hagan714

as long as jimmy is not signed he can talk to whoever he wants/ the only issue is the time frame. after a certain date it appears the saints would lose the option of matching. no one is sure how that will work out in the CBA since it has not happened. language is not clear on the issue. confused? we all are

lmao ass off at collusion. that only applies if the player is getting the short end of the stick.

Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage. It is an agreement among firms or individuals to divide a market, set prices, limit production or limit opportunities.[1] It can involve "wage fixing, kickbacks, or misrepresenting the independence of the relationship between the colluding parties".[2] In legal terms, all acts effected by collusion are considered

Collusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Collusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Collusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

saints have a long history for most part of being overly generous and loyal since Benson took over. so the idea of Collusion would shock the saints nation and the nfl as a whole. hell bounty gate was never proven. all they really got on us was untimely answered email. we are a clean organization.

what do you think goes on at winter meeting and all during the off season. teams talk players and their agents talk , they all talk

in no way do i think the saints would be dirty and under handed in any move concerning ripping a player off during contract talks with another club.

A call between teams is good business relations just giving a heads up that there are talking to a player.

Of course Jimmy would get an offer sheet he wants and feels is fair before doing anything.

the sit down is simple. saints decide to match or not. notify all parties involved and it a done deal either way. either across the table via conference call what ever the media you pick. I am old school and would think the news would be face to face in this matter. but thats just me. shake hands and seal the deal our part ways but do it like men eye to eye.

OLD school business ethic still do go on between teams. rare in today's cut throat and do not care who you hurt business world we have today. maybe i should have left that ideology out of my statements

as for the bit about

Trade - The player has no say so or involvement (Sproles), its between two teams.

plenty of trades have gone down in the past were teams have made deals that the players opinion is weighed in the matter. so there are exceptions.

I am sure Darren was very happy with eagles vs a franchise in the toilet. I would like to think the saints ignored a few teams to get darren a better landing spot without giving him away.

then again old school rose color glasses

"But look, I'm sensitive to how personal these things are to players. I get that. I respect Darren. A lot. He's done a lot for us. When we had the opportunity to trade him, I spoke with his representation a number of times. I wanted to put him in a place where he felt good about going, and yet I've got to consider the team's best interest first."

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/team-re...0221--nfl.html

looks like i picked the right shades after all

"We may have lost the game, but you'll be hurting tomorrow." Doug Atkins