Owners vote to trade compensatory picks but.....

[Username]

.....starting 2017, not in the next draft. That's a bit strange, does somebody have a valuable 3rd round comp pick in 2016 that they could potentially use to trade up to the first pick in the second round hence negating their lack of a first rounder or something?

And yes, I'm assuming we win the Superbowl.

 

[billdog3484]

while it is questionable...my question is...when rule changes similar to this have been made in the past, how soon is the rule change typically implemented? i think if someone knew this answer it would be helpful

 

[sportnik]

Does anyone really think the reason to push this out to 2017 is not related to the number of comp picks the Pats have in 2016? The jealous owners club strikes again!

 

[JMC00]

while it is questionable...my question is...when rule changes similar to this have been made in the past, how soon is the rule change typically implemented? i think if someone knew this answer it would be helpful

Just look at two things from the playoffs that were implemented for this season.

-Formations that the ravens cried about
-Concussion protocol based on the hit on Edelman

Two Patriot related things


This is clearly Patriots related because Pats have a few comp picks coming to them that could help them move up to the top half of the 2nd if they wanted to.

 

[Mack Herron]

No trades for you!

 

[Mack Herron]

Just look at two things from the playoffs that were implemented for this season.

-Formations that the ravens cried about
-Concussion protocol based on the hit on Edelman

Two Patriot related things


This is clearly Patriots related because Pats have a few comp picks coming to them that could help them move up to the top half of the 2nd if they wanted to.

Here's where it's comforting to have an influential owner looking out for the franchise.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

How did Vichy Bob vote on this proposal?

Though I suppose what really matters is how he voted on the immediate vs. 2017 aspect, which is probably something we'll never know. After all, it's in NE's interests for the picks to be tradeable and being tradeable starting in 2017 is better than never being tradeable, so it is reasonable for Kraft to vote in favor of the final proposal even if 2017 instead of 2016 was an anti-NE provision.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

.....starting 2017, not in the next draft. That's a bit strange, does somebody have a valuable 3rd round comp pick in 2016 that they could potentially use to trade up to the first pick in the second round hence negating their lack of a first rounder or something?

And yes, I'm assuming we win the Superbowl.

Yea pretty convenient that the Pats may have up to three 3rd round compensatory picks in 2016..

Oh well

 

[RobertWeathers]

Just look at two things from the playoffs that were implemented for this season.

-Formations that the ravens cried about
-Concussion protocol based on the hit on Edelman

Two Patriot related things


This is clearly Patriots related because Pats have a few comp picks coming to them that could help them move up to the top half of the 2nd if they wanted to.

Well, if we really want to understand how quickly the NFL can make changes they can send out 1/2 baked memos which immediately change sideline videotaping procedures without having the NFL Competition Committee discuss, debate and vote on the proposed rule change.

 

[TomPatriot]

Seattle has comp picks in the 3rd, 5th and 6th round too.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I call ********.

There is absolutely no logistical reason to delay the implementation of this procedure till 2017.

 

[Sicilian]

I know we like to see conspiracies everywhere nowadays, but this makes sense. Since the criteria for awarding these picks for 2016 is already decided (free agents come and gone), you don't want to enact a new policy regarding them right away. Teams deserve the chance to factor this into their decisions to keep/sign free agents, no matter how marginal the impact may actually be.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Seattle has comp picks in the 3rd, 5th and 6th round too.

They haven't been kicking ass for 15 years so they were not considered as being impacted by the rule

 

[TomPatriot]

Yea pretty convenient that the Pats may have up to three 3rd round compensatory picks in 2016..

Oh well

Might be 4. Revis, Wilfolk, Ayers and Vereen.

 

[Froob]

How did Vichy Bob vote on this proposal?

Though I suppose what really matters is how he voted on the immediate vs. 2017 aspect, which is probably something we'll never know. After all, it's in NE's interests for the picks to be tradeable and being tradeable starting in 2017 is better than never being tradeable, so it is reasonable for Kraft to vote in favor of the final proposal even if 2017 instead of 2016 was an anti-NE provision.

He voted for 2017 because he can't let our selfishness take precedent over the other 31. But, don't worry it's all part of the master plan to overthrow the league front office.

 

[borg]

My greatest fear is that Brady will get tagged for a failed drug test in the near future. Given the vindictiveness of the Park Avenue lynch mob, would it surprise anyone to wake up one morning and discover Brady had been suspended for a mysterious illegal substance. After every piss test, I hope Brady keeps a "splash" for his own personal files as a "C" sample. Who knows where Pash and Vincent are lurking as we speak?

 

[The Gr8est]

Yea pretty convenient that the Pats may have up to three 3rd round compensatory picks in 2016..

Oh well

Where would we get three 3rd round comp picks?

Revis is one, who are the others?

3rd round picks are hard to get, I don't think an team has ever had two 3rd round comp picks in one year let alone three.

You may be significantly over rating the comp pick likelihood

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Two general comments:

First, I think this IS the right thing to do in theory. Allowing the 2016 comp picks to be traded is retroactively changing the rules. Those comp picks were earned due to actions this past offseason. In theory, if teams had known then that those picks could be traded, they could have taken a different course of action in deciding who to sign/not sign. It makes sense to start with a fresh slate in 2017 for actions that will happen this upcoming offseason. It's the most fair result for any change, dare I say the one with the most "integrity".

Second, the problem is that the NFL *has* done retroactive changes in the past without consideration for the above. So why is it different this time??? I highly doubt "integrity" is the reason. Yes, I believe the Patriots having pick 97 (and no major free agents this offseason) is playing a part in this sudden change in philosophy. That's ridiculous.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Yea pretty convenient that the Pats may have up to three 3rd round compensatory picks in 2016..

Oh well

No. The only player who's in line for a 3 is Revis.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

He voted for 2017 because he can't let our selfishness take precedent over the other 31. But, don't worry it's all part of the master plan to overthrow the league front office.

I'm pretty damn sure it wasn't "Would you rather start trading in 2016 or 2017?"