KSJets Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Bill Belichick says Patriots didn’t violate any unwritten rules by claiming Jake Ballard Bill Belichick shot down the notion this morning that the Patriots violated an unwritten rule by claiming injured tight end Jake Ballard off waivers from the Giants. The Giants waived Ballard on Monday with the presumed intention, according to Ballard’s Twitter account, of placing him on an injured list when he cleared. Yet, the Patriots swooped in and claimed Ballard yesterday. After the transaction, the question was raised that the Patriots might have violated an unwritten rule, and Belichick was asked about that this morning. “First of all, there aren’t any unwrittens,” Belichick said. “I’m sure that you’re aware that you can’t negotiate a contract with a player while he’s under contract. You can’t negotiate a contract, release him, then renegotiate another contract with him that was already done in advance. I’m sure the Giants weren’t doing that. If a player’s on waivers, he’s on waivers, ours or anybody else’s. I don’t know what unwrittens you’re talking about.” Belichick then discussed the risk of placing a player on waivers. The Patriots, like everyone else, have been bitten by the waiver process in recent years, losing draft picks whom they wanted to store on the practice squad. “Anytime you put a player on waivers, you know there’s 31 teams out there that can take him if they want him,” Belichick said. “We all know that. There’s no secret to that.” Belichick also said Ballard hadn’t arrived at Gillette Stadium yet, though he believed the tight end would arrive today. Therefore, the Patriots’ medical staff hasn’t been able to examine the two-year veteran who tore his ACL during the Super Bowl and had microfracture surgery this offseason. Still, Belichick likes the prospects of working with Ballard and seeing how it all plays out. “Obviously, he had a real productive year last year,” Belichick said. “We’ll see how all that goes. We haven’t seen him yet.” ********************************************************* Considering he's violated written rules and claimed to misunderstand them, I'm not surprised he's acting surprised here. He can't seem to beat the Giants, and we all know he's a vengeful prick, so this was done to spite them. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonEJet Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Sort of unreal the media's continued fellation of everything Bellichick and Patriots. It is nauseating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 And from the Giants' point of view... Giants disappointed with losing Jake Ballard to the Patriots Published: Wednesday, June 13, 2012, 12:27 PM Updated: Wednesday, June 13, 2012, 2:26 PM By Jorge Castillo/The Star-Ledger Share Print EPA/Larry W. SmithThe Patriots' decision to claim Jake Ballard off waivers left the Giants in shock and disappointed.1 pm: UPDATED with Bill Belichick reaction Tom Coughlin was orchestrating practice yesterday when he was notified that tight end Jake Ballard had been claimed by the Patriots, the team that Ballard torched in Week 9 of the regular season and against whom he tore his ACL in the Giants' Super Bowl XLVI victory. The surprise won't have an effect on the Giants' 2012 campaign; they were already going under the assumption that Ballard was going to miss the entire season due to the ACL injury. But he was in the team's long-term plans and the Giants' decision to waive Ballard was simply a formality in their attempt to stash him away for 2012 in anticipation of his return in 2013. Then in stepped Bill Belichick and the Patriots to claim Ballardand ruin the plan. "Discouraged is a minor description," Coughlin said this morning. "I'm very disappointed. I don't have a lot to say about that one. It's just the fact that we're disappointed, very disappointed." Jake Ballard's coach and teammates talk about losing him to the Patriots On the day after New York Giants tight end Jake Ballard was claimed off waivers by the New England Patriots, coach Tom Coughlin, fellow tight ends Travis Beckum and Bear Pascoe and center Jim Cordle talk about their disappointment. The Giants placed Ballard on waivers in the hopes that he would clear because his torn ACL will keep him sidelined for the year, and then they intended to place him on injured reserve. But the plan backfired when the Patriots claimed him yesterday. Video by John Munson/The Star-Ledger Belichick said according to ESPNBoston.com. "I'm sure the Giants weren't doing that. So the player is on waivers, he's on waivers -- ours or anybody else's. I don't know what unwrittens you're talking about. "Any time you put a player on waivers, you know there are 31 teams out there that can take him if they want him. We all know that. There is no secrets about that." Asked why the Giants simply didn't keep him on the roster and avoiding taking the chance of losing him, Coughlin wouldn't go into specifics. "Don’t ask me those questions," he said. "I don’t have the answers for you there. We are all disappointed, that’s all." Offensive lineman Jim Cordle was Ballard's teammate for six years dating back to their time together at Ohio State and when center David Baas told him the news as he was heading off the field after practice yesterday Cordle didn't believe him. Sure enough, when he looked back at Ballard he saw "a sad look on his face." Cordle said he had talked with Ballard about the possibility of a team claiming him, but he was still "shocked" by the news. "You hope he's not being used in spite of the Giants or whatever," Cordle said. "Obviously here he fits into the offense. He's a tight end that can run block, play-action pass, run down the field and catch some big passes. Hopefully he's utilized in New England to his ability." Jorge Castillo: jcastillo@starledger.com; twitter.com/jorgeccastillo (Obviously I feel the same way as this player in bold) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 the nfl is a big boy league no unwrittens crap, now I feel dirty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointman Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Its professional football, not frat boy tennis. gtfo with this pouting nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Sort of unreal the media's continued fellation of everything Bellichick and Patriots. It is nauseating Word. If the Hartford Courant is right, the Giants screwed the pooch by exposing Ballard. He was under control through 2013 for a total of $1.27 million. While his availability for this year is debatable, it is not like keeping him on the roster was costing a lot outside of a body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 I am the first one to blast all things Belly. But even I can't blast him for this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kay_gee Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 The Giants can blame themselves for this. Why'd they put Ballard on waivers anyway if they wanted him so much? Clearly they knew this was a risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointman Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 The Giants can blame themselves for this. Why'd they put Ballard on waivers anyway if they wanted him so much? Clearly they knew this was a risk. Being in the nfc, I guess they didn't know how Bill plays... take rivals leftovers to find out all you can about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 There are 31 teams out there who know Belichick's a soulless scumbag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointman Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 There are 31 teams out there who know Belichick's a soulless scumbag. Pretty sure everyone on the Pats thinks it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 I hate the Pats with every fiber of me being, but this one is a little bit much even for me. The Giants could have just waited and then put him on the PUP or IR when the time came if they wanted, but they tried to get cheap and it bit them in the a$$. They have nobody to blame but themselves. Since when does another team have to let a team re-sign a player they still want but cut? The Jets didn't seem to be worried about that with the Ravens when they grabbed Trevor Pryce from under therir noses, so what's the difference really? I'll trash the Pats for everything they deserve for, and trust me there is plenty, but this one's a reach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Rex did the same sh*t with Trevor Pryce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 I hate the Pats with every fiber of me being, but this one is a little bit much even for me. The Giants could have just waited and then put him on the PUP or IR when the time came if they wanted, but they tried to get cheap and it bit them in the a$$. They have nobody to blame but themselves. Since when does another team have to let a team re-sign a player they still want but cut? The Jets didn't seem to be worried about that with the Ravens when they grabbed Trevor Pryce from under therir noses, so what's the difference really? I'll trash the Pats for everything they deserve for, and trust me there is plenty, but this one's a reach. The biggest difference was that Trevor Pryce actually played for the Jets that season. He was cut and they were going to resign him for less, but he was going to play. Ballard isn't going to play this year and they were probably going to place him on IR. I have no idea why they chose to do it this way, and it doesn't bother me so much since it's the Giants and they haven't shut up even though "all they do is play". I have no doubt Belichick did this to spite the Giants for depriving him of his first two legitimate Super Bowl wins. I'm just surprised they did this considering they have half of their roster filled with TE's. I'm prepared to see tons of articles by the Giants' beat writers about how their current TE is turning heads in practices and sh*t like that to keep the Giants' fans from blasting the front office for taking such a boneheaded and calculated move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurnleyJet Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Like to hear Mike Fatcesca's take on this, Belly done the Giants wrong bo hoo! - "IF YOU DON'T WANT ANOTHER TEAM TO SIGN HIM, DON'T PLACE HIM ON WAIVERS!" That is all... P.s Belly is still an Uber Douche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin L Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 I hate Belichick as much as the next guy, but this is just sour grapes on the Giants part. Don't want a guy to get picked up by another team off waivers? Don't put him on waivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 I am the first one to blast all things Belly. But even I can't blast him for this one. This is no different than when you claimed GOB off waivers from JI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 What's really funny is that when this happens to the Giants, it's known as a calculated risk. If this had happened to the Jets', the media, and one poster here in particular, would be saying how the Jets' GM had gotten fleeced and doesn't know what he's doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rillo Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Don't see a problem here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYGiantFan10 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 I hate Belichick as much as the next guy, but this is just sour grapes on the Giants part. Don't want a guy to get picked up by another team off waivers? Don't put him on waivers. how is it sour grapes by the giants?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 There are 31 teams out there who know Belichick's a soulless scumbag. This. But the Giants screwed up by releasing Ballard. It was really unnecessary and Coughlin's reaction seems to indicate that Reese screwed up and Coughlin was against it from the beginning. That said, Ballard also had microfracture surgery. He's not playing in 2012-13 so ultimately it doesn't matter. Giants would need another TE in 2013-14 anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 I hate Belichick probably more than anyone but this is just dumb. I hate the term "unwritten rules." If you want there to be a rule, write it the f*** down. Make it official. Until then, this is a non-story. I hate the media for putting me in a position where I had to defend that mumbling prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 I hate Belichick probably more than anyone but this is just dumb. I hate the term "unwritten rules." If you want there to be a rule, write it the f*** down. Make it official. Until then, this is a non-story. I hate the media for putting me in a position where I had to defend that mumbling prick. The "no video taping your opponent during a game" was a written rule and he went against that, so expecting him to comply with an "unwritten" rule was naive of the Giants lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 The "no video taping your opponent during a game" was a written rule and he went against that, so expecting him to comply with an "unwritten" rule was naive of the Giants lol. Excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Word. If the Hartford Courant is right, the Giants screwed the pooch by exposing Ballard. He was under control through 2013 for a total of $1.27 million. While his availability for this year is debatable, it is not like keeping him on the roster was costing a lot outside of a body. The Giants dont make mistakes - they are a perfect organization just like the Pats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 What's really funny is that when this happens to the Giants, it's known as a calculated risk. If this had happened to the Jets', the media, and one poster here in particular, would be saying how the Jets' GM had gotten fleeced and doesn't know what he's doing. If Tannenbaum produced two Super Bowl teams within the last five years, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonEJet Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 If Tannenbaum produced two Super Bowl teams within the last five years, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. That's what happens when your team sucks, and gets the #1 overall pick. That's the difference between having Sanchez, or Matthew Stafford. Tanny always keeps us competitive...so I'll take no #1 picks, thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 That's what happens when your team sucks, and gets the #1 overall pick. That's the difference between having Sanchez, or Matthew Stafford. Tanny always keeps us competitive...so I'll take no #1 picks, thank you He's had the 4th, 5th and 6th overall picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonEJet Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 okay,those produced Brick,Sanchez and Gholston Bricks draft, Vince Young was drafted #3, Cutler and Leinart after Sanchez' draft, Stafford was #1, and Freeman after Gholstons draft. Ryan was picked #3.and Flacco after The only player I'd take is Stafford. It's awful easy to hit a HR picking #1 overall, rather than a crapshoot later on Yup, Reese is God Jr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 He's had the 4th, 5th and 6th overall picks. The fifth was through a trade numbnuts. We actually earned the 17th overall pick that year and then the "accountant" fleeced his former employee to move up 12 spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 okay,those produced Brick,Sanchez and Gholston What's funny is that you personally hate Brick, which makes Tannenbaum 0 for 3 in your book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 The fifth was through a trade numbnuts. We actually earned the 17th overall pick that year and then the "accountant" fleeced his former employee to move up 12 spots. Trading up for Sanchez is a fleecing the same way that getting JiF over here from JI is a fleecing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSJets Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share Posted June 14, 2012 What's funny is that you personally hate Brick, which makes Tannenbaum 0 for 3 in your book. And you seem to hate every player on the team... Is there any player you DO like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonEJet Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 What's funny is that you personally hate Brick, which makes Tannenbaum 0 for 3 in your book. I don't blame Tanny for Gholston....that entire draft sucked,and he took the player that was considered BAP Brick, yup, not my favorite player, but not a bust Sanchez, TBD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Trading up for Sanchez is a fleecing the same way that getting JiF over here from JI is a fleecing. I don't care what you think of Sanchez, trading up 12 spots for Brett Ratliff, Abram Elam and and Kenyon Coleman is highway robbery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.