Skip to content

Belichick talks about roster exempt deadline

Bill Belichick was asked about the rules regarding the roster exempt list on Sunday morning, and his answers on the topic only served to raise more questions.

Belichick was asked by Mike Reiss of ESPNBoston.com if Sunday was the deadline for any team to send a letter to a player (in this case guard Logan Mankins) to declare a team’s right to put the player on the roster exempt list.

“I’m not sure, but I don’t think it affects any of our players. I’m not sure the
exact date on that,” Belichick said.

Belichick was asked if it would affect Mankins, and Belichick simply said, “He’s not under contract.”

It’s quite possible Belichick was just being purposefully vague, not including Mankins as one of “our players.”  Mankins’ agent said Friday he expected to receive the letter soon, just like Marcus McNeill and Vincent Jackson did in San Diego.  It appears Mankins’ agent may have misread the Patriots’ intentions.

Frankly, we’re trying to track down how Belichick’s answers coalesce with the information coming out of San Diego

We’ll follow up when we know more.

Permalink 13 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, New England Patriots, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors
13 Responses to “Belichick talks about roster exempt deadline”
  1. YourJustJealous says: Aug 15, 2010 11:30 AM

    Be careful. Be very very careful Mr. Hoodie. You just might get fined and lose another first round draft pick if you “misinterpet” the rules like last time.

  2. GRpatriot says: Aug 15, 2010 11:47 AM

    Good user name! what he said is, “He is not under contract.” Don’t think there’s much to misconstrew? He basically didn’t answer the question, which is classic BB!
    Somehow, someway a poster will (sooner than later) figure out a way to show how it’s cheating?
    Mankins hasn’t signed his tender! Fact. He is not under contract, Fact His agent is convinced that the Patriots are going to get nasty…Not a fact. They might not even send Logan a letter just to prove his agent is a little more than zealous? They can always cut somebody, if they need a roster spot. At some point they’ll need to get to 53 anyway!

  3. ampats says: Aug 15, 2010 12:14 PM

    There is nothing else to track down. Mankins is not under contract and acted like a 12 year old calling out Bob Kraft.
    Thankfully BB is not a loud mouth trash talking HC who puts his foot in his mouth every time he opens it like the coach whost team rents space in the New Giants Stadium..
    On another note, I have never been one to comment on Rex being fat but after watching Hard Knocks did he really have lap band surgery? If so, he should be looking for a refund.

  4. Blackheld says: Aug 15, 2010 12:23 PM

    If Mankins isn’t under contract to the Patriots, then Mankins isn’t an NFL “player”, and thus is not a member of the NFLPA.
    So if Mankins isn’t a member of the NFLPA, then any agreement regarding restricted free agency between the NFLPA and the league, and thus the Patriots, doesn’t apply to him.
    Yet, the NFLPA and the league are, in effect, conspiring to deny Mankins the right to sign with any NFL team, and play football in the NFL.
    Eerily similar on the surface to baseball’s reserve clause, which Curt Flood challenged in court, and as we all know…
    Curt Flood won his case.
    So why not take a shot? Without restricted free agency, the owners are SOL…welcome to the NBA.

  5. TryTheVeal says: Aug 15, 2010 12:46 PM

    I looked at a calendar today and it said 2010….It reminded me how long ago 2004 was……

  6. BigBear123 says: Aug 15, 2010 12:51 PM

    Without restricted free agency, the owners are SOL…and will lockout the players.

  7. GRpatriot says: Aug 15, 2010 1:31 PM

    WOW! Mankins is making the decisions here!
    He choose not to sign his tender. There isn’t any ambiguity here. No conspiracy. The guy felt slighted, real or imagined???
    They offered him a deal and a chance to sign both tenders. One for 3.3 mil and the other half that figure. He wants to stay hame and punch cows, that’s his choice.
    This story is about a letter he didn’t receive. Warning him to report or they can get a roster exeption. He is not under contract, but still gets full consideration from the Players Union.
    What are you guys smoking and can I have some?

  8. Steve W. says: Aug 15, 2010 1:36 PM

    Nice try blackheld, but your entire argument is based on in incorrect initial statement. Mankins is a “player” and a member of the NFLPA, and he will remain so until he retires. He simply is not under contract or on an active roster right now. As for how the NFL is conspiring to keep him from signing with any team, the same could be said for the draft in any sport.

  9. LaxMojo says: Aug 15, 2010 2:08 PM

    Blackheld, The Patriots still own exclusive “rights” to Mankins. He’s just not under contract. As a result, he can’t sign with anyone else.

  10. robsterNY says: Aug 15, 2010 2:12 PM

    @ ampats: Jets dont pay rent there …in case your not up on current events the stadium was built and is co-owned by both clubs…no renters here. Oh!..and bring it ..on game day!

  11. Bossman says: Aug 15, 2010 2:24 PM

    Mankin’s agent has given him very bad advice. Who the hell turns down a contract for an NFL guard north of 35 million dollars? What has he got now? Nothing! He is sitting at home fuming while his rock-throwing agent rolls out the nonsense.
    The truth is the Patriots are a better team with Mankins(everybody knows that). But because the Saints overpaid for their best guard does not mean that others must follow that same mistake.
    Truthfully, I think Mankins is getting the shit-end of the stick in this one.

  12. Mad Campah says: Aug 15, 2010 4:15 PM

    Dummies!
    A roster exemption is used when a player who is under contract does not show up for what ever reason. Mankins is not currently under contract thus he is not on the Pats roster. Therefore Pats do not need a roster exemption for him.
    There is nothing to construe from Belichick’s statement, he merely stated a fact and assumed that the press was smart enough to understand what it means.

  13. BostonTym says: Aug 20, 2010 7:50 PM

    “…he merely stated a fact and assumed that the press was smart enough to understand what it means.”
    Wait – I thought BB was smart. How could he possibly assume that?
    Cheers, BostonTim

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!