Signing Herron WAS revenge says Star Tribune [merged]

[DarrylS]

From Pro football talk:

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm

CHILDRESS ASKING FOR TROUBLE

Regardless of his motivation for sharing with the media a conversation that he claims to have had with Pats coach Bill Belichick regarding maneuverings at the bottom of their respective rosters, the early reaction from league insiders regarding the harsh comments from Vikings coach Brad Childress regarding Belichick is that Childress made an enormous blunder.

Said one source: "Why, in God's name, is Brad Childress talking about Bill Belichick to the press? Is [Childress] a complete and senseless moron? He basically insults one of the most powerful coaches in the league by calling him out as dishonest. He's an idiot coach."

We tend to agree. As a reader astutely observed, the coaching industry at the NFL level is fueled by relationships. When a coach is fired and begins to look for other work, he relies on those relationships. So why would any head coach gratuitously alienate a current head coach who has plenty of friends?

Indeed, if Childress is accurate in his belief that Belichick was trying to leverage the Vikings into not claiming tight end Garrett Mills on waivers, who's to say that Belichick won't eventually try to leverage some other team into not giving a job to Childress when/if/when he's fired by the Vikings?

 

[PatsFan37]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

I don't see how this is relevant. Your coach tried to collude to keep a player he should have just kept on the roster. In your eyes he can do no wrong, but this was wrong. If this was any other coach I would say the same thing. It's bad for the sport, it's bad for the players. If Mangini did this I would say the same thing.

If you read my posts, you'd see I agree. The difference, however, is I wouldn't go to a Jets forum to comment on Mangini. Your presence on this forum speaks of who you are.

 

[Mangold74]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

If you read my posts, you'd see I agree. The difference, however, is I wouldn't go to a Jets forum to comment on Mangini. Your presence on this forum speaks of who you are.

I post on this site because you have a lot of good, smart posters. I don't come here posting how the Pats suck and other nonsense like that. I hate trolls like that who are completely blinded by their false loyalty. We have some solid Pats fans that post on the Jets boards, and other pats fans who are just looking to start up trouble.

I find the Garrett Mills situation troubling. If two coaches can get together and decide that a guy is going to be a practice squad player and make 300k less this season thats really bad for the sport. I understand why the Pats would be interested in this but it's not fair to the player. I'm assuming that the Pats and Vikings had some sort of discussions earlier in training camp about possible trades.

If this is a bigger problem and something that goes on every year then the league really needs to look into it. Two teams can't be trading favors that affect players salaries.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

If this is a bigger problem and something that goes on every year then the league really needs to look into it. Two teams can't be trading favors that affect players salaries.

Whether it's a problem or not is debatable but did you REALLY need to put an "If" in front of that ? You don't think wink-wink go on all the time.

Coaches f*ck around all the time. Like Mangina not letting Rhodes talk to Peter King so he can try to perpetuate the lie that was written about what Belichick said. Of course, in this case Mangina looks like a fool thinking he can actually keep it going for another week.

 

[PatsFan37]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

I post on this site because you have a lot of good, smart posters. I don't come here posting how the Pats suck and other nonsense like that. I hate trolls like that who are completely blinded by their false loyalty. We have some solid Pats fans that post on the Jets boards, and other pats fans who are just looking to start up trouble.

I find the Garrett Mills situation troubling. If two coaches can get together and decide that a guy is going to be a practice squad player and make 300k less this season thats really bad for the sport. I understand why the Pats would be interested in this but it's not fair to the player. I'm assuming that the Pats and Vikings had some sort of discussions earlier in training camp about possible trades.

If this is a bigger problem and something that goes on every year then the league really needs to look into it. Two teams can't be trading favors that affect players salaries.

Fair enough. But if you read your original post, that's not what you said. You were talking about the NFL going after the Pats to take away draft picks. This would be an NFLPA grievance, which is completely different. The NFL would only take away draft picks if a team tampered with negotiations with a player under contract to another team. I'm thinking September 2006 and a certain WR.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

Mangina fans are living in a glass house and shouldn't throw stones.

Mangina threatened to fine players if their agents talked about injuries which is an illegal threat.

Mangina was recruiting Patriots' assistants and front office people without permission before he was even named HC of the JEST. That's why he was locked out when he got back from the Denver playoff game. That's illegal.

 

[Mangold74]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

Fair enough. But if you read your original post, that's not what you said. You were talking about the NFL going after the Pats to take away draft picks. This would be an NFLPA grievance, which is completely different. The NFL would only take away draft picks if a team tampered with negotiations with a player under contract to another team. I'm thinking September 2006 and a certain WR.

Yeah the Jets definitely were a nuisance. But two teams working together to get player(s) onto practice squads is something that might draw the attention of not only the NLFPA but also the commissioners office. While I doubt the commish would take picks away from the Pats anything is possible when Collusion talks are involved.

 

[thomas144]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

Fair enough. But if you read your original post, that's not what you said. You were talking about the NFL going after the Pats to take away draft picks. This would be an NFLPA grievance, which is completely different. The NFL would only take away draft picks if a team tampered with negotiations with a player under contract to another team. I'm thinking September 2006 and a certain WR.

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but the "issue" here would be that two coaches might have colluded to make two players unrestricted free agents. This isn't something that the player's union is going to have a problem with.

I'm not sure I'm making this clear enough. If the story is true, Belichick was saying to Childress "I'll let your guy clear waivers if you'll let my guy clear waivers." After clearing waivers both players could have signed with either team, or neither team, or whatever. That's the nice thing about being a free agent. Garrett Mills would have much more leverage if he hadn't been claimed by the Vikings.

 

[ClevTrev]

Re: Signing Herron WAS revenge says Star Tribune

This is ridiculous. The season is about to start and people are getting worked up over practice squad players. Give me a break. BB called the damn coach to ask a favor, the dude said no. END OF STORY. If Childress wants to run around and pump up his chest in the media because he feels that he's getting one over on BB, so be it. GO AHEAD BUDDY, POP YOUR COLLAR.

BB did nothing wrong in asking, unless there is some rule in the CBA that says that he's not supposed to ask and I've never heard of such a rule.
You all think that this stuff doesn't happen all the time? Please. Teams are always trying to sneak players through waivers. IMHO, that conversation never should have hit the media, it seems very unprofessional to me, and he did it with malicious intent. You better believe that other coaches in the league will be careful how they do business with this clown in the future.

Lastly, we don't know the exact content of this conversation. Only what Childress "said took place". I've already been duped by one media report that BB said something. This better not be another attempt to put words in BB's mouth.

Good post and very sound points. You've summarized the situation and its relative importance accurately. You'd think that Childress might understand the concept of professional courtesy, and I don't mean that he should have cooperated with BB's request, he just didn't need to make it public, as someday, he'll want the same courtesy. All in all if this is true, a very short-sighted action by our man Childress.

 

[PatsFan37]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but the "issue" here would be that two coaches might have colluded to make two players unrestricted free agents. This isn't something that the player's union is going to have a problem with.

I'm not sure I'm making this clear enough. If the story is true, Belichick was saying to Childress "I'll let your guy clear waivers if you'll let my guy clear waivers." After clearing waivers both players could have signed with either team, or neither team, or whatever. That's the nice thing about being a free agent. Garrett Mills would have much more leverage if he hadn't been claimed by the Vikings.

At the risk of repeating myself, the coaches would have colluded to deny these players regular roster positions and the several hundred thousand dollars in salary that go with it. Free agent is nice if you're a sought-after superstar. It's not so nice if your alternative is a practice squad.

So how in heck would Garrett Mills have more leverage if the Vikings agreed to NOT bid for his services.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

I find the Garrett Mills situation troubling. If two coaches can get together and decide that a guy is going to be a practice squad player and make 300k less this season thats really bad for the sport. I understand why the Pats would be interested in this but it's not fair to the player...Two teams can't be trading favors that affect players salaries.

Well, I say sir, I say, there's little, I say a little, too much assumin' going on around here! (In my worst Foghorn Leghorn voiceover.)

Mills isn't guaranteed a spot on Minnesota's roster, he's been claimed off waivers which means he's guaranteed three weeks salary if he's cut today, and a chance to shop his services elsewhere.

We can't know if Mills was told to keep his NE locker, as others who have been cut and re-signed here in the past have been told.

We can't know if Mills Practice Squad negotiations with NE involved second year salary or Practice Squad salary.

We can't know if Mills informed BB that he preferred to stay if BB could swing an agreement with Childress.

Et Cetera.

What we can know:
- Two teams both wanted Mills' services.
- There were communications between the head coaches.
- One head coach made a fuss over it in the media and didn't exactly cover himself with glory while flinging monkey crap at the other.
- Mills is, for the moment, a Viking...who knows, maybe the kid will stick there because a former coach put the wind up his current coach and Minny winds up hanging onto Mills to spite NE (maybe BB and the NE staff are still laughing themselves sick at Childress).

In regards to the salary Mills may or may not have lost - whom would you prefer to work for, an employer who has worked with you, who has a plan for you, and is willing to fight or you, or an employer who wants a closer look at you in their system to determine if their thoughts about how you fit are legitimate? Both are opportunities, either could pan out or fall flat. All things being equal, I'd prefer to take a chance on the guy who knows me and has articulated a plan for how that relationship can develop - but that's me - I prefer the more solid situation with a proven winner who wants me over the more ambiguous situation.

 

[RayClay]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

Well, I say sir, I say, there's little, I say a little, too much assumin' going on around here! (In my worst Foghorn Leghorn voiceover.)

Mills isn't guaranteed a spot on Minnesota's roster, he's been claimed off waivers which means he's guaranteed three weeks salary if he's cut today, and a chance to shop his services elsewhere.

We can't know if Mills was told to keep his NE locker, as others who have been cut and re-signed here in the past have been told.

We can't know if Mills Practice Squad negotiations with NE involved second year salary or Practice Squad salary.

We can't know if Mills informed BB that he preferred to stay if BB could swing an agreement with Childress.

Et Cetera.

What we can know:
- Two teams both wanted Mills' services.
- There were communications between the head coaches.
- One head coach made a fuss over it in the media and didn't exactly cover himself with glory while flinging monkey crap at the other.
- Mills is, for the moment, a Viking...who knows, maybe the kid will stick there because a former coach put the wind up his current coach and Minny winds up hanging onto Mills to spite NE (maybe BB and the NE staff are still laughing themselves sick at Childress).

In regards to the salary Mills may or may not have lost - whom would you prefer to work for, an employer who has worked with you, who has a plan for you, and is willing to fight or you, or an employer who wants a closer look at you in their system to determine if their thoughts about how you fit are legitimate? Both are opportunities, either could pan out or fall flat. All things being equal, I'd prefer to take a chance on the guy who knows me and has articulated a plan for how that relationship can develop - but that's me - I prefer the more solid situation with a proven winner who wants me over the more ambiguous situation.

I hate to say it, but if I were Mills I'd take the opportunity elsewhere. The pats have invested heavily in TEs, got a lot of WRs and heath Evans likes it here and is going to fight like hell for his job.

Plus Welker is a fine possession guy we spent for.

If a team needs a possession type receiver, Mills might get a chance to develop some average full back skills, the lack of which are going to hold him back. He's not a big enough target at TE IMO. A man without a position often loses the game of musical chairs.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Well I didn't really see it as a threat. It was more a negotiation.
It sounded like BB offered not to take their guy as long as they didn't take our guy.
That sounds more like bargaining then some kind of 'shakedown' or "oooh i'm gonna get you sucka!"

 

[Brady to Brown]

Re: Signing Herron WAS revenge says Star Tribune

Right, clearly it's not as simple as others would like it to be. And unless Childress has the conversation taped - it never happened. Poor Brad. He loses to Belichick in the Super Bowl. Then he gets punked on MNF last year. I guess he thinks he's even now.

I think you nailed it.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

Mangina fans are living in a glass house and shouldn't throw stones.

Mangina threatened to fine players if their agents talked about injuries which is an illegal threat.

Mangina was recruiting Patriots' assistants and front office people without permission before he was even named HC of the JEST. That's why he was locked out when he got back from the Denver playoff game. That's illegal.

Don't forget stealing intellectual property. We know he took the book they had on Pennington. He probably stole a lot more.

And Mangold74, you're being a bit trollish here even if that isn't your intention. Your first post on an opponent's board should not be calling out their coach on something that will just get swept under the rug, going so (laughably) far as to saying draft picks should be lost. Talk about the Jets, prove your worth, and maybe then we'll care what you have to say about NE.

 

[spacecrime]

Re: Was Childress accusing BB of being dishonest?

Mills isn't guaranteed a spot on Minnesota's roster, he's been claimed off waivers which means he's guaranteed three weeks salary if he's cut today

Not true. He can be cut any time, including before the first game.

 

[Fencer]

I'm writing this from the terrace of my hotel room on the East End of Grand Cayman, and I apologize, but I'm not going to read the whole thread.

However, here's something I don't like. The story as it reads sounds as if BB was attempting to collude to screw up Mills' employment prospects. And last year there was a story that the Cowboys as a favor to him didn't go after Vinateri.

If those stories are true, he's acting wrongfully. If they are false, it's a pity that they're going around.

 

[ClevTrev]

In rethinking this, I'm inclined to propose a different possibility: Suppose BB knew he had to cut two TEs to work the roster in his favor later. Suppose he really wanted to re-sign one of the TEs and was concerned that some team very lean in TEs would claim the one he wanted to re-sign. So, he calls Childress and appears to propose an agreement for the one he doesn't want in a bit of a diversion. Knowing Childress would be intrigued with whomever the Pats thought was worth re-signing, BB floats Mills' name rather than Rivers' name and asks to make a deal. Knowing Childress' recalcitrant personality, BB banks on the fact that whichever name he floats, Childress is going to bite and grab the player he thinks is favored by the Pats. Well, Brad bit for Mills, and BB re-signed Rivers later. Just the way he planned . . . .

 

[spacecrime]

In rethinking this, I'm inclined to propose a different possibility: Suppose BB knew he had to cut two TEs to work the roster in his favor later. Suppose he really wanted to re-sign one of the TEs and was concerned that some team very lean in TEs would claim the one he wanted to re-sign. So, he calls Childress and appears to propose an agreement for the one he doesn't want in a bit of a diversion. Knowing Childress would be intrigued with whomever the Pats thought was worth re-signing, BB floats Mills' name rather than Rivers' name and asks to make a deal. Knowing Childress' recalcitrant personality, BB banks on the fact that whichever name he floats, Childress is going to bite and grab whichever player he thinks is favored by the Pats. Well, Brad bit for Mills, and BB re-signed Rivers later. Just the way he planned . . . .

So why didn't he just not cut Rivers? It wasn't like he didn't have two roster spots open.

 

[ClevTrev]

So why didn't he just not cut Rivers? It wasn't like he didn't have two roster spots open.

According to the local media, BB told Rivers to hang tight as the team had to make some roster moves. Once those moves were done, Rivers was resigned. My guess is that the team dangled some players who were high risk in being picked up, but they retained some who were key to their success in the first few weeks. A form of monopoly with roster names.

Of course we'll never know whether they felt Rogers was a high risk at being claimed, as I felt he was solid for the 53-man roster as well. Guess you can't be right all the time.