PonyExpress
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2006
- Messages
- 4,659
- Reaction score
- 78
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.DonBlackmon55 said:Bobs My Uncle said:Apparently the Pats never responded back to their proposal. Almost like they wanted to pay Chayut and company back for not countering their original proposal. Had the Pats countered it's quite possible that Chayut could have brokered a betterment of the 2nd round offering. Therein apparently lies the basis for one of their (good faith) claims.Pats726 said:If the Jets and Hawks wanted him soooooooooooooo badly, offer their #1 and case closed. Chayut should be asking the Jets or Hawks to fork over the pick, since they are willing to offer him MEGA $$. Works both ways.
At this point they'll threaten to sue anyone and anybody for anything. Chayut, in particular, is looking to create a ruckus, he wants bad PR for the Pats and for the league so that he might get them to sor this out by trading his client to another team.DonBlackmon55 said:If money is not an issue, why threaten to sue to Pats for the salary difference between Jets offer and his 2006 Salary. Heck its only 5 Mill more. What's another 5 Mill from a $36Mill contract.
It's playing out almost exactly as some of us worried it would.DonBlackmon55 said:Your hypothesis is skewed and myopic.
You don't get it!Patriotic Fervor said:Given the realities of this case, neither of those are really options, let alone valid ones.
No, what we are witnessing is a classic exercise in futility, nothing more, nothing less. Even the proverbial snowball in hell has a better chance than the exercise of these "options".
Boy, you sure view the real world a bit differently than the rest of us!
Bobs My Uncle said:DonBlackmon55 said:Bobs My Uncle said:Apparently the Pats never responded back to their proposal. Almost like they wanted to pay Chayut and company back for not countering their original proposal. Had the Pats countered it's quite possible that Chayut could have brokered a betterment of the 2nd round offering. Therein apparently lies the basis for one of their (good faith) claims.
At this point they'll threaten to sue anyone and anybody for anything. Chayut, in particular, is looking to create a ruckus, he wants bad PR for the Pats and for the league so that he might get them to sor this out by trading his client to another team.
It's playing out almost exactly as some of us worried it would.
Only the fans, media, and the Peeon's agent/lawyers are the worried ones. Pats FO has said nothing and don't seem to be perturbed about the actions camp Peeon/Chayut are taking.
In the end, Peeon loses if Pats decide to, ahem, stand "Pat".
Have fun paying that mortgage this year Peeon.:rocker:
Bobs My Uncle said:You don't get it!
They don't give two hoots how realistic their chances are at success in these hearings. Their intention is to "go TO" on this, drag it out for as long as they can, while generating as much bad PR as posible for both the Pats and for the league in HOPES that either the Pats or the league puts a stop to it before it gets any uglier.
Bobs My Uncle said:They don't give two hoots how realistic their chances are at success in these hearings. Their intention is to "go TO" on this, drag it out for as long as they can, while generating as much bad PR as posible for both the Pats and for the league in HOPES that either the Pats or the league puts a stop to it before it gets any uglier.
Bobs My Uncle said:You don't get it!
They don't give two hoots how realistic their chances are at success in these hearings. Their intention is to "go TO" on this, drag it out for as long as they can, while generating as much bad PR as posible for both the Pats and for the league in HOPES that either the Pats or the league puts a stop to it before it gets any uglier.
PatsFaninAZ said:I think we may have a thread of 11 pages based on a bit of a misunderstanding. I doubt Kessler was suggesting he would actually try to go to court to bring the claim for compensation. The boston herald article doesn't say that.
The bottom line is that the CBA is as close to bullet proof on this point as can be -- this kind of dispute is subject to binding arbitration. There can be no court. I think the only new piece of news is that Branch is going to seek IN ARBITRATION not merely a trade here but to hold the Patriots responsible for the contract he says he would have received. But he has to make that claim in arbitration not court (unless the Patriots, the NFL, the NFLPA, and Branch were all to agree that it could be brought in court, which actually wouldn't be a bad thing for the Pats).
I think the issue about whether to consolidate the cases is based on the fact that there are two different procedures for Branch's two different claims, so they probably cannot be consoidated.
I also don't think I would demonize Chayut on this one. This is all Kessler and the Union pushing the limits.
In any event, there is nothing really new about this claim. The theory is the same -- the Patriots breached an implied promise. The only thing that's different is what relief Branch is seeking.
Finally, though I doubt any one cares, the Shakespeare quote about lawyers does not mean what those of you mentioning it think it means.
Bobs My Uncle said:Failing that I think Chayut is banking on the league coercing Kraft into settling this (ie trading Branch) for the good of the league.
The "good for the league" comment was not meant for how I feel but rather what Chayut obviously feels. I mean he's got no other sane reason for doing this but to bank on the league not wanting to see this drag on.Steve1iron said:How is encouraging players to break valid contracts "for the good of the league". What are you smoking? The NFL has to be firmly behind the Pats. The integrity of the league is at stake here. Burn Branch burn. :bricks:
Patriotic Fervor said:This points up to what is wrong with America today.
The problem is, the lawyers now run everything. EVERYTHING!!!!
Non-elected, held responsible to no one, this is the segment of society that most bears watching.
With each passing day, it becomes more and more apparent that Shakespeare was right.
What a sad commentary on our times.
Bobs My Uncle said:The "good for the league" comment was not meant for how I feel but rather what Chayut obviously feels. I mean he's got no other sane reason for doing this but to bank on the league not wanting to see this drag on.
Bobs My Uncle said:One other point.
I highly doubt that Chayut and company truly believe that they'll win. All they want is the threat of the legal proceedings and the ugliness that such proceedings offers as a way to resolve this issue by a) forcing the Pats to make a deal to stop this mess from continuing at a time when a new season is starting b) hoping the league will step in and broker a deal to stop the bad PR such a fiasco is creating.
In the end Chayut just wants his client in another uniform and with a new deal so that they both make more money. He doesn't gave two craps about how he gets it done.
kurtinelson said:I agree. Lawyers suck.
PatsFaninAZ said:I think we may have a thread of 11 pages based on a bit of a misunderstanding. I doubt Kessler was suggesting he would actually try to go to court to bring the claim for compensation. The boston herald article doesn't say that.
The bottom line is that the CBA is as close to bullet proof on this point as can be -- this kind of dispute is subject to binding arbitration. There can be no court.
Patriotic Fervor said:And RAWKY, maybe you'd better stay at the senior center a little longer to find out exactly what B-I-N-G-O is.