Blount Released

hwc said:

Except that you still have to cut somebody. And, realistically, you probably have to cut a running back who would likely not make it through waivers to the practice squad.

The end result is that you haven't increased depth on the roster. You've simply replaced a young running back (probably White) with a short term rental on Blount (who has performed so unconvincingly this season that the Steelers are giving him few if any carries and who has a dope arrest and a walked off the field on his 2014 rap sheet).

Click to expand...

You make an absolutely fair point. Somebody will have to be cut. IMHO you cannot cut an OL, DBs, WRs, DL, certainly not LBs.......I wouldn't want their ranks lessened all things considered. So, ultimately, it's White or Bolden who wold need to be cut. Given Bolden has a few years of big game/post season experience and is a ST cog, I think it would have to be WHite (who we can get to the PS hopefully).

The prime question to consider; right now the Patriot's feature back duties are fully upon the shoulders of a completely unheralded and inexperienced player. We have big time upcoming games against Det, GB, Miami -- and in January under the intense pressure of the playoffs maybe Denver, KC, Balt, Indy -- in February Arizona, GB, Dallas. It's very concerning that our feature back is so inexperienced going into these sky high supremely important games.
So the ultimate question: Would it be best to have a vet RB who can be the feature back, when needed, in case Gray is injured or becomes less than effective? Or is keeping White on the active roster trump the that depth/experience?

OhExaulted1 said:

As for 3.) Was putting a claim in whether we got the player or not reported before the change? Not really all that knowlegeable about the claim process. Sounds like all 32 teams can submit a claim and going by record it goes to the first team with a submission with the worst record.

Click to expand...

Yes. I used to see reports of failed waiver claims all the time on my twitter feed.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/11/02/nfl-stops-disclosing-failed-waivers-claims/

ATippett56 said:

I would cut Jordan Devey.

Most recently, Jordan "game day inactive" Devey.

Click to expand...

excellent idea, we could both white and blount.

Miguel said:

Yes. I used to see reports of failed waiver claims all the time on my twitter feed.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/11/02/nfl-stops-disclosing-failed-waivers-claims/

Click to expand...

I see. This is part of the "whoops, I really effed this Ray Rice thing up" knee-jerk cover the shield and the teams (and especially his own) ass.

As asserted by the comments, excellent display of transparency by a non-profit organization . Goodell really needs to go. The league will make money hand over fist and continue to grow with or without him. He's become a stain on the league image. His arbitrary handling of conduct is the most erratic and incomprehensible set of standards any person purporting leadership could possibly mishandle more ineptly.

Were he a COO of any other Fortune 500 company any board of directors would see to it he's out on his ear before the next incident and subsequent wave of backlash rears it's ugly head. He's embarrassing the shield, not protecting it.

OhExaulted1 said:

Were he a COO of any other Fortune 500 company any board of directors would see to it he's out on his ear before the next incident and subsequent wave of backlash rears it's ugly head. He's embarrassing the shield, not protecting it.

Click to expand...

...and you could bring in the CEO of any F500 company to run the NFL in ways Goody never even thought of or couldn't even comprehend.

OhExaulted1 said:

I see. This is part of the "whoops, I really effed this Ray Rice thing up" knee-jerk cover the shield and the teams (and especially his own) ass.

As asserted by the comments, excellent display of transparency by a non-profit organization . Goodell really needs to go. The league will make money hand over fist and continue to grow with or without him. He's become a stain on the league image. His arbitrary handling of conduct is the most erratic and incomprehensible set of standards any person purporting leadership could possibly mishandle more ineptly.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute, I can't stand Goodell any more than the rest of you, but this new waiver policy is a good thing for every team, including the Patriots. Why do you think this is bad? Why would it be a good thing for a player like Jonas Gray or Brandon Bolden to find out that the Patriots tried to claim another running back?

bresna said:

Wait a minute, I can't stand Goodell any more than the rest of you, but this new waiver policy is a good thing for every team, including the Patriots. Why do you think this is bad? Why would it be a good thing for a player like Jonas Gray or Brandon Bolden to find out that the Patriots tried to claim another running back?

Click to expand...

Yeah, I was scratching my head over how this modest procedural change reflects on Goodell, or has anything whatsoever to do with Ray Rice.

It seems to me that Bill Belichick of all people would be delighted to have LESS information about his personnel machinations made public. In addition to the potential locker room impact you describe, it could also give away info on the length of time an injured player is expected to be out, etc.

bresna said:

Wait a minute, I can't stand Goodell any more than the rest of you, but this new waiver policy is a good thing for every team, including the Patriots. Why do you think this is bad? Why would it be a good thing for a player like Jonas Gray or Brandon Bolden to find out that the Patriots tried to claim another running back?

Click to expand...

That was never an issue before. Players find out when their team entertains free agents, right? This is about protecting teams from scorn and ridicule by putting a claim in for controversial players. This is about secrecy over transparency for an antitrust tax-exempt billion dollar industry. This is not about Gray or Bolden's hurt feelings. It wasn't before and it isn't now.

patchick said:

Yeah, I was scratching my head over how this modest procedural change reflects on Goodell, or has anything whatsoever to do with Ray Rice.

It seems to me that Bill Belichick of all people would be delighted to have LESS information about his personnel machinations made public. In addition to the potential locker room impact you describe, it could also give away info on the length of time an injured player is expected to be out, etc.

Click to expand...

Well, let's take it from another perspective. Wouldn't YOU want to know if your company is actively looking to replace you even though you hadn't given notice? Also wouldn't you want to know if another company in your field was interested in your services? I'm just trying to look at it through an employees eyes juxtaposed to the view you've given through the employers side. Although it is a fact of life in this profession, no one likes to be unceremoniously blindsided when it comes to your career.

That being said, why keep this "modest procedural change" a secret instead of making a simple announcement? Doesn't pass the smell test.

Well the answers to all these questions will come at 4 pm today. That is when the NFL will announce if Blount and Tate have cleared or have been claimed on waivers.

Tune in then, same bat time, same bat channel

hwc said:

Except that you still have to cut somebody. And, realistically, you probably have to cut a running back who would likely not make it through waivers to the practice squad.

The end result is that you haven't increased depth on the roster. You've simply replaced a young running back (probably White) with a short term rental on Blount (who has performed so unconvincingly this season that the Steelers are giving him few if any carries and who has a dope arrest and a walked off the field on his 2014 rap sheet).

Click to expand...

You have to separate the character thing. BB has first hand knowledge of his character, as a Patriot in situations where he was everywhere from #1 to end of the bench.
This discussion assumes that BB is fine with that character. (Not because he definitely is, but if he isn't we know that Blount won't be here)
Given that, Blount would unquestionably be an improvement.
Right now, we have no idea what Gray will give us the rest of the year. Calling the position set based on one game is crazy.
BB has always preferred 2 'regular' RBs and one passing formation RB (Faulk, Woodhead, Vereen).
Those 2 could be a 80/20 or a 50/50 or anywhere in between.
Right now the second is Brandon Bolden, and he simply sucks.
Blount would take Bolden's spot, and immediately upgrade depth, because we won't be afraid to play him, and potentially upgrade the #1 RB spot as Blount will compete for carries with Gray and it is certainly conceivable he could overtake him.

OhExaulted1 said:

That was never an issue before. Players find out when their team entertains free agents, right? This is about protecting teams from scorn and ridicule by putting a claim in for controversial players. This is about secrecy over transparency for an antitrust tax-exempt billion dollar industry. This is not about Gray or Bolden's hurt feelings. It wasn't before and it isn't now.

Click to expand...

The NFL does a lot of scummy things. This is just another one of them.

OhExaulted1 said:

I see. This is part of the "whoops, I really effed this Ray Rice thing up" knee-jerk cover the shield and the teams (and especially his own) ass.

As asserted by the comments, excellent display of transparency by a non-profit organization . Goodell really needs to go. The league will make money hand over fist and continue to grow with or without him. He's become a stain on the league image. His arbitrary handling of conduct is the most erratic and incomprehensible set of standards any person purporting leadership could possibly mishandle more ineptly.

Were he a COO of any other Fortune 500 company any board of directors would see to it he's out on his ear before the next incident and subsequent wave of backlash rears it's ugly head. He's embarrassing the shield, not protecting it.

Click to expand...

I'm not a Goodell defender, but this personal conduct policy is being horribly butchered in discussion.

First, whoever was in charge of handing out the discipline would be criticized by one side or the other.
Second, so much of the discussion is just wrong.
Due process and fairness and equality in punishment are not part of Goodells responsibility as given to him by the league.
He is there to handle these issues from a PR standpoint. No more, no less. More publicity and outrage should result in a stiffer penalty. His job is not to be fair to the players. His job is to exact a punishment that sends a message to the public about the NFLs opinion on the character of its players.

He really isn't handling things inconsistently, because he is consistent within the responsiblities given him and the goals of the personal conduct program. I can understand people thinking the goals should be different and that concepts such as innocent until proven guilty, due process, and equality in punishment should be part of it, but thats just not what this is.
This is the NFL, having negotiated unilateral power in punishing players for actions considered harmful to the image and reputation of the league in order to mitigate the damage the players, by committing horrendous crimes caused to the leagues image and reputation.

A Gray/Blount/Vereen/Develin/White backfield is better than a Gray/Bolden/Vereen/Develin/White backfield.

The question is what would be the downside/ripple effect on ST if Bolden is jettisoned.

Given that, Blount would unquestionably be an improvement.

Click to expand...

I don't think that is "unquestionable". As it stands today, both Jonas Gray and Shane Vereen have more yards rushing in 2014 than Blount. In addition to getting popped for smoking weed on the way to the team plane for an away game and walking off the field before the end of the game, Blount hasn't been doing jack squat on the field this year.

If you are going to have a running back on the game day inactive list, you might as well keep the promising 4th round draft pick.

hwc said:

I don't think that is "unquestionable". As it stands today, both Jonas Gray and Shane Vereen have more yards rushing in 2014 than Blount.

Click to expand...

That's completely meaningless. You know that. Come on.

The thing that is easy to overlook in discussions of this type is that football is a game played by 53 players. The impact of one backup over another backup in the context of the whole team is minimal.

Say that we assign a point value of somewhere between 1 (Dont' care if he makes it to the practice squad) and 100 (Hall of Fame) for each of the 53 players. Figure, your roster averages 50 and your total point total is 2500.

So, even you think replacing a back up running back with another back up running back gives you a 10 point improvement at that position. Big whup. You've improved your team from 2500 to 2510 points. Meaningless. And that's before you even consider what you might be giving up (coaches worrying about a known stoner getting arrested again, the lost opportunity cost of developing a 4th round draft pick with potential, etc.

OhExaulted1 said:

That was never an issue before. Players find out when their team entertains free agents, right? This is about protecting teams from scorn and ridicule by putting a claim in for controversial players. This is about secrecy over transparency for an antitrust tax-exempt billion dollar industry.

Click to expand...

Oh please. Gimme a break on the ideological misrepresentation (to be charitable) about "tax-exempt". Only the NFL "umbrella" organization (essentially NFL HQ) is a tax-exempt organization (501(c)(6) trade association, to be specific). All the teams (other than the Packers) are fully-taxable, for-profit businesses and the 32 teams get the vast majority of all revenues. As for the anti-trust exemption, that is only with respect to TV broadcasts and league mergers and is for all US pro sports leagues, not just the NFL (see 15 USC 1291).

rlcarr said:

Oh please. Gimme a break on the ideological misrepresentation (to be charitable) about "tax-exempt". Only the NFL "umbrella" organization (essentially NFL HQ) is a tax-exempt organization (501(c)(6) trade association, to be specific). All the teams (other than the Packers) are fully-taxable, for-profit businesses and the 32 teams get the vast majority of all revenues. As for the anti-trust exemption, that is only with respect to TV broadcasts and league mergers and is for all US pro sports leagues, not just the NFL (see 15 USC 1291).

Click to expand...

Actually I probably didn't need to use the last line to get my point across. I really don't care all that much about those symantics. You can quote every section of the US tax code if that makes you feel better.

My point was Goodell is an embarrassment and it's an opinion widely held by many in the media, the NFLPA, the players themselves as well as fans throughout the league.

Field Yates says that the Vikings have claimed Tate, still nothing if Blount was claimed or cleared waivers.