NFC East: Roger Goodell
Good and interesting insight in this story from Albert Breer on NFL.com about what, exactly, upset the other teams in the NFL about the way the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins spent their money in the uncapped 2010 season. The NFL stripped the Redskins of $36 million and the Cowboys of $10 million in salary cap space over the next two years, and those two teams have filed a grievance against the league and the NFLPA to dispute the punishment. But to this point, it has remained unclear what, exactly, the other teams felt they did wrong.
Albert writes that, by structuring the contracts of Miles Austin, Albert Haynesworth and DeAngelo Hall in such a way as to inflate 2010 base salaries and save money in future years, the Cowboys and Redskins inflated the franchise-player numbers for wide receivers, defensive tackles and cornerbacks. As a result, the Chargers had a hard time keeping Vincent Jackson, the Ravens were handcuffed by the contract they wanted to give Haloti Ngata and the Bengals were unable to keep Johnathan Joseph. For example:
Many thanks to Albert for shining some light on what, exactly, the other owners found wrong with the way the Cowboys and the Redskins behaved in a year that was supposed to have no spending restrictions. The Cowboys and Redskins are arguing that there was no rule against what they did, and while that may be true, Giants owner and NFL management committee chairman John Mara said last month that all teams were warned that they could be punished if they did what these two teams did.
But for a couple of reasons, I continue to believe the teams that are complaining about this are full of it. First of all, commissioner Roger Goodell said at the owners' meetings last month that the reason for the penalties was that the teams in question had attempted to gain a competitive advantage in future years through their 2010 actions. But what Albert writes (on the league's own web site) is something quite different. Albert's reporting indicates that the reason the other teams got upset at the Cowboys and the Redskins was because their actions required them to spend more money than they wanted to spend to pay their own players. And if that's the case, then the artificial, unwritten guidelines the owners tried to put in place to control spending during the uncapped year were not an effort to maintain future competitive balance (as they have claimed publicly), but rather clearly an attempt to control player salaries.
Furthermore, it's important to remember that there never would have been an uncapped 2010 season -- or any reason to cut backroom deals to regulate spending therein -- if the owners hadn't decided to lock out the players in 2011 in an effort to restructure the CBA in a manner more favorable to themselves. Had they negotiated in good faith prior to 2010, they could have put a new CBA in place that would have imposed a salary cap and clear spending rules for that season. But because they had decided long before to impose a lockout strategy and not negotiate until they had the players backed up against the wall, the 2010 season arrived without a salary cap, as the prior CBA said it must if it were to be the final league year.
The entire concept of the uncapped 2010 season was an avoidable mess of the owners' own making. The lockout was an unnecessary act of pure greed, as evidenced by a new CBA that solved almost none of the competitive-balance issues raised by small-market owners. And the idea that the teams could whisper together behind closed doors about acting as though there was a cap when there wasn't and expect every owner to go along with the plan is (and always was) utterly foolish. The salary cap penalties against the Cowboys and Redskins are part of the fallout from the clumsy way in which the NFL's owners executed their negotiating strategy, and I continue to see no common-sense reason why those teams shouldn't expect to get some sort of restitution from the arbitrator.
Albert writes that, by structuring the contracts of Miles Austin, Albert Haynesworth and DeAngelo Hall in such a way as to inflate 2010 base salaries and save money in future years, the Cowboys and Redskins inflated the franchise-player numbers for wide receivers, defensive tackles and cornerbacks. As a result, the Chargers had a hard time keeping Vincent Jackson, the Ravens were handcuffed by the contract they wanted to give Haloti Ngata and the Bengals were unable to keep Johnathan Joseph. For example:
[+] Enlarge
Jason O. Watson/US PresswireOne of the contracts owners were upset about was the one the Cowboys gave to Miles Austin in 2010, according to an NFL.com story.
Jason O. Watson/US PresswireOne of the contracts owners were upset about was the one the Cowboys gave to Miles Austin in 2010, according to an NFL.com story.Austin's contract was instrumental in pushing the receiver number from $9.5 million in 2010 to $11.3 million in 2011. San Diego franchised Vincent Jackson at the latter number in 2011. The leverage Jackson gained from having an $11.4 million tender made him difficult to sign to a long-term deal, and the resulting 2012 franchise figure -- by rule, 120 percent of the previous number, which came out to $13.7 million -- made it even harder to tag him again for the club.
So San Diego, which likely would've tagged Jackson again if the number had been more affordable, let Jackson walk. He signed a five-year, $55.6 million contract with the Buccaneers this offseason.
Many thanks to Albert for shining some light on what, exactly, the other owners found wrong with the way the Cowboys and the Redskins behaved in a year that was supposed to have no spending restrictions. The Cowboys and Redskins are arguing that there was no rule against what they did, and while that may be true, Giants owner and NFL management committee chairman John Mara said last month that all teams were warned that they could be punished if they did what these two teams did.
But for a couple of reasons, I continue to believe the teams that are complaining about this are full of it. First of all, commissioner Roger Goodell said at the owners' meetings last month that the reason for the penalties was that the teams in question had attempted to gain a competitive advantage in future years through their 2010 actions. But what Albert writes (on the league's own web site) is something quite different. Albert's reporting indicates that the reason the other teams got upset at the Cowboys and the Redskins was because their actions required them to spend more money than they wanted to spend to pay their own players. And if that's the case, then the artificial, unwritten guidelines the owners tried to put in place to control spending during the uncapped year were not an effort to maintain future competitive balance (as they have claimed publicly), but rather clearly an attempt to control player salaries.
Furthermore, it's important to remember that there never would have been an uncapped 2010 season -- or any reason to cut backroom deals to regulate spending therein -- if the owners hadn't decided to lock out the players in 2011 in an effort to restructure the CBA in a manner more favorable to themselves. Had they negotiated in good faith prior to 2010, they could have put a new CBA in place that would have imposed a salary cap and clear spending rules for that season. But because they had decided long before to impose a lockout strategy and not negotiate until they had the players backed up against the wall, the 2010 season arrived without a salary cap, as the prior CBA said it must if it were to be the final league year.
The entire concept of the uncapped 2010 season was an avoidable mess of the owners' own making. The lockout was an unnecessary act of pure greed, as evidenced by a new CBA that solved almost none of the competitive-balance issues raised by small-market owners. And the idea that the teams could whisper together behind closed doors about acting as though there was a cap when there wasn't and expect every owner to go along with the plan is (and always was) utterly foolish. The salary cap penalties against the Cowboys and Redskins are part of the fallout from the clumsy way in which the NFL's owners executed their negotiating strategy, and I continue to see no common-sense reason why those teams shouldn't expect to get some sort of restitution from the arbitrator.
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said there was still no date set for the arbitration hearing on the salary-cap penalties against the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins. Goodell did take a couple of questions on the matter at his news conference wrapping up the owners meetings here Wednesday morning, but he didn't shine too much light on the reasons the Redskins were penalized $36 million against the cap and the Cowboys $10 million against the cap over the next two years.
"The question was, 'Did any teams gain a competitive advantage?'" Goodell said. "And that was the focus that we and the NFLPA had in reaching our agreement -- making sure that no team had a long-term competitive advantage."
The NFL's management council, which imposed the penalties, determined that the Redskins and Cowboys did work to gain a competitive advantage in future seasons by the way they structured contracts during the uncapped 2010 season. As Goodell points out, the penalties were agreed to by the players' union, though as we first reported on March 12, the union only agreed to them after the league threatened to reduce this year's salary cap.
As for the issue of how a team could be penalized for the way it spent its money during an uncapped year, Goodell said: "I think the rules were articulated. I'd have to go back and look at it again, but the rules were quite clear -- the rules that were followed and the rules that weren't."
It's hard to understand what Goodell could "go back and look at," since I think we've all been under the impression that these rules were not spelled out in any document. Giants owner John Mara, the chair of the management council, said Sunday that the rules intended to govern spending and contract structures in the uncapped year "came up several times in our meetings." There's nothing so far that's indicated the Redskins and Cowboys were in violation of any written rule.
Regardless, the owners did vote Tuesday to ratify the management council's decision. The vote passed 29-2-1, according to Goodell, with the Cowboys and Redskins obviously voting no and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers abstaining. Goodell said it was not necessary to have a full-membership vote to ratify a management council decision, but that it was not unprecedented. It was likely done as a show of support for the punishments in advance of the arbitration hearing.
"The question was, 'Did any teams gain a competitive advantage?'" Goodell said. "And that was the focus that we and the NFLPA had in reaching our agreement -- making sure that no team had a long-term competitive advantage."
The NFL's management council, which imposed the penalties, determined that the Redskins and Cowboys did work to gain a competitive advantage in future seasons by the way they structured contracts during the uncapped 2010 season. As Goodell points out, the penalties were agreed to by the players' union, though as we first reported on March 12, the union only agreed to them after the league threatened to reduce this year's salary cap.
As for the issue of how a team could be penalized for the way it spent its money during an uncapped year, Goodell said: "I think the rules were articulated. I'd have to go back and look at it again, but the rules were quite clear -- the rules that were followed and the rules that weren't."
It's hard to understand what Goodell could "go back and look at," since I think we've all been under the impression that these rules were not spelled out in any document. Giants owner John Mara, the chair of the management council, said Sunday that the rules intended to govern spending and contract structures in the uncapped year "came up several times in our meetings." There's nothing so far that's indicated the Redskins and Cowboys were in violation of any written rule.
Regardless, the owners did vote Tuesday to ratify the management council's decision. The vote passed 29-2-1, according to Goodell, with the Cowboys and Redskins obviously voting no and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers abstaining. Goodell said it was not necessary to have a full-membership vote to ratify a management council decision, but that it was not unprecedented. It was likely done as a show of support for the punishments in advance of the arbitration hearing.
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- All right, I can't actually see the beach or the ocean from inside the media workroom here at the NFL owners meetings. But I know they're only a few feet away, on the other side of the walls of The Breakers. So you'll have to take my word for it as I sit and answer questions for you in our weekly NFC East chat. It starts at noon ET, as it does every Tuesday, and will last about an hour unless I get word that Jerry Jones is in the lobby publicly ripping John Mara and Roger Goodell over the salary-cap penalties. If that's going on, I'm going to go listen. And maybe egg him on.
Other than that, though, I'm all yours. Just click on these blue letters right here at noon and we'll have ourselves a time.
Other than that, though, I'm all yours. Just click on these blue letters right here at noon and we'll have ourselves a time.
Breakfast links: Giants 'slow-playing' market
March, 27, 2012
Mar 27
8:00
AM ET
By
Dan Graziano | ESPN.com
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- We are all up bright and early this morning for the first of two "coaches breakfasts" at the NFL owners meetings. Pretty cool deal, actually. Today, all of the AFC coaches sit at tables for an hour and you can sit with them and ask them anything you want. The NFC coaches do it tomorrow. So, in my capacity as NFC East blogger, I will of course be working those tables tomorrow for information and insight from Jason Garrett, Tom Coughlin, Andy Reid and Mike Shanahan. But I'm going to today's session, too, to do some work on another project and because you never know what you might learn.
I don't know if they'll have links there. I do know you have them here.
Dallas Cowboys
After saying he'd talk with reporters Monday about the salary cap penalty issue, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones declined to do so and in fact stayed very much out of sight all day. (I mean, I was looking for the guy from 8 am until 10 pm, and I saw him once, and he was in a room I wasn't allowed to enter.) It sounds as though the Cowboys and the Redskins will both keep quiet on this, though you should stay tuned because you never know with Jerry, right?
Wanna hear what Tony Romo thinks about Peyton Manning and Tim Tebow? Here you go. What? Hey, at least it's not about Romo playing golf. I know you guys just love it when I give you the Romo golf updates...
New York Giants
Giants general manager Jerry Reese spoke with Sirius XM Radio about several issues, including the team's ongoing hunt for a middle linebacker and the idea of "slow-playing" free agency. I'm amazed that I still get questions from Giants fans about why they haven't done much in free agency. They don't have much cap room, first of all. And second of all, this is how they usually handle free agency, and it seems to be working well for them, no?
Former Giants wide receiver Steve Smith signed with the Rams, which could be an Eagles link because he "played" for them last year and could be a Cowboys link because some Cowboys fans were wondering if their team might sign him to replace Laurent Robinson but is ultimately a Giants link because Smith was much more a Giant than he ever was an Eagle or certainly a Cowboy.
Philadelphia Eagles
Boston College linebacker Luke Kuechly is doing a periodic draft diary for Philly.com, and Sheil Kapadia has the latest installment. We don't know if the Eagles will end up picking Kuechly in the first round, but he's a guy who would fit nicely there, and he's someone who's been on the minds of Eagles fans, so there you go -- a little look into the pre-draft process through his eyes.
Jeff McLane explains why he thinks the Eagles could use one of their first three draft picks on a quarterback.
Washington Redskins
Patriots owner Robert Kraft said that commissioner Roger Goodell has the "full support" of the league's other owners on the matter of the salary cap penalties against the Redskins and Cowboys. Of course, Kraft also said Goodell was "in the best position to speak to that," and a few hours later Goodell refused to do so. So, you know. Whatever.
My old friend LaVar Arrington thinks this is a case of two NFL owners bucking the "old-school" approach the others are so determined to preserve. And in truth, this does feel more and more like a vindictive personal issue among the owners involved. That's probably why the league doesn't want anyone talking about it anymore. If the arbitrator assigned to the case thinks there's some kind of personal motivation behind the penalties, that might make him more likely to overturn them.
I don't know if they'll have links there. I do know you have them here.
Dallas Cowboys
After saying he'd talk with reporters Monday about the salary cap penalty issue, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones declined to do so and in fact stayed very much out of sight all day. (I mean, I was looking for the guy from 8 am until 10 pm, and I saw him once, and he was in a room I wasn't allowed to enter.) It sounds as though the Cowboys and the Redskins will both keep quiet on this, though you should stay tuned because you never know with Jerry, right?
Wanna hear what Tony Romo thinks about Peyton Manning and Tim Tebow? Here you go. What? Hey, at least it's not about Romo playing golf. I know you guys just love it when I give you the Romo golf updates...
New York Giants
Giants general manager Jerry Reese spoke with Sirius XM Radio about several issues, including the team's ongoing hunt for a middle linebacker and the idea of "slow-playing" free agency. I'm amazed that I still get questions from Giants fans about why they haven't done much in free agency. They don't have much cap room, first of all. And second of all, this is how they usually handle free agency, and it seems to be working well for them, no?
Former Giants wide receiver Steve Smith signed with the Rams, which could be an Eagles link because he "played" for them last year and could be a Cowboys link because some Cowboys fans were wondering if their team might sign him to replace Laurent Robinson but is ultimately a Giants link because Smith was much more a Giant than he ever was an Eagle or certainly a Cowboy.
Philadelphia Eagles
Boston College linebacker Luke Kuechly is doing a periodic draft diary for Philly.com, and Sheil Kapadia has the latest installment. We don't know if the Eagles will end up picking Kuechly in the first round, but he's a guy who would fit nicely there, and he's someone who's been on the minds of Eagles fans, so there you go -- a little look into the pre-draft process through his eyes.
Jeff McLane explains why he thinks the Eagles could use one of their first three draft picks on a quarterback.
Washington Redskins
Patriots owner Robert Kraft said that commissioner Roger Goodell has the "full support" of the league's other owners on the matter of the salary cap penalties against the Redskins and Cowboys. Of course, Kraft also said Goodell was "in the best position to speak to that," and a few hours later Goodell refused to do so. So, you know. Whatever.
My old friend LaVar Arrington thinks this is a case of two NFL owners bucking the "old-school" approach the others are so determined to preserve. And in truth, this does feel more and more like a vindictive personal issue among the owners involved. That's probably why the league doesn't want anyone talking about it anymore. If the arbitrator assigned to the case thinks there's some kind of personal motivation behind the penalties, that might make him more likely to overturn them.
Goodell: Bounty investigation still open
March, 26, 2012
Mar 26
8:30
PM ET
By
Dan Graziano | ESPN.com
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Last week, when the NFL imposed discipline against the New Orleans Saints and former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams for the bounty program that went on in New Orleans, I wrote that the Washington Redskins were in the clear. In spite of Washington's having once employed Williams as its defensive coordinator and been part of the league's investigation into the bounty matter, the league's release announcing the Saints' penalties seemed to indicate that Williams' former employers were not at risk of being penalized. When I asked a league official whether the Redskins were in the clear, that official referred me to that section of the release.
However, when asked about this very issue at his news conference Monday evening at the NFL owners' meetings, commissioner Roger Goodell left open the possibility that further information could come to light that could implicate people and teams who have not been implicated.
"We haven't closed the investigation," Goodell said. "We haven't stopped investigating, and if we get new information, we'll act on it. We're not saying everybody's got a free pass here. If we get credible information, we're going to follow up on it."
There have been several reports recently in which former Redskins players, anonymous and otherwise, have discussed the bounty programs that were in place during Williams' time as Washington's defensive coordinator. So stay tuned on this, I guess. Still hard to imagine the Redskins could incur 2012 punishment for 2004-07 offenses, but in the NFL, you really never know.
Goodell should address cap penalty issue
March, 26, 2012
Mar 26
7:07
PM ET
By
Dan Graziano | ESPN.com
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Those Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys fans hoping to get some explanation from the NFL about the salary cap penalties levied against their teams are going to be waiting for a while. Asked about the matter in his news conference Monday night at the NFL owners meetings, commissioner Roger Goodell declined to comment.
"We put out a release on this, and we're not going to have any comment beyond that," Goodell said.
The NFL released a statement Monday afternoon, and the statement ended by saying the league and clubs would have no further comment on the matter. Redskins owner Daniel Snyder and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones did discuss the matter with the league's other owners in a morning meeting, according to a source with knowledge of what happened in the meeting, and those two owners were then asked to leave the room so the remaining 30 owners could discuss the issue among themselves. It's unclear what was discussed, other than the apparent decision not to talk about the matter publicly so long as it remains a pending case for arbitrator Stephen Burbank.
This is, in the opinion of this reporter, pretty weak. Goodell spent a good portion of his news conference talking about the importance of increased transparency to fans. There were 19 fans invited to sit in on the afternoon session of the meetings and discuss issues with the owners in an open forum. Four of those fans were invited to speak to the media at the end of Goodell's Monday news conference (though, to their credit, nearly all of the media exited the room rather than function as props for the league's propaganda effort).
Fans of the Redskins and Cowboys are looking for further explanation about what their teams did to deserve to lose $36 million and $10 million worth of salary cap space, respectively, over the next two years. For the league to talk about transparency one minute and to hide that explanation behind a mutually agreed-upon gag order the next feels like a failure to practice what they preach. Giants owner John Mara, who chairs the NFL Management Council that imposed the penalties, discussed the issue Sunday before the gag order went into effect, but more detail is needed for fans to truly understand what went on, and the NFL does not, apparently, believe it needs to offer it.
The Cowboys and Redskins also were declining comment Monday, though Goodell did say Snyder and Jones were welcome to speak to the media about what they said in their address to their fellow owners if they so chose. As I wrote earlier in the day, the way the Cowboys and Redskins are acting about this makes me think they believe they have a strong case and can win in front of Burbank. The way Goodell and the league are acting about it reinforces my belief that they just wish it would go away.
"We put out a release on this, and we're not going to have any comment beyond that," Goodell said.
The NFL released a statement Monday afternoon, and the statement ended by saying the league and clubs would have no further comment on the matter. Redskins owner Daniel Snyder and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones did discuss the matter with the league's other owners in a morning meeting, according to a source with knowledge of what happened in the meeting, and those two owners were then asked to leave the room so the remaining 30 owners could discuss the issue among themselves. It's unclear what was discussed, other than the apparent decision not to talk about the matter publicly so long as it remains a pending case for arbitrator Stephen Burbank.
This is, in the opinion of this reporter, pretty weak. Goodell spent a good portion of his news conference talking about the importance of increased transparency to fans. There were 19 fans invited to sit in on the afternoon session of the meetings and discuss issues with the owners in an open forum. Four of those fans were invited to speak to the media at the end of Goodell's Monday news conference (though, to their credit, nearly all of the media exited the room rather than function as props for the league's propaganda effort).
Fans of the Redskins and Cowboys are looking for further explanation about what their teams did to deserve to lose $36 million and $10 million worth of salary cap space, respectively, over the next two years. For the league to talk about transparency one minute and to hide that explanation behind a mutually agreed-upon gag order the next feels like a failure to practice what they preach. Giants owner John Mara, who chairs the NFL Management Council that imposed the penalties, discussed the issue Sunday before the gag order went into effect, but more detail is needed for fans to truly understand what went on, and the NFL does not, apparently, believe it needs to offer it.
The Cowboys and Redskins also were declining comment Monday, though Goodell did say Snyder and Jones were welcome to speak to the media about what they said in their address to their fellow owners if they so chose. As I wrote earlier in the day, the way the Cowboys and Redskins are acting about this makes me think they believe they have a strong case and can win in front of Burbank. The way Goodell and the league are acting about it reinforces my belief that they just wish it would go away.
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- We're about an hour away from commissioner Roger Goodell's news conference here at the NFL owners meetings, but it doesn't look as though we're going to get much out of him on the issue of the salary cap penalties against the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins. The NFL just put out a statement acknowledging that those two teams have challenged those penalties, and that arbitrator Stephen Burbank will preside over the arbitration hearing. This is the statement, in its entirety:
That last part indicates that Goodell does not intend to entertain questions on this issue at his news conference today. Which is a shame, since we're all still awaiting a full explanation of what exactly the Cowboys and Redskins did wrong.
Two other things that caught my eye:
1. The NFL's repeated referral to the punishments as an "agreement" with the NFLPA. It was, of course. The players' union agreed to the penalties after the league threatened to reduce this year's salary cap if they didn't. The fact that the NFLPA signed off on this is clearly part of the league's case here.
2. The line about "competitive balance" is disingenuous. Just because money is redistributed from the caps of the Redskins and Cowboys to other teams does not mean it will be spent. The league has taken money away from two teams that love to spend it and redistributed it among 28 other teams, many of which never spend to anywhere near the cap. So this surely isn't a perfect solution for the players -- just one into which the league was able to strong-arm the union.
The Cowboys and Redskins have challenged the NFL's recent agreement with the NFL Players Association to set the salary cap for 2012 and to reallocate certain salary cap room from Dallas and Washington to 28 other clubs.
The reallocation aspect of the agreement is intended to address competitive issues from contract practices by those clubs in the 2010 League Year intended to avoid certain salary cap charges in 2011 and later years.
Under the agreement with the NFLPA, the two clubs will be charged a total of $46 million in cap room in the 2012 and 2013 seasons ($18 million per year for Washington; $5 million per year for Dallas). That room, instead, will be reallocated to 28 other clubs in the 2012 and 2013 season as determined by the Club. (The New Orleans Saints and Oakland Raiders, which engaged in similar contract practices at a far different level, will not receive any additional cap room. Those two clubs have not challenged the agreement with the NFLPA.)
The agreement will promote competitive balance without reducing the salary cap or player spending on a league-wide basis.
The arbitration will be heard by Professor Stephen Burbank of the University of Pennsylvania. No date has been set for a hearing. The clubs were advised of the status of the proceeding at today's league meeting. The NFL and Clubs will have no further comment at this time.
That last part indicates that Goodell does not intend to entertain questions on this issue at his news conference today. Which is a shame, since we're all still awaiting a full explanation of what exactly the Cowboys and Redskins did wrong.
Two other things that caught my eye:
1. The NFL's repeated referral to the punishments as an "agreement" with the NFLPA. It was, of course. The players' union agreed to the penalties after the league threatened to reduce this year's salary cap if they didn't. The fact that the NFLPA signed off on this is clearly part of the league's case here.
2. The line about "competitive balance" is disingenuous. Just because money is redistributed from the caps of the Redskins and Cowboys to other teams does not mean it will be spent. The league has taken money away from two teams that love to spend it and redistributed it among 28 other teams, many of which never spend to anywhere near the cap. So this surely isn't a perfect solution for the players -- just one into which the league was able to strong-arm the union.
Sometimes, you guys email questions. On Saturdays, I like to pick through them and see if I can offer some answers. Today is Saturday, so...
Larry, who lists his location as "Anywhere but here," is rankled by the idea that the New York Giants always draft the "best player available," regardless of need. Larry asks if doing this "simply makes their decisions less informed."
Dan Graziano: The Giants' draft philosophy, which is almost always to take the best player available on their board regardless of need, is based on their belief that they maintain a deep roster and excel at developing their own players. It can be frustrating to watch them pass on positions like linebacker and offensive linemen when they appear to need them year after year, but they prioritize certain positions (defensive line, defensive back) more than others in the draft and believe that's where the value lies. The Giants have faith in their veterans and their coaching staff to manage the roster, and they don't view draft picks as quick fixes. They view them as assets to be developed and brought along in the program, and that's the way they manage them while they're picking them and after they've signed them.
Jake from the Death Star Command Centre (goodness, you guys are clever this week...) isn't awed by the Philadelphia Eagles' current backup quarterback situation, especially in light of the fact that the Eagles' starting quarterback has a bit of a history of missing a game or two here and there.
DG: Yeah, the top backups on the market got snatched up quickly -- Kyle Orton by the Cowboys and Jason Campbell by the Bears. So the Eagles have Trent Edwards, who didn't play in 2011, and Mike Kafka, who couldn't beat out scatter-armed Vince Young for the Eagles' backup job in 2011. As you point out, Jake, Michael Vick is far from a guarantee to play all 16 games, and unless Kafka takes a dramatic leap forward this offseason you're not going to have much confidence in whoever comes in to replace Vick if he gets hurt. I'll say this, though: As uninspiring as Edwards may seem, the Eagles' coaching staff saw something they liked when they worked him out. And they have a history of getting more than we expect them to get out of that backup QB spot. And besides, how much worse can he be than Young was? Don't be surprised to see the Eagles take a quarterback at some point in the draft.
Mark Reynolds from Roanoke, Va. (Hey! An actual place!) wonders why NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has yet to comment on the salary cap penalties handed down 12 days ago to the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins. Goodell gave some interviews this week, but the topics were limited to the Saints' bounty scandal, and he was not asked about the Redskins/Cowboys issue.
DG: You're right, Mark. He hasn't commented, and doesn't appear to have been asked. But he's giving a news conference Monday at the NFL's annual meetings in Palm Beach, Fla. I will be there, and I promise you, if no one else asks him a question about this, I will. And I'll make sure and tell you everything he says about it.
Larry, who lists his location as "Anywhere but here," is rankled by the idea that the New York Giants always draft the "best player available," regardless of need. Larry asks if doing this "simply makes their decisions less informed."
Dan Graziano: The Giants' draft philosophy, which is almost always to take the best player available on their board regardless of need, is based on their belief that they maintain a deep roster and excel at developing their own players. It can be frustrating to watch them pass on positions like linebacker and offensive linemen when they appear to need them year after year, but they prioritize certain positions (defensive line, defensive back) more than others in the draft and believe that's where the value lies. The Giants have faith in their veterans and their coaching staff to manage the roster, and they don't view draft picks as quick fixes. They view them as assets to be developed and brought along in the program, and that's the way they manage them while they're picking them and after they've signed them.
Jake from the Death Star Command Centre (goodness, you guys are clever this week...) isn't awed by the Philadelphia Eagles' current backup quarterback situation, especially in light of the fact that the Eagles' starting quarterback has a bit of a history of missing a game or two here and there.
DG: Yeah, the top backups on the market got snatched up quickly -- Kyle Orton by the Cowboys and Jason Campbell by the Bears. So the Eagles have Trent Edwards, who didn't play in 2011, and Mike Kafka, who couldn't beat out scatter-armed Vince Young for the Eagles' backup job in 2011. As you point out, Jake, Michael Vick is far from a guarantee to play all 16 games, and unless Kafka takes a dramatic leap forward this offseason you're not going to have much confidence in whoever comes in to replace Vick if he gets hurt. I'll say this, though: As uninspiring as Edwards may seem, the Eagles' coaching staff saw something they liked when they worked him out. And they have a history of getting more than we expect them to get out of that backup QB spot. And besides, how much worse can he be than Young was? Don't be surprised to see the Eagles take a quarterback at some point in the draft.
Mark Reynolds from Roanoke, Va. (Hey! An actual place!) wonders why NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has yet to comment on the salary cap penalties handed down 12 days ago to the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins. Goodell gave some interviews this week, but the topics were limited to the Saints' bounty scandal, and he was not asked about the Redskins/Cowboys issue.
DG: You're right, Mark. He hasn't commented, and doesn't appear to have been asked. But he's giving a news conference Monday at the NFL's annual meetings in Palm Beach, Fla. I will be there, and I promise you, if no one else asks him a question about this, I will. And I'll make sure and tell you everything he says about it.
Morning. The new league year begins at 4 p.m. ET, and while two of our teams may have less to spend than they initially thought, it promises to be an interesting day on which speculation finally begins converting to reality. No longer must we wonder what our teams will do once free agency begins. Today, we get to watch and see.
At this hour, it is still technically not yet the new league year. So one last time, our links are in order of this past year's division standings. Tomorrow, they'll be alphabetical again.
New York Giants
Old friend Kevin Boss has been released by the Raiders. Lots of people were asking, in the wake of this news, whether this meant he'd come back to the Giants. It makes perfect sense to me. Boss knows the system. The Giants need a tight end. He's not likely to cost anything near what he cost last year. He probably regrets leaving. Why not? If he's healthy, the Giants need to at least look at it.
Free-agent running back Mike Tolbert says he wants to be the guy to replace Brandon Jacobs in New York. I say it's a great fit. Tolbert is a different kind of back than Ahmad Bradshaw is. He's used to being in a committee situation and apparently wouldn't mind being in one again. He's good enough to be an every-down guy if and when Bradshaw has to miss a game. Tolbert and Michael Bush, two starter-quality free agents who have been operating in running back committees, make the most sense as Jacobs replacements if the Giants can afford them. The question now for Tolbert is how much he expects to make. They're right up against the salary cap, which is why Jacobs is gone in the first place.
Philadelphia Eagles
Rich Hofmann wonders if free agency will be the time when the Eagles, who should be feeling a sense of urgency about the coming season, start to show it. I don't think that's how the Eagles roll. And while they might make a signing or two (Rich raises the London Fletcher possibility we discussed here last week), they're not likely to go nuts the way they did a year ago. Those players are all still there, or the good ones are at least, and they believe they'll perform better in Year 2.
The Eagles did take care of restricted free agent Antonio Dixon on Monday, tendering him at second-round level. If any team wants to sign him to an offer sheet, the Eagles will have seven days to match the offer or receive a second-round pick from the team that wants him. Basically means he's not likely to go anywhere.
Dallas Cowboys
Jean-Jacques Taylor writes that the salary-cap sanctions against the Cowboys show that Jerry Jones doesn't wield the same power he used to in an NFL that's become a Roger Goodell dictatorship. I don't think that's what happened here. It wasn't Goodell who pushed for these sanctions, but rather the other owners. And it does bear mentioning that the new chairman of the NFL Management Council, which issued the sanctions, is Giants owner John Mara. Jones and the Redskins' Dan Snyder likely flaunted the 2010 guidelines because they saw that they constituted illegal collusion and figured the NFL would have to admit to such if it ever wanted to call them on it. They just didn't count on the NFL getting its union to go along with the punishment, which effectively cut off their avenue for complaint.
Todd Archer explains what you really want to know if you're a Cowboys fan -- why the sanctions announced Monday don't necessarily kill the Cowboys' plans to use free agency to fill the many holes on their roster.
Washington Redskins
Regardless of the sanctions, the Redskins still need to be active and intelligent in free agency, according to Mike Jones and Mark Maske, who run down some of the Skins' potential moves. One name that popped on the market late Monday is that of right tackle Eric Winston, who was released by the Houston Texans in a surprise move and should be one of the Redskins' first phone calls this afternoon.
Dan Daly writes that the sanctions are a disgrace, and that the Redskins were negligent for allowing them to happen. Strong take, but again, I'm not sure I agree. The Redskins broke no rule whatsoever. They simply acted in a way that upset their competitors. Unfortunately for them, the NFL is a business in which their competitors have the ability to band together and punish them for behavior they don't like. I guess the Redskins should have known that, but (a) it strikes me as having been worth a shot and (b) they have so much cap room this year that it's unlikely to matter too much anyway.
At this hour, it is still technically not yet the new league year. So one last time, our links are in order of this past year's division standings. Tomorrow, they'll be alphabetical again.
New York Giants
Old friend Kevin Boss has been released by the Raiders. Lots of people were asking, in the wake of this news, whether this meant he'd come back to the Giants. It makes perfect sense to me. Boss knows the system. The Giants need a tight end. He's not likely to cost anything near what he cost last year. He probably regrets leaving. Why not? If he's healthy, the Giants need to at least look at it.
Free-agent running back Mike Tolbert says he wants to be the guy to replace Brandon Jacobs in New York. I say it's a great fit. Tolbert is a different kind of back than Ahmad Bradshaw is. He's used to being in a committee situation and apparently wouldn't mind being in one again. He's good enough to be an every-down guy if and when Bradshaw has to miss a game. Tolbert and Michael Bush, two starter-quality free agents who have been operating in running back committees, make the most sense as Jacobs replacements if the Giants can afford them. The question now for Tolbert is how much he expects to make. They're right up against the salary cap, which is why Jacobs is gone in the first place.
Philadelphia Eagles
Rich Hofmann wonders if free agency will be the time when the Eagles, who should be feeling a sense of urgency about the coming season, start to show it. I don't think that's how the Eagles roll. And while they might make a signing or two (Rich raises the London Fletcher possibility we discussed here last week), they're not likely to go nuts the way they did a year ago. Those players are all still there, or the good ones are at least, and they believe they'll perform better in Year 2.
The Eagles did take care of restricted free agent Antonio Dixon on Monday, tendering him at second-round level. If any team wants to sign him to an offer sheet, the Eagles will have seven days to match the offer or receive a second-round pick from the team that wants him. Basically means he's not likely to go anywhere.
Dallas Cowboys
Jean-Jacques Taylor writes that the salary-cap sanctions against the Cowboys show that Jerry Jones doesn't wield the same power he used to in an NFL that's become a Roger Goodell dictatorship. I don't think that's what happened here. It wasn't Goodell who pushed for these sanctions, but rather the other owners. And it does bear mentioning that the new chairman of the NFL Management Council, which issued the sanctions, is Giants owner John Mara. Jones and the Redskins' Dan Snyder likely flaunted the 2010 guidelines because they saw that they constituted illegal collusion and figured the NFL would have to admit to such if it ever wanted to call them on it. They just didn't count on the NFL getting its union to go along with the punishment, which effectively cut off their avenue for complaint.
Todd Archer explains what you really want to know if you're a Cowboys fan -- why the sanctions announced Monday don't necessarily kill the Cowboys' plans to use free agency to fill the many holes on their roster.
Washington Redskins
Regardless of the sanctions, the Redskins still need to be active and intelligent in free agency, according to Mike Jones and Mark Maske, who run down some of the Skins' potential moves. One name that popped on the market late Monday is that of right tackle Eric Winston, who was released by the Houston Texans in a surprise move and should be one of the Redskins' first phone calls this afternoon.
Dan Daly writes that the sanctions are a disgrace, and that the Redskins were negligent for allowing them to happen. Strong take, but again, I'm not sure I agree. The Redskins broke no rule whatsoever. They simply acted in a way that upset their competitors. Unfortunately for them, the NFL is a business in which their competitors have the ability to band together and punish them for behavior they don't like. I guess the Redskins should have known that, but (a) it strikes me as having been worth a shot and (b) they have so much cap room this year that it's unlikely to matter too much anyway.
Breakfast links: Morning after in Philly
August, 19, 2011
8/19/11
8:00
AM ET
By
Dan Graziano | ESPN.com
DALLAS -- Up and back at 'em, and trying to figure out why it sounds as though there's a marching band practicing outside my hotel at 6:00 in the morning. But that's not your problem. You want your links.
Dallas Cowboys
Patrick Crayton is enjoying these Chargers-Cowboys joint practices, as it's allowing him to reconnect with some of his former Cowboys teammates. As he raced to the team bus following Thursday's practice, Crayton was asked about the Cowboys' potential need for a third receiver with Roy Williams gone. "I won't be available," he said, smiling.
The Cowboys have switched Isaiah Greenhouse from inside linebacker to fullback. Jason Garrett said it's a case of a guy impressing on special teams and the coaching staff deciding to try to find him an opportunity as a result. He wasn't getting that opportunity at linebacker, so here's something new they think he can handle. Never know.
New York Giants
The Star-Ledger's Matthew Stanmyre has an intense, painful and outstanding look at Darius Hamilton, a New Jersey prep football star and the son of former Giant Keith Hamilton. The relationship has been brutal at times, with Keith having been arrested for child abuse after beating Darius with an electrical cord over a bad report card, but they appear to have survived it, and their story is the best Giants-related read out there this morning.
Mathias Kiwanuka spoke with The New York Times about the ways in which his neck injury and his brother's motorcycle accident have altered his perspective on his life and football career.
Philadelphia Eagles
Plenty to criticize from the Eagles' extremely disappointing preseason effort against the Steelers on Thursday night. Jeff McLane zeroes in on Casey Matthews and takes the Eagles to task for their decision to go with a rookie at middle linebacker after all of the improvements they made elsewhere on the roster. As Jeff points out, that decision isn't final and still could be corrected.
And while this isn't game related, Les Bowen points out that those focusing on the did-Roger-Goodell-steer-Michael-Vick-to-Philly part of that GQ story are missing the overall point of the story -- which is about how race influences people's perspectives on Vick's story and the depth of Vick's own feelings about his crimes and the reaction to them. Les is, of course, correct.
Washington Redskins
Redskins defensive coordinator Jim Haslett says he's happy with what he's seen so far from his defensive line rotation, particularly the way Barry Cofield has taken to the nose tackle position. When I was at Redskins camp, more than one person told me how nice it was to have a nose tackle who actually was excited about playing nose tackle, which may or may not have been a series of digs at another guy who's not there anymore.
And yeah, it's John Beck time tonight, folks, as Beck gets the start in the preseason game against Indianapolis. Remember, the Redskins' coaches say they're sure Beck is talented enough to be an NFL quarterback and now want to see how he handles the spotlight and pressure of his opportunity. So all eyes will be on Beck in the Redskins' second preseason game, and for good reason.
Sadly, I'll be in the air during most of this game, flying back home from Dallas after my trip to Cowboys training camp here. But I plan to watch the game upon my return home and will offer you my own observations sometime Saturday morning. Meantime, more today from the Cowboys and anything else that may catch our attention in the wild and woolly NFC East.
Dallas Cowboys
Patrick Crayton is enjoying these Chargers-Cowboys joint practices, as it's allowing him to reconnect with some of his former Cowboys teammates. As he raced to the team bus following Thursday's practice, Crayton was asked about the Cowboys' potential need for a third receiver with Roy Williams gone. "I won't be available," he said, smiling.
The Cowboys have switched Isaiah Greenhouse from inside linebacker to fullback. Jason Garrett said it's a case of a guy impressing on special teams and the coaching staff deciding to try to find him an opportunity as a result. He wasn't getting that opportunity at linebacker, so here's something new they think he can handle. Never know.
New York Giants
The Star-Ledger's Matthew Stanmyre has an intense, painful and outstanding look at Darius Hamilton, a New Jersey prep football star and the son of former Giant Keith Hamilton. The relationship has been brutal at times, with Keith having been arrested for child abuse after beating Darius with an electrical cord over a bad report card, but they appear to have survived it, and their story is the best Giants-related read out there this morning.
Mathias Kiwanuka spoke with The New York Times about the ways in which his neck injury and his brother's motorcycle accident have altered his perspective on his life and football career.
Philadelphia Eagles
Plenty to criticize from the Eagles' extremely disappointing preseason effort against the Steelers on Thursday night. Jeff McLane zeroes in on Casey Matthews and takes the Eagles to task for their decision to go with a rookie at middle linebacker after all of the improvements they made elsewhere on the roster. As Jeff points out, that decision isn't final and still could be corrected.
And while this isn't game related, Les Bowen points out that those focusing on the did-Roger-Goodell-steer-Michael-Vick-to-Philly part of that GQ story are missing the overall point of the story -- which is about how race influences people's perspectives on Vick's story and the depth of Vick's own feelings about his crimes and the reaction to them. Les is, of course, correct.
Washington Redskins
Redskins defensive coordinator Jim Haslett says he's happy with what he's seen so far from his defensive line rotation, particularly the way Barry Cofield has taken to the nose tackle position. When I was at Redskins camp, more than one person told me how nice it was to have a nose tackle who actually was excited about playing nose tackle, which may or may not have been a series of digs at another guy who's not there anymore.
And yeah, it's John Beck time tonight, folks, as Beck gets the start in the preseason game against Indianapolis. Remember, the Redskins' coaches say they're sure Beck is talented enough to be an NFL quarterback and now want to see how he handles the spotlight and pressure of his opportunity. So all eyes will be on Beck in the Redskins' second preseason game, and for good reason.
Sadly, I'll be in the air during most of this game, flying back home from Dallas after my trip to Cowboys training camp here. But I plan to watch the game upon my return home and will offer you my own observations sometime Saturday morning. Meantime, more today from the Cowboys and anything else that may catch our attention in the wild and woolly NFC East.
Did Goodell steer Vick to Philadelphia?
August, 18, 2011
8/18/11
10:02
AM ET
By
Dan Graziano | ESPN.com
In this very good GQ story on Michael Vick by Will Leitch, one paragraph in particular is raising NFL eyebrows this morning, and it is this one:
"I think I can say this now, because it's not going to hurt anybody's feelings, and it's the truth," Vick tells me a few weeks after the commencement ceremony. "I didn't want to come to Philadelphia. Being the third-team quarterback is nothing to smile about. Cincinnati and Buffalo were better options." Those two teams wanted him and would've allowed him to start, but after meeting with commissioner Roger Goodell and other reps from the NFL, Vick was convinced -- and granted league approval -- to sign with Philly. "And I commend and thank them, because they put me in the right situation."
The immediate question is whether Goodell had any business influencing where Vick signed once he got out of prison, and some have raised the issue of whether the Bengals or Bills will or should be upset about this. I see the point but have some issues with that interpretation.
First, I don't buy that the Bengals would have started Vick ahead of Carson Palmer in 2009, fresh out of prison. I may buy that the Bills would have done it, since they were going with Trent Edwards and eventually Ryan Fitzpatrick, but to say he was a starting option even for a team as quarterback-desperate as Buffalo is revisionist history.
Year of the Quarterback
ESPN has dedicated 2011 to examining one of the most crucial positions in all of sports -- the quarterback.
Year of the QB »
Goodell's mission at that time was not to return Vick to on-field football glory but simply to return him to NFL society and allow him to resume his career in the situation that would best enable him to be a productive member of that society on and off the field. Goodell had a lot of help in this effort, from agent Joel Segal to NFLPA chief DeMaurice Smith to former Colts coach Tony Dungy, who served as a mentor to Vick during and after Vick's prison stay.
Now, to Goodell and all of those other people, the Eagles looked like the best spot for a number of reasons. They all believed coach Andy Reid, in part because of his own personal experience with his sons and their legal trouble, would be a compassionate mentor. They believed that Reid and his coaches could nurture and coach Vick while Vick served as backup to Donovan McNabb. They believed McNabb would be a good mentor for Vick.
Goodell said more than once, at that time, that he was looking for "a success story." And he didn't mean success in terms of yards or touchdown passes. And he certainly didn't mean success for any one particular NFL team. He meant success for Michael Vick -- and that meant putting Vick in the most beneficial situation for Michael Vick. The idea that the commissioner might have been playing favorites, or that other teams should be upset that he may have steered this remarkable athletic talent to a training camp other than theirs, is fueled by nothing other than hindsight. At the time, no one knew if Vick had it in him to ever complete another NFL pass. Even the Eagles didn't know. They just took a chance -- a chance for which they were ridiculed and criticized by many at the time -- and coached him into a better quarterback than he'd ever been before without ever thinking he'd start for them. Remember, a year ago, Vick was Kevin Kolb's backup.
To think that Vick would have become what he's become while riding the bench behind Palmer or even while starting games for Buffalo is to underestimate the work the Eagles did with him once they got their hands on him. If this is going to be a controversy, people had better come at it with all of the facts. Sure, it's possible Goodell wanted Vick in Philadelphia. But if he did, it had nothing to do with wanting to help the Eagles. They did that on their own.
See, to me, this can only be a good sign. The fact that the NFLPA would ask commissioner Roger Goodell -- and that he would agree -- to speak to rookies at the rookie symposium the NFLPA is having in lieu of the one the league canceled because of the lockout heralds a new level of trust between the two parties. It gives you reason to believe the optimism that the latest round of talks will lead to a new labor deal and an on-time start to the season may not be misplaced.
What I'm interested to see is this: If there's no actual deal -- i.e., a signed document establishing the work rules for the league for the next three, five, eight, however many years -- within a couple of weeks, but during that time the two sides make significant enough progress that they know what those rules are going to be and all that remains are formalities, could the league year start anyway? The owners, theoretically, have the ability to lift the lockout any time they want to. Could they do that in the absence of a formal, finalized contract with the players and just hold free agency under rules to which they mutually agree as part of their settlement talks?
It sounds easy, but it may not be. Remember, these are not collective bargaining-talks that are going on right now. These are settlement talks on the antitrust suit the players filed against the league. If the owners were to lift the lockout and have free agency, even under mutually agreed-to rules, they'd have to be 100 percent sure they weren't putting themselves at risk of being guilty of an antitrust violation. I imagine they'd have to get a promise in writing from the players that the players wouldn't pursue legal action against them as a result of anything that happens during the free-agent period.
So it may be that they need to dot all I's and cross all T's on the new labor agreement before free agency and the league year can start. But if that's not the case -- if they can get close enough to a finalized deal that they feel they can start the league year and training camps on time -- at least now it looks as if there's a decent enough relationship between the two sides that they could work that, and eventually all of this, out.
In the meantime, as ever, we link:
Dallas Cowboys
Calvin Watkins and the gang at ESPNDallas.com have been looking at potential free-agent targets for Dallas. Today, Calvin brings up Eagles guard Nick Cole as a potential Kyle Kosier replacement. His theory is that he's younger and versatile and might be more worthy of a long-term deal than will Kosier. Calvin knows the Cowboys. Even if he is really a baseball writer at heart.
Oh and Gerry Fraley has this item about former Cowboys coach Barry Switzer's foray into the wine business. Love the part about him describing his rural Arkansas childhood home on the label. Priceless.
New York Giants
Lots of people ask about Barry Cofield, and the Giants have a number of free-agent concerns once the lockout ends. Cofield himself doesn't sound like a man who expects to be back in New York. "I think they think I'm a good player," Cofield told the New York Post. "Obviously they don't view me as indispensable. They place a premium on certain positions. Let's be honest, defensive end is the name of the game in New York." He's certainly right about that, but that doesn't mean they don't appreciate a defensive tackle who can get to the quarterback. The question is whether the Giants feel they have enough in guys like Linval Joseph and Marvin Austin to replace Cofield if they focus on other concerns. He seems to feel as though that's the idea.
Eli Manning worked out with Hakeem Nicks and rookie receiver Jerrel Jernigan last week at Duke University, according to The Star-Ledger. Priceless time with QB1 for Jernigan, who could theoretically be asked to do more if he shows something and if Steve Smith isn't fully healthy.
Philadelphia Eagles
In light of the recent news on Terrell Owens, Sheil Kapadia wonders if Andy Reid's biggest football regret would be not finding a way for Owens and Donovan McNabb to coexist after their relationship blew up in the wake of their Super Bowl appearance -- if the magic that landed them in the big game could have been extended if Owens' stay in Philly had been as well.
The Eagles' team site breaks down the running backs, wondering as we all are whether Jerome Harrison will return as LeSean McCoy's backup. They do agree, however, that if he doesn't, Dion Lewis isn't the answer there. Expect the Eagles to re-sign Harrison or find a veteran replacement.
Washington Redskins
Rookie Ryan Kerrigan spoke about the challenges he's facing transitioning from college defensive end to 3-4 outside linebacker in the NFL -- especially with no coaches around to tell him if he's doing it correctly.
Redskins.com takes a gander at the right guard spot and whether Will Montgomery looks like the starter there this year. Montgomery also would seem to loom as an option at center should the team decide to part ways with Casey Rabach. Upshot is, Washington may be looking for interior line help.
Go get 'em.
What I'm interested to see is this: If there's no actual deal -- i.e., a signed document establishing the work rules for the league for the next three, five, eight, however many years -- within a couple of weeks, but during that time the two sides make significant enough progress that they know what those rules are going to be and all that remains are formalities, could the league year start anyway? The owners, theoretically, have the ability to lift the lockout any time they want to. Could they do that in the absence of a formal, finalized contract with the players and just hold free agency under rules to which they mutually agree as part of their settlement talks?
It sounds easy, but it may not be. Remember, these are not collective bargaining-talks that are going on right now. These are settlement talks on the antitrust suit the players filed against the league. If the owners were to lift the lockout and have free agency, even under mutually agreed-to rules, they'd have to be 100 percent sure they weren't putting themselves at risk of being guilty of an antitrust violation. I imagine they'd have to get a promise in writing from the players that the players wouldn't pursue legal action against them as a result of anything that happens during the free-agent period.
So it may be that they need to dot all I's and cross all T's on the new labor agreement before free agency and the league year can start. But if that's not the case -- if they can get close enough to a finalized deal that they feel they can start the league year and training camps on time -- at least now it looks as if there's a decent enough relationship between the two sides that they could work that, and eventually all of this, out.
In the meantime, as ever, we link:
Dallas Cowboys
Calvin Watkins and the gang at ESPNDallas.com have been looking at potential free-agent targets for Dallas. Today, Calvin brings up Eagles guard Nick Cole as a potential Kyle Kosier replacement. His theory is that he's younger and versatile and might be more worthy of a long-term deal than will Kosier. Calvin knows the Cowboys. Even if he is really a baseball writer at heart.
Oh and Gerry Fraley has this item about former Cowboys coach Barry Switzer's foray into the wine business. Love the part about him describing his rural Arkansas childhood home on the label. Priceless.
New York Giants
Lots of people ask about Barry Cofield, and the Giants have a number of free-agent concerns once the lockout ends. Cofield himself doesn't sound like a man who expects to be back in New York. "I think they think I'm a good player," Cofield told the New York Post. "Obviously they don't view me as indispensable. They place a premium on certain positions. Let's be honest, defensive end is the name of the game in New York." He's certainly right about that, but that doesn't mean they don't appreciate a defensive tackle who can get to the quarterback. The question is whether the Giants feel they have enough in guys like Linval Joseph and Marvin Austin to replace Cofield if they focus on other concerns. He seems to feel as though that's the idea.
Eli Manning worked out with Hakeem Nicks and rookie receiver Jerrel Jernigan last week at Duke University, according to The Star-Ledger. Priceless time with QB1 for Jernigan, who could theoretically be asked to do more if he shows something and if Steve Smith isn't fully healthy.
Philadelphia Eagles
In light of the recent news on Terrell Owens, Sheil Kapadia wonders if Andy Reid's biggest football regret would be not finding a way for Owens and Donovan McNabb to coexist after their relationship blew up in the wake of their Super Bowl appearance -- if the magic that landed them in the big game could have been extended if Owens' stay in Philly had been as well.
The Eagles' team site breaks down the running backs, wondering as we all are whether Jerome Harrison will return as LeSean McCoy's backup. They do agree, however, that if he doesn't, Dion Lewis isn't the answer there. Expect the Eagles to re-sign Harrison or find a veteran replacement.
Washington Redskins
Rookie Ryan Kerrigan spoke about the challenges he's facing transitioning from college defensive end to 3-4 outside linebacker in the NFL -- especially with no coaches around to tell him if he's doing it correctly.
Redskins.com takes a gander at the right guard spot and whether Will Montgomery looks like the starter there this year. Montgomery also would seem to loom as an option at center should the team decide to part ways with Casey Rabach. Upshot is, Washington may be looking for interior line help.
Go get 'em.
It's been a quarter of a century since Bill Parcells, Phil Simms, Lawrence Taylor and the Giants won their first Super Bowl. They gathered this weekend to celebrate the 25-year anniversary of that title, to mingle with fans and with each other and to marvel in retrospect at what they were able to accomplish together. Mark Bavaro summed it all up for The Star-Ledger:
That Giants team and defense won the Super Bowl one year after the Chicago Bears nearly went undefeated and won theirs. They didn't get to knock off the champs themselves, as the Redskins defeated Chicago in the divisional round, but Bavaro's memory is better than that of whoever told him the games were close. The Giants beat the 49ers 49-3 in the divisional playoff round, whipped the Redskins 17-0 in the NFC Championship Game and then rolled the Broncos 39-20 in the Super Bowl. That's a combined 105-23 over three playoff teams. You can see why they might not have thought it was possible to lose.
More Giants
George Martin wasn't the happiest guy at the reunion. He's pouting because NFLPA chief DeMaurice Smith won't give him a meeting to discuss the role of retired players in the current labor dispute. Martin is the head of NFL Alumni, which is a retired player organization that is funded and supported by the NFL. Because of that association, Smith and the NFLPA, who hosted quite a few retired players at their annual meetings each of the past two years, do not trust or particularly like Martin's group. Martin made an appearance at the NFLPA meetings this year, but it wasn't a face-to-face meeting with Smith. It was an address to the group of retired players affiliated with the NFLPA, and word is they all gave him an earful about his connections to Roger Goodell and the league. It sounds like, if Martin's looking for a supportive ear, he's looking on the wrong side of the labor fight.
Dallas Cowboys
Rainer Sabin looks at the Cowboys' internal options at cornerback in case they get rid of one of their starters and don't sign Nnamdi Asomugha. Not a pretty picture, though Sabin agrees with the prevailing opinion that the team should and will address the safety position first.
The heart attack Godfrey Miles had last Wednesday took his life. He played six years with the Cowboys and was a starter during their run to the Super Bowl XXX title. RIP.
Philadelphia Eagles
The life of a free agent is a weird one during this lockout. At a charity softball game in Camden, N.J., Eagles safety Quintin Mikell mused on his future thusly to the Philadelphia Daily News: "We're so deep in the lockout I don't even care. I'm just worried about staying in shape and making sure I'm ready to go. Obviously, I would like to be back here with the Eagles, but at this point I'm not sure what their thinking is. I am fairly sure that there's going to be a lot of people interested in me if I hit the market so either way I'll be fine." Mikell isn't super-likely to be back in Philly, but his name has come up as an option for the Cowboys in their hunt for a safety.
Michael Vick gave the commencement speech at a school for at-risk kids and handed out a couple of $5,000 college scholarships. Again, think what you want, but...
Washington Redskins
Redskins.com looks at the recent success of rookie wide receivers in the league and what that might mean for draft picks Leonard Hankerson, Niles Paul and Aldrick Robinson. It's an interesting point, with guys like Dez Bryant, Mike Williams, Percy Harvin, Austin Collie and Jeremy Maclin as strong examples from the past two years. And given the Redskins' current situation at WR, the rookies are likely to get an opportunity to show what they can do. It's just...well, I don't want to be accused of being negative or anything, but ... isn't it tough for a receiver, rookie or otherwise, to do much without a quarterback?
And Vonnie Holliday joined the piling-on-Albert-Haynesworth party during a recent radio appearance. Question: Do you think it's possible that the piling on of Haynesworth will ever get to the point where he's a remotely sympathetic figure? I kind of thought it might last summer during the conditioning-drill fiasco, but the way the guy carried himself throughout the season prevented that. I doubt he's at all redeemable in the eyes of Washington fans, but you tell me.
All right. The kids need to eat before they go to school. You know I'll be back later, though. You can count on me.
"Even in 1990, when we won the second Super Bowl, there was the constant feeling that we might lose, we might lose," Bavaro said. "In 1986, it was always we were going to win, just by how much. Somebody pointed out that most of those games were very close. In my memory, I don't remember them being close because I never thought we were going to lose any of those games."
That Giants team and defense won the Super Bowl one year after the Chicago Bears nearly went undefeated and won theirs. They didn't get to knock off the champs themselves, as the Redskins defeated Chicago in the divisional round, but Bavaro's memory is better than that of whoever told him the games were close. The Giants beat the 49ers 49-3 in the divisional playoff round, whipped the Redskins 17-0 in the NFC Championship Game and then rolled the Broncos 39-20 in the Super Bowl. That's a combined 105-23 over three playoff teams. You can see why they might not have thought it was possible to lose.
More Giants
George Martin wasn't the happiest guy at the reunion. He's pouting because NFLPA chief DeMaurice Smith won't give him a meeting to discuss the role of retired players in the current labor dispute. Martin is the head of NFL Alumni, which is a retired player organization that is funded and supported by the NFL. Because of that association, Smith and the NFLPA, who hosted quite a few retired players at their annual meetings each of the past two years, do not trust or particularly like Martin's group. Martin made an appearance at the NFLPA meetings this year, but it wasn't a face-to-face meeting with Smith. It was an address to the group of retired players affiliated with the NFLPA, and word is they all gave him an earful about his connections to Roger Goodell and the league. It sounds like, if Martin's looking for a supportive ear, he's looking on the wrong side of the labor fight.
Dallas Cowboys
Rainer Sabin looks at the Cowboys' internal options at cornerback in case they get rid of one of their starters and don't sign Nnamdi Asomugha. Not a pretty picture, though Sabin agrees with the prevailing opinion that the team should and will address the safety position first.
The heart attack Godfrey Miles had last Wednesday took his life. He played six years with the Cowboys and was a starter during their run to the Super Bowl XXX title. RIP.
Philadelphia Eagles
The life of a free agent is a weird one during this lockout. At a charity softball game in Camden, N.J., Eagles safety Quintin Mikell mused on his future thusly to the Philadelphia Daily News: "We're so deep in the lockout I don't even care. I'm just worried about staying in shape and making sure I'm ready to go. Obviously, I would like to be back here with the Eagles, but at this point I'm not sure what their thinking is. I am fairly sure that there's going to be a lot of people interested in me if I hit the market so either way I'll be fine." Mikell isn't super-likely to be back in Philly, but his name has come up as an option for the Cowboys in their hunt for a safety.
Michael Vick gave the commencement speech at a school for at-risk kids and handed out a couple of $5,000 college scholarships. Again, think what you want, but...
Washington Redskins
Redskins.com looks at the recent success of rookie wide receivers in the league and what that might mean for draft picks Leonard Hankerson, Niles Paul and Aldrick Robinson. It's an interesting point, with guys like Dez Bryant, Mike Williams, Percy Harvin, Austin Collie and Jeremy Maclin as strong examples from the past two years. And given the Redskins' current situation at WR, the rookies are likely to get an opportunity to show what they can do. It's just...well, I don't want to be accused of being negative or anything, but ... isn't it tough for a receiver, rookie or otherwise, to do much without a quarterback?
And Vonnie Holliday joined the piling-on-Albert-Haynesworth party during a recent radio appearance. Question: Do you think it's possible that the piling on of Haynesworth will ever get to the point where he's a remotely sympathetic figure? I kind of thought it might last summer during the conditioning-drill fiasco, but the way the guy carried himself throughout the season prevented that. I doubt he's at all redeemable in the eyes of Washington fans, but you tell me.
All right. The kids need to eat before they go to school. You know I'll be back later, though. You can count on me.
Cruising through the mailbag on a dreary Sunday, killing time between my son's Little League game and the latest episode of "Game of Thrones," which we tend to hope are two very different spectator events.
John from Dallas was intrigued by the idea that the Redskins might patch it together at quarterback and wait until next year in the hopes of drafting Andrew Luck as their long-term answer. This led John to ask, "If the lockout continues and there is no 2011 NFL Season, how would the draft order be determined for the Spring 2012 NFL Draft?"
Dan Graziano: Pat Yasinskas hit this one Friday in a post regarding commissioner Roger Goodell's conference call with Panthers season ticket holders. Basically, the answer is that the NFL hasn't thought about it yet. "We haven't given any consideration to a season-long work stoppage," Goodell said. This could mean the owners have a drop-dead date by which they plan to cave in, or that they're 100 percent convinced their lockout strategy will break the players' union. Because if the owners imposed a lockout with no defined end date and without considering the possibility that it might last all season, then they'd be fools. And as foolish as they might be acting right now, I don't think they're fools.
John Binando from Bergenfield, N.J. (represent!) asks what I think about the Cowboys' chances for next season. "Are they contenders like I thought a year ago or was last year a real view of what Jerry has assembled?"
Dan Graziano: As someone who picked the Cowboys to win last season's Super Bowl, I might be the wrong guy to consult on this. But I do think there's enough talent there that if they have addressed and continue to address their deficiencies on the lines, they could rebound quickly. I don't think it's any accident the way they responded to Jason Garrett as head coach. And if he ever gets the chance to coach them again, I think he'll pick up where they left off. So yeah, with the disclaimers that we still have no idea (a) what any team looks like until free agency happens or (b) how much if any of the season will be played, I'd say I think the Cowboys rebound into contention in 2011.
milroyigglesfan from Anchorage, Alaska asks if I believe "as many do, that the Eagles got a miracle save by the rejuvenation of Vick, that the team was well situated for winning in 2010, or a little of both?"
Dan Graziano: I definitely think it was the Vick thing, milroy. When I went to Eagles training camp last year, it felt like I was watching a rebuilding project. Lots of young players, not a lot of stars, and lots of questions on the offensive line and the defense in general. But that was before anybody knew what Vick would do, or that he would play at all. I think he was spectacular enough to disguise the Eagles' deficiencies, most of which were on defense, and that the Eagles seem wisely to have focused this offseason on improving the defensive personnel. I don't think they'd have contended in 2010 without Vick's resurgence.
Matthew Gene from Summit, NJ (aw yeah) asks: "What current NFL player does Prince Amukamara remind you of? Seeing as he has limited experience as a cornerback, how high is his ceiling?"
Dan Graziano: Tough one, and I'm not alone here. I asked our man Matt Williamson of Scouts Inc. and he couldn't come up with one either. A couple of places compared him to Malcolm Jenkins before the draft, but I think that's mainly because of a thought that he might end up at safety. But given his size, speed, intellect, ability to contribute on special teams ... Amukamara's ceiling is a lot higher than that of a typical 19th overall pick. The Giants got a star here, I think.
Zain Saleh of Lincoln, Neb. asks: "Do you think instead of throwing a lot of money towards Nnamdi Asomugha, we sign a Jonathan Joseph type of corner?"
Dan Graziano: Zain, buddy, I got no idea who "we" are. You didn't tell me which team you root for. I imagine Joseph could become an option for any team that either fails to get Nnamdi or decides not to pursue him because of the money. But remember, if they play under 2010 rules, Joseph's RFA not UFA and probably stays in Cincy.
Arnold from Pittsburgh wonders about the talk of trading Kevin Kolb to Arizona: "What are the chances that the Eagles could trade him for Patrick Peterson or Domonique Rodgers-Cromartie?
Dan Graziano: I think he'll be traded for picks, not players, if he's dealt. (Can Arizona even trade Peterson? I don't think so. They just drafted him, right?)
Mike Burkey from Nashville, understandably nervous about the idea of John Beck at quarterback, asks what I think the chances are that Mike Shanahan would give Donovan McNabb a second chance in Washington.
Dan Graziano: About the same as the chances he'll give me a tryout at nose tackle.
Bill Ray from Philly has a lockout-related question: "If players can get together and work out on their own, why can't the coaches join them? The coaches are not the owners, so what stops the coaches from meeting up with the players during off hours and working with them?"
Dan Graziano: The owners (i.e., the coaches' bosses) are what's stopping them. The owners imposed the lockout and the rules that go along with it. One of those rules is that players and coaches can't have any contact during the lockout. Theoretically, the owners could change the rule and allow players to work out with their coaches. But methinks that would defeat the purpose of the lockout which, as we've discussed, is an effort to break the players down and make them cave in.
On a personal note, much of the mailbag during the first week was filled with very kind and complimentary stuff welcoming me to the blog. Just wanted to tell you all how happy I am to be here, how much fun I'm having so far and how much I'm looking forward to more and more interaction with you all. Thanks for the kind wishes. I'll look back on them fondly as the future unfolds and your opinion of me ... uh ... flickers?
John from Dallas was intrigued by the idea that the Redskins might patch it together at quarterback and wait until next year in the hopes of drafting Andrew Luck as their long-term answer. This led John to ask, "If the lockout continues and there is no 2011 NFL Season, how would the draft order be determined for the Spring 2012 NFL Draft?"
Dan Graziano: Pat Yasinskas hit this one Friday in a post regarding commissioner Roger Goodell's conference call with Panthers season ticket holders. Basically, the answer is that the NFL hasn't thought about it yet. "We haven't given any consideration to a season-long work stoppage," Goodell said. This could mean the owners have a drop-dead date by which they plan to cave in, or that they're 100 percent convinced their lockout strategy will break the players' union. Because if the owners imposed a lockout with no defined end date and without considering the possibility that it might last all season, then they'd be fools. And as foolish as they might be acting right now, I don't think they're fools.
John Binando from Bergenfield, N.J. (represent!) asks what I think about the Cowboys' chances for next season. "Are they contenders like I thought a year ago or was last year a real view of what Jerry has assembled?"
Dan Graziano: As someone who picked the Cowboys to win last season's Super Bowl, I might be the wrong guy to consult on this. But I do think there's enough talent there that if they have addressed and continue to address their deficiencies on the lines, they could rebound quickly. I don't think it's any accident the way they responded to Jason Garrett as head coach. And if he ever gets the chance to coach them again, I think he'll pick up where they left off. So yeah, with the disclaimers that we still have no idea (a) what any team looks like until free agency happens or (b) how much if any of the season will be played, I'd say I think the Cowboys rebound into contention in 2011.
milroyigglesfan from Anchorage, Alaska asks if I believe "as many do, that the Eagles got a miracle save by the rejuvenation of Vick, that the team was well situated for winning in 2010, or a little of both?"
Dan Graziano: I definitely think it was the Vick thing, milroy. When I went to Eagles training camp last year, it felt like I was watching a rebuilding project. Lots of young players, not a lot of stars, and lots of questions on the offensive line and the defense in general. But that was before anybody knew what Vick would do, or that he would play at all. I think he was spectacular enough to disguise the Eagles' deficiencies, most of which were on defense, and that the Eagles seem wisely to have focused this offseason on improving the defensive personnel. I don't think they'd have contended in 2010 without Vick's resurgence.
Matthew Gene from Summit, NJ (aw yeah) asks: "What current NFL player does Prince Amukamara remind you of? Seeing as he has limited experience as a cornerback, how high is his ceiling?"
Dan Graziano: Tough one, and I'm not alone here. I asked our man Matt Williamson of Scouts Inc. and he couldn't come up with one either. A couple of places compared him to Malcolm Jenkins before the draft, but I think that's mainly because of a thought that he might end up at safety. But given his size, speed, intellect, ability to contribute on special teams ... Amukamara's ceiling is a lot higher than that of a typical 19th overall pick. The Giants got a star here, I think.
Zain Saleh of Lincoln, Neb. asks: "Do you think instead of throwing a lot of money towards Nnamdi Asomugha, we sign a Jonathan Joseph type of corner?"
Dan Graziano: Zain, buddy, I got no idea who "we" are. You didn't tell me which team you root for. I imagine Joseph could become an option for any team that either fails to get Nnamdi or decides not to pursue him because of the money. But remember, if they play under 2010 rules, Joseph's RFA not UFA and probably stays in Cincy.
Arnold from Pittsburgh wonders about the talk of trading Kevin Kolb to Arizona: "What are the chances that the Eagles could trade him for Patrick Peterson or Domonique Rodgers-Cromartie?
Dan Graziano: I think he'll be traded for picks, not players, if he's dealt. (Can Arizona even trade Peterson? I don't think so. They just drafted him, right?)
Mike Burkey from Nashville, understandably nervous about the idea of John Beck at quarterback, asks what I think the chances are that Mike Shanahan would give Donovan McNabb a second chance in Washington.
Dan Graziano: About the same as the chances he'll give me a tryout at nose tackle.
Bill Ray from Philly has a lockout-related question: "If players can get together and work out on their own, why can't the coaches join them? The coaches are not the owners, so what stops the coaches from meeting up with the players during off hours and working with them?"
Dan Graziano: The owners (i.e., the coaches' bosses) are what's stopping them. The owners imposed the lockout and the rules that go along with it. One of those rules is that players and coaches can't have any contact during the lockout. Theoretically, the owners could change the rule and allow players to work out with their coaches. But methinks that would defeat the purpose of the lockout which, as we've discussed, is an effort to break the players down and make them cave in.
On a personal note, much of the mailbag during the first week was filled with very kind and complimentary stuff welcoming me to the blog. Just wanted to tell you all how happy I am to be here, how much fun I'm having so far and how much I'm looking forward to more and more interaction with you all. Thanks for the kind wishes. I'll look back on them fondly as the future unfolds and your opinion of me ... uh ... flickers?
NFC East links: Roseman set for draft
April, 21, 2011
4/21/11
10:22
AM ET
By ESPN.com staff | ESPN.com
Dallas Cowboys
The Dallas Morning News' Rick Gosselin on the Cowboys in the draft: "You can always bank on Jerry Jones looking to trade out. That’s his history; he doesn’t want to draft; he doesn’t want that pick; he’d rather have quantity than quality."
SI.com's Don Banks isn't pleased with what he calls the NFL's "love affair" with the Cowboys.
New York Giants
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell spoke for 30 minutes on Wednesday with Giants season-ticket holders.
Philadelphia Eagles
Eagles general manager Howie Roseman discusses his approach in working a draft that precedes free agency.
The Eagles are following the lead of the Giants in allowing season-ticket holders the chance to defer the second half of their ticket payment until the league announces there will be a season in 2011.
Washington Redskins
The Washington Post's Mike Jones on some of the quirks that go along with holding a minicamp with only 30 players: "The circumstances weren’t perfect. At times defensive lineman Kedric Golston lined up at free safety to help out free safety Macho Harris, and at one point, nose tackle Ma’ake Kemoeatu went on a pass route so linebacker Rob Jackson had someone to cover."
Is Jake Locker a good fit for the Redskins? Two NFL analysts seem to think so.
The Dallas Morning News' Rick Gosselin on the Cowboys in the draft: "You can always bank on Jerry Jones looking to trade out. That’s his history; he doesn’t want to draft; he doesn’t want that pick; he’d rather have quantity than quality."
SI.com's Don Banks isn't pleased with what he calls the NFL's "love affair" with the Cowboys.
New York Giants
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell spoke for 30 minutes on Wednesday with Giants season-ticket holders.
Philadelphia Eagles
Eagles general manager Howie Roseman discusses his approach in working a draft that precedes free agency.
The Eagles are following the lead of the Giants in allowing season-ticket holders the chance to defer the second half of their ticket payment until the league announces there will be a season in 2011.
Washington Redskins
The Washington Post's Mike Jones on some of the quirks that go along with holding a minicamp with only 30 players: "The circumstances weren’t perfect. At times defensive lineman Kedric Golston lined up at free safety to help out free safety Macho Harris, and at one point, nose tackle Ma’ake Kemoeatu went on a pass route so linebacker Rob Jackson had someone to cover."
Is Jake Locker a good fit for the Redskins? Two NFL analysts seem to think so.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Dan Graziano
Graziano joined ESPN.com in 2011 after two years as a Senior NFL Writer for AOL FanHouse. He covered Major League Baseball, the Olympics and various other sports during his time at the Star-Ledger and the Palm Beach Post. A New Jersey native and author of two published novels, he now lives in Ridgewood, N.J., with his wife and two sons.
