:35 PM
This is your brain on intelligence and comprehention of the written word.

Mr. Iowanian is merely stating that it is not unusual for a team to take a lesser offer. The inter-divisional example is simply that - an example.

Besides, the sasquatch mask deprives him of oxygen.

FAX

Iowanian
03-01-2009, 08:37 PM
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe the new Headcoach at Denver was a cocksucker to the NE management? Maybe they didn't like him leaving for Denver? Maybe they didn't like the idea of McDaniels ending up with their QB for some reason you didn't learn about on Madden 09.

what's the difference between Denver and KC to New England?

Nothing.

htismaqe
03-01-2009, 08:38 PM
It's pretty obvious to me that Mort is wrong. AGAIN.

No way does BB take less from the Chiefs for any reason, Pioli or not. That's crazy talk.

wild1
03-01-2009, 08:50 PM
You're mistakenly assuming that Belichick mixes his personal feelings for business.

well isn't there bad blood between he and mangini? what were the circumstances behind that?

wild1
03-01-2009, 09:03 PM
I am not really buying this business about all these golden offers being passed up for our high 2nd round pick. I think a lot of teams were just too late to the party or may not have had the cap space. Maybe taking Vrabel was a condition of the deal. Who knows.

Something doesn't add up. Look at the vikings. They just traded a 4th for Rosenfels. he is 30 years old, also a backup on his previous team, but was much less than stellar when he came in. Maybe they are high on him for some reason, but would any team really trade a 4th for him, when Cassel could be had for a 2nd?