Bad Morty
-
Posts
981 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Bad Morty
-
-
I think if you told Pats fans ahead of time that they would trade Garapollo and Cooks and that they would get a mid 1st and a high 2nd in return, they would have been ok with that.
-
The only team that seems to have routine success against the Pats is the Dolphins (in Miami), but I don't think too many Pats fans view them as a "rival"...probably because those games never seem to mean much for either team when all is said and done. The Pats still end up with a bye and the Dolphins are usually out of the playoffs.
-
Malcolm Butler was on the 'deflategate' team. Malcolm Butler just got humiliated by Bill on National TV and will be on another team in a few months. What a great way for him to get even, right? He could spill the whole story of deflategate...if there is a story to tell, that is.
-
505 yards, 3 TD's, no interceptions, 33 points...37 if you include the botched extra point and the botched field goal. I'd keep the champagne corked for a bit on this prediction
-
1 minute ago, dgambill said:
Morty I get you...but let’s call be honest these two situations are no where near similar to you going back to your job. On the surface the comparison might make sense but everything that goes into a hiring of such a high level position is so much different and it didn’t just effect McDaniels and his family. Several others families were effected as well...and if there is truth to NE doing this somehow to be vindictive...well let’s not go there because of how wrong that would be. I’m not going to let me go there in my mind to save my anger.
None of us know his motivation. It was being reported days ago that this wasn't a done deal, meaning he must have had some sort of reservations. How do we know that his reservations weren't with the ownership/management and maybe he took the premature announcement of his hiring before the contract was signed as an unprofessional move by the Colts that scared him off?
-
1 minute ago, Nadine said:
Are you seriously here to focus on this issue?
It doesn't matter to me what happens with payment. If you are ok with his behavior....fine.
But, it was a low move on his part and not something that most anyone would ever do. Not anyone who cared about their integrity and reputation anyway.
sheesh
Oh I think it was a totally D-move...I'm just saying that there's not going to be any compensation if there wasn't a signed contract.
-
1 minute ago, Fluke_33 said:
I think there are issues with not having a signed contract but they may have equity arguments as well but most of all we are not talking about what laws or rights limit our courts. They will be heard by the league which as we have seen can meter out damages as it sees fit. I’m not saying it will happen but it may be an avenue for the colts.
It doesn't hurt to ask...but if you separate the 2 teams involved here ( I understand that's difficult) and just view it as an issue between 2 NFC teams, you are left with an assistant coach who entertained a head coaching offer, waffled on it, then said no and returned to the job he already had. I've done this myself in life...I went through 3 interviews and got a job offer from a company, then my existing company which I really enjoyed, stepped up and made me an offer I couldn't refuse...so I said no to the other company. I felt badly about it, but ultimately I made the right call for me and my family and that's really all that matters. You can't start punishing people for that.
-
2 minutes ago, Superman said:
We're talking about two different things.
1) The timing and impact on the Colts. In every way that matters, this is just like Belichick and the Jets. There's no reason to dig into the nitty gritty and minutiae, this is the same situation, the Colts are just as blindsided as the Jets were, etc. McDaniels was calling potential assistants, who have now signed contracts with the Colts, as late as this morning. He screwed us, plain and simple.
2) The league's stance on this. We don't know what will happen. It's seems obvious that McDaniels hadn't signed an actual contract. And in the Jets case, Belichick was under contract, and the end result was the Jets traded him to the Pats (for all intents and purposes) for draft picks. Clean resolution to a messy situation.
Since McDaniels was not officially a Colts employee, it's possible the resolution to this messy situation won't be as clean as it was back then. But you better believe the Colts are filing a grievance, and I'm pretty sure they'll have the support of the majority of the other owners in the league. They were irreparably harmed by McDaniels actions, and the Patriots facilitated that harm by swooping in at the last minute, when they had over a month to discuss a plan to retain McDaniels.
I think you can also count on the league not wanting to see one team hang another team out to dry like this.
I don't know what will happen, but if you think it's as simple as 'he wasn't officially signed,' I think you're being naive.
So first off, I don't disagree that this is a pretty bad look for McDaniels, and if I were a Colts fan I would be as angry as everyone here is. But again I will say it...what is the harm? No team is guaranteed that the person they want to hire for a job will accept that job. The fact that he agreed verbally to the terms the Colts presented him and then changed his mind is really irrelevant. People are allowed to do this, regardless of the negative ramifications on the other party. The only thing they AREN'T allowed to do is reneg on a legal contract. So where is the "irreparable harm" that needs to be remedied? They tried to hire him, he said no...it's as simple as that. Had he said no 4 weeks ago, nobody would be arguing for any compensation, right? So a risk was taken by the Colts to wait 4 weeks for him to make this decision. That risk is the sole responsibility of the Colts. It's not the responsibility of another team to compensate the Colts for the risk they willingly took to wait the extra 4 weeks on an uncertain outcome.
-
5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
Kraft did that deal with the Jets because the NFL leaned in him to do so.
It's documented in the latest ESPN 30 for 30. Worth a look.
Even if there is zero paperwork, this wouldn't be hard to prove there was an understanding... we have signed contracts with a bunch of assistants... it wouldn't be hard to have them tell the NFL that they spoke with JM and joined the Colts to be on the staff with Josh McDaniels.
I dont think this is a hard case to prove by any reasonable doubt.
I think the only question is how much we get and not whether we get anything at all.
The Belichick contract situation with the Jets was much different in that he actually WAS under contract with the Jets as an assistant when the Pats hired him. Now any assistant coach has the right to take a head coaching job without compensation (for obvious reasons), however the Jets had a legal argument because it was specified in Bill's contract as an assistant that he would automatically become the Jets head coach if/when Parcells stepped down. So when Parcells decided to step down and take a front office job, the Jets contended that Bill B. became their head coach and were therefore entitled to compensation. The Pats probably could have fought this, but the commissioner stepped in and encouraged them to settle it with the Jets...which they did.
In this case, McDaniels is essentially a free agent. I think it was a D-move by him...but I really don't think there is any basis to award the Colts any picks unless there is a signed agreement that he renegged on. Until he signs the contract, any team could have technically swooped in and hired him away.
-
15 minutes ago, Superman said:
I think you'll be wrong in the end. Let's see.
It wouldn't be the first time
-
9 minutes ago, Superman said:
The only material difference is that McDaniels evidently hadn't signed a contract. And I agree that that's a big issue, but end of the day, the situation is the same. McDaniels agreed to take the job, then backed out at the 11th hour. Result is the same, the would-be hiring team is blindsided by someone reneging on an agreement, signed or verbal.
It's hard to see the league office viewing it any other way.
There is zero chance the league will award compensation because a guy not under contract decided not to take a job.
-
Just now, bluebombers87 said:
If you honestly see nothing wrong with this then I have to question your morals.
This is wrong.
I didn't make any moral judgments one way or the other. I'm just saying that if he didn't sign a contract, then there's not going to be any compensation.
-
1 minute ago, 21isSuperman said:
@NewColtsFan has stated ways that he wouldn't have to sign a contract, but still agreed to terms. I think he called it a letter of intent or something?
If he signed a contract, the Colts should get compensation. And as a Pats fan, I'd be PO'd that they signed him knowing they would have to give up picks.
I just have a feeling there was no contract here. But we'll see.
-
2 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:
At this point, I think compensation is guaranteed.
On the basis of what? If he didn't sign a contract, he's free to do what he pleases.
-
"Agreed to contract terms" is not equal to "signed a contract"...
-
20 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:
"however, McDaniels did not have a signed contract with the Colts"
-
2 minutes ago, RealityIsLuck said:
Nobody can, or will trust him ever again because they don't wanna be as screwed over as the Colts are now.
I'm not entirely sold on McDaniels, personally. However let's be honest...this league has a short memory when it comes to success. How many teams did Parcells leave high and dry? But they kept hiring him, right?
-
1 minute ago, RealityIsLuck said:
And when he eventually gets fired there, he'll never get another head coaching job again
It will all depend on how he does. If he wins, he'll get hired again.
-
Per Tom E. Curran...Bill coaching 1 more year, then McDaniels takes over in 2019
-
1 minute ago, ReMeDy said:
At first I thought this was a joke, because wasn't it confirmed at this point? Seems very odd.
The only reason I can think of for this is Belichick is indeed retiring and McDaniels will get to take his place?
This was my first thought...
-
Drew Brees is only a year younger and he still looks very good as well. QB is probably the only position (aside from kickers and long snappers) where a player really has a chance for longevity if they can keep fit and avoid catastrophic contact injuries. I'm convinced that experience and knowledge at that position is as important if not more than physical skills (to a certain degree). I.e. if Brady's speed and arm strength decline a little bit (as they probably already have), but he can still stand over center and immediately diagnose a defense and check into a play that has a good chance at success, that still makes for a pretty valuable player. Obviously there are limits on how much deterioration of the physical skills is still passable. If he's literally unable to hit a receiver in stride on a crossing route or he can't get it more than 20 yards down field with zip on it then that obviously isn't sustainable. I liken it to older pitchers in baseball...the ones who actually know how to pitch and don't simply rely on blowing guys away with 98 mph heat can survive in the game a long time even though the 98 turns into 92-93 as they age.
-
I'd rather see the USFL come back. My guess is that this is going to be a cartoonish joke that features over the top displays of "look how much we all LOVE America!!!!" to reel in the vastly overstated "NFL Boycotters" audience.
-
14 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:
Per the rule, once a defender is contacted by a receiver, the defender is allowed to defend themselves. This idea that no defender ever touches a receiver is just plain silly.
And he never cut him off. Please re-read my previous posts as I don’t feel like repeating myself again. It’s poor form to ignore previous points in a thread.
I agree it was a fumble...but again - the premise here is that the league is trying to help the Patriots win. At that point, it's the 4th quarter and they are down 10. What's the point of "rigging" the penalties all game long if you are going to let that play stand?
-
People are focused on PI calls as evidence of the Pats getting breaks. If the league were really trying to assist the Pats, then there's no way they would have allowed that 4th quarter fumble on the trick play to stand. They could easily have overturned that on review. That was at a critical point in the game.
Antonio brown to the pats
in NFL General
Posted
It's a bad look...reeks of an NBA move where superstar players basically get to dictate where they play. But I don't know what the league can do about it. The reality of the situation is that AB had a $30M guaranteed contract on Friday and now he only has a $9M guaranteed contract...he essentially "paid" $21M to become a free agent and sign anywhere. Does he have a good chance of breaking even or doing better on the deal? Sure. He also has the risk of blowing out a knee and never seeing another dollar, in which case this move will have cost him a TON of money.
As for whether he knew the Pats would sign him before he pulled this stunt...I'm sure he had a good idea given that they offered a first round pick for him last year. But as for "tampering" I dunno...the fact is, whether it was the Pats or not, SOMEBODY was going to sign AB once Oakland released him. So it's not like he pulled this stunt thinking there was any chance he'd hit the unemployment line. If it hadn't of been the Pats, it would have been KC or any one of a dozen teams who would have stepped in with similar contracts. He's too big a talent to go unclaimed. Heck...I'm wondering if part of the Pats motivation to sign him was to keep him away from KC.