Comments on: Source: No poison pill in Bell offer sheet

By: turbodog

turbodog — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:24:24 +0000

The Saints will match this. Yes, they have a stable of running backs and each one has had injury issues the past 2 years. 1.5 million for a guy who got us valuable first downs at the end of games is a bargain. Not getting those crucial first downs killed us in 2008.
WHO DAT BABYYY

By: .VoxVeritas

.VoxVeritas — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:57:57 +0000

“Why wouldnt a team always insert a poison pill into the contract of an RFA that they wanted? I mean, there doesnt seem to be any risk associated with this at all.”
The risk is declaring open season on your own RFA’s. Also I don’t think that the owners are too eager to piss each other off.

By: Rip

Rip — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:26:31 +0000

Payton doesn’t want Bell, we have 3 better backs already and Bell has issues with his work ethic.
And he doesn’t know which cleats to wear, even after being told multiple times……

By: Mr. Common Sense

Mr. Common Sense — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:17:38 +0000

Saints won’t match. Wearing the wrong cleats in the Super Bowl is not a good idea. Never saw the field again after that faux pas.

By: MasterShake

MasterShake — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:06:04 +0000

msw141 says:
March 16, 2010 9:18 PM
“hey could somebody here explain what a poison pill is?”
I would love to but you are too late.
Best Wishes,
Corey Haim

By: pdxbolt4life

pdxbolt4life — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:02:16 +0000

Poison pill….collusion….tampering….Man I love a uncapped year!!! All we’re missing is a little Rooney rule action!!!

By: robothero

robothero — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:01:45 +0000

@Gabrielsdad237 That is incorrect. The contract was that if he was not the highest paid lineman in a given year, the entire contract would be guaranteed. With Walter Jones there as well, this was impossible for Seattle.

By: SF Saints Fan

SF Saints Fan — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:58:23 +0000

Good pickup by the Eagles. They get a back with a Super Bowl Championship ring and a decent backup for $1.7 million for one year and possible incentives that take it above $2 million. No way the Saints match the offer.

By: The Devil

The Devil — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:44:51 +0000

Rocman -
really, No risk… it is called GUARANTEED money. Do you think the team or ownership would be financially successful giving guaranteed contracts to a bunch of players that may or may not work out? Really, people on this site should study or learn about financial terms like RETURN ON INVESTMENT (ROI)

By: The Devil

The Devil — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:33:57 +0000

there still can be poison pills in uncapped year.
We are dealing with MILLIONS of dollars here and some owners simply do not have the stomach to swallow that type of coin to retain a player -therefore the terminology in a contract that would create an ‘uncomfortable’ situation could be a poison pill
The effect of poison is quickened by a salary cap, but still there are ways to work a contract and poach the player

By: BroadStreetBully9286

BroadStreetBully9286 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:14:58 +0000

A poison pill is not just limited to the NFL; some corporations have a poison pill agreement in place to dissuade takeovers. Many employment contracts also contain versions of the poison pill.
So alas, this is not an invention of the NFL, Mike Florio, or whatever else is attributed to in these comments.

By: SayItAin'tSoFlorio

SayItAin'tSoFlorio — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:03:44 +0000

Rocman: The “risk” is that another team does the same thing to yours in retribution. Seattle got its payback for the Vikings signing RFA Steve Hutchinson by getting RFA Nate Burleson from Minnesota. In reality, Minnesota got the best of that deal, but that’s not the point.

By: rocman101

rocman101 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:39:02 +0000

Alright so now I have another question. Why wouldnt a team always insert a poison pill into the contract of an RFA that they wanted? I mean, there doesnt seem to be any risk associated with this at all.

By: PCinOz

PCinOz — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:50:36 +0000

Expecting a poison pill in a one year contract to be effective is ludcirous anyway, especially in an uncapped year and for a player who would’nt be getting mega dollars.

By: SayItAin'tSoFlorio

SayItAin'tSoFlorio — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:39:36 +0000

DallasFan in NY: You would be right, unless the NFL and NFLPA agree to a new CBA which includes a salary cap in future years. Then it would come into play. Since the teams have no idea whether that will actually happen, they can’t take the chance.

By: drumbug71

drumbug71 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:29:17 +0000

No poison pill? That’s proof of collusion….

By: msw141

msw141 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:18:43 +0000

hey could somebody here explain what a poison pill is?

By: DallasFan in NY

DallasFan in NY — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:15:15 +0000

Poison pills make absolutely no sense in an uncapped year. While their designed to have a team not match, there more designed to screw with the teams salary structure pertaining to the cap. No cap, no pill!

By: Eagles4life

Eagles4life — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:14:59 +0000

The Poison Pill is actually a pill that will make all food taste disgusting to Andy Reid.
I think the Bell offer match comes down to whether the saints believe in Hamilton’s ability to replace him. They are both pretty much the same type of back…
Hamilton will be cheaper but who cares in uncapped year…

By: jan van flac

jan van flac — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:09:38 +0000

Doesn’t the NFL review all contracts?
You’d think that they would invalidate any contract which involves a geographical poison pill on the basis of bad faith.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:59:15 +0000

A poison pill is a provision in the contract that the Saints can’t possibly meet, guaranteeing that the Saints can’t match, guaranteeing that he’s gonna be an Eagle.

By: Cheesewizer

Cheesewizer — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:58:16 +0000

@rocman101 - Best/First example I know of was Curtis Martin. Here's a decent write-up - along with some discussion about the Jets being interested in Miles Austin: http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/04/will_the_new_york_jets_insert.html

By: Euclid34

Euclid34 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:56:01 +0000

Poison pill would be language int he contract that says Bell gets a kazillion million trillon dollar bonus if heplay more than 4 games in New Orleans next year. Only if NO matches the contract and he becomes a saint, would that trigger it.
See hutchinson, steve

By: PhillyBen

PhillyBen — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:55:22 +0000

They already have two running backs with different styles of play (and a lot of money invested in) and a potential goal line back in Lynell Hamilton so why would they want Bell around?

By: Bwa Ha Ha

Bwa Ha Ha — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:54:53 +0000

# rocman101 says: March 16, 2010 8:34 PM
Can someone fill me in on what a poison pill is?
Cyanide………. No, actually it is a contract clause that the team wanting to retain a player can’t meet with any practicality.
Example, Bell has to start four games in Philadelphia in 2010
………….. poison pill for N.O. to match

By: Favrelous

Favrelous — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:54:27 +0000

I also wonder a poison pill is, it must have been created by some type of football genius.

By: robothero

robothero — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:54:19 +0000

How could Mike Bell become multiple eagles?

By: Vet735

Vet735 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:54:06 +0000

rocman,
it means that Andy Reid will commit suicide if the Saints match the offer.

By: mustbechris

mustbechris — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:53:45 +0000

Florio DOES read the comments after all, I guess. Thank God he’s not Tatum Bell.
rocman101, it’s basically an offer sheet that has provisions written into it that makes it impossible for the original team to be able to match the offer. The Vikings did it to the Seahawks when they made an offer to Steve Hutchinson, and then the Seahawks returned the favor by signing Nate Burleson to the same contract. For instance, there would be a provision that says that if Mike Bell “played for a team in Louisiana”, his salary would rise to a level that would be impractical for the Saints to afford.
Basically, the Eagles felt no need to do that because the Saints tendered him at a non-draft pick level, which essentially says they would keep him if nobody else made an offer, but if someone makes an offer they probably won’t bother to match it. Doesn’t make sense to pay almost 2 mill for a 3rd string RB. He’ll be an Eagle I would imagine.

By: Gabrielsdad237

Gabrielsdad237 — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:52:44 +0000

A poison pill is language written into a RFA contract that makes it almost impossible for the original team to match. Example was the Vikings offer to Steve Hutchinson. It said if he played more than 2 games a year in the state of Washington he had to be the highest paid OG.