Mankins could hold up NFL settlement

Discussion in ' - Patriots Fan Forum' started by crowell33, Jul 17, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. crowell33

    crowell33 In the Starting Line-Up

  2. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

  3. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson Veteran Supporter

    And Borges article was 100% speculation.
  4. flasox27

    flasox27 Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    #54 Jersey

    I recall that when Reggie White won his case, the Eagles received a first round pick as compensation for him becoming a free agent. Give the Pats a first round pick and we will be happy to pack his bags for him
  5. Calciumee

    Calciumee Supporter Supporter

    #3 Jersey

    I'd be ok with that! Rather keep him, but if he is going to whine (i know it is speculation), I'll be happy with a first!
  6. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact Pro Bowl Player

    Need to extend mankins......the 33rd pick in the 2012 draft will not make a difference until Brady is done.
  7. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 Supporter Supporter

    #3 Jersey

    *cough* Vollmer *cough*
  8. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks Supporter Supporter

    I think your recollection is incorrect. White became a FA in 1993 because he won the lawsuit he had filed and his Eagles deal was up and they didn't offer him a deal and they weren't allowed to use the tag on him as part of the settlement of that case.

    The difference here as even Florio pointed out is this case has never advaned to trial because the appeals court basically ruled it's remained a labor dispute... White was fighting for FA for his class. These guys were basically fighting for leverage in a labor negotiation...
  9. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks Supporter Supporter

    That's odd rationale considering your high opinion of the 32nd pick in the 2005 draft...
  10. Gwedd

    Gwedd Supporter Supporter

    #11 Jersey

    Yup. Looks like someone needed copy and just dashed off something without thinking it through. :cool:
  11. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks Supporter Supporter

    It was worse than that, it was agenda driven pot stirring. He's basically extolling Mankins to hold the league and his peers up while he attempts to extort his particular franchise...
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2011
  12. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox Supporter

    #50 Jersey

    If Mankins or any of the named plantiffs for that matter, hold this up for selfish reasons, they can screw themselves.. Seriously. The idea that anything anti-trust has gone on outside of the agreed terms is BS.

    If Mankins TRULY wanted free agency, I don't think he'd be working out with Brady and the rest of the team during those workouts.
  13. Gwedd

    Gwedd Supporter Supporter

    #11 Jersey

    Absolutely agree. Certain writers have specific agendas and they will shade a story, any story, in order to make it fit that agenda.
  14. Rob0729

    Rob0729 Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    And let's not forget that the White lawsuit was filed in 1987 and settled in 1993. Reggie White was denied a chance at free agency from 1987 through 1993 because of it. Since the judge ruled in favor of White and the rest of the players, you can argue that the Eagles had Reggie White as an illegally franchised player from 1987 until 1993.

    Mankins, on the other hand, will not have a single season where his lawsuit is open which will restrict him from getting to free agency. Mankins lost an offseason in which he would have been franchised.
  15. flasox27

    flasox27 Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    #54 Jersey

    I agree that the legal cases are not identical. My point was that if Mankins status may become the sticking point in the CBA deal as Borges indicates the league has a way toresolve the matter which is fair to the Pats.
  16. Frick

    Frick Practice Squad Player

    I, for one, am so blankety-blank sick of every few years the Union turning around and saying "we'll hit you with an anti-trust suit if we don't get what we want." Have the owners turn around and say "at the end of this agreement we're closing down shop if you can't think of a way where this BS doesn't come up every time, then you go buy some stadiums, you pay for the health care, the retirement, see how you like it."

    I know there'll be one or two greedy businessmen who have always wanted to have their own football team but a two or three team league will put a lot of Union guys out of work. And, if the owners agree not to let them use their stadiums, exercise rooms and practice fields, it'll be back to playing at college stadiums and using beat up buses and flying coach.

    Unlike the writers who are almost all union members, I believe I can see both sides to an argument, but to be threatened every few years, as if you were paying off a blackmailer, is beyond the pall. If the owners need extra money for stadiums and upkeep, I don't have a problem with it. If they want to have NFL Europe, it comes out of their pockets. I know the owners want to spread the game beyond where it is and if that's so why in heaven's name haven't they talked to the owners of the CFL and have them start playing Spring games? With the teams we could have set up in this country, it would triple the money that the CFL is already making. And, most fans that I talk to loved having football in the Spring and Fall.
  17. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 Supporter Supporter

    That's a tautology.
  18. Defsoul

    Defsoul On the Game Day Roster

    So let me get this straight: Borges has no scource and is just speculating, Florio picks it up and now fans are blaming Mankins for possibly holding up the settlement talks of the antitrust case?
  19. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks Supporter Supporter

    No, they don't... Unless you consider caving under duress and releasing the franchise tagged plaintiff's to immediate UFA free of compensation this year. In which case it would not only suck for us but mankind since Polian would then sue everyone like he threatened to in 2006!!!
  20. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks Supporter Supporter

    Schefter is reporting that the NFLPA has begun reaching out to the plaintiffs to discuss a settlemment. The NFLPA cannot technically negotiate one for them (since they are negotiating the CBA and have to recertify as a union to finalize that but won't be able to vote on a deal to end the lockout until they get the lawsuits settled). They can settle the Doty/TV case because that arose out of a union grievance. If any of their star plaintiffs should cause the lockout to continue or make it impossible to stay on the timeline and vote by the end of this week so FA can commence and then camps open by the end of the month, they will face not only the wrath of owners and fans but their peers. All most of these plaintiffs did was lend their name and cache to an off season lawsuit.

    Mankins and his agent are a hotheaded combo. Hope the association doesn't live to regret adding his name to the suit after the fact...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page