Woody Paige on the Cassel/Cutler fiasco

[ctpatsfan77]

Not an editorial, but answering a mailbag question. I present the information without comment.

Woody - Maybe you can help an out-of-state Broncomaniac make sense of the attempted trade of Jay Cutler. Why on earth would the Broncos' supposed braintrust of Josh McDaniels and Brian Xanders even consider it?
-- Corbin Davis, Berkeley, Calif.

Corbin - McDaniels wanted Matt Cassel. That's all there is to it. Josh told me several weeks ago in a phone conversation, as I sat in my car and took notes on napkins and Burger King sacks, that he and Cassel connected last year, that Cassel was probably responsible for him getting a head coaching job, that Cassel had studied hard for four years to be a starter (as McDaniels studied hard to become a head coach), that Cassel was ready to go when called on and had a strong work ethic, understood the game and the New England offense and got better and better as the season went on.

McDaniels loves Cassel and saw a chance to get him. The word I heard from somebody I'd trust with my ATM password was that New England shopped Cassel around, and Denver was on the list. McDaniels said no, then rethought the possibility. Detroit and Tampa Bay came into the mix, and Tampa Bay really wanted Cutler. Cassel's salary-cap number is way higher than Jay's. The Bucs would offer two high draft picks to New England, they would get Cutler, and Denver would get Cassel.

However, on that Friday night, Bill Belichick did a deal with his old friend and ex-GM, Scott Pioli in Kansas City. The Bucs and the Broncos didn't know there was a deal in place, so Tampa Bay kept pursuing. Then they found out, and that was that. The problem for McDaniels was when other teams got involved in a three-way possibility, it was going to get out, and he didn't know that. Rookie mistake.

Some insight: A former president/general manager in the NFL was one of my closest friends when we were younger. We used to hang out all the time. Nobody really knew we were friends because I had moved to Denver and he was in another city. When Dan Reeves was the Broncos coach and he made cuts, he would announce them to the press, because sometimes he would pull them back if another team wanted them. I'd call my buddy GM, and he would read me the waiver wire, and I would write exactly who the Broncos cuts were, and Reeves would call me all (ticked) off. He went to every person at the Broncos demanding to know who was telling me the cuts. To this day, I've never revealed it was an executive with another team.

There is a pro sports executive in town who leaks league information all the time to a national TV commentator. In return, the commentator talks about this executive in a good light on TV several times a year. I was talking to a person in football I trust, and he told me he had an e-mail in front of him that said "Cutler will not be traded" after all the dust settled. I know that e-mail was from somebody in the Broncos organization. Long-winded answer.

I never heard Brian Xanders was involved in any way in a possible trade, so you got to wonder what his role is out there at Dove Valley. He hasn't spoken once publicly about the trade. Isn't a general manager supposed to let the media and the fans know? These guys are like Bush. They never hold press conferences.

And after the conference call involving Cutler and McDaniels (and several others), we know the situation hasn't improved. The conflict rages on. We'll find out more next week when the Broncos have ""voluntary'' meetings.

 

[bigjunk1]

The Bucs would offer two high draft picks to New England, they would get Cutler, and Denver would get Cassel.

Boy, I hate reading that.

 

[BelichickFan]

Boy, I hate reading that.

It's all conjecture, there's a wider train of thought that says Denver only offered their #2 and the picks from TB would go to Denver as they were trading what most people consider to be the better QB. That makes sense to me - McDaniels connection or not I can't see Denver trading Cutler for Cassel straight up.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

It's all conjecture, there's a wider train of thought that says Denver only offered their #2 and the picks from TB would go to Denver as they were trading what most people consider to be the better QB. That makes sense to me - McDaniels connection or not I can't see Denver trading Cutler for Cassel straight up.

Another possibility is something like TB sending #19 to the Patriots, and the Pats sending #47 or #58 and Cassel to the Broncos (or something like that).

I agree that the likelihood of a straight-up Cassel for Cutler trade seems improbable.

 

[BelichickFan]

Another possibility is something like TB sending #19 to the Patriots, and the Pats sending #47 or #58 and Cassel to the Broncos (or something like that).

I agree that the likelihood of a straight-up Cassel for Cutler trade seems improbable.

It's possible the Patriots could have gotten a little better deal. Or not. We'll never really know unless Belichick writes an autobiography in 20 years. But the problem seems to be that he had a deal he was happy with, a valuable pick and the chance to move on in FA - we signed Taylor, Baker, we had an offer out to Bodden, we signed Springs not too far in - and I don't think Belichick wanted to deal with the uncertainty of what he likely considered a clusterf*ck of a 3 way deal that he couldn't count on getting done.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's possible the Patriots could have gotten a little better deal. Or not. We'll never really know unless Belichick writes an autobiography in 20 years. But the problem seems to be that he had a deal he was happy with, a valuable pick and the chance to move on in FA - we signed Taylor, Baker, we had an offer out to Bodden, we signed Springs not too far in - and I don't think Belichick wanted to deal with the uncertainty of what he likely considered a clusterf*ck of a 3 way deal that he couldn't count on getting done.

I don't think that there's any real question at this point, unless pretty much all the reporting is wrong. There were better deals available. I've said that I think BB did Pioli a solid because he could have waited another 1-2 days before pulling the trigger. Others have insisted that Belichick felt that the time crunch was so harsh that a deal had to be made immediately. Both of those scenarios seem much more realistic to me than "this was the best they could get", particularly given the follow up reporting that's been done on this issue.

Me, I'll always go with the "solid" scenario, since it's the one that best fits the facts of the situation.

 

[BelichickFan]

I don't think that there's any real question at this point, unless pretty much all the reporting is wrong. There were better deals available.

Nah. There MIGHT have been better deals available. That I'll agree with. And maybe Belichick should have waited to see if they developed, who knows. But at the time TB and Denver were scrambling and I highly doubt there was an actual deal on the table to be taken. And there is plenty of "reporting" that says all the Patriots would have gotten is Denver's #2. I don't know for sure but no-one else does either. We all have our gut feelings.

 

[BelichickFan]

Me, I'll always go with the "solid" scenario, since it's the one that best fits the facts of the situation.

Me too and mine if that Denver wasn't trading Cutler for Cassel. They were going to get more IMO.

 

[BlitzFritz]

Fascinating stuff.

1. KC had the only firm deal on the table at the start of FA
2. BB might have done SP a solid by pulling the trigger rather than waiting a few days, but SP might have told BB this is a now or never offer etc.
3. JMcD is NOT the GM in Denver is he??? Why is he getting all the blame?

-- FRITZ

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

It's unfortunate that Cassel didn't have an extra year on his contract. If there wasn't the downside of a $15M contract, BB would have had more time.

What I find really, really irritating about this is the misguided perception. Organizational genius turned a 2005 7th round pick into the 34th pick of the 2009 draft.

Unfortunately, the "debate" seems to have degenerated into BB getting hosed, "losing it", needs to be investigated for collusion, he can't do anything without Pioli......

 

[bigjunk1]

3. JMcD is NOT the GM in Denver is he??? Why is he getting all the blame?

-- FRITZ

This has been bugging me too. Do you think it may be a lot of Shanahan's old cronnies flooding the rumor mill just to take cheap shots at the new guy?

 

[Deus Irae]

Fascinating stuff.

1. KC had the only firm deal on the table at the start of FA
2. BB might have done SP a solid by pulling the trigger rather than waiting a few days, but SP might have told BB this is a now or never offer etc.
3. JMcD is NOT the GM in Denver is he??? Why is he getting all the blame?

-- FRITZ

The Denver message boards are filled with people that are just out of their minds about this. It's been great theater.

 

[Headcase]

Me, I'll always go with the "solid" scenario, since it's the one that best fits the facts of the situation.

The only "solid" that BB did Scott was he didn't pull the paperwork when other things became possibilities.

I'm sure BB had a time frame he wanted to get the deal done in, and the Chiefs had the best deal on the table when the time frame was up, so that is what BB took. These other possibilities apparently didn't start to materialize until after the paperwork had been sent to the league. BB kept the his word and honored the deal that had been made, rather than screwing Scott. That is even doing a solid, it is just doing what a decent person should do.

SSDD

 

[363839]

It's possible the Patriots could have gotten a little better deal. Or not. We'll never really know unless Belichick writes an autobiography in 20 years. But the problem seems to be that he had a deal he was happy with, a valuable pick and the chance to move on in FA - we signed Taylor, Baker, we had an offer out to Bodden, we signed Springs not too far in - and I don't think Belichick wanted to deal with the uncertainty of what he likely considered a clusterf*ck of a 3 way deal that he couldn't count on getting done.

Most likely scenario in my eyes.
I think you got Bingo, BF.

 

[Grizzafted]

The more I look at this year's draft, the more I think that the 19 pick really isn't that much better than the 34 pick. Obviously it is nicer, but one of the guys we're targeting at OLB will be there at 23. I'm not sure that the guys we want/need aren't going to fall right into our laps at our current position. I'm sure that factored in. If there were two OLBs in this draft, and Belichick wanted to get one of them desperately, I think things would have gone differently. But as it stands now there are literally 5 guys who have pro bowl potential, and presuming we don't want to draft 2 of them, I don't think we're in much different of a position now than we would have been with #s 19 and 23.

 

[WhiZa]

I think Woody has gone (or already was) crazy. How does McDaniels say no, and then decided to tear his team apart for Cassel. Too much of a mood swing.

Then no one thought a deal was in place? Teams had 3 months to contact the Patriots with any interest. Even a simple email would had sufficed, but Woody is saying these teams didn't know the Patriots were that far into a deal after all that time. There was a reason they put the tag on Cassel the first day they could. If they cared that much getting him they would of asked about a trade that day Cassel signed the tag. I doubt the Patriots would hide they were dealing with KC as that is bad practice during negotiations.

 

[jmt57]

One thing I don't understand in these theories that BB was doing a favor because he and Pioli are friends is that it ignores that he and McDaniels are also friends and also worked together. How is it that people come up with the conclusion that BB would give Pioli a sweetheart deal because of friendship from having worked together, but not McDaniels ?

Re-reading the Woody Paige column, Paige is actually very unclear in regards to when Denver and Tampa let BB know they were interested, and when they made their trade offer. But Paige clearly implies that BB made a decision to accept less with his use of the words "with his old friend and ex-GM."

Personally I'm more inclined to believe Mike Reiss' opinion: the Pats called everybody, Kansas City was the only interested team, the two agreed on a deal, and Denver and Tampa bay made their offer too late. BB had to move quickly so he could sign free agents like Fred Taylor and Chris Baker; if he waited he ran a high risk that they would sign elsewhere. The fact that he and Pioli are friends is irrelevant; he and McDaniels are friends too.

 

[Metaphors]

Unfortunately, the "debate" seems to have degenerated into BB getting hosed, "losing it", needs to be investigated for collusion, he can't do anything without Pioli......

Exactly. While nobody that I've heard directly says it, that crowd implies that:
1) Belichick had the #34 offer from Pioli
2) Belichick hadn't agreed to the offer yet
3) Belichick received another offer that included a pick somewhere between #12 and #20
4) Belichick weighed the various offers on the table
5) Belichick chose the worst offer
6) Belichick added Vrabel into the worst offer on the table

A preschooler can tell that 34 comes after 12. That must mean that Belichick had some ulterior motive for taking the worst offer. He intentionally hurt the Patriots to help his buddy in KC. Or he intentionally screwed over his "supposed" friend in Denver. Or he has some hidden agenda against the Detroit and/or TB organizations. And he uprooted one of his loyal team leaders just to further whatever devious game he was playing.

Yeah. That all makes much more sense than KC being the best offer on the table (including Vrabel) at the time he needed to fish or cut bait.

 

[Deus Irae]

Exactly. While nobody that I've heard directly says it, that crowd implies that:
1) Belichick had the #34 offer from Pioli
2) Belichick hadn't agreed to the offer yet
3) Belichick received another offer that included a pick somewhere between #12 and #20
4) Belichick weighed the various offers on the table
5) Belichick chose the worst offer
6) Belichick added Vrabel into the worst offer on the table

A preschooler can tell that 34 comes after 12. That must mean that Belichick had some ulterior motive for taking the worst offer. He intentionally hurt the Patriots to help his buddy in KC. Or he intentionally screwed over his "supposed" friend in Denver. Or he has some hidden agenda against the Detroit and/or TB organizations. And he uprooted one of his loyal team leaders just to further whatever devious game he was playing.

Yeah. That all makes much more sense than KC being the best offer on the table (including Vrabel) at the time he needed to fish or cut bait.

Don't know how many times this has to be pointed out......

He didn't need to fish or cut bait.

 

[Absurdly Metro]

Don't know how many times this has to be pointed out......

He didn't need to fish or cut bait.

Would he have had the cap room to sign Taylor and Baker if he had waited another 48 hours?