No. While somewhat similar the Suggs case was not the same. Suggs was not franchised. His grievance was over his negotiated salary and an arbiter agreed that he was basically a DE and should be paid as one.

The Graham case was based upon franchise position designation. It was a different animal entirely. The NFLPA was arguing that he was basically a WR and should have been designated as one with the franchise tag. It was all about tag designation, not negotiated salary based. This truly was new ground.

We can argue all that 'til we're purple. If you think Jimmy was merely a pawn and not actively involved then we just have to agree to disagree.

Back in March (early on in the legal battle), Saints quarterback Drew Brees offered Graham advice that remains relevant in light of the latest development: "I just told him be patient," Brees said. "Don't get frustrated. Don't take it personally. It's part of the deal and it's hard and ... you just want it to be over. You want certainty. That's the hardest part."

Oh, I have no doubt Graham was simply a pawn in the franchise designation ploy by the NFLPA. While Graham never provided any input during the proceedings, his good friend Brees implied that Graham was not an enthused participant ...







All the facts point to the NFLPA and their bank of lawyers driving the grievance action. Graham had, in fact, never changed his Twitter description stating that he was an "NFL Tight End".

All he had to do was sign. Nobody stopped him. Not his agent. Not the NFLPA. Like I said earlier, otherwise somebody goes to jail. Believe it or don’t, but Jimmy knew exactly what he was doing. To believe your angle would be to believe he was some sort of victim, and, as I said, we can agree to disagree.

No. All he had to do wasn't just sign. Graham didn't want to play under the franchise tag. He wanted a contract. He was coerced into letting the NFLPA file a grievance on the franchise tag designation. This was something the PA had wanted to address and this was their first chance. By doing what they requested of him it did not hurt anyone. That is other than a number of soft-skinned fans that couldn't understand that this was a point of contention between the league and the PA that both sides wanted to resolve. All it did was postpone the deal that Graham was going to be getting anyway.

No, Graham wasn't a victim. There were no victims. It was simply a legal issue that hurt nobody. And where the heck are you getting this jail tripe? Yes, Jimmy knew what he was doing and why he was doing it. It is clear that you don't understand.

You are making it all too personal. Nobody did anything wrong. It is all just business. Lighten up.

See the parts in bold? You just lost the debate for yourself.

Again, NOBODY FORCED him to do anything. The choice was his and he knew exactly what he was doing - your words, and you're the self-proclaimed expert eh? Otherwise, what you call 'tripe' would be against the law, and thank you again for proving my point. The agent and the NFLPA forced Jimmy not to sign? Sir you need to get real.

What is clear is that the only person taking this personal is you sir. YOU are the one who, by your own admission read everything ever published on the internet on the subject. For me, this is just my football team, not my life.

We could have just agreed to disagree, but you won't let it go.

As for lightening up, I think a look in your mirror is in order sir.

Yes, Graham had a choice but he made the choice...

Yes, he knew what he was doing...

.

Oh, I have no doubt Graham was simply a pawn in the franchise designation ploy by the NFLPA. While Graham never provided any input during the proceedings, his good friend Brees implied that Graham was not an enthused participant ...







All the facts point to the NFLPA and their bank of lawyers driving the grievance action. Graham had, in fact, never changed his Twitter description stating that he was an "NFL Tight End".