MARSHAWN HEADS TO THE PRINCIPAL’S OFFICEOn the heels of a guilty plea to misdemeanor weapons charges in California, Bills running back Marshawn Lynch is making a trip Tuesday to New York City, for a meeting with Commissioner Roger Goodell.
According to Clark Judge of CBSSports.com, Lynch is likely to be suspended for one but no more than two regular-season games.
In our view, the real question is whether and to what extent Goodell holds against Lynch last year’s alleged hit and run incident in Buffalo, which ultimately resulted in a guilty plea to a traffic violation. No discipline was imposed on Lynch at the time.
But since the league’s Personal Conduct Policy focuses on repeat offenders, Lynch’s inability to stay out of trouble could result in something stiffer than the one-game or two-game suspension that would be imposed in the event of a true first-time offense.
That said, Lynch reportedly will try to convince Goodell that the situation was “not as it was portrayed,” according to Judge.
Indeed, we’ve heard rumblings that the gun was in a case in the trunk of the car, and that Lynch was supposedly transporting it for a friend.
Still, Lynch pleaded guilty to the charge; if he wanted to pull a Ricky Manning, Jr. and later claim he didn’t do it, Lynch should have copped a plea of “no contest.”
Lynch also could be facing enrollment in stage one of the league’s substance abuse program, given the finding by police of marijuana in the vehicle. Even though none of the three occupants face charges for marijuana possession, the situation could trigger the “behavior” exception, allowing scrutiny of Lynch under the substance abuse policy without a positive urine test.
LEAGUE READY FOR “WAR”As new NFLPA Executive Director DeMaurice Smith proclaims that he’ll spend every day hoping for peace but preparing for war over the next Collective Bargaining Agreement, a league source tells us that the owners are hoping for “war” — and already are prepared for it.
Per the source, the owners already have been taking steps aimed at ensuring that a lockout will have minimal financial impact.
For starters, and as we’ve previously pointed out, most if not all contracts for assistant coaches hired in 2009 have a two-year duration only. Come 2011, the owners can proceed with a lockout.
Also, there’s a belief that many of the recent layoffs and other cost-cutting moves haven’t been made as a result of the bad economy, but as part of the preparations for a no-revenue work stoppage. (The reductions also help bolster the notion that the economic model under the current CBA doesn’t work.)
Finally, we’re told that most if not all employee contracts that extend into the 2011 season or beyond include specific language reducing compensation in the event of a work stoppage.
So while the union has spent the past seven months squabbling over the procedure for choosing the man who’ll potentially lead the players into battle, the owners have been sharpening the swords and hoarding cans of generic waxed beans. (If you take off the label, you can hardly tell the difference.)
Plenty of league insiders believe that the owners are ready to do whatever is necessary to take back the territory that the union acquired during the last round of CBA negotiations in 2006. The perception is that, with the owners obsessing over the issue of revenue sharing, the union ate the league’s lunch on all of the important issues.
Though different opinions exist as to where the blame for this outcome should rest (rightly or wrongly, former Commissioner Paul Tagliabue is bearing the brunt of it), the owners are motivated to score a major victory this time around, even if it means an extended period of no football games being played.
We hope it doesn’t come to that. We’re starting to wonder, however, whether it can be avoided.
SCHEFTER SAYS PEPPERS-TO-PATS WON’T HAPPENIn his weekly appearance on WEEI in Boston, Adam Schefter of NFL Network said that the Panthers won’t be trading defensive end Julius Peppers to the Patriots.
“That trade is not gonna happen,” Schefter told Dennis & Callahan of WEEI.
Schefter cited the financial investment that Peppers would require and the looming class of Patriots free agents (including Vince Wilfork and Richard Seymour), who will be on the market in 2010.
Schefter’s opinion conflicts sharply with a Monday report from Vic Carucci of NFL.com, who seemed to suggest that a trade would happen at some point between the upcoming league meetings (which open on March 22) and the 2009 draft.
“I’m telling you, they’re not gonna do it,” Schefter said later in the segment. “. . . . I don’t believe for a second there’s any truth to it.”
Schefter then said he’s 99.9 percent sure that Peppers won’t be playing for the Patriots next year.
But Schefter then acknowledged that that 0.1 percent could come to fruition, and that he could be exposed as a “complete fraud.”
Meanwhile, Schefter said that he regards the chances of the Pats signing defensive end Jason Taylor as “realistic.”
SOME TEXANS PLAYERS MIGHT BE GETTING NERVOUSA couple of months ago, word broke of a high-end call-girl operation in Charlotte. There were/are rumors of at least one Panthers player becoming ensnared in the ensuing mess.
Now, authorities have busted a prostitution ring in Houston, and the client list includes “professional athletes, doctors, and lawyers.”
For now, there’s no report or rumor or any other information that one or more members of the local pro football team devoted a chunk of their discretionary income to this specific brand of “economic stimulus.” But if any of them did, then they should be sweating right now for reasons unrelated to the offseason strength and conditioning program.
REPORT: COOK WAS “BEGGING” FOR CUTLER TRADEA couple of weeks ago, Peter King of SI.com reported, almost in passing, that Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler asked to be traded after quarterbacks coach Jeremy Bates left for USC. If true, this would make Cutler’s outrage over nearly being traded a tad, shall we say, phony.
Now, John Czarnecki of FOXSports.com adds some meat to the bone, reporting that agent Bus Cook was “begging” the Broncos to trade Cutler before the failed attempt to send him to a new team.
“Denver told him no from the beginning,” Czarnecki writes. “But somehow Cook has been able — how hilarious is this? — to paint Cutler as some victim in the cruel world of NFL trade talk.”
It’s the perfect setup for one of our new PFTV segments, in which we pin a nice chunk of the blame on the agent whose name rhymes with Pus Book.
‘SKINS SNIFFING AROUND CUTLER?We’ve been flooded with questions about whether the Redskins will be making a play for Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler.
There’s an item at bleacherreport.com that sets forth a far-fetched three-team trade, involing Cutler and Broncos tight end Tony Scheffler going to Washington, Redskins quarterback Jason Campbell and tight end Chris Cooley going to Cleveland, and Browns quarterback Brady Quinn going to Denver.
Citing an unnamed source, the report stated that the deal would be announced by 5:00 p.m. EDT on Tuesday.
We poked around a but bit [Editor’s note: unfortunate typo not narrowly avoided] on this one, but only because we heard on Monday that the ‘Skins are interested in Cutler. A source with knowledge of the situation scoffed at the bleacherreport.com item regarding the supposed mega-trade. “Guess we’ll find out when that 5:00 p.m. news conference begins somewhere,” the source said Tuesday afternoon.
Coincidentally, now that 5:00 p.m. EDT has come and gone, the word “satire” appears in parentheses at the top of the bleacherreport.com story. (Damn, we should have used that one when we reported after we found out that Terry Bradshaw hadn’t croaked.)
But there’s also a report from John Keim of dcexaminer.com suggesting that the Redskins are interested in Cutler.
Again, we’re dipping our toe into this pool only because we’re separately hearing that the ‘Skins are indeed interested in Cutler.
Whether they make a run for him remains to be seen.
CERRATO: “JASON CAMPBELL IS GOING TO BE OUR QUARTERBACK”Posted by Mike Florio on March 17, 2009, 9:07 p.m.
The rumors of the Washington Redskins possibly trading for Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler, fueled by a bleacherreport.com story setting forth a far-fetched three-team trade scenario that might or might not have been labeled ambiguously as “satire” before the predicted 5:00 p.m. EDT announcement of the deal, have already created a sufficient stir to require the Redskins to address them.
In an item posted at 6:41 p.m. EDT on Tuesday, executive V.P. of football operations Vinny Cerrato told David Elfin of the Washington Times that the Redskins “haven’t talked to anyone” about Cutler, and that “Jason is going to be our quarterback this season.”
We don’t want to pick nits here, but Cerrato didn’t say that the Redskins aren’t interested in Cutler, only that they “haven’t talked to anyone” about him. And when Cerrato says that “Jason is going to be our quarterback,” Cerrato omits the key words “starting” or “backup.”
We’re kidding. Sort of.
Here’s the deal — the Cutler fiasco has confirmed that teams need to handle their starting quarterbacks like a college football coach handles his current job. Neither can afford to allow word to get out that a change might be coming. If change is going to happen, it needs to come swiftly and without advance rumor or speculation.
It’s the “I’m not going to be the Alabama coach” phenomenon; the Redskins would end up with the next disgruntled starting quarterback if credible word were to get out that the Redskins are thinking about making a change at the most important position on the roster.
ESPN’S COURTSHIP OF FAVRE GETS KID-GLOVE TREATMENT FOR COOK?Posted by Mike Florio on March 17, 2009, 9:58 p.m.
At a time when more and more people are realizing that agent Bus Cook is the common link in a string of ugly contractual situations involving his clients, culminating in the ongoing mess engulfing the Broncos and quarterback Jay Cutler , John Clayton of ESPN.com surprisingly goes in the other direction, absolving Cook of any responsibility for the overgrown kid over whom Cook surely has considerable influence.
“Cook, Jay Cutler’s agent, has done nothing in the Cutler mess other than offer his support,” Clayton wrote in a recent mailbag item. “People may be getting a wrong perception of Cook. He’s not a Scott Boras. He’s not trying to play hardball. Remember, Steve McNair and Brett Favre had long, successful careers in their cities, and Cook was their agent. In fact, Cook’s willingness to sign both to long-term deals made sure the Tennessee Titans and the Green Bay Packers, respectively, kept their quarterbacks as long as possible. But when trouble comes, Cook will fight for his client. Remember, it was the Titans who kept McNair off team property when they were ready to move him. The Favre problem was between Favre and his bosses. Cook just had to do the dirty work. In the Cutler affair, he just has to sit back and watch and be with his client in all meetings. The problem is between Cutler and his coach.”
Wrong.
The problem is that Cutler has a stick up his butt, and that Cook either planted it there — or Cook is keeping coach Josh McDaniels from removing it.
If Cook were a problem-solver and not a problem-maker, he’d encourage Cutler to have a one-on-one meeting with McDaniels, and Cook would stay out of it. Cook also wouldn’t have been peddling then notion that the team has wronged Cutler given that, as reported by John Czarnecki of FOXSports.com, Cook had asked the Broncos to trade Cutler before the Broncos ever tried to.
The deeper issue, as we see it, is that ESPN currently is courting Brett Favre to join its stable of NFL analysts. And Cook continues to be Favre’s agent. So if Clayton or Chris Mortensen or anyone else calls it like they truly see it regarding Cook’s role in the Cutler fiasco, Cook might hold it against ESPN when the time comes to negotiate Favre’s deal.
We know it sounds far-fetched, but we also know of at least one example in which the folks in Bristol have engaged in actions that would objectively be viewed as far-fetched, all in the name of preserving the relationship with Lord Favre.
The reality is that ESPN desperately wants to be in the Brett Favre business, and so they’ll tiptoe around Favre and anyone close to him in order to make it happen.
Posts
