BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19345178/belichick-no-unwritten-rules-for-ballard-claim-very-disappointed-coughlin-agrees When the Giants waived injured tight end Jake Ballard on Tuesday, they certainly didn't expect anyone to claim him. After all, Ballard's probably going to miss all of 2012 after tearing his ACL in the Super Bowl. But the Patriots -- who, as you know, lost that Super Bowl -- snatched him off waivers. And that prompted a lot of questions as to whether or not the Pats violated any "unwritten" rules of NFL transactions. Bill Belichick, who was asked those questions, scoffed at the notion on Wednesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 All's fair. Ballard won't play in 2012, seeing as how he tore his ACL and had the repair plus microfracture surgery in February. And after this season, he'll be a RFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramblin' Rob Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 This is a stretch. hope this tread dies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 All's fair. Ballard won't play in 2012, seeing as how he tore his ACL and had the repair plus microfracture surgery in February. And after this season, he'll be a RFA. is he an RFA next year? I heard them quoting his salary for next year. Of course it could have been an assumed level of tender but it certainly wasnt specified, and they didnt mention any compensation possibility when discussing it. They being espn who easily could have dropped the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 is he an RFA next year? I heard them quoting his salary for next year. Of course it could have been an assumed level of tender but it certainly wasnt specified, and they didnt mention any compensation possibility when discussing it. They being espn who easily could have dropped the ball. Rotoworld has his listed as making $540K this coming year and being a RFA in 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 This pissed Coughlin off Its funny cause apparently it had pissed BB off too when it happened to them a couple of season ago from what I heard. Some are saying it is just BB trying to get some revenge/get back at the team that keeps beating him in the SB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19345178/belichick-no-unwritten-rules-for-ballard-claim-very-disappointed-coughlin-agrees When the Giants waived injured tight end Jake Ballard on Tuesday, they certainly didn't expect anyone to claim him. After all, Ballard's probably going to miss all of 2012 after tearing his ACL in the Super Bowl. But the Patriots -- who, as you know, lost that Super Bowl -- snatched him off waivers. And that prompted a lot of questions as to whether or not the Pats violated any "unwritten" rules of NFL transactions. Bill Belichick, who was asked those questions, scoffed at the notion on Wednesday. why work any harder to dislike the pats than you have to? an unwritten rule simply means there is no rule at all. as much as i despise bb, i'd scoff too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optometric Insight Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) What's the unwritten rule? Taking a player from a team that beat you in the Super Bowl last year? Taking an injured player off waivers? EDIT: Thanks Senator! Edited June 14, 2012 by Teen Insight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Lol, this is lame...there is no unwritten rule and there is nothing to see here. This happens all the time, and Giants took a risk and it back fired. They are stupid for taking the risk on a guy they did not want to give up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickedface Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 i agree that its stupid, on both parts, the pats* don't need a TE and may have done this out of spite or to get the playbook and the njg's should've been a bit more careful with a player they wanted to keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Meh...it's actually kinda funny to watch these two girls (Belicheat* & Coughlin) kick and scratch and pull each other's hair! Ballard's 1-yard TD catch with 17 seconds to go ends a NE* 20-game win streak at home (Foxboro*) last November, then NJ beat NE* in the SB. In an extremely petty move by a guy* already well -stocked at the TE position, Belicheat* sees an opportunity to tweak Couglin's nose by taking a guy who can't play a down this season, and becomes an RFA when the season ends. The Patriots are well-stocked at tight end with Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez, but Bill Belichick has made these types of unconventional moves before. Belichick scoffed at the notion he broke some unwritten rule about claiming an injured player. “First of all, there aren’t any unwrittens,’’ Belichick said in New England. “Any time you put a player on waivers, you know there are 31 teams out there that can take him if they want him. We all know that.” Ballard, 24, caught 38 passes last season, was a revelation for the Giants and wanted to stay. He arrived at the Giants facility on Tuesday figuring he’d cleared waivers but was informed that the Patriots claimed him at 3:50 p.m., 10 minutes before the waiver deadline. “Obviously he built a reputation here, he’s very close with the guys here, the staff, the team,’’ tight end Travis Beckum said, “and I think if he could have picked he would have picked to stay here, but that is not how the NFL works.’’ (link - NY Post) Would be a real pisser if the Giants signed him back next Spring! (Personally, I loved it when Buddy and Chan grabbed NE* 5th-round pick - Marshall TE Lee Smith - off waivers last season just before Belicheat could sign Smith to the NE* PS!) GO BILLSSS!!! "I expect to be undefeated...I expect to win every game." - Chan Gailey 19 and 0 baby!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 It sucks most for Ballard. Pats really don't have a need for him, but he is sort of in limbo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 This is similar to how we got tasker. It isn't cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 It sucks most for Ballard. Pats really don't have a need for him, but he is sort of in limbo... Exactly what I was thinking; he's probably broken hearted. It's one thing to change teams for a better opportunity, but he's unlikely to ever play for the Pats and now loses his connection to the Giants while rehabbing his injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optometric Insight Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 This is similar to how we got tasker. It isn't cheating. That's creepy. I was just reading about how Steve Tasker joined the Bills via waiver wire after he got injured in the book he wrote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 This is similar to how we got tasker. It isn't cheating. And if you want to go WAY back in time, also Jack Kemp... Link - How The Chargers Lost Jack Kemp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 And if you want to go WAY back in time, also Jack Kemp... Link - How The Chargers Lost Jack Kemp What about Lawyer Milloy? He wasn't on waivers, but the Bills did grab him less than a week before the home opener against the Pats*. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Sounds like insurance in case Hernandez wants mad money after the 2013 season. But Ballard's microfracture surgery isn't a good sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Why are they even allowed to waive someone who is out due to injury? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 What about Lawyer Milloy? He wasn't on waivers, but the Bills did grab him less than a week before the home opener against the Pats*. Yeah...a bit different in that the Cheats* weren't trying to keep Milloy, or 'hide' him on IR, PUP, etc. They just outright released Milloy 5 days before the start of the season after failing to agree on a renegotiated deal. (Still, I'm pretty sure Belicheat* was caught a bit 'flat-footed' whe the Bills signed Milloy the next day - just in time to get the entire NE* game plan and trounce the Cheatriettes* 31-0 !!!!!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) Meh...it's actually kinda funny to watch these two girls (Belicheat* & Coughlin) kick and scratch and pull each other's hair! Ballard's 1-yard TD catch with 17 seconds to go ends a NE* 20-game win streak at home (Foxboro*) last November, then NJ beat NE* in the SB. In an extremely petty move by a guy* already well -stocked at the TE position, Belicheat* sees an opportunity to tweak Couglin's nose by taking a guy who can't play a down this season, and becomes an RFA when the season ends. The Patriots are well-stocked at tight end with Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez, but Bill Belichick has made these types of unconventional moves before. Belichick scoffed at the notion he broke some unwritten rule about claiming an injured player. “First of all, there aren’t any unwrittens,’’ Belichick said in New England. “Any time you put a player on waivers, you know there are 31 teams out there that can take him if they want him. We all know that.” Ballard, 24, caught 38 passes last season, was a revelation for the Giants and wanted to stay. He arrived at the Giants facility on Tuesday figuring he’d cleared waivers but was informed that the Patriots claimed him at 3:50 p.m., 10 minutes before the waiver deadline. “Obviously he built a reputation here, he’s very close with the guys here, the staff, the team,’’ tight end Travis Beckum said, “and I think if he could have picked he would have picked to stay here, but that is not how the NFL works.’’ (link - NY Post) Would be a real pisser if the Giants signed him back next Spring! (Personally, I loved it when Buddy and Chan grabbed NE* 5th-round pick - Marshall TE Lee Smith - off waivers last season just before Belicheat could sign Smith to the NE* PS!) GO BILLSSS!!! "I expect to be undefeated...I expect to win every game." - Chan Gailey 19 and 0 baby!!!! Ballard gets caught in the mix on this. Now he has to change his whole medical staff and rehab program. Pats rehab program usually starts at the unemployment line, so Good luck to Ballard on this mess. Edited June 14, 2012 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanC883 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) This is a stretch. hope this tread dies. Why do people continually post on threads that they hate the topic. If you don't like it, leave. Most likely he picked him up thinking that he can sign him when Hernendaz leaves. (can't imagine them spending top TE money on two TE's.) Edited June 14, 2012 by RyanC883 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Exactly what I was thinking; he's probably broken hearted. It's one thing to change teams for a better opportunity, but he's unlikely to ever play for the Pats and now loses his connection to the Giants while rehabbing his injury. Disagree. Though probably not happy, he will get reps if he's good. They schemed well to get those guys in packages (see Hernandez in the backfield) not to mention the inevitable injuries along the way. I think you could also see oddball formations with 3 TEs where he is the traditional role, and the other 2 can go from goal line to 3 wr formations without subs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 This is similar to how we got tasker. It isn't cheating. Not quite. Different rules at the time. Houston tried to sneak Tasker through the waiver wire back onto its active roster (don't remember the exact rule.) People tried to sneak active players through waivers all the time, and there was player movement when a team paid attention to the waiver wire. Giants OTOH, needed to put Ballard on waivers before they could claim him back & put him on IR for the 2012. There's some quirk in the rule that mandates Giants to have Ballard on the regular roster before he can be put on IR. The Tasker move is similar to what Sabres did with Ellis a few years back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Disagree. Though probably not happy, he will get reps if he's good. They schemed well to get those guys in packages (see Hernandez in the backfield) not to mention the inevitable injuries along the way. I think you could also see oddball formations with 3 TEs where he is the traditional role, and the other 2 can go from goal line to 3 wr formations without subs Anything is possible, but he went from the presumptive 2013 starter in NY to the #3 guy in NE with zero chance of ever being the #1 guy. Plus, he'll hardly be forming close relationships with his offensive teammates in NE since he won't step on the field until next spring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 He was released by the Giants and put on waivers. Like many have said, no story here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Never NEVER Give-up Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Much ado about nothing. Coughlin was just being frank voicing his disappointment in losing Ballard via a calculated risk of sneaking him through waivers. GM Jerry Reese echoed those sentiments. For a reporter to ask BB if he violated any unwritten rules is laughable and makes that reporter look like a rank amateur. The question for whomever picked up Ballard was - Do you wnat to carry him on IR for a full year? BB's answer is yes. TE is a major part of their attack now - this is not a dumb move, especially if Hernandez isn't happy with playing 2nd fiddle. Heck this is EXACTLY how the Bills pilfered Jack Kemp from San Diego and Steve Tasker from Houston!! To a lesser extent it's how we got Merriman - but it's taken him at least 2 years AND SanDiego was finished with him. There are probably other examples, but I cannot think of them right now. Not quite. Different rules at the time. Houston tried to sneak Tasker through the waiver wire back onto its active roster (don't remember the exact rule.) People tried to sneak active players through waivers all the time, and there was player movement when a team paid attention to the waiver wire. Giants OTOH, needed to put Ballard on waivers before they could claim him back & put him on IR for the 2012. There's some quirk in the rule that mandates Giants to have Ballard on the regular roster before he can be put on IR. The Tasker move is similar to what Sabres did with Ellis a few years back. Sounds the same to me, but I agree - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 If the Bills did this, there would be 16 threads saying NIX IS A GENIUS. I understand how most people hate the Patriots and anyone associated with them, but come on ... there's nothing wrong with this at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Giants OTOH, needed to put Ballard on waivers before they could claim him back & put him on IR for the 2012. There's some quirk in the rule that mandates Giants to have Ballard on the regular roster before he can be put on IR. Why didn't the Giants just put him on IR? If they wanted him on IR, why waive him at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 It sucks most for Ballard. Pats really don't have a need for him, but he is sort of in limbo... They'l sign him then trade him back to G men or some other team for a 4th rounder or better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 It sucks most for Ballard. Pats really don't have a need for him, but he is sort of in limbo... Why does is it suck for Ballard? By the Patriots claiming him off waivers he keeps his salary and current contract. The only reason the Giants waived him was to get him at a lower salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optometric Insight Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 He was released by the Giants and put on waivers. Like many have said, no story here. Quite the contrary. Anything involving the Pats* is a story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Why didn't the Giants just put him on IR? If they wanted him on IR, why waive him at all? I'm not fully up to speed on the new rules and I don't think that Giants were allowed to put him on IR at this time. He had to be on their 90-man roster until August and then go on IR? I don't know the exact reason. Giants could have kept him on the 90-man roster and cut a no name rookie, but they gambled that no one would claim a player who won't see the field until 2013. They lost the gamble. Still, for Patriots to pull this move does smack of sleaziness, because Ballard won't contribute at all until 2013. That's why it's different than the Tasker case, because Tasker wasn't injured when he was put on waivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Why does is it suck for Ballard? By the Patriots claiming him off waivers he keeps his salary and current contract. The only reason the Giants waived him was to get him at a lower salary. I don't know all the specifics about Ballard, but it just seems like he kind of got caught up in a battle of "gamesmenship" between two coaches, who have a bit of a rivalry, at this point. Don't know how much more money we are talking about, but my hunch would be, if a guy is injured, he would feel a lot better knowing, when healthy, he will be returning to a situation where he was pretty successful, rather than one wher he is not likely to see a lot of playing time. And, for all we (and Ballard) know, the Pats could just cut him at any point, when they are depleted at another spot... nothing wrong with what the Pats did, and I realize it is all part of the sport... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 I'm not fully up to speed on the new rules and I don't think that Giants were allowed to put him on IR at this time. He had to be on their 90-man roster until August and then go on IR? I don't know the exact reason. Giants could have kept him on the 90-man roster and cut a no name rookie, but they gambled that no one would claim a player who won't see the field until 2013. They lost the gamble. That's what I gathered from reading the papers. They didn't want to use a spot on their 90 man roster for the entire training camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 plenty of reasons to hate the cheaters. this aint one of em Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 This is similar to how we got tasker. It isn't cheating. Kemp too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best Player Available Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Still, for Patriots to pull this move does smack of sleaziness, because Ballard won't contribute at all until 2013. That's why it's different than the Tasker case, because Tasker wasn't injured when he was put on waivers. Zero sleeze. Merriman and the Bills knew his injury history when he was signed after clearing waivers 2 years ago. Plus Merriman is payed a Kings Ransom too cheerlead. Ballard's salary is I've heard around 700k this year. Chump change in the NFL for a guy with potential. No one uses TE's like Bealicheat. I don't get the big deal on this? If the Bills did this, there would be 16 threads saying NIX IS A GENIUS. I understand how most people hate the Patriots and anyone associated with them, but come on ... there's nothing wrong with this at all. Exactly!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Zero sleeze. Merriman and the Bills knew his injury history when he was signed after clearing waivers 2 years ago. Plus Merriman is payed a Kings Ransom too cheerlead. Ballard's salary is I've heard around 700k this year. Chump change in the NFL for a guy with potential. No one uses TE's like Bealicheat. I don't get the big deal on this? Exactly!! Merriman was a bit different as the chargers actually wanted to waive him. In this case the giants pulled a pretty standard issue "don't screw us and we won't screw you" roster move for this time of year. I won't condemn BB for claiming him but am not surprised that some GMs would be frustrated or there would be raised eyebrows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsSD Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Merriman was a bit different as the chargers actually wanted to waive him. In this case the giants pulled a pretty standard issue "don't screw us and we won't screw you" roster move for this time of year. I won't condemn BB for claiming him but am not surprised that some GMs would be frustrated or there would be raised eyebrows. In a billion dollar game, where you can be dropped at any time, there is no "don't screw us and we won't screw you". If anyone but NE had done this no one would have cared. This thread is solely based upon the hatred Bills fans have for NE. It is old and pathetic at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts