NFL Nixes Josh Barrett Contract

[kmonty]

Denver rookie deal nixed

June 18, 2008 10:58 PM

Posted by ESPN.com's Bill Williamson

The NFL disapproved the rookie contract signed by Denver seventh-round pick Josh Barrett, a safety from Arizona State. Denver announced his signing last week.

Barrett goes back to being unsigned property of the Broncos and the two sides have to come to a new agreement. Often, when these situations arise, it is because of language that is fairly easy to correct. It wouldn't be a surprise if the Broncos resolved this by the end of the week. Barrett was Denver's only signed draft pick.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/hashmarks...eal-nixed.html

[Killericon]

What the what?

[BroncoDoug]

Hmm, don't know if I've heard of that before...

[Kaylore]

The league has to approve all deals and there was something in this one they didn't like that both sides missed. As the article says, it was probably the language and not the nature of the contract itself.

[s0phr0syne]

First goof of the Goodman regime? ...or do we blame Xanders?


It's the offseason, we have to blame someone.

[lex]

Originally Posted by s0phr0syne

First goof of the Goodman regime? ...or do we blame Xanders?


It's the offseason, we have to blame someone.

Or maybe this is the first sign of axe grinding for Shanahan standing up to Goodell on the Henry suspension last year.

[worm]

Originally Posted by lex

Or maybe this is the first sign of axe grinding for Shanahan standing up to Goodell on the Henry suspension last year.

Thats it! Brilliant reasoning! Rejecting this contract will show Shanahan and the Broncos.

It never ceases to amaze me the way peoples minds work here on the Mane.

ALL contracts go through the league office for approval. When a contract gets rejected...it doesn't mean there has to be ulterior motives or vendettas....it might just, maybe, possibly could mean that the league has done their job.

[RunSilentRunDeep]

I think we should all panic. We're facing an 0-16 season.

[lex]

Originally Posted by worm

Thats it! Brilliant reasoning! Rejecting this contract will show Shanahan and the Broncos.

It never ceases to amaze me the way peoples minds work here on the Mane.

ALL contracts go through the league office for approval. When a contract gets rejected...it doesn't mean there has to be ulterior motives or vendettas....it might just, maybe, possibly could mean that the league has done their job.

Yeah, it might mean that. Whats more amazing are those who are militant at the mere suggestion of any kind of backlash. It happens. To go around suggesting vendettas dont exist is more hysterical than being skeptical.

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by lex

Yeah, it might mean that. Whats more amazing are those who are militant at the mere suggestion of any kind of backlash. It happens. To go around suggesting vendettas dont exist is more hysterical than being skeptical.

There might be backlash, but your idea that making them rework a seventh round pick's contract language is some kind of punishment is incredibly stupid.

[CBF1]

The sky HAS fallen. Doom and gloom..... 40 years of drought are coming. RUN FOR YOUR LIVES

[worm]

Originally Posted by lex

Yeah, it might mean that. Whats more amazing are those who are militant at the mere suggestion of any kind of backlash. It happens. To go around suggesting vendettas dont exist is more hysterical than being skeptical.

Lex. If backlash WERE to happen....I think the league could come up with a better way to impact the Broncos then asking them and Josh to rework a rookie contract.

To take a business as usual event that results in something as simple as lawyers changing the language of the contract...and start assigning meaning to that event based on vendettas\conspiracy is just silly.

Maybe you should watch less made-for-TV movies.

[Smiling Assassin27]

clearly griese's fault

[lex]

Originally Posted by worm

Lex. If backlash WERE to happen....I think the league could come up with a better way to impact the Broncos then asking them and Josh to rework a rookie contract.

To take a business as usual event that results in something as simple as lawyers changing the language of the contract...and start assigning meaning to that event based on vendettas\conspiracy is just silly.

Maybe you should watch less made-for-TV movies.

I wouldnt rule out the league creating obstacles any way they can. Nor would I minimize the incentive(s) to do so. That would be folly.

[lex]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

There might be backlash, but your idea that making them rework a seventh round pick's contract language is some kind of punishment is incredibly stupid.

Hey, I dont make fun of your religion do I?

[BroncoBuff]

I found the offending clause on an attorney website. I had no idea he held such a grudge from his senior year:

ARTICLE VI: SPECIFIC TERMS

Clause 1: TEAM agrees to take any and all reasonable measures
to ban the presence of one "Dennis Ericksen," his employees, agents,
heirs, successors and assigns, from all TEAM activities of any kind,
whether involving PLAYER or not. This ban shall extend, but is not
limited to, hotel, practice and game sites in the State of Arizona,
whenever TEAM visits that state.

I couldda told them this wouldn't fly. You can't contract for the behavior of a person that is not a party to the contract. I had no idea Josh was so bitter ... he has 2nd round talent, but was frusrated by Erickson's staff as a senior. Cost him alotta dough.

[kmonty]

Originally Posted by BroncoBuff

I found the offending clause on an attorney website. I had no idea he held such a grudge from his senior year:

ARTICLE VI: SPECIFIC TERMS

Clause 1: TEAM agrees to take any and all reasonable measures
to ban the presence of one "Dennis Ericksen," his employees, agents,
heirs, successors and assigns, from all TEAM activities of any kind,
whether involving PLAYER or not. This ban shall extend, but is not
limited to, hotel, practice and game sites in the State of Arizona,
whenever TEAM visits that state.

I couldda told them this wouldn't fly. You can't contract for the behavior of a person that is not a party to the contract. I had no idea Josh was so bitter ... he has 2nd round talent, but was frusrated by Erickson's staff as a senior. Cost him alotta dough.

Every so often I get confused about when the sarcastic Mane stops and the legit Mane begins...

so, are you serious?

[worm]

Originally Posted by kmonty

Every so often I get confused about when the sarcastic Mane stops and the legit Mane begins...

so, are you serious?

As a general rule...look at the poster name. If it has the words Bronco and Buff in it......don't look for the sarcastic Mane to stop.

[TheReverend]

Originally Posted by BroncoBuff

I found the offending clause on an attorney website. I had no idea he held such a grudge from his senior year:

ARTICLE VI: SPECIFIC TERMS

Clause 1: TEAM agrees to take any and all reasonable measures
to ban the presence of one "Dennis Ericksen," his employees, agents,
heirs, successors and assigns, from all TEAM activities of any kind,
whether involving PLAYER or not. This ban shall extend, but is not
limited to, hotel, practice and game sites in the State of Arizona,
whenever TEAM visits that state.

I couldda told them this wouldn't fly. You can't contract for the behavior of a person that is not a party to the contract. I had no idea Josh was so bitter ... he has 2nd round talent, but was frusrated by Erickson's staff as a senior. Cost him alotta dough.

That's where it gets real crazy! Lol.

[2KBack]

Originally Posted by kmonty

Every so often I get confused about when the sarcastic Mane stops and the legit Mane begins...

so, are you serious?

Well, Dennis Erickson is spelled wrong, so...

[kmonty]

lol alright thanks... that's some hardcore sarcasm there.

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by lex

Hey, I dont make fun of your religion do I?

Huh? You're all over the board, Lex.

[SureShot]

It used to be Mike Draftbust-o-tan-a-han couldn't draft, and now he can't draft or sign his crappy draft picks. When is Bowlen going to wake up? Its obvious now the league has it in for him.

We are screwed until Pat cleans house.

[lex]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Huh? You're all over the board, Lex.

Not really. But I will say it makes more sense for the league to make problems on the small stuff because if they wait for something big to happen, they risk looking bad...and with the scrutiny that has surrounded spygate, the smaller stuff makes more sense. People already think that he favors some teams (namely New England) and to hold a bias against some teams on the bigger ticket items calls more attention to the already held belief that favoritism exists. So actually, the less conspicuous items make sense in spite of your meinung to the contrary. But circumstances aside, its folly to rule out anything where grudges exist...thats as a general rule.

[SureShot]

Nice Disown-a-Bronco you jack ass.