Officially, the Chiefs and Broncos have no comment about the contention that receiver Emmanuel Sanders had an agreement in principle with Kansas City before agreeing to terms in Denver.
Unofficially, they’re saying plenty.
The Chiefs indeed believe that a deal was in place with agent Steve Weinberg. The Broncos contend they didn’t know about the existence of a verbal deal with the Chiefs. The Broncos likewise intend to proceed with the signing of Sanders to a written contract.
Now that the Broncos know that the Chiefs believe a deal was in place before an agreement was reached with Denver, the Broncos could (in theory) fully investigate the situation and, if persuaded that the contention is true, refuse to proceed with a written contract.
Of course, for the same reason that the Broncos would have the right to pull the plug now, Sanders had the right to pull the plug on the Chiefs. Regardless of what the Chiefs think of Weinberg’s alleged tactics, a deal isn’t done until it’s signed and filed and approved by the league office.
Coincidentally, the Broncos know a thing or two about the difference between agreements in principle and binding contracts. Last year, they had an agreement in principle with defensive end Elvis Dumervil on a revised contract. Because the documents weren’t signed on a timely basis, the revised contract wasn’t binding — and the Broncos were forced to terminate the existing deal before a significant financial obligation to Dumervil was triggered.