My annual breakouts piece is a photo gallery this year with shorter text from me. And yes, I still love Rickie Weeks, even though he’s not on there.
I’ll be on First Take via phone at 10:20 am on Thursday, and KTAR at 9:24 am Arizona Time. I’ll be on Baltimore 105.7 FM tonight at 9:30 pm.
Yes, there will be a Phoenix food post soon. It’s mostly done, but I’ve got some more preview stuff to hand in to ESPN.com first.
There will be a Klawchat on Thursday at 1 pm.
So can someone explain this Cutler thing to me? I keep hearing how the Broncos have to trade him. Isn’t he under contract? So he wants a trade. I want a million dollars, a night with Ashley Judd, and a pony. If I’m Josh McDaniel, I’m staring at two options:
1. Keep Cutler and make it clear to players and agents that I am in charge.
2. Trade Cutler for 80 cents on the dollar* and show everyone that the lunatics are running the asylum.
*This is my assumption, as someone who doesn’t really know football, because Denver would be seen as somehow unable to keep Cutler, and because I doubt you ever really get full value when trading a top-ten quarterback.
Erik Kuselias was subbing for SVP on the Tirico/VP show today and kept saying how Cutler has “leverage” – but does he? He’s an employee of the Broncos. If they decide to bench him for four games to teach him a lesson, as long as they’re paying him and abiding by the letter of the contract, they are within their rights to do so. I’ve heard no mention of a contractual obligation on the part of the Broncos to avoid hurting Cutler’s feelings, nor does he have a no-trade clause or a no-discussing-a-trade clause or a no-even-thinking-about-a-trade-even-while-you’re-on-the-throne clause. If Cutler doesn’t show up for a required camp or workout, you fine him. You may be able to suspend him without pay, which would be true in MLB. But just like I don’t give in to my daughter when she throws a tantrum, a GM shouldn’t give in to a player (or agent) when he throws one.
Am I wrong?
Keith, couldn’t agree with you more regarding Cutler, there is no way I would trade him if I were the Broncos, even if they can get full value.
Keith,
I couldn’t agree more. I don’t understand why the MSM is killing the Broncos for exploring their options. Cutler is an asset that the Broncos believe other teams may value more than they do. If they don’t think Cutler’s a good fit in their system, they have every right to look for fair value via trade.
There is some belief held (I’m not sure where or when it was popularized) that respecting a player’s feelings is crucial to organizational success and not doing so is somehow inhumane. I’m certain this is a one-way street. Cutler does have some leverage – he can refuse to play; in doing so, he risks being viewed as a malcontent around the league which could inhibit his ultimate future earnings potential when this contract is either up or punitive to the salary cap and needs renegotiation in a couple years.
In no way do I think the Broncos have handled this well from a PR standpoint, but Cutler comes off as an entitled whiner.
Keith,
I see you have Milledge on your list and I know you’ve been a big fan of him for a while. I’m a big Mets fan so I’ve followed him for years. Now I’m just a fan and clearly have no scout training, but I’ve always thought he had serious trouble hitting off-speed pitches. Sometimes he looks as though he’s never seen a curveball. Do you see that as well or am I subconsciously justifying the Mets giving him away?
You’re spot on with the Cutler/Broncos situation. Although McDaniels is a very systematic coach from his training in NE, and Cutler is known as a on the fly type gunslinger. I’ve read/heard stories of Cutler ignoring the first few options of a play and heaving the ball downfield at times. I think it’s more that McDaniels has a problem with Cutler the player, but doesn’t want to say so in fear of damaging his trade value.
Cutler has leverage for one main reasons: the Bronco’s don’t really have any other options at QB, and certainly don’t have one as good as Cutler. Cutler could hold-out (costing himself a lot of money and potentially making life difficult for himself down the road) and refuse to play, therefore putting the Bronco’s in a really bad position from a talent standpoint. If that happens, they’ll still be able to trade him but will get even less in return. So he does not have leverage in the traditional sense, but does have some, because he can make some (selfish) decisions that would be very bad for the Broncos.
That being said, I agree with much of what you said, but it is difficult to really comment on the situation without knowing what went on behind closed doors. Because of the ways in which coaches set the tone and culture of a football team (much moreso than in baseball), the fact that McDaniels’ first move there was to try to trade Cutler sent the message that he didn’t think Cutler fit his plan. When the trade fell apart (publicly unfortunately), McDaniels refused to own up to it, tried to get cutesy by holding up a Cutler jersey at a press conference to show the new uniforms, and kept insisting he wanted Cutler all around. That doesn’t justify what Cutler did, but it certainly shows a great deal of shadiness on McDaniels part, that I think rightfully would lead Cutler (and perhaps others) to question playing for him.
Nice work on the breakout players, though I would have preferred to see more analysis and fewer GIANT PICTURES. I guess that wouldn’t be flashy enough for the four-letter.
Keith the big issue here is that McDaniels is 32 years old and clearly appears to be in over his head. He tried to pull one over on the Patriots by back-dooring them out of Cassell by working a three way trade through Detroit or Tampa Bay w/o New England knowing.
He is possibly creating a division in the locker room and might be alienating veteran players. This could be a disaster for him, especially if their season falls apart because of it.
It is questionable how much patience Pat Bowlen will have with McDaniels if the Broncos’ season is torpedoed because of a situation that might have been easily avoided.
Connecticut mike: Do we know for sure this is creating a division in the locker room or alienating veteran players? I mean Cutler is demanding a trade away from the team, so he’s not exactly showing loyalty, either.
The first mistake may have been by the Broncos, but Cutler compounded that. I’ve never been in a pro locker room before, but I’m thinking Cutler would have more respect had he come out and said “I’m still a Bronco and will continue to do my best for the Broncos until that changes.”
I agree that Cutler is too thin-skinned, but it’s tough to compare baseball and football in this situation. Generally speaking, a QB is more valuable to a football team than an individual player in baseball – even a stud player. Cutler (most franchise QB’s) cannot be replaced adequately with anyone currently on the roster. They’re basically choosing to lose to prove a point if they just let him sit out. If they think Brady Quinn + a first-rounder is worth curing this headache, then they should just pull the trigger and deal him.
Ct Mike,
I have a hard time believing Denver was pulling a fast one on NE. I’m sure Belichick knew Denver would be involved in a 3 way trade. McDaniels left NE with the blessing of Bellichick. This isn’t Mangini-Belichick type stuff.
You forgot to include Ramiro Pena in your batch of breakout players.
Seriously, why is this guy suddenly considered a legitimate prospect? Am I missing something?
They wouldn’t have given into his demand to trade him but Pat Bowlen felt personally insulted and was finished with Cutler as soon as he stopped returning his calls.
You’ve worked in a front office. I can only imagine what that was like.
Like you, I’m more interested in baseball than in football, and I’m more interested in the principles involved than in this specific situation.
What I wonder is how the managers you’ve observed have gotten the most out of their players? How important is it for them to let the players know who’s in charge? How important is it to acknowledge their feelings?
I also wonder if a team that pretty much has to deal a top player always ends up getting something along the lines of 80 cents on the dollar? Have you ever seen a team in that situation get other teams into a bidding war that ultimately overvalued the player?
No you’re not wrong. At the end of the day Cutler would come running back to Denver. Good thing they don’t know this though.
Cutler wanted to get his way and ignoring everything that came from Denver (texts/calls etc.) and then ignoring workouts and forfeiting over 100k made Denver assess if he was worth all the trouble. To a new head coach who tried to replace Cutler with a worse QB already, Cutler wasn’t worth all that trouble to him.
@stixx23:
I do not know that McDaniels’ actions are causing a division in the locker room. I am only suggesting that might result from what has occurred, and that seems like a bad risk for a young, first-time head coach to take.
@Chuck:
re: Denver trying to acquire Cutler, check out this link from Mike Lombardi’s blog, 3/18/09:
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/03/diner-morning-news-the-cutler-saga/
He was also on Bill Simmons’ podcast a few weeks back and he elaborated further on the situation. That was where I got that information, and if he is wrong, so am I, but he has a pretty good track record.
At the risk of turning this particular thread into an echo chamber, I’ve wondered exactly the same thing about ‘leverage’, but I just assumed I was probably ignorant of some NFL rule.
Since NFL contracts are (mostly) non-guaranteed, I assume the players are attempting to create some type of leverage by threatening to sit. But again, I’m not clear why a team doesn’t just say, “We’ve already had that discussion. You signed a contract. You are still under the contract. Either show up, or sit out and you won’t be paid.”
About disrupting the locker room..well, winning cures all ills. I’ve yet to read the story about a crappy team with great chemistry.
I wonder if there are salary cap implications that force a team’s hand. As an example: Let’s say Cutler sits out, the Broncos don’t pay him, but his salary still counts against the cap. In this scenario the team may not have much freedom to go out and sign a respectable replacement due to a lack of cap space, so they figure the best they can do is trade him and get a replacement in the swap.
I agree with your take generally, Keith, but I’m not sure the Broncos couldn’t get near full value back for Cutler, for the simple reason that a lot of teams will be interested, which will drive up the price. There are probably at least 4 or 5 teams out there that become instant contenders by adding Cutler, and I have to believe they’re going to be fairly competitive in making trade offers. Of course, in order to get something approximating full market value, the Broncos may have to be willing to take a package that helps them a lot more in the long term than in the short term.
Well, I don’t know… trading him to Detroit would seem like an appropriate punishment for his insolence.
Kidding aside, yes, it’s certainly within the Broncos’ power to just keep him and bench him. The issue to me is… I’m not sure, if I were the Broncos, that I wouldn’t WANT to trade Cutler for whatever I can get, because by all accounts he’s had a serious prima-donna complex going back into his college years, and he’s bound to be a headache for any coach.
Cutler is good, but he’s not GREAT — he’s not Brady/Manning/Roethlisberger/Warner good — and if he’s not truly a tip-top-echelon quarterback, it probably isn’t worthwhile to keep his bad attitude on the team. I’d try and shop him for something like someone else’s young QB and a couple picks (Jason Campbell, Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn spring to mind) or just unload him for high picks and sign Byron Leftwich, who is a pretty good quarterback whose main problem has always been staying healthy, as a short term stopgap.
I look forward to your apperances on ESPN.
Also I won’t get too deep into the situation of Jay Cutler, but I agree with you; pretty damn much.
I’m a Bengals fan (stop laughing) and the fact that they would NOT trade Chad Ocho Cinco last year made me so happy. It set a tone for the rest of the team…you don’t want to be here, but guess what? you have to be. You agreed and we’re paying you. I don’t see the Bengals getting into that situation again for a long time because they made Ocho look like an ass when he eventually showed up to camp with his tail between his legs. Granted he sucked last year…but still. Sent a message, and it was the right one.
Keith, I completely agree with you on Cutler. The Broncos should hold strong on this one. And if he doesn’t want to play then bench him, that means he is more unlikely to get any bonuses. Don’t trade him unless you can get something of equal value, and considering Cutler’s recent show of immaturity it is doubtful that receiving value for him is feasable.
its probably easy to say you would bench him as long as you werent the one paying him to sit and pout while the team tries to win.
and then what happens when the broncos go 0-4 with the trade deadline looming? they would just get 50 cents on the dollar then or be forced to start him, which would be a pr disaster and at that point, knowing a little bit about cutlers maturity, he’d probably have no problem tanking it for the rest of the year.
its become a no-win situation for them if they keep him.
I think you are right to a point. As a Bronco fan who owns a Cutler jersey trading him is the last thing I want to see. The problem is that Cutler has created an artificial leverage. First, he has made it clear that he will be a cancer in the clubhouse evidenced by his lies and distortions via his agent regarding this situation. The most recent example is claiming that Bowlen never tried to contact him just because Bowlen had an assistant try to set up the call. That’s disingenuous and he know it, he’s just trying to get out of town at any cost. The other form of artificial leverage is that he has pissed off the owner to the point that Bowlen just wants to be finished with situation. They definitely can make him play for them for the next few years and see if during that time fences can be mended. It doesn’t look like it will happen because Cutler and his agent Cook are shameless in their attempts to get him traded. Just like your daughter throwing a tantrum, if it was a small tantrum this would blow over, but what if your daughter hired a professional tantrum coach and worked you over for several weeks. Maybe you wouldn’t give in, but then you have more fortitude than the Broncos management team.
This might just be a case where Bowlen/McDaniels just don’t want Cutler anymore. To them, recognizing they can only get X% (80) of his value back in a trade, it might be world that Y% (20) loss to be rid of him. They may also think that putting him on the market now – in a very public way, right before the draft – is a way to limit Y. I don’t know if I would do the same, but I can see a point of view.
One of the difficulties in the NFL has to do with the guaranteed vs non-guaranteed money and the salary cap. Some people have said that, as he is under contract, they should just bench him and not pay him. Unfortunately, that’s not an option. If they bench him, they still owe him the guaranteed portion of his deal, minus any appearance penalties and such. And if they cut him, they still owe him his guaranteed portion and take a HUGE cap hit, meaning that a large portion of their salary cap is eaten up for this year. So in that sense, there is some leverage on his part. He can say I’m not going to play, and they have little recourse but to pay him to sit on the bench. That is a bigger waste of resources than trading him for below market-value. It’s a very different system than MLB, so it’s hard to compare the two.
Again, I’m not saying I agree with Cutler. I think both sides screwed up. I’m just trying to show how Cutler might have leveraged and why the situation is more complicated than it seems.
@BSK:
Maybe I’m mistaken, but I think you describe two separate scenarios. If Cutler refuses to play (by not showing up), then he is in violation of his contract and therefore the team should be within their rights to NOT pay him. But if he shows up, you play him. And if he’s serious enough about this to take a dive, then its his own value that he is ultimately hurting. And I just don’t think there’s any way he plays and doesn’t go all out.
Either way, I realize I’m ignoring some other real world implications. In order to follow through on the scenarios above, the Broncos would have to be willing to basically mail in a season to make a point.
Anyhoo, it is an interesting little conundrum.
BSK: While I agree that in the short term it’s a waste of resources to pay him to sit on the bench, there’s a long-term benefit to standing up to Big Baby Jay and his agent – you make it clear to players/agents who think about pulling this stunt in the future that you will not allow them to run your team, and that they’ll suffer more in the long run through lack of playing time, inability to earn bonuses, and regular media coverage of how the player’s tantrum left him on the bench. It’s a good example of credible commitment. In future dealings with players/agents, the Broncos will be at a disadvantage if they let Cutler dictate the terms of his departure.
Trade rumors are mostly pointless, but are a lifeline for the major sports media. It’s perfect for them; drama and speculation dragged along by very few details. Rumors give fans hope that their team will be the one to land the star. There has been so much talk in Chicago and every other town whose team needs a quarter back. “Do you want Jay Cutler?” “What if X team got Jay Cutler?” What if your team got Peyton Manning? Nobody talks about that becuase it will never happen.
This reminds me of the Kobe Bryant trade rumors from two summers ago. The worldwide leader was even reporting “There is a 0% chance Kobe will play for the Lakers next year”. How’d that turn out? I guess 0% > 0. Did the Lakers then or the Broncos now have any tangible reason to trade their best player? No.
@Josh, I have to disagree. I’m also a bengals fan and even though they made a point they gave up two first round picks. I’d rather have those picks than an over the hill Chad.
Brandon,
As a fan who wants them to win now, I agree…I think 2 draft picks would have been better, however I think as an organization it was important to put the foot down and stop this from happening in the future. Every player on the roster knows that the Brown family will no budge on this.
In addition to that, now that CJ had a bad year his entire career hinges on him turning things around. It was a bad year; either he’s done or he gives it everything this year to prove he’s still got it. In the long term, i think the Bengals win.
Judging from the fact that the Broncos think Matt Cassell is an upgrade over Cutler, I don’t think the Broncos’ opinion of Cutler is as high as other teams’ and fans’ opinions of him. Therefore, if they can get what others think is 80 cents on the dollar for him, they’ll probably take it.
Keith and EMC-
Both great points. I was not necessarily pointing out how it SHOULD go, but often how it does go. And, if memory serves me, there is a certain about of time that players can “sit out” and still earn most (or all) of their salary. This happened with Joey Galloway years ago in Seattle, where I believe he sat out 10 games, came back for the last 6 just to retain his salary, then was traded to Dallas. This is was TO tried to do in Philly, but he took a different route (both pre-season and than once he did choose to play). I agree that teams should now cow-tow to it, because of the precedent it sets, but to some extent, it is how business is done in the NFL. The system is very different, and very slanted against players (especially given the average NFL career length). It is the one bargaining chip the players have, since contracts are essentially one-way at-will, where teams can cut a player whenever they choose (given that they can absorb the cap hit) and players have no repercussions.
Speaking of players’ rights, I saw you comment on players using agents to prepare for the draft without sacrificing eligibility. Will this right be extended to football and basketball players? Given the vastly different public and league responses to players going pro early and players dancing in and out of the draft, do you think there is a racial component or something else at play? Also, the cake-loving sociopath line may be your best one of the year thus far. Well played!
The Broncos got two 1st round picks, a 3rd round pick and Kyle Orton from the Bears for Cutler and a 5th round pick. Judging from the fact that New England only got a 2nd round pick for Matt Cassel, who is the QB Denver desired to replace Cutler, and the Pats also had to give up Mike Vrabel in the deal, it seems like Denver got a pretty good haul for Cutler.
Huge haul by the Broncos, all things considered. Cutler had some gaudy numbers and will certainly improve the Bears team, but they are really going make-or-break with a team that is likely more than just one piece away. When did this turn into a football blog? Somehow, Denver did well, and if Cutler gets the deal he wants, I guess he got what he wanted to.
Cutler should not have leverage, but he does. Essentially, its sort of like why the Red Sox had to trade Manny Ramirez. A quarterback is the most important position on the field and in a position of leadership. If he doesn’t care or is not motivated, how well is your team going to do? I say not very well. If he doesn’t care, he’ll play hard, but will he go 100%? By that I mean go to OTAs, study like crazy in meetings, watch extra film? I doubt it. In football, you need your quarterback to do more than just drop back and throw it and if he isn’t willing to do all the little things, the Broncos are better off without him.
Couple that with an inexperienced head coach without much stability or personal power and its a disaster waiting to happen.
If this was ANY OTHER position, Keith, you would be correct. But quarterback is a little more complicated.
Why SHOULDN’T Cutler have leverage? Again, I’m not agreeing with how he handled the situation, but do we really want the balance of power completely tipped towards management/ownership?
Per yesterday’s chat, Wilmer Font’s in Hickory’s starting rotation according to Jason Cole at rangers.scout.com.
Nice, nice, nice.
At least Weeks started off well this season. Hopefully he keeps it up after slumping the next 2 days….