Waters' Locker Cleaned Out (Update: Reports Nameplate Taken Down)

[mgteich]

The reaction of a pro-bowler being told that he wasn't worth $1.4M to show up for Game One and beyond was for the pro-bowler to tell the team where they could take their offer, a Johnny Paycheck moment.

No offense but I am still lost.

Lets say the team ask him to restructure and he said no. How does that keep him out of camp? Would he not still have a valid contract? Wouldn't the appropriate thing to do be to show up at camp and force them to pay you or cut you? Am I missing something here?

 

[Ring 6]

If the rumours are true that they wanted to cut his salary to the vet minimum, then I hope the team is happy when Brady is laid out on is back from inferior O line play.

via rotoworld:

So, in your opinion Brady would be better off behind an OL who felt attending camp was too good for him?

 

[Ring 6]

The reaction of a pro-bowler being told that he wasn't worth $1.4M to show up for Game One and beyond was for the pro-bowler to tell the team where they could take their offer, a Johnny Paycheck moment.

Do you take into account at all that the pro-bowler said FU I will show up when I want to?
Are we running a football team to win or collecting talent regardless of the cost or consequence?

 

[TheBeers]

The most basic philosophy of this franchise over the past 11 years is that no one player is irreplacable and the next man up needs to be ready.
I'm not sure Brian Waters, at this stage of his career after blowing off camp is worth obliterating that tenant over.

So BB maybe only wanted Waters back if he wasn't say.. the only guy on the team with a different set of rules? Last year they brought him in last minute, this year he is already under contract. Perhaps part of this reported "agreement" was Waters showing up for camp... otherwise they would restructure and go to game based incentives. It's speculation like everything else in this thread but it makes sense considering the reportedly bad locker room we had a few years ago. Bedard made that point earlier on twitter.

Edit: d%#*!@t.. i'm a slow typer

 

[Snake Eyes]

Do you take into account at all that the pro-bowler said FU I will show up when I want to?
Are we running a football team to win or collecting talent regardless of the cost or consequence?

Consequences like TFB getting beaten like a rented mule? Many teams have shown intelligent flexibility with aging players and it can make a lot of sense depending on the circumstances. I think that having special rules in training camp served the Broncos well in Elway's last year. If Waters needs to skip TC I'm ok with that, it seems he's not ok with the attempted adjustments to his deal.

 

[TyronePoole]

So, in your opinion Brady would be better off behind an OL who felt attending camp was too good for him?

if that guy is Brian Waters then the answer is obviously YES.

 

[Ring 6]

if that guy is Brian Waters then the answer is obviously YES.

Not really

 

[hovis]

Consequences like TFB getting beaten like a rented mule? Many teams have shown intelligent flexibility with aging players and it can make a lot of sense depending on the circumstances. I think that having special rules in training camp served the Broncos well in Elway's last year. If Waters needs to skip TC I'm ok with that, it seems he's not ok with the attempted adjustments to his deal.

How about consequences like de-motivating the rest of the guys that were actually IN camp? How do you think they'd react to a guy skipping out all August, then coming in and getting paid MORE? Why bother even showing up?

 

[mgteich]

In a word, "yes". If a pro-bowl lineman who knew our system was out there for $1.4M, I'd say that we should sign up tomorrow.

I would much rather have the Solder-Mankins-Connolly-Waters-Vollmer in 2012 than to have Wendell be a starter instead of Waters. I absolutely think that this OL would be effective, even without a pre-season of play together. Waters wasn't needed for the pre-season. Playing Wendell because Belichick and dante can't handle the locker room issues shows something about the stubbornness of the coaches. Or perhaps, they really think Wendell is a better choice, given the circumstances.

So, in your opinion Brady would be better off behind an OL who felt attending camp was too good for him?

 

[supafly]

No, they didn't. They opted to try and cut his pay for no reason other than they thought they could...

It would seem awfully strange that they would ask a guard who was already on a pretty cheap deal to take a pay cut, especially after he had such a great year and went to the probowl.

It seems that there is some grey area here, Mo, so I will hold off further judgement and comments until we find out more information.

 

[TyronePoole]

Not really

I mean, you have to be such a silly homer to try to make this argument that it doesn't even need a rebuttle. Are you really claiming that the OL situation is better than it would be with Waters because the guys we have in there now attended training camp? notsureifserious.jpg

 

[mgteich]

OK, pay the pro-bowl OG what he is worth and subtract the fines from that number.

But I think that we are beyond this. The open question is how soon will we trade Waters, if at all. His value will go down each week.

How about consequences like de-motivating the rest of the guys that were actually IN camp? How do you think they'd react to a guy skipping out all August, then coming in and getting paid MORE? Why bother even showing up?

 

[TheBeers]

if that guy is Brian Waters then the answer is obviously YES.

I'm totally cool with it too.. but maybe BB isn't. He's the one building the championship level team... and the locker room. But I would absolutely like to have Waters in there.. Even if depth is weaker at OT.

 

[Ring 6]

Consequences like TFB getting beaten like a rented mule?

We will have a professional RG who wants to play football out there.
To suggest Tom Brady will be 'beaten like a rented mule' because of thatis exceedingly ignoramt.

Many teams have shown intelligent flexibility with aging players and it can make a lot of sense depending on the circumstances.

Please give me that list of many.

I think that having special rules in training camp served the Broncos well in Elway's last year.

Please elaborate on those rules that had the people protecting Elway sitting home, asking for raises and showing up on the eve of the opener only if they get a raise.

If Waters needs to skip TC I'm ok with that, it seems he's not ok with the attempted adjustments to his deal.

Apparently he wants to skip the season. I'm glad though that you are OK with players making thier own rules and making demands while doing so. Nice team you woulld run.

 

[Patstopia]

I am also assuming that all this is coming from Waters agent? There is no way someone in the organization would spew this nonsense around. So I would also assume that they are trying to force a release by spreading this fertilizer around and seeing what grows from it.

A contract is a contract, you either comply with it, or negotiate a new one. You don't skip part of it to be home to your benefit, then complain about the rest of it after you get what you wanted out of it.

They should wait until he reports, or let him sit out the season. Fining him the entire time. F' him if he can't play nice with the other boys.

 

[mgteich]

Yup, don't mess around with trying to secure a draft choice. Just prove your point and get nothing.

They should wait until he reports, or let him sit out the season. Fining him the entire time. F' him if he can't play nice with the other boys.

 

[TyronePoole]

I'm totally cool with it too.. but maybe BB isn't. He's the one building the championship level team... and the locker room. But I would absolutely like to have Waters in there.. Even if depth is weaker at OT.

lets say the narrative out there right now is true. By the teams argument it's ok to skip TC if you take a pay cut? or convert your salary to incentives? Pretty sure that doesn't jive with the "can't have guys skipping TC because of terrible morale" argument, all it does is send the message that you can pay the team to get out and still get right back into the lineup.

This is one of those situations where you take the BS principle of it and just let the guy skip under the ruse that he's contemplating retirement because it's better for the team to have him than not. All they've done is gotten into a ridiculous dispute with a guy who by all accounts is a stand up guy and is a perennial pro bowler. How's that for morale?

Never mind the incompetence that comes with asking him for the cut and then just hoping he signs to it later.

That, of course comes with the caveat that I'm arguing the narrative and not what the actual situation which I'm not sure we know. It still doesn't add up to me that the team would be this stupid. Plus they haven't fined him and he hasn't restructured his contract, why not just show up and demand his money? makes no sense to me as told. But it is slightly amusing that there are people who are still willing to twist themselves in knots to defend the team even under such an absurd story (not talking about you here).

 

[supafly]

Yup, don't mess around with trying to secure a draft choice. Just prove your point and get nothing.

Oh, you mean like the Brandon Meriweather situation?

A 2x probowler in his first 3 starting seasons who was a 1st rd pick?

Nevermind, that didn't happen

 

[ATippett56]

The open question is how soon will we trade Waters, if at all. His value will go down each week.

Not necessarily. If a starting offensive guard for the Dallas Cowboys goes down for the season in week two, Brian Waters value may actually go up.

 

[mgteich]

To consider the value of Waters the same as Meriweather is probably the most ignorant suggestion in months, IMHO.

Oh, you mean like the Brandon Meriweather situation?

A 2x probowler in his first 3 starting seasons who was a 1st rd pick?

Nevermind, that didn't happen