Page 37 of 37 FirstFirst ... 27353637
Results 361 to 366 of 366
  1. #361
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Match Seahawks offer on Nate?

    "twiztedfait" wrote:
    "aHawksFan" wrote:
    They subverted the whole intent of the transition tag. PERIOD.
    I personally don't like the use of tags anyways.

    "Your contract is up, but we just don't want to loose you or offer you a new contract to begin with"

    "I don't even want to play here anymore"

    "To bad, we invented this thing to protect us. We don't care that you are unhappy. You play for us even though your contract is up. You have no choice"

    Just don't seem right to me.
    The players hate the tags too. They know that it effectively allows teams to keep players on a team for less money. The NFLPA would rather see the tags done away with completely than close up the loopholes.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  2. #362
    IdaVike_Cheese-Hater is offline Training Camp
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    20

    Re: Match Seahawks offer on Nate?

    Seattle responded days later by signing Vikings receiver Nate Burleson to a long-term contract, invoking wild poison pill clauses that basically ensured that Minnesota couldn't match its offer.

    "That was very distasteful to me, to retaliate so to speak like that (against the Vikings)," Holmgren said. "I do believe the commissioner should look into these kind of clauses. We work so hard on trying to gain labor peace and a new collective bargaining agreement and then we as clubs allow agents to get cute and circumvent it. On the playing field there are rules and there are unwritten rules about how the game should be played in the spirit and the fairness of it all. It doesn't make sense to me that we had to lose such a fine football player this way. I was surprised by the ruling."
    This was just part of an article from fox sports. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5455024

    It sounds like this poison pill thing has caused a serious rift between Holmgren and management. I completely agree with him that this "retaliation" thing is just childish. That doesn't mean they need to be happy about what happened but as mama said "Two wrongs don't make a right".

  3. #363
    ShanePurpleBlood's Avatar
    ShanePurpleBlood is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    772

    Re: Match Seahawks offer on Nate?

    Well it looks like we didn't match, they reported it on ESPN.

    Here is another article.

    Another great sig by PPE!
    SKOL VIKINGS!!!
    Vikings #1
    Raiders #2
    Hawkeyes #1
    Longhorns #2

  4. #364
    cajunvike's Avatar
    cajunvike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    32,063

    Re: Match Seahawks offer on Nate?

    Buh bye...have fun in Seattle!

    Oh yeah, the "Curse of the Super Bowl Loser" will be in full effect next season...so enjoy that too!!! :evil4:
    BANNED OR DEAD...I'LL TAKE EITHER ONE

  5. #365
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,185

    Re: Raonall Smith and The Rams?

    "ItalianStallion" wrote:
    Meh the guy has been a waste of a roster spot since he was drafted, injured non-stop.

    I completely agree!!! Everybody was so gung-ho on putting him in the number 1 spot since he did such a good job when Moss was hurt( ukeright: )!!!! I think if we kept him he would just be a bigger bust and waste good roster space!!! I think we move Koren to 1 slot and put Troy in the 3 slot and maybe travis taylor in the 2 spot!!! We could aslo swicth troy and Travis!!!
    http://www.myspace.com/pooptin


  6. #366
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Match Seahawks offer on Nate?

    True the guy had an offseason last year. The fact that he played hurt most of the year I guess didn't count. The guy had a great 2004. Folks, he had 1006 yards. Moss was only out 5 games. He didn't do it all in those guys. The fact is he could have been a #1 WR. He still has the potential. The guy has one bad year and everyone is saying he's a bust.

Page 37 of 37 FirstFirst ... 27353637

Similar Threads

  1. Raonall Smith signed by Rams
    By ThePurplePotato in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-04-2006, 02:22 AM
  2. I want to know what people think about Raonall Smith?
    By finnishvikingsfan in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 03-10-2005, 09:44 PM
  3. Raonall Smith will he play again?
    By whackthepack in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-04-2004, 09:10 PM
  4. What's with Raonall Smith?
    By eelpout72 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-25-2004, 12:59 AM
  5. Raonall Smith
    By VikingsTw in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 10-09-2004, 08:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •