Skip to content

Bisciotti’s beef with Bears went a bit too far

Steve Bisciotti AP

We’ve got a ton of respect for Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti, a truly self-made man who built his financial empire and then purchased an NFL team.  As an owner, he knows what he doesn’t know — and he knows to hire good football people and give them the ability to do their thing, with minimal interference.

But the respect we have for Bisciotti makes his remarks regarding the failed round-one trade with the Bears even more disappointing.  He called out the franchise and the family that owns it for failing to compensate the Ravens for a trade that failed happen because the Bears didn’t call it in to the league.

I’m disappointed in the Bears and the McCaskeys,” Bisciotti said. “It is in my opinion a deviation from their great legacy.  They concluded that their heartfelt and admirable apology was sufficient for our loss.”

First, the Ravens didn’t “lose” anything.  They wanted Jimmy Smith.  And they got Jimmy Smith.  They lost nothing.

Second, calling out the McCaskeys by name serves no purpose.  Just last month, Bisciotti lamented the public squabbling of the owners and the players.  “I’m embarrassed that we’re fighting over money, just like you would be embarrassed if you and your wife were fighting over money in public,” Bisciotti said.  “It’s an embarrassing topic to have to get into.”

Nevertheless, Bisciotti has opted to fight over trade compensation in public with one of his partners.  The fact that Bisciotti stepped so far out of character could be interpreted as a sign of the stress that he and other owners are feeling as the stutter-step lockout enters its eighth week, as the antitrust litigation heads to the Eighth Circuit, and as the sport seemingly has slid firmly into the eighth level of Hell.

Permalink 64 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Baltimore Ravens, Chicago Bears, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
64 Responses to “Bisciotti’s beef with Bears went a bit too far”
  1. kevo126 says: Apr 30, 2011 2:24 PM

    “First, the Ravens didn’t “lose” anything. They wanted Jimmy Smith. And they got Jimmy Smith. They lost nothing.”

    apparently other teams were also in trade talks with the ravens but they had a deal with the bears. so how can you say that????? you dont know what they lost.

  2. txchief says: Apr 30, 2011 2:30 PM

    Mike, your skills as a psychoanalyst are limited.

  3. voxveritass says: Apr 30, 2011 2:30 PM

    Maybe Biscotti should go back to competing against himself for the services of Ray Lewis and asking the league not to have to play the Steelers in prime time.
    I don’t think he stepped out of character as much as had it revealed.

  4. iamtalkingsolistenandlearn says: Apr 30, 2011 2:33 PM

    I highly doubt that just because Bisciotti voiced his displeasure with the Bears publicly has anything to do with “stress” related to the labor issue.
    It is very apparent that you are so behind the players that you fail to notice the brown smudge on your nose.

    Maybe, just maybe Bisciotti called out the McCaskeys because they were the ones who decided not to compensate the Ravens. If so, then he has every right to call them out.

    You say the Ravens lost “nothing” is dead wrong. The Ravens wanted Smith and they still got him, but so what? The deal was to receive a 4th round pick. They both agreed to the deal, but the Bears didn’t finalize due to an error. Just because the Ravens still got their man, doesnt mean they didnt “lose anything”, they LOST the 4th round pick that was promised!!!!!!!!

    Even though the Bears will not be forced to pay up by Goodell, it would still be the right thing to do. If an elderly lady falls down in the street, I don’t have to help her up. But I’m going to do it because it’s the right damn thing to do!

    That’s a quality that is lacking in your precious players. The ability to do the right thing!

  5. hobartbaker says: Apr 30, 2011 2:38 PM

    Bisciotti dipped in whine.

  6. chadmurdigan says: Apr 30, 2011 2:39 PM

    Instead of calling out Chicago, this guy and all his fellow owners should be calling out the damn lawyers to get a deal done with the bargaining agreement.

  7. harmcityhomer says: Apr 30, 2011 2:41 PM

    They lost the trade the Bears admitted they agreed to, and said they called in but did not. The fact that the name on the card was still available does not mean there was no harm or foul here.

  8. stuartscottslefteye says: Apr 30, 2011 2:42 PM

    “First, the Ravens didn’t “lose” anything. They wanted Jimmy Smith. And they got Jimmy Smith. They lost nothing.”

    —————————————————

    Uhhhhhhhh, yes, they lost a 4th round draft pick.

  9. jo3jo says: Apr 30, 2011 2:43 PM

    “First , the Ravens didn’t “lose” anything. They wanted Jimmy Smith. And they got Jimmy Smith. They lost nothing.”

    Actually according to multiple reports, the Ravens were considering an offer from another team to trade down before the Bears came to them with their 4th round offer. So yeah, they did lose something. They lost the deal the Bears enticed them away from. Sure, they came away with Smith. But you are kidding yourself if you think you can monopolize a teams pick time on draft day and not be costing them anything. There are probably a dozen teams calling about every pick through the first 5 rounds, feeling teams out about what they might be willing to do. The Ravens accepted what they thought was the best offer, but whose to say what they would have done had the Bears not monopolized them in this way. I think you probably should stick to reporting the stories rather than analysis of whether folks got what they wanted, because you are missing the mark here.

  10. tombreck says: Apr 30, 2011 2:44 PM

    Could be the stress of living in a sewer like Balt.

  11. ArtModellsPimp says: Apr 30, 2011 2:47 PM

    Ozzie screwed up by putting his 1st round pick in the hands of another team.

    It happens…but it couldn’t have happened to a more deserving team.

    Get over it. Move on. LOL…..

  12. takingbacksundays5 says: Apr 30, 2011 2:49 PM

    “First, the Ravens didn’t “lose” anything. They wanted Jimmy Smith. And they got Jimmy Smith. They lost nothing.”

    Wrong. They lost the Bears 4th round pick as had been agreed to by both parties. The Ravens and Bears had a deal, the Ravens called it in and the Bears didn’t. The Ravens had no way of knowing this, hence getting “jumped” by the Chiefs. It was handled terribly by the Bears, and they should have been forced to give their 4th round pick to the Ravens as it had been agreed to.

  13. qj1984 says: Apr 30, 2011 2:50 PM

    They lost a draft spot. You do know that teams make trades to move up one spot. The Ravens did it with the Browns in 2006. It cost them a 4th round pick. Last year the Pats wanted a 3rd to swap spots in round 1.

  14. handsatlanta says: Apr 30, 2011 2:53 PM

    Gotta disagree with you Mike. A man is as good as his word and the Bears didn’t live up to theirs. Bisciotti has every right to express that.

  15. Entropy says: Apr 30, 2011 2:54 PM

    The bear should have at least offered a 7th rounder in compensation. The lack of anything tangible is unacceptable, and Bisciotti was right to get his nose out of joint.

    If the Bears made this sort of token offer, and he still turned them down, then I would say that he has a point.

  16. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 2:57 PM

    The NFL didn’t award the Bears a draft compensation pick after the tragic death of Gaines Adams (who the Bears gave up a 2nd round pick for “damaged goods”), so why would the NFL step in on a trade that never was official?

    This is a classic case of a guy wanting something for nothing. If anything, the Bears wound up doing him a favor because he’ll now have to pay a little less guaranteed signing bonus money because Smith dropped a slot.

    There’s no room for cry-baby’s in the NFL, and that’s exactly what Biscotti is coming off being. You’d think that a guy with that kind of money and success would be more of a man about it and simply accept the Bears very public apology and move on.

    Geeze Louise… we’re only talking about a very low 4th round draft pick. You’d think from Biscotti’s incessant whining somebody jobbed him out of a top 10 pick in the first round.

  17. smellmyface says: Apr 30, 2011 2:59 PM

    You Balitimorons are so stupid. So the Bears should give the Ravens picks for a pick they never got. If Baltimore wants the picks they agreed to then they shouldnt have used that pick on Smith

  18. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 3:01 PM

    Entropy… the Bears don’t have a 7th round pick in this years draft because they burned it in the supplemental draft last summer. Even if they did though it would have been just two picks ahead of “Mr. Irrelevant” at the very end of the draft.

    The Bears owe the Ravens NOTHING, because the Ravens still got their man and saved a little signing bonus money because he wound up dropping a slot.

    The Bears should send the rights to QB Todd Collins to the Ravens as a gesture of good faith! Nothing more.

  19. skoobyfl says: Apr 30, 2011 3:10 PM

    Are the cannabalistic owners starting to turn on each other ??

  20. snnyjcbs says: Apr 30, 2011 3:12 PM

    You would think having a background as a Lawyer you would not assume as much as you do at this site. You know nothing about what the Ravens potentially lost as you know nothing of the other trade offers they could have turned down to take the Bears offer.

    You make a deal as the Bears did and because of your negligence you blow the deal up. As a man you make it right. The Ravens owner hit it right on the money and other teams around the NFL will watch their backs when dealing with the Bears in the future, me?, I would not even take their call.

  21. edgarpoe2 says: Apr 30, 2011 3:19 PM

    purdueman says:

    The Bears owe the Ravens NOTHING, because the Ravens still got their man and saved a little signing bonus money because he wound up dropping a slot.
    ———————————-
    Integrity is important to me, whether it is on or off the field. If you cannot keep your word, that says something.

    The Bears should send the rights to QB Todd Collins to the Ravens as a gesture of good faith! Nothing more.
    —————————–
    The Ravens should settle for nothing less than 2 future first-rounders. ;)

  22. larryfitzgerald4mvp says: Apr 30, 2011 3:22 PM

    What a joke. Ozzie Newsome is a hypocrite in this situation, and apparently he’s shared that opinion with Bisciotti.

    The Bears owe the Ravens nothing, because the Ravens felt they owed Minnesota nothing in 2003. What comes around goes around, plain and simple.

  23. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 3:32 PM

    I don’t get Riscotti’s classly act of dragging the Bears owner into the argument. The Bears are currently owned by George Halas’s Granddaughter and she’s over 90 years old. I kindof doubt she even knows what day of the week it is, much less what happened on this non-trade.

    The one thing that the Bears ownership has done right is that over the past decade they’ve turned over all of the day to day football operations to career football people, and have stopped running the franchise “on the cheap” (Bear founder Papa Halas was well known for squeezing the buffalo nickels in his pocket until the poor buffalo finally had to take a dump).

    Bear ownership had NOTHING to do with this screw up.

  24. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 3:54 PM

    snnyjcbs says:
    Apr 30, 2011 3:12 PM

    You make a deal as the Bears did and because of your negligence you blow the deal up. As a man you make it right. The Ravens owner hit it right on the money and other teams around the NFL will watch their backs when dealing with the Bears in the future, me?, I would not even take their call.
    ********************
    snnyjcbs… you need not worry; don’t waste the rest of your life sitting by the phone waiting for the Bears to call!

    If you had a clue, this won’t have ANY impact on the Bears ability to trade with anyone (except for perhaps the Ravens only because of their spoiled brat owner), because no GM is going to bite off their nose in spite of their face and pass up a deal that he thinks will help his club regardless of whether is slithery Al Davis or Bears GM Jerry Angelo.

  25. t1mmy10 says: Apr 30, 2011 3:57 PM

    if the ravens were dumb enough not to question why they were still on the clock for 2 minutes and the trade a “done deal” then they don’t deserve anything.

  26. thephantomstranger says: Apr 30, 2011 4:10 PM

    If the Bears are supposed to give the Ravens their 4th-round pick, the Ravens better give the Vikings some compensation for what they pulled in 2003. With inflation, I’d say that probably equals their next two first-round picks.

  27. firethorn1001 says: Apr 30, 2011 4:24 PM

    ‘The fact that Bisciotti stepped so far out of character could be interpreted ….’

    I see you’ve stepped out into being a part time psychiatrist now.

  28. ravensfan4life52 says: Apr 30, 2011 4:25 PM

    I’m sorry we didn’t lose anything? we lost a 4th round pick because the Bears management is incompetent. I would be pissed too. yeah according to the rules the Bears don’t own the Ravens anything, but in principal they should make it up to the Ravens with a pick. maybe not a 4th but they do owe us something more than an apology. But i guess the important thing we learned from this experience is to not trade with the incompetent bears front office.

  29. ravenunitas says: Apr 30, 2011 4:45 PM

    Hey…Smellmyass or face.
    This Baltimoron would love to meet you and teach you
    how the business world works.

    If a trade was promised then a pick should have been awarded to the Ravens.
    If you think differently,then you are obviously letting your jealously of the Ravens get in the way.

    I expect comments like that from idiots that are from Cleveland but OK …Whatever.

  30. ravensfan4life52 says: Apr 30, 2011 4:54 PM

    and the difference between what happened with us and the bears and us and the vikings as far as i can remember is that the Ravens backed out at the last minute with minnesota while the bears kept telling us they already called when they didn’t. it was a simple fix for the bears all they had to do was pick up the phone and call again, but they aren’t smart enough to figure that out. but they can keep the pick they need it more than we do.

  31. snaponrules says: Apr 30, 2011 5:01 PM

    To all the whiney raven babies. What exactly was your payment to the vikings when you cost them a pick in the same scenario?
    I believe Ozzies quote was “It’s not a deal until the call goes through” How many draft choices did they give the viking “on Principal” for shafting them?

    The only mistake the bears made was not using the same lame excuse the ravens used when they shafted the vikings, ” We tried to call but the line was busy”

  32. Deb says: Apr 30, 2011 5:22 PM

    Can’t believe you keep forcing me to defend the Ravens …

    The Ravens and Bears executed a trade, which the Bears were required to call in. They didn’t. It’s called lying and cheating. The Ravens are owed a fourth-round draft pick, which isn’t nothing. The Ravens did not do the same thing to the Vikes, but if they had, it wouldn’t have anything to do with this. Nor does this have anything to do with the labor dispute. Bisciotti hasn’t done anything except react understandably to his organization being blatantly cheated. If Goodell were doing his job, he would have awarded the Ravens the pick before the fourth round. If your son stole a backpack from another child, would you allow him to keep it and chastise his father for calling you out? Get real.

  33. Deb says: Apr 30, 2011 5:25 PM

    @snaponrules …

    The Jags deliberately tied up the line so they could get Leftwich. The Bears never made the call. There is a difference between the NFL using bush-league technology that allows something like that to occur … and a team deliberately reneging on a deal. I don’t like the Ravens anymore than anyone else. But this was dirty-dealing.

  34. kevpft says: Apr 30, 2011 5:40 PM

    You guys saying that the Ravens are “owed” a 4th-round pick are idiots. The Bears agreed to a deal, but no merchandise ever exchanged hands.

    The Bears didn’t get the slot they were trying to trade up to get, so they lost their half of the deal too. They could have been making other deals instead of this one, so since both teams got the players they wanted at that moment and both teams missed out on chances to be making other deals, they both gained and lost EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

    So why should the Bears have to pay for something the didn’t receive?

    The other argument is that the Bears should be “man” enough to offer some compensation. Seems to me that, if you’re going to be that way about it, it’s up to the two “men” to work it out, not you bunch of talkers. And how “manly” is it for this Ravens exec to whine publicly about it? That seems every bit as unseemly and “un-manly” as any supposed lack of appropriate gestures from the Bears.

    So both parties got what they were after in the moment (the players), both lost what they were after in the moment (the Bears, the higher draft slot which would have guaranteed they got the player they wanted; the Ravens, a later draft pick in payment for that), and both look a bit dopey in the public eye afterward.

    It’s a draw. Move on.

  35. ravensfan4life52 says: Apr 30, 2011 5:52 PM

    @Deb

    wow i never though that i would see you defend the ravens. i think hell just froze over. hahaha

  36. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 5:56 PM

    How many times has a player taken virtually at the end of round 4 ever really made a difference? That’s all the Ravens lost out on; it’s like going to the bread outlet store and forgetting to get your card punched. Ho-hum.

  37. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 6:01 PM

    This isn’t a case of the Bears “lying and cheating”; it’s simply a case of an aging GM having a brain fart, that’s all.

    You Raven fans keep implying that there was some sort of premeditated malice on the part of the Bears, but I’ll guarantee you that Angelo’s heart sank into the pit of his stomach once he realized the error and saw that Kansas City was now on the clock.

    The whole reason that the Bears tried to trade up with the Ravens was to get ahead of Kansas City, who the Bears thought were going to take the Jewish Hammer, but they didn’t and the Bears of course wound up with him anyways.

  38. dabears72 says: Apr 30, 2011 6:02 PM

    I was gonna play those winning lottery numbers but didn’t. The lottery owes me money cause I was gonna play those numbers.

  39. edgarpoe2 says: Apr 30, 2011 6:06 PM

    ravensfan4life52 says:
    and the difference between what happened with us and the bears and us and the vikings as far as i can remember is that the Ravens backed out at the last minute with minnesota while the bears kept telling us they already called when they didn’t. it was a simple fix for the bears all they had to do was pick up the phone and call again, but they aren’t smart enough to figure that out. but they can keep the pick they need it more than we do.
    ————————————
    Your memory serves you wrong. Jacksonville took advantage of the system back then and clogged the lines where Baltimore was unable to get through. They kept getting busy signals. The Ravens really wanted Leftwich and had to settle on Boller. So we know how that went. I’m not sure if anything was done to the Jags that year. Karma was evident in that case though as the Ravens got Suggs in the first round and Jacksonville got an average QB that took them nowhere for their efforts.

    As far as Chicago is concerned they reneged on a deal. Plain and simple. They admitted it. They only thing they didn’t do is honor the deal.

    For those of you that argue with this, do a google search and you will see.

  40. momsasaynt says: Apr 30, 2011 6:12 PM

    They ALL need to shut their pieholes and get a damn

    deal done owners and players both.

  41. ravensfan4life52 says: Apr 30, 2011 6:22 PM

    @edgarpoe2

    maybe that was it. i don’t really remember it was a while ago. but the point is the deal with the ravens and the vikings didn’t fall through because the ravens lied about making a phone call.

  42. Deb says: Apr 30, 2011 6:35 PM

    @ravensfan4life52 …

    I often say nice things about Ozzie and some of your players … just not Suggs :)

  43. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 6:41 PM

    ravensfanforlife… the Bears DID NOT renege on any deal, because no deal was completed and then approved by the league; simple as that!

    Bears GM Angelo looked like he had just been told his dog died once he realized the Bears mistake and saw Kansas City rush to get their pick in before the Ravens could figure out what went wrong, because Angelo was positive that the Chiefs would take his guy (which of course they didn’t, nor did they take the Ravens guy either).

  44. pooflingingmonkey says: Apr 30, 2011 6:44 PM

    Pretty simple stuff here…

    1) The Ravens and Bears make a verbal agreement on a trade. Ozzie Newsome hangs up the phone knowing he now had another 4th round pick.

    2) The Bears failed on their end (and admitted it) to complete the deal. Now Newsome doesn’t have what the Bears agreed to give him.

    The fact that each team still got they wanted is immaterial, and the Bears should have made good on their end of the deal.

  45. ravensfan4life52 says: Apr 30, 2011 6:58 PM

    @Deb

    i love suggs. hahaha he is ugly though, and he does talk a lot.

  46. mswravens says: Apr 30, 2011 7:10 PM

    @Deb – once again, we don’t agree on everything, but definitely have much respect for your opinions.

    To Vikings fans: you’re comparing apples to oranges…and if you continue to do so while blaming the Ravens, than perhaps you are simply dumb enough to deserve what happened to you in whatever year that was…

    …but I still maintain that we are owed nothing. We have every right to be pissed at the Bears, but they did not call the league as required, so there was no trade. Period. Unfortunately, I agree that as the clock ticked down, Ozzie should have taken a different deal if the Bears weren’t closing the deal with the Ravens! We just need to shut up, move on, not deal with Angelo again, and continue to kick their asses every time we play them!!!

  47. barklikeadog says: Apr 30, 2011 7:16 PM

    Wasn’t Unitas a Colt, you DF ravenunitas? and about the business world, u call stealing a team from adoring fans right? I think not! Thanks for the shout out though. I hope every time something bad happens to you POS’s you think of C-Town!

  48. purdueman says: Apr 30, 2011 7:24 PM

    mswravens… the Bears play the Ravens on average, what? once every 5 years or so (if that). By the time they next meet this nonsense will have I’m sure all have blown over, and besides, I seriously doubt that the players on either team give a damn about this little snafu.

  49. ravenunitas says: Apr 30, 2011 8:30 PM

    Cleveland Sucks

  50. rockinron2 says: Apr 30, 2011 8:30 PM

    Those of you who say they had a verbal agreement and should honor it need to look at what Ozzie did in 2003. He had a verbal agreement with Minny. He “supposedly” couldn’t get through on the phone. He didn’t try to call anyone else at the league or even go to the desk where you turn in your draft card to notify them or Minny that there was a problem. So Minny thought they had a deal (verbal agreement) and lost thier spot when Balt didn’t follow through. The reason for it not going through doesn’t really matter (as long as not intentional and we don’t know that in either case), the end result is the same, but worse for Minny. They lost the spot and the player they wanted and the rest of the trade.

    Add to that their own GM saying there isn’t a trade until both teams notify the league.

    So until Balt “mans up” and sticks to their verbal agreement, they should STFU. They never even apologized. Such Hypocryties. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

  51. ravenunitas says: Apr 30, 2011 8:34 PM

    The only time we think of C-town is when we flush.

  52. philtration says: Apr 30, 2011 10:40 PM

    Ravens.
    Biggest whiners in the NFL.

  53. ravensfan4life52 says: May 1, 2011 2:32 AM

    @purdueman i didn’t say they reneged. i said they were idiots who are too stupid to just pick up a phone and call the league to make sure the deal went through. i also called them incompetent. and if they aren’t idiots and incompetent then they are liars.

    but after reading everything you’ve posted on here it doesn’t really matter what you think about what i’ve said because it’s obvious that you’re and idiot too. maybe you should apply for a front office job with the bears.

    lets see former 4th round draft picks:

    Shaun phillips
    brandon marshall
    jared allen
    elvis dumervill
    marion barber
    brandon jacobs
    steve largest
    andre reed
    kyle orton
    Le’ron McClain
    ray edwards
    asante samuel
    david garrard
    larry foote
    brandon stokely
    derrick mason
    chuck cecil
    cris carter
    rich gannon
    and those are just off of the top of my head i’m sure there are plenty more.

    there is plenty of good talent to be found think before you speak and if you’re an idiot or just don’t know what you’re talking about then please just don’t speak. but hey i guess i just can’t expect much more from someone from purdue.

  54. ravensfan4life52 says: May 1, 2011 2:36 AM

    oh and @barklikeadog

    unitas meant more to baltimore then you can imagine. so shut your mouth. that’s all his name shows. and baltimore didn’t steal a team the browns obviously just finally realized what cleveland was, the same thing that people are starting to realize the bear’s front office is. and your name barklikeadog, that’s all you can do bark, you aint got no bite. i bet if i ever saw you on the street you would just beg like a dog. what a punk

  55. truthserum4u says: May 1, 2011 2:50 AM

    ravensfan4life52 says:
    Apr 30, 2011 4:54 PM

    and the difference between what happened with us and the bears and us and the vikings as far as i can remember is that the Ravens backed out at the last minute with minnesota while the bears kept telling us they already called when they didn’t. it was a simple fix for the bears all they had to do was pick up the phone and call again, but they aren’t smart enough to figure that out.

    ————————————————-

    First off, the Ravens didn’t back out of the deal, they also didn’t complete a call to the league. As far as picking up the phone again, sort of like how Ozzie didn’t bother to call the Vikings back and tell them he couldn’t get through to the league.

    Deb says:
    Apr 30, 2011 5:22 PM

    The Ravens and Bears executed a trade, which the Bears were required to call in. They didn’t. It’s called lying and cheating. The Ravens are owed a fourth-round draft pick, which isn’t nothing. The Ravens did not do the same thing to the Vikes, but if they had, it wouldn’t have anything to do with this.

    [It’s the exact same thing Deb! I’m sorry, not exactly the same, the Bears at least appologized and didn’t offer up a smart @$$ remark as Newsome did. And it has everything to do with this when an owner and a GM come out and bad mouth another organization for doing something they themselves did in the past. It’s called being a hyocrite Deb. They’re holding another organization to a higher standard than they do their own.]

    Bisciotti hasn’t done anything except react understandably to his organization being blatantly cheated.

    [You don’t know this was intentional on the Bears part anymore than you know the line was busy when the Ravens made the call in 2003.]

    If Goodell were doing his job, he would have awarded the Ravens the pick before the fourth round. If your son stole a backpack from another child, would you allow him to keep it and chastise his father for calling you out? Get real.

    [Goodell couldn’t do it because, as Angelo has pointed out, it was a mistake inwhich no rules were broken.]

    ———————————————-
    mswravens says:
    Apr 30, 2011 7:10 PM

    To Vikings fans: you’re comparing apples to oranges…and if you continue to do so while blaming the Ravens, than perhaps you are simply dumb enough to deserve what happened to you in whatever year that was…

    [Seriously? You claim it’s apples to oranges and then you go on to admit you don’t even know what year the Ravens shafted the Vikings in the same manner? Talk about being “simply dumb”!]

    And for all of you claiming Jacksonville was blocking the lines preventing Baltimore from reaching the league: I have some Urban Myths I want to share with you.

    They had cell phones in 2003 people. The Ravens couldn’t have reached someone from the league via cell phone to say the line was busy? They couldn’t call the Vikings back to say we couldn’t reach the league, you should treat the pick like it’s still yours? They couldn’t even have the decency to say they were sorry for the mishap?

    It’s called karma!

  56. ravensfan4life52 says: May 1, 2011 2:51 AM

    but overall the Ravens had a solid draft and the bears needed the pick more than we did even though they wasted it.

  57. mswravens says: May 1, 2011 9:44 AM

    @purdueman – my point simply was that I want our front office to shut up & take payback on the field…whenever that date comes around again. And they play every 4th year.

    @trurthserum: I’m dumb for not keeping a catalogue in my head of every year’s draft nonsense? I’d say your dumb for having enough room upstairs to store such useless knowledge!!! So get it through your thick skull…and empty head…that they are two entirely different situations. If you still can’t figure that out I really have nothing more to say to you…

    I still don’t think the Bears owe us anything, and everyone just needs to move on. But you Vikings fans are really pathetic. Lousy owner, lousy stadium, lousy team. Why don’t you concentrate on improving those things and stop crying about a trade that never happened lo those many years ago…

  58. golonger says: May 1, 2011 10:17 AM

    to purdueman – yes ownership DID have everything to do with it moron….they hired, employ and PAY the moron responsible for the snafu. Please tell me you arent really this stupid???

  59. purdueman says: May 1, 2011 11:58 AM

    The average NFL career is 3.8 years, so it’s largely irrelevant if teams had bad (or “off”), draft years prior to 2007-2008.

    Take (now former), Bear DT and 1st round draft choice Tommy Harris as just one of many examples. When Harris came into the league he was a stud and quickly became a Pro Bowler. Just a few short years later though? Bum knee and he gets released.

    What is relevant is who, in a now ever increasing passing oriented league, your QB is and thankfully because the rules have changed to protect the QB’s more and more good ones now usually have a much longer shelf life than most of the rest of the guys in the league.

  60. ravensfan4life52 says: May 1, 2011 12:10 PM

    @truthserum

    yeah i’ve already been corrected on that. i’m sorry i couldn’t remember exactly what happened with a single trade 8 years ago. and i really don’t care what happened honestly. all i know is that the bears organization is full of idiots. from the management to the coaches. and i just wanted an extra draft pick whether we deserved it or not, which we probably didn’t. but oh well it didn’t happen.

  61. truthserum4u says: May 1, 2011 9:31 PM

    mswravens says:
    May 1, 2011 9:44 AM

    @trurthserum: I’m dumb for not keeping a catalogue in my head of every year’s draft nonsense? I’d say your dumb for having enough room upstairs to store such useless knowledge!!! So get it through your thick skull…and empty head…that they are two entirely different situations. If you still can’t figure that out I really have nothing more to say to you…
    ——————————–

    I’ll type slowly for you as I’m sure with your mental capacity you can only read this at the same pace. You’re dumb because you claim the scenarios are different yet you admit to not knowing all of the facts involved. You’re also dumb because if you could remember the facts you would realize the situations are almost identical. By not seeing this, or admiting it, you are just providing more proof of your stupidity.

    Did you mean usless “facts”? Because “knowledge” is never useless. Look up the word and you’ll get a better understanding of its meanings. And actually, the ability to store useless knowledge along with current, relative, important facts and information indicates a higher useage of one’s brain and is closley linked to intelligence. Not saying that is my case, but I hope you get the point. Maybe this will help:

    Memory and Intelligence
    “Your memory, especially your working memory, can significantly influence your “intelligence”. That is, your memory affects your ability to quickly and easily retrieve and apply stored information in situations when you need to solve a problem – and your ability to solve problems is often defined as intelligence. Therefore, memory and intelligence are almost like two sides of the same coin. “]

    I still don’t think the Bears owe us anything, and everyone just needs to move on. But you Vikings fans are really pathetic. Lousy owner, lousy stadium, lousy team. Why don’t you concentrate on improving those things and stop crying about a trade that never happened lo those many years ago…

    [Actually the owner is willing to spend and has been pretty good overall. The team, while failing to win a Super Bowl, has been competitive for most of its existance; 5th best record I think since it came into the league. Hated the stadium when they built it. Now no one is crying about the situation in 2003, no one really cried about it back then either. We are just telling the Ravens organization to stop crying, especially since they did the same thing to the Vikings.]

  62. purdueman says: May 1, 2011 10:12 PM

    truthserum: ROFLMAO!!! mswravens has just completely PANTSED you and left you walking butt naked and backwards!!!

  63. thephantomstranger says: May 1, 2011 10:28 PM

    rockinron2 says:
    Apr 30, 2011 8:30 PM
    Those of you who say they had a verbal agreement and should honor it need to look at what Ozzie did in 2003. He had a verbal agreement with Minny. He “supposedly” couldn’t get through on the phone. He didn’t try to call anyone else at the league or even go to the desk where you turn in your draft card to notify them or Minny that there was a problem. So Minny thought they had a deal (verbal agreement) and lost thier spot when Balt didn’t follow through. The reason for it not going through doesn’t really matter (as long as not intentional and we don’t know that in either case), the end result is the same, but worse for Minny. They lost the spot and the player they wanted and the rest of the trade.
    __________________

    Minnesota didn’t lose the player they wanted. They were going to draft Kevin Williams and they got him.

  64. raven4life21 says: May 4, 2011 4:08 PM

    The Ravens lost a 4th Round pick… that’s only part of the deal they agreed to… you never know if that 4th round pick could have made the winning catch against Pittsburgh to win the AFC Championship this year… so yes… the Ravens DID LOSE… yeah maybe they would have picked up a scrub, maybe not… but we will never know now because of Da Bears… asking for that pick is absolutely necessary and i don’t think Mr. Biscotti was in the wrong for what he said… man… the media really does take one comment and turn it into massive drama don’t they? the media may be the culprit of tons of drama over the years that never needed to happen

Leave a Reply

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