Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by freelance2, Sep 9, 2019.
Have you ever seen Gronk and Adam Seward in the same room?
If he wants to come back, let him. I just don’t see it
Just a feeling, house on the market etc. I could see him being an above average QB for many more years after he is no longer on the top which he seems to still be.
If he comes back for Game 13, the cap hit would be $2.9M. That would likely take an extension or two (at most). I suspect that this was gross, so the net cap hit would be $2.4M plus any incentives.
In any case, this shouldn't be part of our planning. He could certainly change his mind, or the team might.
Has to be reinstated by trade deadline on Oct 30. (right after W8 game against the Browns) to be eligible to come back without passing through waivers.
could you give us a source. thanks.
Miguel and Bedard had said that the last date was right before Game 13 and that cap cost would be $2.9M.
Perhaps Gronk has to file papers by the trade deadline and can get waivers for a month, and then only count as a roster player for Game 13.
Via Lombardi in June:
He says he needs to be on the active roster by the trading deadline. Maybe Miguel and Bedard talk about some kind of practice exemption but either way he needs to be off the retired list by the end of October to avoid the waiver wire (which the Pats would obviously not agree to do).
I hope he doesn't become Favre 2.0.
Not yet, he hasn't been caught sending out dick pics.
I got my information from Mike Reiss - "If he isn't moved off the reserve/retired list by Week 13, he can't return at all. That rule is in place, in part, to eliminate the possibility that a player could sit out all season and then return just for the playoffs."
Patriots' Bill Belichick advocates for more time working with players
I think you have a bad link there. Try this:
The GM Shuffle with Michael Lombardi and Adnan Virk | Is Gronk Coming Back to the NFL? | Cadence13
Begins around the 10:30 mark.
And as I posted in the other thread, I believe Lombardi is wrong and doesn’t understand the rule. The example he uses was for a player (Deion Sanders) who wanted to unretire and sign with the Raiders. The Redskins held his rights. They released his rights so he could sign with the Raiders, but then he became subject to waivers and was claimed by 5 different teams.
In Gronk’s case, the Patriots hold his rights. Therefore if he wants to unretire, he wouldn’t be subject to waivers if he came back for the Pats. Which explains Reiss’ determination that the actual deadline for Gronk is Week 13, to eliminate the postseason-only possibility.
Please god..make this happen.
I will even spearhead a GoFundMe account to pay Gronk!
Not sure what makes you think I have the wrong link when it has Lombardi literally saying Gronk has to unretire before the trade deadline.
Could very well be. Usually he is pretty accurate about those things which is why I used him as a source. But with Miguel saying he got it directly from Reiss and your scenario making sense from the lens of vested veterans FA having to go through waivers it sounds like he might have screwed that one up.
Because the link was showing up as a Halo engagement ring ad, at least for me. Sounds like it might be a problem with my phone.
OK, so maybe I missed it but I have to ask:
Doesn't the whole CBD treatment thing make him ineligible to play in the NFL? Ie banned substance? (Something the league very much needs to change IMO).
As far as we know he never tested positive before which means he is not in the substance abuse program. This means a first time positive test would do absolutely nothing at all (except increase the number of tests he has to go through).
It a couple of positive tests for substance of abuse to get to the point where you get suspended.
Gotcha. I think streamable has started pushing ads down our throats.
Separate names with a comma.