Demaryius Thomas says he was insulted/disrespected by Patriots.

Deus Irae said:

Of course there is "word". Anyone who claims otherwise is just trying to defend dishonesty.

Click to expand...

There is a word to sign an agreement ... there is no word that a position being promised.

IcyPatriot said:

There is a word to sign an agreement ... there is no word that a position being promised.

Click to expand...

You're trying to justify a man going back on his word by claiming the word doesn't exist. And you're trying to minimize the dishonesty by tying ti to a position promised, when the coach already acknowledged that he went back on what he said.


You're better than that.

Deus Irae said:

You're trying to justify a man going back on his word by claiming the word doesn't exist. And you're trying to minimize the dishonesty by tying ti to a position promised, when the coach already acknowledged that he went back on what he said.


You're better than that.

Click to expand...

'word' is a concept being added to this discussion by fans.
Belichick does not give his word (promise) that any players job is safe.
There is no dishonesty in cutting anyone if you already know you can be cut at any time.
This is implied when one plays for Belichick ... we all know this ... we have all seen this.

captain stone said:

And whose fault is that?
.

Click to expand...

Not sure it’s anyone’s “fault” it just is but it may explain why Watson a million less fit but at a million more didn’t.

Word.

Deus Irae said:

No, Thomas is not full of bull. Belichick has openly admitted the truth of Thomas' statement.



Bill Belichick on Demaryius Thomas: I was truthful with him, but things change


What the hell is wrong with you people? The guy being accused of breaking his word has acknowledged that he broke his word, citing a change in circumstances as the justification.

Argue "AB coming free changed everything". Argue "subsequent injuries/developments made it impossible to keep DT, no matter how much we wanted to". Argue whatever you want in defense of BB going back on his word. But don't argue that BB didn't do it, because he acknowledged that he did it.

Click to expand...

Towards the end of my second year of Business School, several classmates and I were invited to dinner with the CEO and a few senior managers of a major Motion Picture Studio as a "Thank you" for a project we'd done for them. I remember the evening well...a private room at the old Maison Robert.

One of my classmates had her eyes set on a career in Hollywood and asked the CEO for the advice he'd give an aspiring junior manager in Tinseltown. His answer was brief: "A little while ago, someone came up to me and told me that I had 'lied' to him about a project he was pushing. My answer was simple. 'Well, you should have known who you were dealing with.'" Belichick was more or less saying the same thing.

IcyPatriot said:

'word' is a concept being added to this discussion by fans.
Belichick does not give his word (promise) that any players job is safe.
There is no dishonesty in cutting anyone if you already know you can be cut at any time.
This is implied when one plays for Belichick ... we all know this ... we have all seen this.

Click to expand...

Nonsense.

mgteich said:

Even simpler, if DT were here (and no AB experiment), DT would be taking WR reps instead of Gunner.

I know a lot of folks think that DT isn't very good, but he is better than Gunner and likely better than Meyers.

To put it another way, if DT were available, we'd sign him in a heartbeat, perhaps even trade a 6th for him.

Click to expand...

Correct but not the point at hand. At the time of DT's release the Patriots had AB, Jules, Gordon, Dorsett. This was simple numbers not in favor of DT whose abilities, due to injury, were still in question. That it didn't work out with AB and due to injuries, we could use DT right now is not applicable to 'disrespected' and 'waste of time'. BB made his best guess based on what he thought would e best team and cap usage. That didn't work. Since there's no such thing as making 100% perfect decisions that hardly equals disrespect and wasted time for DT. What it equals is the business of football. Maybe DT would feel not disrespected if he would have remained unsigned and on his own to rehab?

And keeping WR's 5/6 that are cheap, have unknown upside, and have STs importance is S.O.P.
DT would not bring any STs to the table.

Deus Irae said:

Nonsense.

Click to expand...

Prove it ...
One player for Belichick who was ever promised a no cut position.
There has never been 1 ... ever.

Belichick cut Asante Cleveland on Christmas ... he is ruthless.

PatsFanSince74 said:

Towards the end of my second year of Business School, several classmates and I were invited to dinner with the CEO and a few senior managers of a major Motion Picture Studio as a "Thank you" for a project we'd done for them. I remember the evening well...a private room at the old Maison Robert.

One of my classmates had her eyes set on a career in Hollywood and asked the CEO for the advice he'd give an aspiring junior manager in Tinseltown. His answer was brief: "A little while ago, someone came up to me and told me that I had 'lied' to him about a project he was pushing. My answer was simple. 'Well, you should have known who you were dealing with.'" Belichick was more or less saying the same thing.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not sure why the BB defenders can't just acknowledge that he went back on his word, when he's acknowledged it. It's not the end of the world, BB is certainly not the first coach in NFL history who's gone back on his word, and he certainly won't be the last. One can make a persuasive, albeit not exactly moral or principled, argument that a coach breaking his word in a situation like this is not just understandable, but desirable. And, in this case, Karma has bitten the Patriots right in the ass (Brown gone, WR a need position again), and the player got a nice bonus pay bump before getting tossed overboard, so why bother getting into semantics over it?

IcyPatriot said:

Prove it ...
One player for Belichick who was ever promised a no cut position.
There has never been 1 ... ever.

Click to expand...

You are literally trying to craft a claim that's unassailable by making **** up when you have no idea what BB has told players behind closed doors, and I'm the one who's supposed to supply the proof?




Hey, remember when BB was going to trade Gronk to the Lions, and Gronk had to threaten retirement in order to get BB to agree that Gronk was going to remain a member of the Patriots? That doesn't count as guaranteeing a player a roster spot, I guess...

IcyPatriot said:

'word' is not applicable to how Belichick has historically coached this team.
Can you link to where we know Belichick gave his 'word' or is that a fabrication by another?

Click to expand...

Yeah, this whole "no-cut/no-trade" NFL contract subject is a new one to me. Can someone bring me up to date on this innovation?????

.

Deus Irae said:

Yeah, I'm not sure why the BB defenders can't just acknowledge that he went back on his word, when he's acknowledged it. It's not the end of the world, BB is certainly not the first coach in NFL history who's gone back on his word, and he certainly won't be the last. One can make a persuasive, albeit not exactly moral or principled, argument that a coach breaking his word in a situation like this is not just understandable, but desirable. And, in this case, Karma has bitten the Patriots right in the ass (Brown gone, WR a need position again), and the player got a nice bonus pay bump before getting tossed overboard, so why bother getting into semantics over it?

Click to expand...

What is this "word" of which you write?????

Are you saying he PROMISED Demaryius Thomas something??????

.

Deus Irae said:

You are literally trying to craft a claim that's unassailable by making **** up when you have no idea what BB has told players behind closed doors, and I'm the one who's supposed to supply the proof?

Hey, remember when BB was going to trade Gronk to the Lions, and Gronk had to threaten retirement in order to get BB to agree that Gronk was going to remain a member of the Patriots? That doesn't count as guaranteeing a player a roster spot, I guess...

Click to expand...

A business agreement and a personal promise are not the same thing.
Fans are wrong to assume Belichick has given his word as a man to anyone
unless they either hear it or Belichick says he has done it ...

Deus Irae said:

Yeah, I'm not sure why the BB defenders can't just acknowledge that he went back on his word, when he's acknowledged it. It's not the end of the world, BB is certainly not the first coach in NFL history who's gone back on his word, and he certainly won't be the last. One can make a persuasive, albeit not exactly moral or principled, argument that a coach breaking his word in a situation like this is not just understandable, but desirable. And, in this case, Karma has bitten the Patriots right in the ass (Brown gone, WR a need position again), and the player got a nice bonus pay bump before getting tossed overboard, so why bother getting into semantics over it?

Click to expand...

Yep. BB's word, to use one of his favorite expressions, "is what it is," just like that guy in Hollywood "should have known who you were dealing with." We could have a lengthy Jesuitical debate about the semantics of what exactly constitutes a "lie," but the underlying facts would still go unchallenged.

shmessy said:

Yeah, this whole "no-cut/no-trade" NFL contract subject is a new one to me. Can someone bring me up to date on this innovation?????

.

Click to expand...

Up to date is fans creating drama where none exists ...
The day Belichick feels bad for a player is the day Super Bowls could be over.

venecol said:

"what I said was not the same as what I had said previously."

It's right there in English. Stop being a homer. BB is admitting he went back on his word because things changed. I'm not making anything up or reading into anything. Your take on my interpretation is wrong.

Click to expand...

Then you have a problem with the English language. Parsing that statement letter by letter, there is nothing about a 'word being broken'.

You are manufacturing something that isn't there.

.

Deus Irae said:

Yeah.

Belichick lied/went back on his word. We can argue about justifications ("Things change", etc...), and the exact level of dishonesty in BB's original words to DT, but that's not going to change the underlying fact. And it's stupid for people to try claiming otherwise, when Belichick has admitted it.

Click to expand...

Your claim is bizarre. Were you in the room for this imagined conversation between BB and DT?????

.

IcyPatriot said:

A business agreement and a personal promise are not the same thing.
Fans are wrong to assume Belichick has given his word as a man to anyone
unless they either hear it or Belichick says he has done it ...

Click to expand...

You are dishonestly trying to split a hair that needn't be split, by dishonestly trying to split another hair that needn't be split, by dishonestly trying to split another hair that needn't be split, etc..., and for no good reason. Belichick has already admitted that he did what he did. Stop defending that.

Move on to the next part of the discussion, which is justification, where there are much better avenues of defense.

shmessy said:

Then you have a problem with the English language.
.

Click to expand...

Now that, right there, is some top level irony.