View Full Version : NFL Gives Broncos their R3 draft pick back
Mile High Mania
01-13-2005, 12:18 PM
Well, sort of... :p
Ok, talk amongst yourselves.
------------
Broncos may gain one pick, lose pick
By Bill Williamson
Denver Post Staff Writer
Although they won't officially know until March, there is a good chance the Broncos will recoup a third-round draft pick, making up for the one taken away by the NFL.
The Broncos will get at least one compensatory draft pick by the NFL for the free-agency losses of Bert Berry and Ian Gold. The picks will be announced at the NFL owners meetings in March.
Denver lost a selection in September when the NFL fined the Broncos $950,000 and took away the 2005 third-round choice as a penalty for salary cap circumvention from 1996-98.
Compensatory free agents are determined by a formula based on salary, playing time and postseason honors. Berry, a Pro Bowl selection for Arizona, led the NFC with 14 1/2 sacks. Gold was a solid contributor for Tampa Bay. There is a chance the Broncos could get multiple picks, but the likelihood is that, based on the formula, Berry's and Gold's seasons will add up to a third-round pick. Compensatory picks come at the end of each round, and none is higher than the third round.
Meanwhile, the Broncos will most likely have to give Atlanta their fifth-round pick as compensation for defensive tackle Ellis Johnson. He was acquired in September for a conditional pick that depending on playing time.
Johnson played about 60 percent of the time for Denver; thus the Falcons would receive a fifth-round pick from the Broncos. Johnson, a free agent, has said he is interested in returning to the Broncos.
The Broncos will pick as high as No. 24 in the first round of the April draft if Minnesota or St. Louis - who both finished 8-8 in the regular season - advances to the Super Bowl. If neither team advances to the Super Bowl, Denver will pick No. 25.
Mr. Laz
01-13-2005, 12:22 PM
4321
u guys still a buncha cheat bastiges :cuss:
Phobia
01-13-2005, 12:23 PM
Very misleading title. Heh.
The compensatory formula explanation neglected to mention that acquired Free Agents also count. If you lose 2 UFA's and gain 2 who performed at roughly the same level, the NFL considers that a wash.
Mile High Mania
01-13-2005, 12:24 PM
Of course it was misleading... took a page from TJ to generate interest...
Wile_E_Coyote
01-13-2005, 12:25 PM
Plummer pitty?
~pitty, must been thinking shitty
Skip Towne
01-13-2005, 12:31 PM
I would imagine getting out of jail feels good too but that doesn't make you any less the criminal.
StcChief
01-13-2005, 12:33 PM
Take the SB trophy back, remove the victory from the record book.
Garcia Bronco
01-13-2005, 12:50 PM
LOL....there was no advantage...and we didn't even break a written rule. But believe what you want
Super Bowl 32 and 33 Champs....back-to-back...and we beat you in your house on the way in the playoffs.
jspchief
01-13-2005, 01:13 PM
Yea...they got penalized a third round pick for not breaking any rules. Makes perfect sense.:rolleyes:
IMO, the NFL should make an "honest mistake" and wait to award the compensation pick for Berry for the same amount of time as Denver got away with cheating. I mean all the other teams don't get an unfair advantage form it, right? So, I believe that would be 18 months. Of course it could be longer if they were to base it on the fist time they cheated the cap... :hmmm:
LOL....there was no advantage...and we didn't even break a written rule. But believe what you want
Super Bowl 32 and 33 Champs....back-to-back...and we beat you in your house on the way in the playoffs.
Okay, please explain how there was no advantage of any kind. Many of your kind have tried to explain it, but my question is if there wasn't any advantage of any kind to doing it, why do it then? :hmmm:
You guys crack me up. ROFL
LOL....there was no advantage...and we didn't even break a written rule. But believe what you want
Super Bowl 32 and 33 Champs....back-to-back...and we beat you in your house on the way in the playoffs.
And cheated before hand with the cap and during the game with Vasoline. Those are facts, not based on any judgement call by the officials.
Red Dawg
01-13-2005, 01:45 PM
LOL....there was no advantage...and we didn't even break a written rule. But believe what you want
Super Bowl 32 and 33 Champs....back-to-back...and we beat you in your house on the way in the playoffs.
You got killed in three SB's in the 80's. And you're thinking "big deal."
That's what I'm thinking as well from you statement. Last I checked we handed the Donkeys their ass less than a month ago. We cost you a home playoff game.
go bo
01-13-2005, 01:59 PM
You got killed in three SB's in the 80's. And you're thinking "big deal."
That's what I'm thinking as well from you statement. Last I checked we handed the Donkeys their ass less than a month ago. We cost you a home playoff game.that was sweet, even if it dropped us in the draft a little...
Garcia Bronco
01-13-2005, 02:02 PM
Okay, please explain how there was no advantage of any kind. Many of your kind have tried to explain it, but my question is if there wasn't any advantage of any kind to doing it, why do it then? :hmmm:
You guys crack me up. ROFL
Deferments were made for cashflow to fund upfront cost on the new stadium that the team had to pay for...that's it. It was cashflow...we didn't have extra players....we didn't pay the players on time...that's it. The NFL release a statement at the time in the fall that said there was no advantage for the team.
Garcia Bronco
01-13-2005, 02:05 PM
You got killed in three SB's in the 80's. And you're thinking "big deal."
That's what I'm thinking as well from you statement. Last I checked we handed the Donkeys their ass less than a month ago. We cost you a home playoff game.
Yeah...and we elminated you from the playoffs this year with a win against the Titans. But I don't think you guys cost us a home..I guess you could look at it that way...but so could JAX, SD, RAIDERS, ATL....
Mile High Mania
01-13-2005, 03:09 PM
You got killed in three SB's in the 80's. And you're thinking "big deal."
That's what I'm thinking as well from you statement. Last I checked we handed the Donkeys their ass less than a month ago. We cost you a home playoff game.
Cost Denver a home playoff Game? I doubt that... their record would not have been better than SD or Indy...
Calcountry
01-13-2005, 04:18 PM
LOL....there was no advantage...and we didn't even break a written rule. But believe what you want
Super Bowl 32 and 33 Champs....back-to-back...and we beat you in your house on the way in the playoffs.
I would be satisfied with an asterisk placed by 32 and 33 with a footnote at the bottome of the page explaining that the Broncos violated salary cap rules those years.
:)
Hoover
01-13-2005, 04:21 PM
I'm sure the Browncows will get the first overall pick as a compensation pick
stevieray
01-13-2005, 04:36 PM
Deferments were made for cashflow to fund upfront cost on the new stadium that the team had to pay for...that's it. It was cashflow...we didn't have extra players....we didn't pay the players on time...that's it. The NFL release a statement at the time in the fall that said there was no advantage for the team.
not this shit again. gawd Garcia, you're slipping.
Denial and arrogance.
TheNextStep
01-13-2005, 06:58 PM
Very misleading title. Heh.
The compensatory formula explanation neglected to mention that acquired Free Agents also count. If you lose 2 UFA's and gain 2 who performed at roughly the same level, the NFL considers that a wash.
How exactly does that work, do you know?
I ask because I look at the fact that Eric Barton started all year in New York and Rod Coleman was a beast for Atlanta and I wonder what the Raiders might expect in terms of a compensatory selection. I'm wondering if Danny Clark and Kerry Collins will off-set those losses to the point that we don't get much (since I know Sapp and Washington won't count for much in that equation...).
LiL stumppy
01-13-2005, 07:01 PM
I hate em all
nychief
01-13-2005, 07:03 PM
what do we get for Tait?
Deferments were made for cashflow to fund upfront cost on the new stadium that the team had to pay for...that's it. It was cashflow...we didn't have extra players....we didn't pay the players on time...that's it. The NFL release a statement at the time in the fall that said there was no advantage for the team.
That IS an ADVANTAGE! You're just too damn Bronco to admit it or see it! ROFL
And once again if there is "no advantage" then WHY NOT FOLLOW THE SAME RULES AS EVERYONE ELSE? :hmmm:
Rain Man
01-14-2005, 01:37 PM
How exactly does that work, do you know?
I ask because I look at the fact that Eric Barton started all year in New York and Rod Coleman was a beast for Atlanta and I wonder what the Raiders might expect in terms of a compensatory selection. I'm wondering if Danny Clark and Kerry Collins will off-set those losses to the point that we don't get much (since I know Sapp and Washington won't count for much in that equation...).
In the case of the Rai ders, all compensatory picks are merely applied to the NFL's legal bills incurred on Al Davis' lawsuits. Sorry.
In the case of the Rai ders, all compensatory picks are merely applied to the NFL's legal bills incurred on Al Davis' lawsuits. Sorry.
:clap:
TheNextStep
01-14-2005, 02:21 PM
Deferments were made for cashflow to fund upfront cost on the new stadium that the team had to pay for...that's it. It was cashflow...we didn't have extra players....we didn't pay the players on time...that's it. The NFL release a statement at the time in the fall that said there was no advantage for the team.
I've shown before that it is a matter of public record that you DID receive an advantage in terms of ability to sign free agents. The two notable among them are Neil Smith and re-signing Mark Schlereth.
As I've said before, I'm not asking anybody to believe me. Go right ahead and believe Mike Shanahan:
"I don't believe anybody really thought he was on the decline. There were a number of teams in the NFL who wanted Neil Smith. This was a chance to upgrade our team by getting the premier defensive end in the league. This signing brings a great player to a good defense, and allows us to do some things defensively we've been wanting to do."
Although the Broncos had little room under the salary cap, Shanahan said the signing was possible after Elway's lucrative contract was restructured "a couple days ago."
"We've got some flexibility under the cap," Shanahan said. "We worked John Elway's salary around to free up some more cap money, which enabled us to not only sign Neil, but hopefully a couple of other players before the season starts. It's the only contract we've restructured."
SOURCE (http://www.jsonline.com/packer/sbxxxii/news/free41397.html)
Mile High Mania
01-14-2005, 02:38 PM
There's gotta be a new topic...
I don't believe the "restructuring" that was done was illegal. The moves made with Elways contract were fine, or the NFL would not have approved it.
I believe the issue was with how they were funding it on the backend or something... the actual deal itself was without issue, IIRC.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.