Update: As of Friday morning, the context of Jeff Ireland’s question about Dez Bryant’s is being reported, and that sheds a different light on the issue. Read more in Dan Levy’s story in The Sporting Blog.
Dez Bryant has accepted Jeff Ireland’s apology for an inappropriate question, but the issue of prospect interviews is far from resolved.
ProFootballTalk.com’s Mike Florio weighs in on the Dez Bryant-Jeff Ireland predraft interview:
Last week, Mike Silver of Yahoo! Sports reported that receiver Dez Bryant had been asked during pre-draft interview whether his mother is a prostitute. The story grew no legs.
On Tuesday, Silver reported that the question in question had been asked by Dolphins G.M. Jeff Ireland. Since then, the story has made Usain Bolt and Chris Johnson look like tortoises with torn ACLs.
The situation also presents many twists and turns and layers and levels. I probably could come up with more than 10 takes on the topic. But I must balance my interest in writing about the topic with the audience’s interest in reading about it.
So it’s 10. And only 10.
1. Lawsuit possibilities.
A player who has not yet been drafted has no obligation to defer to the grievance procedures contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. As a result, he can sue the league and/or any of its teams, if he believes his legal rights have been violated.
Generally speaking, there’s no law against being a jerk. That said, most states recognize that, at a certain level, deliberate misconduct creates potential civil liability.
In Florida (as in most states), the bar is high. The behavior must be outrageous, and the target of the conduct must have suffered severe emotional distress. The latter point doesn’t mesh with the image of toughness projected by a football player, making it less likely that a player ever would file suit.
That said, at a certain point, a wildly inappropriate question could spark litigation, especially if the question triggers a real and substantial emotional reaction.
Ireland has taken all of the blame in the Bryant scandal.
2. Ireland’s future.
Before this incident, Ireland was regarded as a guy whose career in Miami likely would be tied to that of V.P. of football operations Bill Parcells. The working theory in league circles was that, after Parcells goes, Carl Peterson will be hired to replace him, and Peterson will hire a new G.M.
This latest development likely will give owner Stephen Ross (and, presumably, Peterson) cover to oust Ireland once Parcells leave.
Ireland surely will land on his feet, especially since he has by all appearances put himself in position to take the fall.
3. The Teflon Tuna.
What’s that, you say? Why shouldn’t Ireland take the fall? Though he’s the one who asked the question, responsibility for the question ultimately lands on the desk of Ireland’s boss.
Still, for reasons not yet known, Bill Parcells has to date avoided blame for the Bryant blunder. The Tuna’s ability to remain off the hook could be changing. Former NFL defensive end Marcellus Wiley told ESPN Radio on Thursday that Parcells’ first question for him during a 2004 free-agent visit was, "Do you do drugs?"
That same question possibly will be posed by Stephen Ross to whoever it was who gave the green light to the question that was posed.
4. The "Fight Club" factor.
Plenty of people believe that the Dolphins didn’t ask the question because they wanted to know the answer to it, but because they wanted to see how Bryant would handle it. It’s also possible that the Dolphins were interested in finding out whether Bryant would opt for discretion moving forward.
In an industry that demands from its workers a high degree of secrecy, the Dolphins are even more secretive than most. And if the first rule of "Fight Club" is to never talk about "Fight Club," maybe the Dolphins wanted to see whether Bryant would blab.
Eventually, he did. Though that didn’t deter the Dallas Cowboys, it could have caused some of the 24 teams who picked players before the ‘Boys to pass on Dez Bryant.
5. Dolphins ultimately didn’t like Dez.
The Dolphins’ objective in posing the question to Bryant isn’t clear. It’s possible that they simply wanted to know the answer. It’s possible that they know the answer, and that they wanted to see how he handled the question. It’s also possible that they simply wanted to see how he’d react to the question.
If it’s the latter, it’s unknown whether the Dolphins hoped he’d sit there and take it, whether he’d storm out, or whether he’d take a swing at the person who posed the question. Regardless, it’s clear that the Dolphins decided not long after their visit with Bryant that they didn’t want him. Roughly a week after Bryant came to town, the Dolphins traded for receiver Brandon Marshall.
Maybe his response and/or reaction to the question was the deciding factor.
6. Was Ireland justified?
Though most people believe Ireland crossed the line when posing the question to Bryant, some in the league and in the media believe he should be applauded. Rightly or wrongly, the NFL is a tough, nasty, mean business, with grown men subjecting each other to physical and verbal abuse between the white lines — and often beyond them.
Multiple league insiders insist that far worse questions have been asked to incoming rookies, all in the name of finding out more about how they’ll handle themselves under the unique stress and duress of pro football.
So under the loose rules that already existed in matters of this nature, Ireland arguably did nothing wrong. The real question is whether the NFL and its teams will use this exercise as the starting point for demanding more respectful interactions and discourse.
7. The presentation caused the problem.
Some have suggested that the Dolphins legitimately needed to know the answer to the question. If, as the theory goes, Bryant’s mother was or is a prostitute, he possibly will need counseling or other services from the team. Also, his mother possibly has associations that could compromise Bryant, from the perspective of the 6,000-pound gambling elephant that always is sitting in the corner of the luxury suite.
If that’s the case — if the Dolphins asked the question not to gauge Bryant’s reaction but because they needed to know the answer — they did a poor job of presenting the topic.
With less than a minute of prefatory comments, the Dolphins could have explained to Bryant their reason for asking a sensitive question, and they could have apologized in advance for even having to ask the question. The fact that they apparently didn’t try strongly suggests that they had one goal: to see how Bryant would react.
8. The union’s role.
Because questions of this nature are posed before the players have joined the union, there’s nothing that the NFLPA can really do to address this problem. Still, the union has the ability to do much more than issue a statement (as it did on Wednesday) expressing disapproval without providing any specific guidance or identifying any precise expectations.
The union instead should attempt to begin to change the culture of the league, coming up with ideas and strategies for getting players to quit disrespecting each other on the field or in a locker room. Though it may take 50 years or longer to fully effect change, the disconnect between football and the rest of the world needs to change, and the union should have a role far more substantial than sniping from the bushes.
9. The league’s role.
Given that most, if not all, teams from time to time pose inappropriate questions to prospects, the league could be tempted to keep its head low and hope that the situation blows over quickly. The perception that the league arguably overreacted regarding 2007’s Spygate situation, nailing the Patriots for cheating without taking a broader look at whether other teams do the same thing, possibly has prompted the NFL to assume that, in matters of this nature, the team’s only real sin was getting caught.
But now that the cathouse question is out of the bag, the league needs to come up with a way to address the situation in a manner that is sensitive both to the fact that most if not all teams ask insensitive questions from time to time to incoming draft picks and to the realities of the unusual chemistry that develops among those who play the game.
Ultimately, the league’s goal should be the same as the union’s — to resist the urge to accept that the football culture "is what it is," and to try to change it.
10. The homophobia connection.
Statistics tell us that, with more than 1,700 players in the NFL, more than a few of them are gay. But no gay player ever has come out of the closet during his playing career.
To understand the reasons for this reality, look no farther than the Ireland-Bryant example.
Football players and coaches are cruel. They prey on weakness. Within the locker room, homosexuality is viewed as a weakness — and as a threat. As long as questions of the kind that Ireland asked Bryant are tolerated within a football team, homosexuality never will be.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Update: As of Friday morning, the context of Jeff Ireland’s question about Dez Bryant’s is being reported, and that sheds a different light on the issue. Read more in Dan Levy’s story in The Sporting Blog.
Dez Bryant has accepted Jeff Ireland’s apology for an inappropriate question, but the issue of prospect interviews is far from resolved.
ProFootballTalk.com’s Mike Florio weighs in on the Dez Bryant-Jeff Ireland predraft interview:
Last week, Mike Silver of Yahoo! Sports reported that receiver Dez Bryant had been asked during pre-draft interview whether his mother is a prostitute. The story grew no legs.
On Tuesday, Silver reported that the question in question had been asked by Dolphins G.M. Jeff Ireland. Since then, the story has made Usain Bolt and Chris Johnson look like tortoises with torn ACLs.
The situation also presents many twists and turns and layers and levels. I probably could come up with more than 10 takes on the topic. But I must balance my interest in writing about the topic with the audience’s interest in reading about it.
So it’s 10. And only 10.
1. Lawsuit possibilities.
A player who has not yet been drafted has no obligation to defer to the grievance procedures contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. As a result, he can sue the league and/or any of its teams, if he believes his legal rights have been violated.
Generally speaking, there’s no law against being a jerk. That said, most states recognize that, at a certain level, deliberate misconduct creates potential civil liability.
In Florida (as in most states), the bar is high. The behavior must be outrageous, and the target of the conduct must have suffered severe emotional distress. The latter point doesn’t mesh with the image of toughness projected by a football player, making it less likely that a player ever would file suit.
That said, at a certain point, a wildly inappropriate question could spark litigation, especially if the question triggers a real and substantial emotional reaction.
Ireland has taken all of the blame in the Bryant scandal.
2. Ireland’s future.
Before this incident, Ireland was regarded as a guy whose career in Miami likely would be tied to that of V.P. of football operations Bill Parcells. The working theory in league circles was that, after Parcells goes, Carl Peterson will be hired to replace him, and Peterson will hire a new G.M.
This latest development likely will give owner Stephen Ross (and, presumably, Peterson) cover to oust Ireland once Parcells leave.
Ireland surely will land on his feet, especially since he has by all appearances put himself in position to take the fall.
3. The Teflon Tuna.
What’s that, you say? Why shouldn’t Ireland take the fall? Though he’s the one who asked the question, responsibility for the question ultimately lands on the desk of Ireland’s boss.
Still, for reasons not yet known, Bill Parcells has to date avoided blame for the Bryant blunder. The Tuna’s ability to remain off the hook could be changing. Former NFL defensive end Marcellus Wiley told ESPN Radio on Thursday that Parcells’ first question for him during a 2004 free-agent visit was, "Do you do drugs?"
That same question possibly will be posed by Stephen Ross to whoever it was who gave the green light to the question that was posed.
4. The "Fight Club" factor.
Plenty of people believe that the Dolphins didn’t ask the question because they wanted to know the answer to it, but because they wanted to see how Bryant would handle it. It’s also possible that the Dolphins were interested in finding out whether Bryant would opt for discretion moving forward.
In an industry that demands from its workers a high degree of secrecy, the Dolphins are even more secretive than most. And if the first rule of "Fight Club" is to never talk about "Fight Club," maybe the Dolphins wanted to see whether Bryant would blab.
Eventually, he did. Though that didn’t deter the Dallas Cowboys, it could have caused some of the 24 teams who picked players before the ‘Boys to pass on Dez Bryant.
5. Dolphins ultimately didn’t like Dez.
The Dolphins’ objective in posing the question to Bryant isn’t clear. It’s possible that they simply wanted to know the answer. It’s possible that they know the answer, and that they wanted to see how he handled the question. It’s also possible that they simply wanted to see how he’d react to the question.
If it’s the latter, it’s unknown whether the Dolphins hoped he’d sit there and take it, whether he’d storm out, or whether he’d take a swing at the person who posed the question. Regardless, it’s clear that the Dolphins decided not long after their visit with Bryant that they didn’t want him. Roughly a week after Bryant came to town, the Dolphins traded for receiver Brandon Marshall.
Maybe his response and/or reaction to the question was the deciding factor.
6. Was Ireland justified?
Though most people believe Ireland crossed the line when posing the question to Bryant, some in the league and in the media believe he should be applauded. Rightly or wrongly, the NFL is a tough, nasty, mean business, with grown men subjecting each other to physical and verbal abuse between the white lines — and often beyond them.
Multiple league insiders insist that far worse questions have been asked to incoming rookies, all in the name of finding out more about how they’ll handle themselves under the unique stress and duress of pro football.
So under the loose rules that already existed in matters of this nature, Ireland arguably did nothing wrong. The real question is whether the NFL and its teams will use this exercise as the starting point for demanding more respectful interactions and discourse.
7. The presentation caused the problem.
Some have suggested that the Dolphins legitimately needed to know the answer to the question. If, as the theory goes, Bryant’s mother was or is a prostitute, he possibly will need counseling or other services from the team. Also, his mother possibly has associations that could compromise Bryant, from the perspective of the 6,000-pound gambling elephant that always is sitting in the corner of the luxury suite.
If that’s the case — if the Dolphins asked the question not to gauge Bryant’s reaction but because they needed to know the answer — they did a poor job of presenting the topic.
With less than a minute of prefatory comments, the Dolphins could have explained to Bryant their reason for asking a sensitive question, and they could have apologized in advance for even having to ask the question. The fact that they apparently didn’t try strongly suggests that they had one goal: to see how Bryant would react.
8. The union’s role.
Because questions of this nature are posed before the players have joined the union, there’s nothing that the NFLPA can really do to address this problem. Still, the union has the ability to do much more than issue a statement (as it did on Wednesday) expressing disapproval without providing any specific guidance or identifying any precise expectations.
The union instead should attempt to begin to change the culture of the league, coming up with ideas and strategies for getting players to quit disrespecting each other on the field or in a locker room. Though it may take 50 years or longer to fully effect change, the disconnect between football and the rest of the world needs to change, and the union should have a role far more substantial than sniping from the bushes.
9. The league’s role.
Given that most, if not all, teams from time to time pose inappropriate questions to prospects, the league could be tempted to keep its head low and hope that the situation blows over quickly. The perception that the league arguably overreacted regarding 2007’s Spygate situation, nailing the Patriots for cheating without taking a broader look at whether other teams do the same thing, possibly has prompted the NFL to assume that, in matters of this nature, the team’s only real sin was getting caught.
But now that the cathouse question is out of the bag, the league needs to come up with a way to address the situation in a manner that is sensitive both to the fact that most if not all teams ask insensitive questions from time to time to incoming draft picks and to the realities of the unusual chemistry that develops among those who play the game.
Ultimately, the league’s goal should be the same as the union’s — to resist the urge to accept that the football culture "is what it is," and to try to change it.
10. The homophobia connection.
Statistics tell us that, with more than 1,700 players in the NFL, more than a few of them are gay. But no gay player ever has come out of the closet during his playing career.
To understand the reasons for this reality, look no farther than the Ireland-Bryant example.
Football players and coaches are cruel. They prey on weakness. Within the locker room, homosexuality is viewed as a weakness — and as a threat. As long as questions of the kind that Ireland asked Bryant are tolerated within a football team, homosexuality never will be.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Of the four top quarterbacks, the last taken could be the best.
Will Colt McCoy end up being best of 2010 QB lot?
A week ago, everyone knew that at least one quarterback would be picked in the first round of the 2010 NFL draft. Most thought that as many as four could be selected on the opening night of the league’s new prime-time format. In the end, only two made it into round one, with another landing in the second round and the last making it into the back half of round three.
Draft position, however, dictates only the amount of money a player will be paid to start his career. It says nothing about whether and to what extent he’ll be successful.
So let’s take a look at the chances each of the four top quarterbacks — Sam Bradford, Tim Tebow, Jimmy Clausen and Colt McCoy — has to thrive with their new NFL teams.
1. Sam Bradford, Rams.
The good news? The first overall pick will get a contract including more than $50 million in guaranteed money. The bad news? Well, when you’re getting $50 million in guaranteed money, there’s really no bad news, is there?
Well, maybe there is. Of all positions on a football field, quarterback depends the most on those around him — offensive linemen, running backs, receivers, coaches, front-office personnel. Even the best physical specimen won’t last long in the NFL if he’s constantly getting tossed around by defensive players who blast through a porous wall of blockers; or if a subpar running game or coaching inadequacies routinely force the quarterback into third down and long yardage; or if an overall bad team falls behind more often than not, allowing defensive linemen to "pin their ears back" as they try to rip the quarterback’s head from his torso.
The Rams need plenty of help to turn Bradford into a great quarterback. Apart from Pro Bowl-caliber running back Steven Jackson, they don’t have much to help Bradford thrive. Or, for that matter, to keep his body in one uninterrupted piece.
2. Tim Tebow, Broncos.
The Broncos made the boldest move of the 2010 draft by trading back into round one only three picks after selecting receiver Demaryius Thomas and snagging Tim Tebow. On one hand, Tebow will have plenty of time to develop into an NFL quarterback under the tutelage of a proven head coach. On the other hand, the pressure will be intense.
The fate of Josh McDaniels and, over the next five or ten years, the well-being of the franchise, rests on Tebow’s ability to become a legitimate NFL quarterback.
Perhaps Tebow relishes the challenge. Perhaps he’ll be paralyzed by the expectations. Either way, his round-one pedigree will keep him in the limelight for at least the next several years, for better or for worse.
3. Jimmy Clausen, Panthers.
The Panthers’ decision to pick quarterback Jimmy Clausen in round two prompted immediate praise in many circles. Closer examination suggests potential trouble.
Coach John Fox occupies one of the hottest seats in the NFL as he enters the final year of a contract with no extension in sight. A coach on the hot seat doesn’t need a rookie quarterback; a coach on the hot seat needs players who can help him save his job.
If the Panthers fail to do enough in 2010 to extend Fox’s stay, the next head coach may want no part of Clausen. The new coach may prefer sixth-round rookie Tony Pike, or presumed starter Matt Moore, who now has to be wondering whether he’ll have the job come September.
For Clausen, his career ultimately could fade into the same kind of fog that has enveloped the NFL fortunes of Brady Quinn, his predecessor in South Bend.
4. Colt McCoy, Browns.
Of the top four quarterbacks taken in the 2010 draft, McCoy could be in the best position to succeed.
His relatively low draft status will allow him to develop without the burden of expectations or timetables. His affiliation with Browns president Mike Holmgren will give him direct access to the man who harnessed and honed the talents of Brett Favre.
With the Browns quietly but effectively improving the quality of the roster, McCoy may end up with the kind of supporting cast that will allow him to become, within the next four years, better than Bradford, Tebow and Clausen.
As always, time will tell. And history tells us that, just as two of the four players ended up in round one, two of the four quarterbacks will end up not becoming successful players at the NFL level.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Of the four top quarterbacks, the last taken could be the best.
Will Colt McCoy end up being best of 2010 QB lot?
A week ago, everyone knew that at least one quarterback would be picked in the first round of the 2010 NFL draft. Most thought that as many as four could be selected on the opening night of the league’s new prime-time format. In the end, only two made it into round one, with another landing in the second round and the last making it into the back half of round three.
Draft position, however, dictates only the amount of money a player will be paid to start his career. It says nothing about whether and to what extent he’ll be successful.
So let’s take a look at the chances each of the four top quarterbacks — Sam Bradford, Tim Tebow, Jimmy Clausen and Colt McCoy — has to thrive with their new NFL teams.
1. Sam Bradford, Rams.
The good news? The first overall pick will get a contract including more than $50 million in guaranteed money. The bad news? Well, when you’re getting $50 million in guaranteed money, there’s really no bad news, is there?
Well, maybe there is. Of all positions on a football field, quarterback depends the most on those around him — offensive linemen, running backs, receivers, coaches, front-office personnel. Even the best physical specimen won’t last long in the NFL if he’s constantly getting tossed around by defensive players who blast through a porous wall of blockers; or if a subpar running game or coaching inadequacies routinely force the quarterback into third down and long yardage; or if an overall bad team falls behind more often than not, allowing defensive linemen to "pin their ears back" as they try to rip the quarterback’s head from his torso.
The Rams need plenty of help to turn Bradford into a great quarterback. Apart from Pro Bowl-caliber running back Steven Jackson, they don’t have much to help Bradford thrive. Or, for that matter, to keep his body in one uninterrupted piece.
2. Tim Tebow, Broncos.
The Broncos made the boldest move of the 2010 draft by trading back into round one only three picks after selecting receiver Demaryius Thomas and snagging Tim Tebow. On one hand, Tebow will have plenty of time to develop into an NFL quarterback under the tutelage of a proven head coach. On the other hand, the pressure will be intense.
The fate of Josh McDaniels and, over the next five or ten years, the well-being of the franchise, rests on Tebow’s ability to become a legitimate NFL quarterback.
Perhaps Tebow relishes the challenge. Perhaps he’ll be paralyzed by the expectations. Either way, his round-one pedigree will keep him in the limelight for at least the next several years, for better or for worse.
3. Jimmy Clausen, Panthers.
The Panthers’ decision to pick quarterback Jimmy Clausen in round two prompted immediate praise in many circles. Closer examination suggests potential trouble.
Coach John Fox occupies one of the hottest seats in the NFL as he enters the final year of a contract with no extension in sight. A coach on the hot seat doesn’t need a rookie quarterback; a coach on the hot seat needs players who can help him save his job.
If the Panthers fail to do enough in 2010 to extend Fox’s stay, the next head coach may want no part of Clausen. The new coach may prefer sixth-round rookie Tony Pike, or presumed starter Matt Moore, who now has to be wondering whether he’ll have the job come September.
For Clausen, his career ultimately could fade into the same kind of fog that has enveloped the NFL fortunes of Brady Quinn, his predecessor in South Bend.
4. Colt McCoy, Browns.
Of the top four quarterbacks taken in the 2010 draft, McCoy could be in the best position to succeed.
His relatively low draft status will allow him to develop without the burden of expectations or timetables. His affiliation with Browns president Mike Holmgren will give him direct access to the man who harnessed and honed the talents of Brett Favre.
With the Browns quietly but effectively improving the quality of the roster, McCoy may end up with the kind of supporting cast that will allow him to become, within the next four years, better than Bradford, Tebow and Clausen.
As always, time will tell. And history tells us that, just as two of the four players ended up in round one, two of the four quarterbacks will end up not becoming successful players at the NFL level.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
ProFootballTalk.com’s Mike Florio weighs in on the 2010 NFL schedule:
1. So much for secrecy. For weeks, the NFL kept a tight lid on the 256-game slate, releasing only scant details, such as the fact that the Jets would host both a Monday night game in Week 1 and the third game on the Thanksgiving slate.
Apparently, the commissioner’s decision to go rogue during an NFL.com live chat on Tuesday afternoon opened the floodgates. Over the next few hours after he announced that the season would begin on September 9 with the Saints hosting the Vikings, the entire schedules of the Steelers, Saints, Giants, and Lions were leaked.
The league can’t be happy about the development. Though schedule leads are not uncommon, the league seemed to be intent on holding back as much as possible until the official announcement of the schedule.
So how does it get out? In the afternoon, the league office begins to tell the teams their individual schedules. If the league ever wants to achieve full secrecy, the better approach could be to tell no one.
The Steelers could have early trouble if Ben Roethlisberger doesn’t play.
2. Steelers could face a tough start without Big Ben. Assuming that Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger receives a four-game suspension (UPDATE: Roethlisberger will receive a six-game suspension that can be reduced to four), the schedule-maker didn’t do the Rooneys any favors.
The Steelers open at home against the Falcons, who didn’t make the playoffs but who have finished above .500 for consecutive years for the first time in team history, before heading to Tennessee and Tampa. Then, the first quarter of the season ends with a visit from the Ravens. It could lead to a 2-2 or 1-3 start.
That said, the Steelers’ schedule doesn’t have a ton of gimme games. Sure, they play the Browns twice, but they lost to them once in 2009. The woeful Raiders come to town, a year after the woeful Raiders won there.
Meanwhile, the Steelers play five prime-time games, but none before Week 8. Surely, the schedule was tweaked a bit in light of the looming suspension of Roethlisberger.
3. Favre hears the siren song of the schedule maker. As Vikings quarterback Brett Favre tries to decide whether to return for a second year in Minnesota and a 20th overall, he now knows that he’d get an immediate shot at redemption for one of the most deflating games of his career.
Vikings at Saints. September 9. Prime time.
Four weeks later, Favre would get a chance to return to his one-year home, New York, for a game against the Jets.
Throw in two games against the Packers, a game against the Cowboys, a rematch with the Cardinals (who drubbed the Vikings in 2009), a trip to face the Patriots, and games against the Giants, Eagles, and Redskins, and 2010 presents plenty of intriguing challenges for Favre.
Indeed, there are almost enough challenges to persuade him to stay in Mississippi.
4. Ravens benefit from Steelers’ troubles. When the Steelers traded receiver Santonio Holmes to the Jets, the Ravens were thrilled. No longer would they have to be torched two (and maybe three) times a year by Holmes.
The Ravens dodged another bullet by getting the Jets in Week 1, when Holmes will be suspended.
And if Roethlisberger gets at least a four-game suspension, the Ravens will go to Pittsburgh on a day in early October when Ben isn’t there.
5. Christmas in the desert. In past years, the NFL tried to avoid playing games on Christmas. Now, they embrace it.
Though the league has yet to schedule a full slate for Dec. 25, the NFL no longer avoids it.
This year, the Cowboys will travel to Arizona for a Christmas night get-together on NFL Network.
Cue the language not suitable for Christmas from Dallas fans throughout the country who don’t have access to the league-owned network.
6. Another reason to be thankful. Over the past few years, the league has taken full advantage of the reality that football fans will pretty much watch whatever games we get on Thanksgiving.
This year, the captive audience has a reason to stay awake.
Though broadcasting rotation guaranteed that the Lions would host the Jets or the Patriots to start the day, conventional wisdom indicated that the second game would feature the Cowboys hosting the Bears.
Conventional wisdom was never so glad to be wrong.
The league instead has diverted what otherwise would have been an excellent Sunday night or Monday night game to the fourth Thursday in November.
The evening ends with the Jets hosting the Bengals, not a great game but good enough to give us all a reason to spend the evening hours in the household of a family member with NFL Network.
7. Sunday night schedule looks rock solid. When NBC re-entered the NFL broadcasting derby for the 2006 season, it emerged with the coveted ability to flex late-season games into prime-time. This year, the slate of games is so good that NBC likely won’t want to move many of them.
The only contest that looks to be destined to be bumped out of the evening slot comes on Dec. 26, when the Bengals meet the Chargers.
Then again, that game would be worth televising, if only to see San Diego linebacker Shawne Merriman physically dismantle Cincinnati receiver Chad Ochocinco.
8. More equity needed for short weeks. This year, every team that plays on a Thursday plays four days beforehand, on a Sunday. And for the short weeks, every road team plays on the prior Sunday at home, requiring only one road trip for the road teams from the end of the Sunday game until the start of the Thursday game.
But with both teams in Thursday games getting only three days to prepare, fairness suggest that each of the teams — road and home — should see their preparation time diminished by travel time.
For the nine Thursday games in 2010, seven of the teams that host the games play at home on the preceding Sunday. It means that these seven teams will have to engage in no travel, maximizing the amount of time they’ll have to get ready to play on Thursday.
The better approach would be to have the Thursday home teams play the prior Sunday on the road and the Thursday road teams play the prior Sunday at home, imposing on every short-week team an obligation to pack up the franchise and move from one place to another.
9. League loves Niners, not the Raiders. To no surprise, the Oakland Raiders will play no prime-time games in 2010. Their neighbors on the other side of the Bay, however, will enjoy four contests under the Klieg lights — two on ESPN, one on NBC, and one on NFL Network.
It appears, then, that the powers-that-be believe the Niners will make a serious run at taking over the top of the NFC West, given the retirement of Kurt Warner.
Given the current state of the Seahawks and the St. Louis Rams, it’s hard to argue with the logic.
And given the perpetual funk that inhabits the Raiders, it makes sense to keep them off of the biggest stage.
10. ESPN still not getting its money’s worth. The folks in Bristol pay more than $1 billion per year to televise 17 prime-time games. And they continue to get something less than a billion-dollar slate of games.
That said, some of the games will be good ones. Ravens-Jets, Pats-Dolphins, Vikings-Jets, Giants-Cowboys, Eagles-Redskins, and Jets-Patriots could be excellent. Saints-Falcons could be a classic in Week 16, unless one of the two teams has run away with the NFC South crown.
But there’s little genuine sizzle. Though division games (ESPN has 13 in all) can generate high interest among the fan bases of the two teams involved, a schedule befitting the price tag would feature more eyebrow-raisers like Ravens-Jets and Vikings-Jets.
Then again, with four games featuring the mammoth New York market, ESPN will do a nice job of making back much of its billion bucks.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
ProFootballTalk.com’s Mike Florio weighs in on the 2010 NFL schedule:
1. So much for secrecy. For weeks, the NFL kept a tight lid on the 256-game slate, releasing only scant details, such as the fact that the Jets would host both a Monday night game in Week 1 and the third game on the Thanksgiving slate.
Apparently, the commissioner’s decision to go rogue during an NFL.com live chat on Tuesday afternoon opened the floodgates. Over the next few hours after he announced that the season would begin on September 9 with the Saints hosting the Vikings, the entire schedules of the Steelers, Saints, Giants, and Lions were leaked.
The league can’t be happy about the development. Though schedule leads are not uncommon, the league seemed to be intent on holding back as much as possible until the official announcement of the schedule.
So how does it get out? In the afternoon, the league office begins to tell the teams their individual schedules. If the league ever wants to achieve full secrecy, the better approach could be to tell no one.
The Steelers could have early trouble if Ben Roethlisberger doesn’t play.
2. Steelers could face a tough start without Big Ben. Assuming that Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger receives a four-game suspension (UPDATE: Roethlisberger will receive a six-game suspension that can be reduced to four), the schedule-maker didn’t do the Rooneys any favors.
The Steelers open at home against the Falcons, who didn’t make the playoffs but who have finished above .500 for consecutive years for the first time in team history, before heading to Tennessee and Tampa. Then, the first quarter of the season ends with a visit from the Ravens. It could lead to a 2-2 or 1-3 start.
That said, the Steelers’ schedule doesn’t have a ton of gimme games. Sure, they play the Browns twice, but they lost to them once in 2009. The woeful Raiders come to town, a year after the woeful Raiders won there.
Meanwhile, the Steelers play five prime-time games, but none before Week 8. Surely, the schedule was tweaked a bit in light of the looming suspension of Roethlisberger.
3. Favre hears the siren song of the schedule maker. As Vikings quarterback Brett Favre tries to decide whether to return for a second year in Minnesota and a 20th overall, he now knows that he’d get an immediate shot at redemption for one of the most deflating games of his career.
Vikings at Saints. September 9. Prime time.
Four weeks later, Favre would get a chance to return to his one-year home, New York, for a game against the Jets.
Throw in two games against the Packers, a game against the Cowboys, a rematch with the Cardinals (who drubbed the Vikings in 2009), a trip to face the Patriots, and games against the Giants, Eagles, and Redskins, and 2010 presents plenty of intriguing challenges for Favre.
Indeed, there are almost enough challenges to persuade him to stay in Mississippi.
4. Ravens benefit from Steelers’ troubles. When the Steelers traded receiver Santonio Holmes to the Jets, the Ravens were thrilled. No longer would they have to be torched two (and maybe three) times a year by Holmes.
The Ravens dodged another bullet by getting the Jets in Week 1, when Holmes will be suspended.
And if Roethlisberger gets at least a four-game suspension, the Ravens will go to Pittsburgh on a day in early October when Ben isn’t there.
5. Christmas in the desert. In past years, the NFL tried to avoid playing games on Christmas. Now, they embrace it.
Though the league has yet to schedule a full slate for Dec. 25, the NFL no longer avoids it.
This year, the Cowboys will travel to Arizona for a Christmas night get-together on NFL Network.
Cue the language not suitable for Christmas from Dallas fans throughout the country who don’t have access to the league-owned network.
6. Another reason to be thankful. Over the past few years, the league has taken full advantage of the reality that football fans will pretty much watch whatever games we get on Thanksgiving.
This year, the captive audience has a reason to stay awake.
Though broadcasting rotation guaranteed that the Lions would host the Jets or the Patriots to start the day, conventional wisdom indicated that the second game would feature the Cowboys hosting the Bears.
Conventional wisdom was never so glad to be wrong.
The league instead has diverted what otherwise would have been an excellent Sunday night or Monday night game to the fourth Thursday in November.
The evening ends with the Jets hosting the Bengals, not a great game but good enough to give us all a reason to spend the evening hours in the household of a family member with NFL Network.
7. Sunday night schedule looks rock solid. When NBC re-entered the NFL broadcasting derby for the 2006 season, it emerged with the coveted ability to flex late-season games into prime-time. This year, the slate of games is so good that NBC likely won’t want to move many of them.
The only contest that looks to be destined to be bumped out of the evening slot comes on Dec. 26, when the Bengals meet the Chargers.
Then again, that game would be worth televising, if only to see San Diego linebacker Shawne Merriman physically dismantle Cincinnati receiver Chad Ochocinco.
8. More equity needed for short weeks. This year, every team that plays on a Thursday plays four days beforehand, on a Sunday. And for the short weeks, every road team plays on the prior Sunday at home, requiring only one road trip for the road teams from the end of the Sunday game until the start of the Thursday game.
But with both teams in Thursday games getting only three days to prepare, fairness suggest that each of the teams — road and home — should see their preparation time diminished by travel time.
For the nine Thursday games in 2010, seven of the teams that host the games play at home on the preceding Sunday. It means that these seven teams will have to engage in no travel, maximizing the amount of time they’ll have to get ready to play on Thursday.
The better approach would be to have the Thursday home teams play the prior Sunday on the road and the Thursday road teams play the prior Sunday at home, imposing on every short-week team an obligation to pack up the franchise and move from one place to another.
9. League loves Niners, not the Raiders. To no surprise, the Oakland Raiders will play no prime-time games in 2010. Their neighbors on the other side of the Bay, however, will enjoy four contests under the Klieg lights — two on ESPN, one on NBC, and one on NFL Network.
It appears, then, that the powers-that-be believe the Niners will make a serious run at taking over the top of the NFC West, given the retirement of Kurt Warner.
Given the current state of the Seahawks and the St. Louis Rams, it’s hard to argue with the logic.
And given the perpetual funk that inhabits the Raiders, it makes sense to keep them off of the biggest stage.
10. ESPN still not getting its money’s worth. The folks in Bristol pay more than $1 billion per year to televise 17 prime-time games. And they continue to get something less than a billion-dollar slate of games.
That said, some of the games will be good ones. Ravens-Jets, Pats-Dolphins, Vikings-Jets, Giants-Cowboys, Eagles-Redskins, and Jets-Patriots could be excellent. Saints-Falcons could be a classic in Week 16, unless one of the two teams has run away with the NFC South crown.
But there’s little genuine sizzle. Though division games (ESPN has 13 in all) can generate high interest among the fan bases of the two teams involved, a schedule befitting the price tag would feature more eyebrow-raisers like Ravens-Jets and Vikings-Jets.
Then again, with four games featuring the mammoth New York market, ESPN will do a nice job of making back much of its billion bucks.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
The Jets have brought in big names like LaDainian Tomlinson, but will they help?
Last year, the Jets dramatically exceeded expectations with a three-game winning streak to start the season. Then, they lost three in a row. They hovered around .500 for a bit, eventually falling to 4-6 before another three-game winning streak pushed them to 7-6. Coach Rex Ryan declared failure (prematurely) after an ugly 10-7 home loss to the Falcons. A Christmas gift from the Colts, back-to-back wins over the overrated Bengals and an upset of the Chargers in the divisional round delivered an unlikely berth in the AFC title game.
Even without a single addition to the roster over the offseason, last year’s success would have created expectations of a return to the postseason, at a minimum. With a string of new, big-name players — Antonio Cromartie, LaDanian Tomlinson and Santonio Holmes — joining the team and Jason Taylor possibly being next to sign on the dotted line, the Jets will have supplemented their squad with a 2007 All-Pro cornerback, the 2006 NFL MVP, the Super Bowl 43 MVP and the 2006 NFL defensive player of the year.
So, basically, it will be Super Bowl or bust for the Jets in 2010.
It’s a reality that has been overlooked or deliberately ignored: The Jets have, by all appearances, taken a page from the Daniel Snyder fantasy football playbook. However, as the regular season approaches — and as the team prepares to assume an even higher profile with an appearance on this year’s edition of HBO’s Hard Knocks — the pressure will be mounting. On the first Monday night of the season, in the inaugural primetime game at the new Meadowlands Stadium, the Jets will be expected to win handily.
If they fail, collars will tighten a bit. And then, six days later, the pressure will be even greater to avoid falling to 0-2.
That said, it’s quite possible the Jets will get off to a great start, that quarterback Mark Sanchez will show solid development in his second season, that Shonn Greene and LaDainian Tomlinson will replace the yardage gained in 2009 by Thomas Jones, whose absence will impact the locker room. Instead of fading from 3-0 to 4-6, they could streak to, say, an 8-2 start and, unlike 2008, not fade down the stretch.
Still, the stakes will be high. Failure will invite intense scrutiny from fans and media. And if the team fails to make the postseason, people will be held accountable.
So who would take the fall? It’s possible no one would lose his job, and that seats simply would be hot in 2011. It depends on how badly the team finishes; an all-out meltdown, albeit unlikely, could prompt owner Woody Johnson to take dramatic action.
And it’s not coach Rex Ryan who’d face the chopping block. Ultimately, a disastrous season could finally claim the position of the man who built the team: GM Mike Tannenbaum.
Though he deserves much credit for putting together the roster that became last year’s AFC finalist, some league insiders already are expressing doubts about an offseason splurge that could result in the addition of two guys with character concerns (Cromartie and Holmes) and two guys who have found a way to cram a capital "I" into "team" (Tomlinson and Taylor). The broader question is whether Tannenbaum has a plan or a philosophy, or whether he’s simply adding recognizable names in the hope of selling tickets, generating buzz and possibly getting people to forget about the misguided decision to draft linebacker Vernon Gholston.
Regardless of how it all turns out, the Jets will be one of the biggest stories of the 2010 season. For a team that has languished behind the Patriots in its division and the Giants in its own stadium, any attention will be considered good attention this year — unless and until the Jets fail to live up to the lofty expectations their quest for publicity has created.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Sponsored link: Jets tickets available
The Jets have brought in big names like LaDainian Tomlinson, but will they help?
Last year, the Jets dramatically exceeded expectations with a three-game winning streak to start the season. Then, they lost three in a row. They hovered around .500 for a bit, eventually falling to 4-6 before another three-game winning streak pushed them to 7-6. Coach Rex Ryan declared failure (prematurely) after an ugly 10-7 home loss to the Falcons. A Christmas gift from the Colts, back-to-back wins over the overrated Bengals and an upset of the Chargers in the divisional round delivered an unlikely berth in the AFC title game.
Even without a single addition to the roster over the offseason, last year’s success would have created expectations of a return to the postseason, at a minimum. With a string of new, big-name players — Antonio Cromartie, LaDanian Tomlinson and Santonio Holmes — joining the team and Jason Taylor possibly being next to sign on the dotted line, the Jets will have supplemented their squad with a 2007 All-Pro cornerback, the 2006 NFL MVP, the Super Bowl 43 MVP and the 2006 NFL defensive player of the year.
So, basically, it will be Super Bowl or bust for the Jets in 2010.
It’s a reality that has been overlooked or deliberately ignored: The Jets have, by all appearances, taken a page from the Daniel Snyder fantasy football playbook. However, as the regular season approaches — and as the team prepares to assume an even higher profile with an appearance on this year’s edition of HBO’s Hard Knocks — the pressure will be mounting. On the first Monday night of the season, in the inaugural primetime game at the new Meadowlands Stadium, the Jets will be expected to win handily.
If they fail, collars will tighten a bit. And then, six days later, the pressure will be even greater to avoid falling to 0-2.
That said, it’s quite possible the Jets will get off to a great start, that quarterback Mark Sanchez will show solid development in his second season, that Shonn Greene and LaDainian Tomlinson will replace the yardage gained in 2009 by Thomas Jones, whose absence will impact the locker room. Instead of fading from 3-0 to 4-6, they could streak to, say, an 8-2 start and, unlike 2008, not fade down the stretch.
Still, the stakes will be high. Failure will invite intense scrutiny from fans and media. And if the team fails to make the postseason, people will be held accountable.
So who would take the fall? It’s possible no one would lose his job, and that seats simply would be hot in 2011. It depends on how badly the team finishes; an all-out meltdown, albeit unlikely, could prompt owner Woody Johnson to take dramatic action.
And it’s not coach Rex Ryan who’d face the chopping block. Ultimately, a disastrous season could finally claim the position of the man who built the team: GM Mike Tannenbaum.
Though he deserves much credit for putting together the roster that became last year’s AFC finalist, some league insiders already are expressing doubts about an offseason splurge that could result in the addition of two guys with character concerns (Cromartie and Holmes) and two guys who have found a way to cram a capital "I" into "team" (Tomlinson and Taylor). The broader question is whether Tannenbaum has a plan or a philosophy, or whether he’s simply adding recognizable names in the hope of selling tickets, generating buzz and possibly getting people to forget about the misguided decision to draft linebacker Vernon Gholston.
Regardless of how it all turns out, the Jets will be one of the biggest stories of the 2010 season. For a team that has languished behind the Patriots in its division and the Giants in its own stadium, any attention will be considered good attention this year — unless and until the Jets fail to live up to the lofty expectations their quest for publicity has created.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Sponsored link: Jets tickets available
The most telling nugget from Thursday’s press conference by Steelers president Art Rooney came not from anything he said in his prepared remarks, but in response to a question regarding whether there’s any truth to the notion that the team is willing to trade quarterback Ben Roethlisberger.
The bidding is open for embattled Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger.
"We don’t talk about trades in advance," Rooney said. "That’s been a consistent policy, and I think that’s the way we’ll proceed. The only thing I’ll add is at this point we have not discussed a trade with any other club."
The Steelers, based on Rooney’s remarks, are occupying the position that Pennsylvania’s other NFL franchise assumed after the 2010 season. They will not say that their starting quarterback is on the block, they will not say that he isn’t, and they will wait for the phone to ring.
It makes sense. Last week’s Santonio Holmes fire sale, which arose when the Steelers called around the league in an effort to find an immediate trade partner, occurred when the team initiated the process. This time around, the Steelers will sit back and see whether anyone makes an offer between now and the draft, which launches a week from today.
And an offer could be coming. Earlier today, a non-Steelers team source told me that potentially interested teams already are comparing notes in an effort to determine whether Roethlisberger can be had.
Some say that the Steelers would trade Roethlisberger only if they receive an offer that "blows them away." That’s the same thing, however, that many were saying about the Eagles and Donovan McNabb, before the Eagles shipped McNabb within the division for something far less than a Herschel Walker-style bounty.
Given that the draft launches in seven days — and Rooney has said that discipline won’t be imposed against Roethlisberger until the week after the draft at the earliest — it’s hardly a stretch to conclude that the one of the true purposes of today’s press conference was to open the bidding without sacrificing any leverage. Though at a certain level it seems like a silly proposition, a sophisticated negotiator recognizes the power of not being the party to make the first move.
The lack of a salary cap makes it easy for the Steelers to make a move. No bonus acceleration would apply, and the new team would have no obligation to write a large bonus check in exchange for a six-year commitment that includes, according to NFLPA records, base salaries of $8.05 million in 2010, $11.6 million in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014, and $12.1 million in 2015.
Then there’s the question of discipline. For now, it appears that the Steelers will, in coordination with the league, levy a suspension for conduct detrimental at some point after the draft. But if he’s traded prior to or during the draft, the Steelers would no longer have jurisdiction over him. If Roethlisberger is traded, the league would then be acting alone.
Though it’s possible that the Steelers don’t feel the same sense of urgency to move Roethlisberger that they experienced over the weekend with Holmes, it’s clear that he’s available. If he wasn’t, Rooney would have said so with the kind of plain, blunt manner in which many Pittsburghers prefer to communicate. Rooney said nothing to dispel the suggestion that Roethlisberger might not be back, so it’s fair to wonder whether Roethlisberger will end up heading to a new NFL city in the not-too-distant future.
So who would be interested? The Bills, Jaguars, Broncos, Raiders, Panthers and every team in the NFC West should be studying tape and deciding whether to get in the bidding. Given that he’s five years younger than McNabb, under contract for six years, and sufficiently scared to swear off barhopping and VIP rooms for at least seven years, it would be easy to justify giving up a first-round pick for a very good player who has been thoroughly humiliated and humbled.
Unless the Steelers want substantially more, it’s not all that crazy to conclude that, for a first-round pick, a deal could be done.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
The most telling nugget from Thursday’s press conference by Steelers president Art Rooney came not from anything he said in his prepared remarks, but in response to a question regarding whether there’s any truth to the notion that the team is willing to trade quarterback Ben Roethlisberger.
The bidding is open for embattled Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger.
"We don’t talk about trades in advance," Rooney said. "That’s been a consistent policy, and I think that’s the way we’ll proceed. The only thing I’ll add is at this point we have not discussed a trade with any other club."
The Steelers, based on Rooney’s remarks, are occupying the position that Pennsylvania’s other NFL franchise assumed after the 2010 season. They will not say that their starting quarterback is on the block, they will not say that he isn’t, and they will wait for the phone to ring.
It makes sense. Last week’s Santonio Holmes fire sale, which arose when the Steelers called around the league in an effort to find an immediate trade partner, occurred when the team initiated the process. This time around, the Steelers will sit back and see whether anyone makes an offer between now and the draft, which launches a week from today.
And an offer could be coming. Earlier today, a non-Steelers team source told me that potentially interested teams already are comparing notes in an effort to determine whether Roethlisberger can be had.
Some say that the Steelers would trade Roethlisberger only if they receive an offer that "blows them away." That’s the same thing, however, that many were saying about the Eagles and Donovan McNabb, before the Eagles shipped McNabb within the division for something far less than a Herschel Walker-style bounty.
Given that the draft launches in seven days — and Rooney has said that discipline won’t be imposed against Roethlisberger until the week after the draft at the earliest — it’s hardly a stretch to conclude that the one of the true purposes of today’s press conference was to open the bidding without sacrificing any leverage. Though at a certain level it seems like a silly proposition, a sophisticated negotiator recognizes the power of not being the party to make the first move.
The lack of a salary cap makes it easy for the Steelers to make a move. No bonus acceleration would apply, and the new team would have no obligation to write a large bonus check in exchange for a six-year commitment that includes, according to NFLPA records, base salaries of $8.05 million in 2010, $11.6 million in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014, and $12.1 million in 2015.
Then there’s the question of discipline. For now, it appears that the Steelers will, in coordination with the league, levy a suspension for conduct detrimental at some point after the draft. But if he’s traded prior to or during the draft, the Steelers would no longer have jurisdiction over him. If Roethlisberger is traded, the league would then be acting alone.
Though it’s possible that the Steelers don’t feel the same sense of urgency to move Roethlisberger that they experienced over the weekend with Holmes, it’s clear that he’s available. If he wasn’t, Rooney would have said so with the kind of plain, blunt manner in which many Pittsburghers prefer to communicate. Rooney said nothing to dispel the suggestion that Roethlisberger might not be back, so it’s fair to wonder whether Roethlisberger will end up heading to a new NFL city in the not-too-distant future.
So who would be interested? The Bills, Jaguars, Broncos, Raiders, Panthers and every team in the NFC West should be studying tape and deciding whether to get in the bidding. Given that he’s five years younger than McNabb, under contract for six years, and sufficiently scared to swear off barhopping and VIP rooms for at least seven years, it would be easy to justify giving up a first-round pick for a very good player who has been thoroughly humiliated and humbled.
Unless the Steelers want substantially more, it’s not all that crazy to conclude that, for a first-round pick, a deal could be done.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Journalists are sometimes accused of burying the lead, when the most compelling piece of information appears almost as an afterthought in the middle or bottom of a news item.
Ocmulgee (Ga.) Judicial Circuit District Attorney Fred Bright arguably buried the lead on Monday when announcing that charges would not be pursued against Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. After discussing the evidence that prompted the decision, Bright added in "oh by the way" fashion that the alleged victim in the sexual assault case had indicated, in a letter written by her lawyer on March 17, that she no longer wished to pursue the matter. As the letter indicates, the alleged victim chose to abandon the matter not because she believed she hadn’t been sexually assaulted, but because she concluded that participating in a public trial with intense media scrutiny conflicted with her long-term best interests.
Most parents of 20-year-old daughters likely would agree with that sentiment. But it created a major problem for Bright. In most criminal cases (except in the event of a murder, where the victim is physically incapable of cooperation), no viable prosecution can proceed if the victim has no desire to participate. Given the very high American standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, a case premised on the star witness being a reluctant victim has no chance of success.
Frankly, Bright should have made that point from the outset of his remarks. It would have made it far easier to understand the situation if Bright merely had said, "Look, there were only two people in that bathroom. One of them isn’t talking. The other one doesn’t wish to proceed. It’s a case no one can win."
Let’s be candid about this. The alleged victim and her family didn’t promptly hire a lawyer with the goal of having someone communicate on their behalf with the prosecutor. They hired a lawyer to advise them as to the alleged victim’s rights — and in turn to represent her interests in conjunction with an eventual civil claim.
Even if the amount of settlement reflects only the expenses that would have been incurred by Roethlisberger if the prosecution had proceeded and/or the costs of defending against a civil suit, the amount would have been sizable. Still, and as suggested in the wake of the initial charges, it would have been very prudent for Roethlisberger to attempt to use his vast financial resources to put this matter behind him.
In 1993, Michael Jackson paid more than $20 million to a boy who accused the late singer of molestation. The boy then refused to testify in the criminal proceeding, and the case went away. More recently, talk of a looming civil settlement seemed to derail the rape prosecution of NBA star Kobe Bryant.
In both of those cases, reports of a settlement created a cloud of guilt. The lesson for lawyers handling similar matters became clear — when striking such deals, ensure complete and total confidentiality.
If done properly, no one would know that a settlement had been negotiated. Sure, some may suspect it. But there wouldn’t be a report in the newspaper or on television. The information would be tightly controlled, and the penalties for disclosure by the alleged victim would include forfeiture of most if not all of the payment.
For Roethlisberger, it would reflect sound business judgment. For the alleged victim, it would provide compensation for whatever she endured, and it would allow her to get on with her life. Though a desire to maintain secrecy implies impropriety, the simple fact is that if Roethlisberger paid any amount of money to resolve the claims, a large chunk of the general population would regard the development as an admission that he did something wrong.
In this case, guilt and innocence are bright lines that don’t mesh with the gray areas of consent and intoxication and reasonable doubt. But alleged victims who hire lawyers rarely decide to walk away with no strings attached. That’s why it would be naive to assume that the alleged victim in this case simply dropped the matter. Few lawyers ever get a $102 million tiger by the tail; when they do, they don’t like to let go easily.
Whether it’s morally right or wrong is irrelevant. If the alleged victim dropped the matter in the wake of a settlement paid by Roethlisberger, the decision will have been the product of two adults making a reasoned decision regarding the resolution of a mutual problem. And it would produce a form of justice no different than the settlement of any other civil claim involving behavior that also potentially violates one or more criminal laws.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Journalists are sometimes accused of burying the lead, when the most compelling piece of information appears almost as an afterthought in the middle or bottom of a news item.
Ocmulgee (Ga.) Judicial Circuit District Attorney Fred Bright arguably buried the lead on Monday when announcing that charges would not be pursued against Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. After discussing the evidence that prompted the decision, Bright added in "oh by the way" fashion that the alleged victim in the sexual assault case had indicated, in a letter written by her lawyer on March 17, that she no longer wished to pursue the matter. As the letter indicates, the alleged victim chose to abandon the matter not because she believed she hadn’t been sexually assaulted, but because she concluded that participating in a public trial with intense media scrutiny conflicted with her long-term best interests.
Most parents of 20-year-old daughters likely would agree with that sentiment. But it created a major problem for Bright. In most criminal cases (except in the event of a murder, where the victim is physically incapable of cooperation), no viable prosecution can proceed if the victim has no desire to participate. Given the very high American standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, a case premised on the star witness being a reluctant victim has no chance of success.
Frankly, Bright should have made that point from the outset of his remarks. It would have made it far easier to understand the situation if Bright merely had said, "Look, there were only two people in that bathroom. One of them isn’t talking. The other one doesn’t wish to proceed. It’s a case no one can win."
Let’s be candid about this. The alleged victim and her family didn’t promptly hire a lawyer with the goal of having someone communicate on their behalf with the prosecutor. They hired a lawyer to advise them as to the alleged victim’s rights — and in turn to represent her interests in conjunction with an eventual civil claim.
Even if the amount of settlement reflects only the expenses that would have been incurred by Roethlisberger if the prosecution had proceeded and/or the costs of defending against a civil suit, the amount would have been sizable. Still, and as suggested in the wake of the initial charges, it would have been very prudent for Roethlisberger to attempt to use his vast financial resources to put this matter behind him.
In 1993, Michael Jackson paid more than $20 million to a boy who accused the late singer of molestation. The boy then refused to testify in the criminal proceeding, and the case went away. More recently, talk of a looming civil settlement seemed to derail the rape prosecution of NBA star Kobe Bryant.
In both of those cases, reports of a settlement created a cloud of guilt. The lesson for lawyers handling similar matters became clear — when striking such deals, ensure complete and total confidentiality.
If done properly, no one would know that a settlement had been negotiated. Sure, some may suspect it. But there wouldn’t be a report in the newspaper or on television. The information would be tightly controlled, and the penalties for disclosure by the alleged victim would include forfeiture of most if not all of the payment.
For Roethlisberger, it would reflect sound business judgment. For the alleged victim, it would provide compensation for whatever she endured, and it would allow her to get on with her life. Though a desire to maintain secrecy implies impropriety, the simple fact is that if Roethlisberger paid any amount of money to resolve the claims, a large chunk of the general population would regard the development as an admission that he did something wrong.
In this case, guilt and innocence are bright lines that don’t mesh with the gray areas of consent and intoxication and reasonable doubt. But alleged victims who hire lawyers rarely decide to walk away with no strings attached. That’s why it would be naive to assume that the alleged victim in this case simply dropped the matter. Few lawyers ever get a $102 million tiger by the tail; when they do, they don’t like to let go easily.
Whether it’s morally right or wrong is irrelevant. If the alleged victim dropped the matter in the wake of a settlement paid by Roethlisberger, the decision will have been the product of two adults making a reasoned decision regarding the resolution of a mutual problem. And it would produce a form of justice no different than the settlement of any other civil claim involving behavior that also potentially violates one or more criminal laws.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
The peripatetic world of pro football can create plenty of opportunities for old relationships to be rekindled. And it’s rarely difficult to connect the dots when a veteran player becomes available.
Marc Bulger, an unrestricted free agent, is in need of a team for the 2010 season.
For quarterback Marc Bulger, the most obvious line between point A and point B leads from St. Louis to Chicago, where former Rams head coach Mike Martz has secured, after roughly a half-dozen candidates declined, the position of offensive coordinator. It probably would sound a bit hyperbolic to claim that the fate of the entire coaching staff, and possibly all of the front office, rides on Martz’s ability to get the most out of Jay Cutler, the man whom Martz criticized pointedly on NFL Network after a Week 1 loss to the Packers last September. Yes, it would sound a bit hyperbolic, but it nevertheless would be accurate.
Charged with the task of saving multiple bundles of bacon, Martz surely would like to have Bulger available, as a "break glass in the event of an emergency"-style option to the starter. And that emergency wouldn’t necessarily come from an injury to Cutler. If the Bears are cursed with a tough early-season schedule, and if the Cutler-Martz connection isn’t able to carry the team to a sufficient number of wins, Martz may need to turn to a quarterback who understands Martz’s 700-page playbook and stubborn determination to cram square pegs into round holes.
That quarterback would be Marc Bulger.
As the saying goes, a backup quarterback often becomes the most popular player in an NFL town. Now that the Bears have followed up a disappointing season by increasing expectations via a misguided free-agency splurge, a slow start from the team generally and Cutler specifically would spark widespread clamoring for Bulger to get a shot to turn things around. Within the walls of Halas Hall, Martz likewise would be cajoling good friend Lovie Smith to make the switch to Bulger, in the hopes of saving the season — and everyone’s jobs.
At that point, things would get very interesting. General manager Jerry Angelo made the decision to trade for Cutler. Benching Cutler less than two seasons into the experiment that cost two first-round draft picks (and a long-term contract) would constitute an admission by Angelo that he screwed up, and that would put Angelo squarely in line for termination if Bulger doesn’t take the team to the postseason.
For that reason, look for Angelo to resist stubbornly any flirtation with Bulger, no matter how hard Martz or Smith may encourage the move. Angelo realizes that not having a veteran quarterback with name recognition, a mixed history of success, and a high degree of familiarity with Martz’s offensive system lurking on the sidelines means that Angelo never will be pressured to allow Smith to use a veteran quarterback with name recognition, a mixed history of success, and a high degree of familiarity with Martz’s offensive system, no matter how badly Cutler might play early in the 2010 season.
So even though the Bears would like to complement Cutler and backups Brett Basanez and Caleb Hanie with a veteran, Angelo will want a veteran who won’t be in position to provide obvious fodder for the fans and the media, if the Bears struggle out of the gates. With Angelo likely believing he has a fighting chance to survive a postseason pink-slip party if Cutler remains under center all year and the Bears miss the tournament for the fourth straight year, Angelo won’t want to risk his own rear end by planting Cutler on his.
Then again, the best interests of the organization require having someone like Bulger available, in the event that Cutler can’t get it done. But, in this regard, the team’s best interests conflict with Angelo’s.
So keep an eye on Chicago in the short term. I’ve got a feeling that Martz, and thus Smith, want Bulger. And I’ve got an even stronger feeling that he’s the last guy Angelo wants to sign.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
The peripatetic world of pro football can create plenty of opportunities for old relationships to be rekindled. And it’s rarely difficult to connect the dots when a veteran player becomes available.
Marc Bulger, an unrestricted free agent, is in need of a team for the 2010 season.
For quarterback Marc Bulger, the most obvious line between point A and point B leads from St. Louis to Chicago, where former Rams head coach Mike Martz has secured, after roughly a half-dozen candidates declined, the position of offensive coordinator. It probably would sound a bit hyperbolic to claim that the fate of the entire coaching staff, and possibly all of the front office, rides on Martz’s ability to get the most out of Jay Cutler, the man whom Martz criticized pointedly on NFL Network after a Week 1 loss to the Packers last September. Yes, it would sound a bit hyperbolic, but it nevertheless would be accurate.
Charged with the task of saving multiple bundles of bacon, Martz surely would like to have Bulger available, as a "break glass in the event of an emergency"-style option to the starter. And that emergency wouldn’t necessarily come from an injury to Cutler. If the Bears are cursed with a tough early-season schedule, and if the Cutler-Martz connection isn’t able to carry the team to a sufficient number of wins, Martz may need to turn to a quarterback who understands Martz’s 700-page playbook and stubborn determination to cram square pegs into round holes.
That quarterback would be Marc Bulger.
As the saying goes, a backup quarterback often becomes the most popular player in an NFL town. Now that the Bears have followed up a disappointing season by increasing expectations via a misguided free-agency splurge, a slow start from the team generally and Cutler specifically would spark widespread clamoring for Bulger to get a shot to turn things around. Within the walls of Halas Hall, Martz likewise would be cajoling good friend Lovie Smith to make the switch to Bulger, in the hopes of saving the season — and everyone’s jobs.
At that point, things would get very interesting. General manager Jerry Angelo made the decision to trade for Cutler. Benching Cutler less than two seasons into the experiment that cost two first-round draft picks (and a long-term contract) would constitute an admission by Angelo that he screwed up, and that would put Angelo squarely in line for termination if Bulger doesn’t take the team to the postseason.
For that reason, look for Angelo to resist stubbornly any flirtation with Bulger, no matter how hard Martz or Smith may encourage the move. Angelo realizes that not having a veteran quarterback with name recognition, a mixed history of success, and a high degree of familiarity with Martz’s offensive system lurking on the sidelines means that Angelo never will be pressured to allow Smith to use a veteran quarterback with name recognition, a mixed history of success, and a high degree of familiarity with Martz’s offensive system, no matter how badly Cutler might play early in the 2010 season.
So even though the Bears would like to complement Cutler and backups Brett Basanez and Caleb Hanie with a veteran, Angelo will want a veteran who won’t be in position to provide obvious fodder for the fans and the media, if the Bears struggle out of the gates. With Angelo likely believing he has a fighting chance to survive a postseason pink-slip party if Cutler remains under center all year and the Bears miss the tournament for the fourth straight year, Angelo won’t want to risk his own rear end by planting Cutler on his.
Then again, the best interests of the organization require having someone like Bulger available, in the event that Cutler can’t get it done. But, in this regard, the team’s best interests conflict with Angelo’s.
So keep an eye on Chicago in the short term. I’ve got a feeling that Martz, and thus Smith, want Bulger. And I’ve got an even stronger feeling that he’s the last guy Angelo wants to sign.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
ProFootballTalk.com’s Mike Florio weighs in on the Donovan McNabb trade:
1. The pressure is on the Eagles. Two years ago, the Green Bay Packers were willing to send quarterback Brett Favre to any team outside the NFC North. Indeed, the Packers’ desire to avoid facing Favre prompted Green Bay to include a provision in its trade terms to the Jets that jacked up the compensation to three first-round picks if New York then shipped him to the Bears, Vikings or Lions.
The Eagles had no such fear with McNabb. They handed him to the Redskins for a second-round pick in 2010 and either a third-round pick or a fourth-round pick in 2011, and they won’t be looking back.
Philly is willing to face Donovan McNabb twice a year, at the risk of being passed by the Redskins.
They won’t have to look back. They’ll see McNabb twice per year. And the real concern should come from whether they ever see him while looking up.
Though plenty of Philly fans were ready to see him get shipped out of town, few will be forgiving if McNabb and the Redskins finish ahead of the Eagles in the standings — or if McNabb and the Redskins advance deeper than the Eagles into the postseason.
And if McNabb gets his fingerprints on a Lombardi Trophy, the pitchforks and torches crowd will dismantle the NovaCare Complex, brick by brick.
So the pressure is on the Eagles, like few teams have ever faced.
2. As in the Jay Cutler deal, the winner came out of nowhere. I’ve been pushing for more than a week the news that teams other than the Raiders, Bills and Rams had been talking to the Eagles, but that those teams wanted to keep their interest in McNabb tightly under wraps. I also firmly believed that, like last year’s trade of Jay Cutler, the quarterback’s new team wouldn’t be a team that anyone was thinking about.
And that’s precisely what happened. Despite those reports that the Raiders were the front-runners, the Redskins pulled the trigger.
Ironically, the Redskins were the team in 2009 most likely to get Cutler. They didn’t; now they’ve got McNabb.
3. The Eagles didn’t want Albert Haynesworth. In the wake of Saturday’s report by Fox’s Jay Glazer that the Redskins had been talking to the Eagles about McNabb, rumors emerged that the Redskins had been willing to send the defensive tackle and safety LaRon Landry to Philly.
Though it’s unclear whether Haynesworth ever was officially offered, a league source told me Sunday night that the Eagles didn’t want him.
If Haynesworth was indeed dangled as part of the McNabb trade, it means that Haynesworth could be available in other possible deals. And that would make sense. Haynesworth has been a major disappointment, and real concerns exist regarding the manner in which he’ll fit — or, more accurately, won’t fit — with the new regime.
4. Eagles-Redskins needs to invade prime time in Week 1. When the NFL delayed the annual announcement of the Week 1 prime-time games and the trio of Thanksgiving contests, some speculated that the uncertain status of two Pennsylvania quarterbacks — Ben Roethlisberger and Donovan McNabb — were forcing the delay.
Now that McNabb has joined the Redskins, the ideal matchup for Week 1 prime time is Philly-Washington.
Unfortunately for ESPN, the NFL already has committed the early Monday night game to the Jets. That leaves Sunday night, on NBC, as the ideal landing spot for McNabb’s first game against the franchise with which he spent 11 seasons.
5. Will this be just a one-year stay? One of the biggest questions the Redskins will face is whether McNabb will stay for a year, or whether he’ll be signed to a long-term extension.
Then there’s the open question regarding whether the franchise tag will be available in 2011, given that the labor agreement expires in March.
Regardless of whether the Redskins would be able to keep McNabb from leaving after only one season, it’s likely that the Redskins — buoyed by the deep pockets of owner Dan Snyder — will get a deal done. After all, the Redskins didn’t make their typical cannonball into the free-agent pool. That money saved can be used to keep McNabb for the next four or five years.
6. Is McNabb’s next stop St. Louis? The McNabb trade comes at a time when the Redskins were kicking tires on a trio of possible first-round quarterbacks: Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, and Colt McCoy. The initial reaction? It was all a ruse.
But was it? With the Rams apparently unwilling to give up the first pick in the second round of the draft for McNabb, would St. Louis be willing to take him and the fourth pick in Round 1 for the No. 1 overall selection?
Under this theory, the Redskins would use McNabb as the ammunition to get in position to draft Bradford. Given the glowing comments that coach Mike Shanahan made about McNabb on Sunday night, it’s highly unlikely. But given that the Redskins have been throwing a string of curveballs ever since Shanahan and GM Bruce Allen arrived, nothing can be ruled out.
7. Jason Campbell, meet the trading the block. With McNabb in, Jason Campbell undoubtedly is out.
And the Redskins should be able to get something of value for the restricted free agent. Last year, Campbell had a higher completion percentage (64.5) than McNabb (60.3), in essentially the same passing attack. Campbell accomplished that feat despite playing behind an inferior offensive line.
The obvious candidates include the teams that had been openly linked to McNabb, like the Bills and the Raiders.
8. Bruce Allen is the early favorite for Executive of the Year. Though Mike Shanahan has the real juice in D.C., someone is setting the table. And that someone is doing a pretty good job.
For starters, Allen persuaded Snyder to resist his big-spending nature in a depressed free-agent market. Then, Allen scooped up some decent values, like Larry Johnson and Willie Parker.
Along the way, Allen renegotiated the big-dollar contracts of Haynesworth and cornerback DeAngelo Hall, taking advantage of the rules of the uncapped year and planning for the likely return of the salary cap.
Getting McNabb for a second-round round pick and a conditional choice in 2011 becomes the coup de grace. In a quarterback’s league, having an elite one makes a team an instant contender. Thus, the Redskins instantly are contenders in their division, and in their conference.
9. A new contract is coming for Kevin Kolb. McNabb’s departure means Kolb will be the new starter in Philly. Those seeds were planted three years ago, when the Eagles traded out of Round 1 with the Cowboys and took Kolb at the top of Round 2.
The transition to Kolb became inevitable when he became the first quarterback in league history to throw for more than 300 yards in his first two starts.
The next step for Kolb? A contract that will pay him a large pile of money to be "the guy" for the next six or seven years. Per a league source, the Eagles have not yet spoken to Kolb about a deal that would replace his current contract, which expires after the 2010 season. But, surely, it’s coming soon.
And then, when the soon-to-be 26-year-old is on the wrong side of 30, the Eagles will likely line up the next young quarterback to eventually take the reins.
10. Suddenly, the Eagles need Mike Vick. With McNabb gone, Vick suddenly becomes the primary backup in Philadelphia. Given that injuries forced McNabb to miss 17 games in the last five years, that there’s a decent chance we’ll see Vick in a role other than part-time gimmick.
It also means that Vick has a shot at winning the job outright, if he can light it up during offseason workouts and training camp and if Kolb struggles as the presumed starter.
Either way, it’s good for Vick. He wasn’t going to be installed automatically as the starter with any team this year. As a result, the best place he could be is right where he currently is, as the primary backup — at worst — to Kolb.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
ProFootballTalk.com’s Mike Florio weighs in on the Donovan McNabb trade:
1. The pressure is on the Eagles. Two years ago, the Green Bay Packers were willing to send quarterback Brett Favre to any team outside the NFC North. Indeed, the Packers’ desire to avoid facing Favre prompted Green Bay to include a provision in its trade terms to the Jets that jacked up the compensation to three first-round picks if New York then shipped him to the Bears, Vikings or Lions.
The Eagles had no such fear with McNabb. They handed him to the Redskins for a second-round pick in 2010 and either a third-round pick or a fourth-round pick in 2011, and they won’t be looking back.
Philly is willing to face Donovan McNabb twice a year, at the risk of being passed by the Redskins.
They won’t have to look back. They’ll see McNabb twice per year. And the real concern should come from whether they ever see him while looking up.
Though plenty of Philly fans were ready to see him get shipped out of town, few will be forgiving if McNabb and the Redskins finish ahead of the Eagles in the standings — or if McNabb and the Redskins advance deeper than the Eagles into the postseason.
And if McNabb gets his fingerprints on a Lombardi Trophy, the pitchforks and torches crowd will dismantle the NovaCare Complex, brick by brick.
So the pressure is on the Eagles, like few teams have ever faced.
2. As in the Jay Cutler deal, the winner came out of nowhere. I’ve been pushing for more than a week the news that teams other than the Raiders, Bills and Rams had been talking to the Eagles, but that those teams wanted to keep their interest in McNabb tightly under wraps. I also firmly believed that, like last year’s trade of Jay Cutler, the quarterback’s new team wouldn’t be a team that anyone was thinking about.
And that’s precisely what happened. Despite those reports that the Raiders were the front-runners, the Redskins pulled the trigger.
Ironically, the Redskins were the team in 2009 most likely to get Cutler. They didn’t; now they’ve got McNabb.
3. The Eagles didn’t want Albert Haynesworth. In the wake of Saturday’s report by Fox’s Jay Glazer that the Redskins had been talking to the Eagles about McNabb, rumors emerged that the Redskins had been willing to send the defensive tackle and safety LaRon Landry to Philly.
Though it’s unclear whether Haynesworth ever was officially offered, a league source told me Sunday night that the Eagles didn’t want him.
If Haynesworth was indeed dangled as part of the McNabb trade, it means that Haynesworth could be available in other possible deals. And that would make sense. Haynesworth has been a major disappointment, and real concerns exist regarding the manner in which he’ll fit — or, more accurately, won’t fit — with the new regime.
4. Eagles-Redskins needs to invade prime time in Week 1. When the NFL delayed the annual announcement of the Week 1 prime-time games and the trio of Thanksgiving contests, some speculated that the uncertain status of two Pennsylvania quarterbacks — Ben Roethlisberger and Donovan McNabb — were forcing the delay.
Now that McNabb has joined the Redskins, the ideal matchup for Week 1 prime time is Philly-Washington.
Unfortunately for ESPN, the NFL already has committed the early Monday night game to the Jets. That leaves Sunday night, on NBC, as the ideal landing spot for McNabb’s first game against the franchise with which he spent 11 seasons.
5. Will this be just a one-year stay? One of the biggest questions the Redskins will face is whether McNabb will stay for a year, or whether he’ll be signed to a long-term extension.
Then there’s the open question regarding whether the franchise tag will be available in 2011, given that the labor agreement expires in March.
Regardless of whether the Redskins would be able to keep McNabb from leaving after only one season, it’s likely that the Redskins — buoyed by the deep pockets of owner Dan Snyder — will get a deal done. After all, the Redskins didn’t make their typical cannonball into the free-agent pool. That money saved can be used to keep McNabb for the next four or five years.
6. Is McNabb’s next stop St. Louis? The McNabb trade comes at a time when the Redskins were kicking tires on a trio of possible first-round quarterbacks: Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, and Colt McCoy. The initial reaction? It was all a ruse.
But was it? With the Rams apparently unwilling to give up the first pick in the second round of the draft for McNabb, would St. Louis be willing to take him and the fourth pick in Round 1 for the No. 1 overall selection?
Under this theory, the Redskins would use McNabb as the ammunition to get in position to draft Bradford. Given the glowing comments that coach Mike Shanahan made about McNabb on Sunday night, it’s highly unlikely. But given that the Redskins have been throwing a string of curveballs ever since Shanahan and GM Bruce Allen arrived, nothing can be ruled out.
7. Jason Campbell, meet the trading the block. With McNabb in, Jason Campbell undoubtedly is out.
And the Redskins should be able to get something of value for the restricted free agent. Last year, Campbell had a higher completion percentage (64.5) than McNabb (60.3), in essentially the same passing attack. Campbell accomplished that feat despite playing behind an inferior offensive line.
The obvious candidates include the teams that had been openly linked to McNabb, like the Bills and the Raiders.
8. Bruce Allen is the early favorite for Executive of the Year. Though Mike Shanahan has the real juice in D.C., someone is setting the table. And that someone is doing a pretty good job.
For starters, Allen persuaded Snyder to resist his big-spending nature in a depressed free-agent market. Then, Allen scooped up some decent values, like Larry Johnson and Willie Parker.
Along the way, Allen renegotiated the big-dollar contracts of Haynesworth and cornerback DeAngelo Hall, taking advantage of the rules of the uncapped year and planning for the likely return of the salary cap.
Getting McNabb for a second-round round pick and a conditional choice in 2011 becomes the coup de grace. In a quarterback’s league, having an elite one makes a team an instant contender. Thus, the Redskins instantly are contenders in their division, and in their conference.
9. A new contract is coming for Kevin Kolb. McNabb’s departure means Kolb will be the new starter in Philly. Those seeds were planted three years ago, when the Eagles traded out of Round 1 with the Cowboys and took Kolb at the top of Round 2.
The transition to Kolb became inevitable when he became the first quarterback in league history to throw for more than 300 yards in his first two starts.
The next step for Kolb? A contract that will pay him a large pile of money to be "the guy" for the next six or seven years. Per a league source, the Eagles have not yet spoken to Kolb about a deal that would replace his current contract, which expires after the 2010 season. But, surely, it’s coming soon.
And then, when the soon-to-be 26-year-old is on the wrong side of 30, the Eagles will likely line up the next young quarterback to eventually take the reins.
10. Suddenly, the Eagles need Mike Vick. With McNabb gone, Vick suddenly becomes the primary backup in Philadelphia. Given that injuries forced McNabb to miss 17 games in the last five years, that there’s a decent chance we’ll see Vick in a role other than part-time gimmick.
It also means that Vick has a shot at winning the job outright, if he can light it up during offseason workouts and training camp and if Kolb struggles as the presumed starter.
Either way, it’s good for Vick. He wasn’t going to be installed automatically as the starter with any team this year. As a result, the best place he could be is right where he currently is, as the primary backup — at worst — to Kolb.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
With the draft less than three weeks away, and with general managers taking fewer chances than usual during the 2010 offseason, let’s look at a few of the moves that should be seriously considered before the annual selection process commences.
Bears should make a move to reunite Brandon Marshall and Jay Cutler.
1. Redskins trade for Sam Bradford.
As the Redskins launch the Mike Shanahan era, they need a quality quarterback. Currently, they do not have one.
So while they’re flirting with Jimmy Clausen and Colt McCoy, they should consider doing whatever they have to do to get the guy who’s currently at the top of the draft board.
And that’s Sam Bradford.
The challenge will be working out a fair trade. In prior years, the move from No. 4 to No. 1 would have required a mountain of picks and/or players. But since sliding down three spots moves the essentially ownerless Rams out of the crosshairs of the biggest contract that ever will be paid to a first-year player (especially if it’s a quarterback), the compensation for the three-spot climb shouldn’t be as stiff as it would have been in past years.
Besides, the Redskins never have been shy about dumping draft picks. So why not take the 2011 first-round selection, package it with a failed free-agent signing (or two) from past years, and offer a flip-flop to St. Louis?
With the Rams needing help at many more positions than quarterback, it makes plenty of sense.
2. Bears trade for Brandon Marshall.
Last year, the Bears sent two first-round picks (and more) to the Broncos for quarterback Jay Cutler. To date, the move has been a failure — and it has left coach Lovie Smith and GM Jerry Angelo on wafer-thin ice.
The situation has created sufficient desperation to prompt the Bears to overpay for a trio for day one free agents – Julius Peppers, Chester Taylor and Brandon Manumaleuna — which in the short term has removed the sense of gloom and doom that had taken over Halas Hall.
So with the Broncos looking to unload receiver Brandon Marshall, why don’t the Bears try to get him? Sure, the Broncos want a first-round draft pick and the Bears already sent theirs to Denver in the Cutler deal. The Bears should instead dangle their 2011 first-rounder, and possibly throw in a conditional selection based on Marshall’s performance in the coming season.
If the Marshall plan fails, Angelo and Smith likely won’t be there to not use the first-round pick in 2011 anyway. If it works, Angelo and Smith would gladly give up the pick for the ensuing job security.
Though the Broncos may not want to enable a Cutler-Marshall reunion, they may not have many/any other options for unloading a guy they clearly don’t want.
3. Cardinals trade for Donovan McNabb.
The Cardinals have said they aren’t interested in Donovan McNabb, presumably because they already have signed future Hall of Famer Derek Anderson to compete with future Hall of Famer Matt Leinart.
But McNabb reportedly wants to play in Arizona, and he could help the suddenly solid Cardinals not miss a beat in the wake of Kurt Warner’s retirement.
Even if it takes the 26th overall pick in Round One, it’s a no-brainer. In a quarterbacks’ league, McNabb is one of the best. Getting him at age 33, with five or more years left in his career, would keep things moving in the right direction deep into the new decade.
4. Steelers trade for Byron Leftwich.
It wouldn’t be a jaw-dropping move, and it wouldn’t take much to make it happen. But the Steelers need to be prepared for the possibility that Ben Roethlisberger won’t be around in 2010 — and the Steelers need to send a message to their fans that they plan to take the situation seriously if Roethlisberger ultimately is indicted for sexual assault.
Byron Leftwich did well for the Steelers as the primary backup to Big Ben in 2008, and Leftwich is the odd man out on the Tampa depth chart. Sure, the Steelers have Dennis Dixon and Charlie Batch. But if Roethlisberger ultimately isn’t available and Dixon gets hurt, Leftwich would be a much more viable alternative to Batch.
Besides, making a move for Leftwich now would let the football-following world know that the Steelers truly regard the Roethlisberger situation as grave, and that they’re making their plans accordingly.
5. Colts sign Marcus McNeill to offer sheet.
Colts president Bill Polian thinks his team’s offensive line was outplayed during Super Bowl 44. Since then, Polian has been trying to round up larger offensive linemen.
As left tackles go, they don’t get much bigger than Marcus McNeill of the Chargers. Listed at 6-7 and 337 pounds, the five-year veteran carries the highest possible restricted free agency tender, requiring a first-round and third-round pick as compensation.
But the Colts draft in nearly the lowest position in the first round, 31st out of 32 teams. So it’s a relatively small price to pay for a proven tackle who would help keep Peyton Manning in one piece during the final third or so of his career.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
With the draft less than three weeks away, and with general managers taking fewer chances than usual during the 2010 offseason, let’s look at a few of the moves that should be seriously considered before the annual selection process commences.
Bears should make a move to reunite Brandon Marshall and Jay Cutler.
1. Redskins trade for Sam Bradford.
As the Redskins launch the Mike Shanahan era, they need a quality quarterback. Currently, they do not have one.
So while they’re flirting with Jimmy Clausen and Colt McCoy, they should consider doing whatever they have to do to get the guy who’s currently at the top of the draft board.
And that’s Sam Bradford.
The challenge will be working out a fair trade. In prior years, the move from No. 4 to No. 1 would have required a mountain of picks and/or players. But since sliding down three spots moves the essentially ownerless Rams out of the crosshairs of the biggest contract that ever will be paid to a first-year player (especially if it’s a quarterback), the compensation for the three-spot climb shouldn’t be as stiff as it would have been in past years.
Besides, the Redskins never have been shy about dumping draft picks. So why not take the 2011 first-round selection, package it with a failed free-agent signing (or two) from past years, and offer a flip-flop to St. Louis?
With the Rams needing help at many more positions than quarterback, it makes plenty of sense.
2. Bears trade for Brandon Marshall.
Last year, the Bears sent two first-round picks (and more) to the Broncos for quarterback Jay Cutler. To date, the move has been a failure — and it has left coach Lovie Smith and GM Jerry Angelo on wafer-thin ice.
The situation has created sufficient desperation to prompt the Bears to overpay for a trio for day one free agents – Julius Peppers, Chester Taylor and Brandon Manumaleuna — which in the short term has removed the sense of gloom and doom that had taken over Halas Hall.
So with the Broncos looking to unload receiver Brandon Marshall, why don’t the Bears try to get him? Sure, the Broncos want a first-round draft pick and the Bears already sent theirs to Denver in the Cutler deal. The Bears should instead dangle their 2011 first-rounder, and possibly throw in a conditional selection based on Marshall’s performance in the coming season.
If the Marshall plan fails, Angelo and Smith likely won’t be there to not use the first-round pick in 2011 anyway. If it works, Angelo and Smith would gladly give up the pick for the ensuing job security.
Though the Broncos may not want to enable a Cutler-Marshall reunion, they may not have many/any other options for unloading a guy they clearly don’t want.
3. Cardinals trade for Donovan McNabb.
The Cardinals have said they aren’t interested in Donovan McNabb, presumably because they already have signed future Hall of Famer Derek Anderson to compete with future Hall of Famer Matt Leinart.
But McNabb reportedly wants to play in Arizona, and he could help the suddenly solid Cardinals not miss a beat in the wake of Kurt Warner’s retirement.
Even if it takes the 26th overall pick in Round One, it’s a no-brainer. In a quarterbacks’ league, McNabb is one of the best. Getting him at age 33, with five or more years left in his career, would keep things moving in the right direction deep into the new decade.
4. Steelers trade for Byron Leftwich.
It wouldn’t be a jaw-dropping move, and it wouldn’t take much to make it happen. But the Steelers need to be prepared for the possibility that Ben Roethlisberger won’t be around in 2010 — and the Steelers need to send a message to their fans that they plan to take the situation seriously if Roethlisberger ultimately is indicted for sexual assault.
Byron Leftwich did well for the Steelers as the primary backup to Big Ben in 2008, and Leftwich is the odd man out on the Tampa depth chart. Sure, the Steelers have Dennis Dixon and Charlie Batch. But if Roethlisberger ultimately isn’t available and Dixon gets hurt, Leftwich would be a much more viable alternative to Batch.
Besides, making a move for Leftwich now would let the football-following world know that the Steelers truly regard the Roethlisberger situation as grave, and that they’re making their plans accordingly.
5. Colts sign Marcus McNeill to offer sheet.
Colts president Bill Polian thinks his team’s offensive line was outplayed during Super Bowl 44. Since then, Polian has been trying to round up larger offensive linemen.
As left tackles go, they don’t get much bigger than Marcus McNeill of the Chargers. Listed at 6-7 and 337 pounds, the five-year veteran carries the highest possible restricted free agency tender, requiring a first-round and third-round pick as compensation.
But the Colts draft in nearly the lowest position in the first round, 31st out of 32 teams. So it’s a relatively small price to pay for a proven tackle who would help keep Peyton Manning in one piece during the final third or so of his career.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Assuming the Eagles trade quarterback Donovan McNabb — and their silence in the face of rampant rumors suggests they eventually will — he has more than a few potential new homes. Though only a handful have been mentioned, the Eagles reportedly are talking to teams that want their interest not to be disclosed, given they already have guys on the roster who think they’ll be the starting quarterback in their current cities when the 2010 season commences.
There’s a long list of possible destinations for Donovan McNabb.
So let’s take a look at where McNabb might land, if/when he indeed is traded.
Buffalo
The Bills have a trio of second-tier quarterbacks, and they are one of only two teams who have been linked to McNabb that have not denied it.
Some think that owner Ralph Wilson won’t pay McNabb’s eight-figure salary for 2011 or give him an extension that might approach nine figures. But if the Bills are serious about becoming a contender in this quarterback’s league, they need an elite quarterback.
The bonus for the rest of us? One game per year in Miami. Which is located in Florida. Which is the state where Donovan has a habit of losing his lunch during games.
Cleveland
Sure, the Browns have guaranteed $7 million to quarterback Jake Delhomme in 2010. But what’s $7 million to a franchise that has been handing out buyouts like comedy show fliers in Times Square?
McNabb would instantly make a franchise nudging toward legitimacy fully and completely legitimate, thrusting them into contention in the highly-competitive AFC North.
Thus, if he Browns are serious about improving, they need to be serious about getting McNabb — even if they already have Delhomme.
Pittsburgh
Though it’s still way too early in the Ben Roethlisberger case to justify serious considerations of trading for McNabb, the Steelers need to be considering their alternatives — and McNabb could be the best one available.
It’s highly unlikely that the Steelers would pursue McNabb absent the filing of charges against Roethlisberger. If, however, Ben does a perp walk before McNabb is moved, the Steelers need to run to the phones and see what it would take to get him.
Jacksonville
Coach Jack Del Rio has suggested that David Garrard isn’t an elite quarterback. McNabb clearly is.
Amid the fading chatter of the Jaguars taking a chance on Tim Tebow, the fact remains that they need short-term help in the hopes of securing long-term future in Jacksonville.
So why not McNabb? If the Jaguars are serious about getting better, McNabb gives them their best shot.
Denver
Why should the Broncos be pursuing McNabb? We can think of two reasons.
Kyle Orton and Brady Quinn.
Though it would make the team better, trading for a franchise quarterback a year after trading one away would look a little odd, but if they can get McNabb for far less than the two first-round picks that the Bears coughed up for Jay Cutler, the Broncos could hold their heads high, for a change.
Oakland
The mere fact that the Raiders have been linked to McNabb and haven’t had John Herrera issue a statement applying "false rumor monger" to anyone who has reported on this possibility is all the proof we need that they’ve concluded that their investment in JaMarcus Russell was a major blunder.
Getting McNabb could help get them out of their mess. The team has talent; it just needs a leader on the offensive side of the ball. McNabb would be that leader — and he could help turn around a team that has struggled since 2002, a season in which both the Raiders and McNabb’s Eagles fell to the eventual champs from Tampa.
Washington
The Redskins need a long-term answer at quarterback, but the Eagles aren’t likely to hand McNabb to a division rival.
That said, the Eagles haven’t been bashful about doing deals with division foes. Indeed, they moved out of round one in 2007 and used a pick at the top of round two to get Kevin Kolb in a deal with Dallas.
Still, it’s one thing to swap picks with the Cowboys; it’s quite another to hand a franchise quarterback over to an archrival, especially when said franchise quarterback knows the ins and outs of his former franchise.
Minnesota
The Vikings would likely prefer that McNabb stay put for one more year. Then, they can sign him after Favre makes one last run at a walk-off Super Bowl win.
But if the market for McNabb is softer than previously believed, the Vikings would be wise to at least explore the possibility of securing a quarterback who would help the team for multiple years beyond 2010.
The fact that McNabb and Brad Childress have an extensive history in Philly could make Childress take a little more seriously the possibility of McNabb being the 2010 version of Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay — and Favre being the 2010 version of, well, Brett Favre.
Carolina
The Panthers have jettisoned Delhomme, and they’ve made Matt Moore the starter.
Who?
Exactly.
The problem is that a lame-duck coach and a lame-duck GM. likely can’t get ownership’s approval to make a deal for a quarterback the next regime might want.
Arizona
The Cardinals say they’re not interested in McNabb. Well, they should be.
With McNabb, they’d remain contenders in a watered-down NFC West. Without him, they’ll struggle to tread water — and they’ll end up wishing they had made the move. Especially if he ends up with another team in the division.
St. Louis
The Rams had been linked to Eagles quarterback Mike Vick. Rumors that they might make a play for another Eagles quarterback heated up last week, only to be shot down by the powers-that-be.
The Rams apparently not wanting McNabb makes it more clear that they’ll find their quarterback in the draft, presumably at the top.
While that likely will make Sam Bradford happy, it provides the Eagles with one less viable suitor for McNabb’s services.
San Francisco The 49ers have been trying to prop up and dust off the first pick in the 2005 draft, and they’ll continue that effort in 2010, as Alex Smith returns as the starter.
Though Smith hasn’t been terrible, McNabb could help push the team to the top of the division. Presumably, the 49ers hope to return to the top of the division.
If they did, they’d send one of their first-round picks to Philly for the guy who instantly would be their best quarterback since Steve Young.
Seattle
The Seahawks have been flirting with making a big splash in the 2010 offseason, but they have consistently stopped short of pulling the trigger.
McNabb would allow them to shake up the division.
The Seahawks could also give Philly something no one else can — a backup quarterback who is schooled in the West Coast offense. Then again, the Eagles could balk at Matt Hasselbeck as part of the offer, given that Hasselbeck could be cut, which would give the Eagles a free and clear shot at him.
Either way, getting McNabb would be precisely the kind of splash that the Seahawks are looking to make.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
Assuming the Eagles trade quarterback Donovan McNabb — and their silence in the face of rampant rumors suggests they eventually will — he has more than a few potential new homes. Though only a handful have been mentioned, the Eagles reportedly are talking to teams that want their interest not to be disclosed, given they already have guys on the roster who think they’ll be the starting quarterback in their current cities when the 2010 season commences.
There’s a long list of possible destinations for Donovan McNabb.
So let’s take a look at where McNabb might land, if/when he indeed is traded.
Buffalo
The Bills have a trio of second-tier quarterbacks, and they are one of only two teams who have been linked to McNabb that have not denied it.
Some think that owner Ralph Wilson won’t pay McNabb’s eight-figure salary for 2011 or give him an extension that might approach nine figures. But if the Bills are serious about becoming a contender in this quarterback’s league, they need an elite quarterback.
The bonus for the rest of us? One game per year in Miami. Which is located in Florida. Which is the state where Donovan has a habit of losing his lunch during games.
Cleveland
Sure, the Browns have guaranteed $7 million to quarterback Jake Delhomme in 2010. But what’s $7 million to a franchise that has been handing out buyouts like comedy show fliers in Times Square?
McNabb would instantly make a franchise nudging toward legitimacy fully and completely legitimate, thrusting them into contention in the highly-competitive AFC North.
Thus, if he Browns are serious about improving, they need to be serious about getting McNabb — even if they already have Delhomme.
Pittsburgh
Though it’s still way too early in the Ben Roethlisberger case to justify serious considerations of trading for McNabb, the Steelers need to be considering their alternatives — and McNabb could be the best one available.
It’s highly unlikely that the Steelers would pursue McNabb absent the filing of charges against Roethlisberger. If, however, Ben does a perp walk before McNabb is moved, the Steelers need to run to the phones and see what it would take to get him.
Jacksonville
Coach Jack Del Rio has suggested that David Garrard isn’t an elite quarterback. McNabb clearly is.
Amid the fading chatter of the Jaguars taking a chance on Tim Tebow, the fact remains that they need short-term help in the hopes of securing long-term future in Jacksonville.
So why not McNabb? If the Jaguars are serious about getting better, McNabb gives them their best shot.
Denver
Why should the Broncos be pursuing McNabb? We can think of two reasons.
Kyle Orton and Brady Quinn.
Though it would make the team better, trading for a franchise quarterback a year after trading one away would look a little odd, but if they can get McNabb for far less than the two first-round picks that the Bears coughed up for Jay Cutler, the Broncos could hold their heads high, for a change.
Oakland
The mere fact that the Raiders have been linked to McNabb and haven’t had John Herrera issue a statement applying "false rumor monger" to anyone who has reported on this possibility is all the proof we need that they’ve concluded that their investment in JaMarcus Russell was a major blunder.
Getting McNabb could help get them out of their mess. The team has talent; it just needs a leader on the offensive side of the ball. McNabb would be that leader — and he could help turn around a team that has struggled since 2002, a season in which both the Raiders and McNabb’s Eagles fell to the eventual champs from Tampa.
Washington
The Redskins need a long-term answer at quarterback, but the Eagles aren’t likely to hand McNabb to a division rival.
That said, the Eagles haven’t been bashful about doing deals with division foes. Indeed, they moved out of round one in 2007 and used a pick at the top of round two to get Kevin Kolb in a deal with Dallas.
Still, it’s one thing to swap picks with the Cowboys; it’s quite another to hand a franchise quarterback over to an archrival, especially when said franchise quarterback knows the ins and outs of his former franchise.
Minnesota
The Vikings would likely prefer that McNabb stay put for one more year. Then, they can sign him after Favre makes one last run at a walk-off Super Bowl win.
But if the market for McNabb is softer than previously believed, the Vikings would be wise to at least explore the possibility of securing a quarterback who would help the team for multiple years beyond 2010.
The fact that McNabb and Brad Childress have an extensive history in Philly could make Childress take a little more seriously the possibility of McNabb being the 2010 version of Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay — and Favre being the 2010 version of, well, Brett Favre.
Carolina
The Panthers have jettisoned Delhomme, and they’ve made Matt Moore the starter.
Who?
Exactly.
The problem is that a lame-duck coach and a lame-duck GM. likely can’t get ownership’s approval to make a deal for a quarterback the next regime might want.
Arizona
The Cardinals say they’re not interested in McNabb. Well, they should be.
With McNabb, they’d remain contenders in a watered-down NFC West. Without him, they’ll struggle to tread water — and they’ll end up wishing they had made the move. Especially if he ends up with another team in the division.
St. Louis
The Rams had been linked to Eagles quarterback Mike Vick. Rumors that they might make a play for another Eagles quarterback heated up last week, only to be shot down by the powers-that-be.
The Rams apparently not wanting McNabb makes it more clear that they’ll find their quarterback in the draft, presumably at the top.
While that likely will make Sam Bradford happy, it provides the Eagles with one less viable suitor for McNabb’s services.
San Francisco The 49ers have been trying to prop up and dust off the first pick in the 2005 draft, and they’ll continue that effort in 2010, as Alex Smith returns as the starter.
Though Smith hasn’t been terrible, McNabb could help push the team to the top of the division. Presumably, the 49ers hope to return to the top of the division.
If they did, they’d send one of their first-round picks to Philly for the guy who instantly would be their best quarterback since Steve Young.
Seattle
The Seahawks have been flirting with making a big splash in the 2010 offseason, but they have consistently stopped short of pulling the trigger.
McNabb would allow them to shake up the division.
The Seahawks could also give Philly something no one else can — a backup quarterback who is schooled in the West Coast offense. Then again, the Eagles could balk at Matt Hasselbeck as part of the offer, given that Hasselbeck could be cut, which would give the Eagles a free and clear shot at him.
Either way, getting McNabb would be precisely the kind of splash that the Seahawks are looking to make.
Mike Florio writes and edits ProFootballTalk.com and is a regular contributor to Sporting News. Check out PFT for up-to-the minute NFL news.
