stuvian Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/poison-pill-aimed-at-helping-brandin-cooks-clear-waivers-could-keep-saints-from-releasing-him Sounds like his contract is designed to dissuade teams he doesn't want to go to 1 Quote
strive_for_five_guy Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago 9 minutes ago, stuvian said: https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/poison-pill-aimed-at-helping-brandin-cooks-clear-waivers-could-keep-saints-from-releasing-him Sounds like his contract is designed to dissuade teams he doesn't want to go to Well they tried to alter his current contract so that he’d likely go unclaimed on waivers and he could decide where he’d go next. Because it sounds like with how his contract currently stands, teams are more likely to submit waiver claims and Cooks wouldn’t control where he goes. Quote
Psautcsk Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago This is fascinating. What team really wanted Cooks? 1 Quote
Big Turk Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago Why wouldn't he just tell teams he'd refuse to report if claimed? Quote
EmotionallyUnstable Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago This dude has had just an insanely bizarre career. 11 year vet, former 1st round pick, traded 4 times, made over 150+ million in career earnings, and just shy of 10k career receiving yards. 3 Quote
Walking Tall Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago 49 minutes ago, Big Turk said: Why wouldn't he just tell teams he'd refuse to report if claimed? He could tell them that but if he didn’t report he wouldn’t get paid. Quote
SCBills Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago Doesn’t this happen all the time when vets get released down the stretch? The Titans aren’t claiming Brandin Cooks and I’m sure his agent made that known. Not sure why this time it’s such a big deal. Quote
Psautcsk Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago 4 minutes ago, SCBills said: Doesn’t this happen all the time when vets get released down the stretch? The Titans aren’t claiming Brandin Cooks and I’m sure his agent made that known. Not sure why this time it’s such a big deal. Simply put, the contract move would be made with the intent of creating a deterrent for a team to claim Cooks. The move is not-so-affectionately referred to as a “poison pill” clause. Further insinuations include the indication that the Saints, Cooks and the team of Cooks’ choosing may have colluded throughout this process. Sounds like there was a team that really wanted a wide receiver. Just speculation on my part. 1 Quote
LittleSammy Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago 13 minutes ago, Psautcsk said: Simply put, the contract move would be made with the intent of creating a deterrent for a team to claim Cooks. The move is not-so-affectionately referred to as a “poison pill” clause. Further insinuations include the indication that the Saints, Cooks and the team of Cooks’ choosing may have colluded throughout this process. Sounds like there was a team that really wanted a wide receiver. Just speculation on my part. Whew, good thing the Bills management determined we didn't need one. 4 2 1 Quote
CSBill Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago 9 hours ago, LittleSammy said: Whew, good thing the Bills management determined we didn't need one. An instant Classic of a post! POTW 2 Quote
YodaMan79 Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago Cooks was a better version of John Brown's style of play. Curious to see who puts a claim in, or how he maneuvers his free agency. Does he have anything left for a contending team? 1 Quote
BuffaloBillyG Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago 14 hours ago, Psautcsk said: This is fascinating. What team really wanted Cooks? The Tennessee Titans have the chance to do the funniest thing ever. 1 1 Quote
Dr.Sack Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago Cooks been in the league for a long time. Sammy Watkins < Cook. Quote
NoSaint Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago 17 hours ago, Big Turk said: Why wouldn't he just tell teams he'd refuse to report if claimed? because they could still claim him and let him sit out unpaid Quote
TheFunPolice Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago (edited) What's the problem with this? He's a Saints player and they're doing him a favor for really nothing in return. But that's their business isn't it? It's between the team and the player. Who cares if the stupid Titans wouldn't be able to claim him. They still could it would just be ridiculously expensive. Edited 3 hours ago by TheFunPolice Quote
NoSaint Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago 6 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said: What's the problem with this? He's a Saints player and they're doing him a favor for really nothing in return. But that's their business isn't it? It's between the team and the player. Who cares if the stupid Titans wouldn't be able to claim him. They still could it would just be ridiculously expensive. you say this until you find out a team is doing a favor to get a player you want to the chiefs or pats 1 1 Quote
TheFunPolice Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 1 hour ago, NoSaint said: you say this until you find out a team is doing a favor to get a player you want to the chiefs or pats I guess but I still see it as between the team and player. If the player can basically get the team to make him a UFA because of past service then it is what it is. If he clears waivers then anyone including us can sign him. Quote
ChronicAndKnuckles Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 19 hours ago, Psautcsk said: This is fascinating. What team really wanted Cooks? i would take over Coleman in a heartbeat Quote
damj Posted 48 minutes ago Posted 48 minutes ago (edited) 17 minutes ago, ChronicAndKnuckles said: i would take over Coleman in a heartbeat I'd take Gary Coleman over Keon Edited 47 minutes ago by damj Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.