Jump to content

NFL nixed Saints/Clowney Deal


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 256
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Cheating is a strong word. Shady,Underhanded, Trashy......you know the typical adjectives used to describe the saints organization seems to be better fit.

I don’t want us to miss the real importance here.    Those mouth breathers over at the Saints board have to be losing it right now.    Focus on the positive people!

As others have said, signing someone for the purpose of trading them, is a very different thing, and has numerous problematic issues, both with the teams and with player rights. If the NFL allowe

Posted Images

10 minutes ago, Vandy said:

I thought it was pretty clever try, actually. Didn’t browns and Oilers pull off a similarly creative trade of Brock Osweiler and his cap hit for a high draft pick?

Exactly. But because it was Osweiler, nobody cared. That would have been a great move by the Saints, but it would open up a can of worms the NFL isn't ready for. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, vel said:

Cheating? I wouldn't say that. Their plan was very creative and would work in most other leagues except the very conservative NFL. 

Against the rules. Creative? I guess but I'd imagine other teams would do it if they could too. Personally I think this would suck, you'd have more teams doing this to tank and more teams going all in for 1-3 years.

 

18 minutes ago, Vandy said:

I thought it was pretty clever try, actually. Didn’t browns and Oilers pull off a similarly creative trade of Brock Osweiler and his cap hit for a high draft pick?

They did it and the NFL was pissed.

Brock also wasn't signed specially to be traded. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ovie_Lover said:

Against the rules. Creative? I guess but I'd imagine other teams would do it if they could too. Personally I think this would suck, you'd have more teams doing this to tank and more teams going all in for 1-3 years.

 

They did it and the NFL was passed.

Brock also wasn't signed specially to be traded. 

 

Why is that bad? All teams would be able to do it. 

3 minutes ago, Ovie_Lover said:

Not exactly. Brock wasn't signed specifically to be traded somewhere else.

Brock was traded for the Browns to reach the minimum spend while gaining a second. The Saints didn't have the space, but was willing to pay in draft picks for a team to pay part of it. How is it different? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vel said:

Why is that bad? All teams would be able to do it. 

Brock was traded for the Browns to reach the minimum spend while gaining a second. The Saints didn't have the space, but was willing to pay in draft picks for a team to pay part of it. How is it different? 

Both would have been trading for cap space but the Browns did it without making it too obvious and the NFL was pissed but they could still say "well we wanna see if he can start for us".

Clowney is a FA and would have only been signed just to be traded so he would have a lesser cap hit for a different team that otherwise couldn't acquire him without the trade. So of course the NFL shot that down. I'm sure they'd of shot down the Osweiler one too if it was this obvious before it happened. 

 

And its bad because I'd rather not have the 4-5 bottom teams making trades to strengthen the top 4-5 teams and have others float in the middle mediocrity for years and make the playoffs just to get slapped by a couple of juggernauts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Vandy said:

I thought it was pretty clever try, actually. Didn’t browns and Oilers pull off a similarly creative trade of Brock Osweiler and his cap hit for a high draft pick?

 

3 minutes ago, vel said:

Why is that bad? All teams would be able to do it. 

Brock was traded for the Browns to reach the minimum spend while gaining a second. The Saints didn't have the space, but was willing to pay in draft picks for a team to pay part of it. How is it different? 

There was nothing creative about Osweiler trade. Falcons could have done the same with Carpenter or brown instead of cutting it they had a partner. Houston took the cap hit on bonus, Cleveland took the yearly cap for the league year he was traded.

What Aints tried here is a totally different thing, very creative I must say. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ovie_Lover said:

Both would have been trading for cap space but the Browns did it without making it too obvious and the NFL was pissed but they could still say "well we wanna see if he can start for us".

Clowney is a FA and would have only been signed just to be traded so he would have a lesser cap hit for a different team that otherwise couldn't acquire him without the trade. So of course the NFL shot that down. I'm sure they'd of shot down the Osweiler one too if it was this obvious before it happened. 

 

And its bad because I'd rather not have the 4-5 bottom teams making trades to strengthen the top 4-5 teams and have others float in the middle mediocrity for years and make the playoffs just to get slapped by a couple of juggernauts. 

Osweiler was a straight forward trade. Houston was on hook for past money he was guaranteed. Cleveland for the salary in that league year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 1989Fan said:

Yep this is different because Clowney is a free agent.

Simple. A usual playing field where teams have to deal with their own cap relative to a FA being circumvented and bypassed by letting another team take him out of the market for the sole purpose of utilizing cap space Saints don’t have...is doing more than bending the cap.

This would be different if it was a sign and trade from Seattle; such as a franchise tag situation.

One team has control of player and the player never is on the open market.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As others have said, signing someone for the purpose of trading them, is a very different thing, and has numerous problematic issues, both with the teams and with player rights.

If the NFL allowed this, it would set a bad precedent. Imagine being a player and agreeing to sign with a team, only to find out that team had a deal in place to trade you before signing you. The NFLPA would go berserk

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ovie_Lover said:

Both would have been trading for cap space but the Browns did it without making it too obvious and the NFL was pissed but they could still say "well we wanna see if he can start for us".

Clowney is a FA and would have only been signed just to be traded so he would have a lesser cap hit for a different team that otherwise couldn't acquire him without the trade. So of course the NFL shot that down. I'm sure they'd of shot down the Osweiler one too if it was this obvious before it happened. 

 

And its bad because I'd rather not have the 4-5 bottom teams making trades to strengthen the top 4-5 teams and have others float in the middle mediocrity for years and make the playoffs just to get slapped by a couple of juggernauts. 

That's not what's happening. A team that wants to trade cap space for draft picks is trading paying guys for a roster today in hopes of picking a player tomorrow. The NBA does it. MLB does it. Soccer loans players. It's just a different way of roster building in a cap controlled environment. Again, all 32 teams would have the same opportunity. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, falconsd56 said:

Cheating is a strong word.

Shady,Underhanded, Trashy......you know the typical adjectives used to describe the saints organization seems to be better fit.

Well yeah not cheating per say. Cheating the system though. Underhanded, typical Taints BS

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, falcons007 said:

 

There was nothing creative about Osweiler trade. Falcons could have done the same with Carpenter or brown instead of cutting it they had a partner. Houston took the cap hit on bonus, Cleveland took the yearly cap for the league year he was traded.

What Aints tried here is a totally different thing, very creative I must say. 

Not at all. The Texans traded Osweiler AND a second round pick for the Browns to take his salary. It's the same thing. A team would have been compensated for taking part of Clowney's salary for a draft pick. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vel said:

That's not what's happening. A team that wants to trade cap space for draft picks is trading paying guys for a roster today in hopes of picking a player tomorrow. The NBA does it. MLB does it. Soccer loans players. It's just a different way of roster building in a cap controlled environment. Again, all 32 teams would have the same opportunity. 

That sounds terrible

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vel said:

Not at all. The Texans traded Osweiler AND a second round pick for the Browns to take his salary. It's the same thing. A team would have been compensated for taking part of Clowney's salary for a draft pick. 

It’s not the same. Brock was a Texan for years. Already controlled.

This changes the purpose of FA. Clowney isn’t controlled by a team. It’s a loop hole at best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hjerry said:

As others have said, signing someone for the purpose of trading them, is a very different thing, and has numerous problematic issues, both with the teams and with player rights.

If the NFL allowed this, it would set a bad precedent. Imagine being a player and agreeing to sign with a team, only to find out that team had a deal in place to trade you before signing you. The NFLPA would go berserk

Like the nba does.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...