Wild Ride for McDaniels (Boston Globe)

[In-com-plete]

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2009/03/25/wild_ride_for_bronco/



DANA POINT, Calif. - The Patriots always seem to be at the epicenter of NFL intrigue, and it's no different with the league's latest soap opera - the spat between new Broncos coach Josh McDaniels (the former Patriots offensive coordinator) and Pro Bowl quarterback Jay Cutler.

The discord arose after it became public that McDaniels considered trading Cutler in a three-way deal with Tampa Bay that would have reunited McDaniels with Matt Cassel and sent a first-round pick to Foxborough. Instead, the Patriots, who were already deep into negotiations with the Chiefs, opted to send Cassel and his $14.65 million salary to Kansas City (and old friend Scott Pioli) for a second-round pick in a deal that also shipped out Mike Vrabel.

McDaniels was left holding the bag, forced to deal with a franchise quarterback who felt betrayed. McDaniels hasn't been able to patch things up with Cutler, who through his agent, Bus Cook, has requested a trade.

McDaniels insists the Broncos didn't initiate talks on a three-way trade involving Cassel, and he said at the NFL owners' meetings yesterday, "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel to me. Why would he want to do that?"

Well, why wouldn't he?

"Because it would help our team," said McDaniels. "He knew and does know that I've coached the player. He saw what happened this past year.

"I don't know that I would want to do that with any of our players - send him to a guy that had coached them and had success with them. That would improve their team significantly.

"I can't speak for him. I just know that's one of the reasons why we never came up with the scenario. It just didn't make any sense. We had a good player. We had Jay Cutler."

McDaniels said teams besides the Buccaneers approached the Broncos about trying to swing a three-way deal before Cassel was dealt.

"There were different teams. There were different scenarios," said McDaniels. "You're talking about three-way trades that rarely happen.

"I can't speak for New England, I can't speak for Kansas City in terms of how far along they were, but obviously they had had dialogue and it was productive for them and they were happy with what happened."

McDaniels maintained that he never talked to his former boss about a deal for Cassel. He said he didn't have any direct contact with the Patriots, but did hint that other teams were acting as brokers.

Belichick said on WEEI last Thursday that the Patriots checked with teams 24-48 hours before the Cassel trade was confirmed and there was no interest until the last minute.

McDaniels seemed to contradict that a little bit.

"I never talked to them," said McDaniels. "There were a few teams that had conversations in those two days. The Patriots had to be involved in them."

Ultimately, McDaniels's success in coaching Cassel last season may have doomed Denver's chances of landing him all along, although McDaniels tried to backtrack from that notion slightly.

"I don't think the decision was really about that," McDaniels said. "I think they were so far along, and they did what they felt was in the best interest of their team at that point.

"I really can't speak about what Bill thought, but I know this, we're all out to try to help our own teams, so we're not really looking to help a lot of other teams along the way."

In his introductory news conference as Broncos coach, McDaniels thanked Belichick "for providing me my foundation in this league and mentoring me for eight years" and said the two had formed a "special bond."

All that is true. But in the world of NFL head coaches, it's every man for himself. McDaniels was asked if the Cutler imbroglio had damaged his relationship with Belichick.

"Not on my end," he said. "I haven't really had a whole lot of communication with him. I've talked to him a few times since I've been in Denver, but haven't had a whole lot of conversations with him. I know he's been very busy, as have we. I hope that that stays the same way."

McDaniels said Cutler is still his quarterback, and Belichick remains his role model.

"I've had an opportunity to witness what I feel like is the finest football coach in the National Football League the last eight years deal with things of this nature," said McDaniels. "I was around when we traded Drew Bledsoe. I was around when we had to release Lawyer Milloy. I saw how Bill handled that and handled the team and never lost focus on what we were trying to do every day, which is improve.

"He didn't allow it to become a distraction for his team and his players. I appreciated being able to witness that.

"This is part of the deal. You don't make a decision to become the head coach without understanding you're going to have days, weeks, months like this."

[Dirk]

Not a bad article for a change. Not the best but at least it didn't sound as if they were trying to "hang" either McD or Cutler.

[fcspikeit]

Not a bad article for a change. Not the best but at least it didn't sound as if they were trying to "hang" either McD or Cutler.

Seriously? They threw a lot of things out there..

1st. McDaniels compared Cassel to someone who would have improve the team significantly..

2nd. he said, "We had a good player. We had Jay Cutler." So Cutler is a good player but Cassel would have improved the team Significantly..

3rd. It said NE could have received a better trade then they did, Implying Bemichick did in fact take a less pick to help Pioli out..

4th. It even suggests Belichick was lying when he said he hadn't received any offers better then the 2nd from KC and also that there were teams asking about Cassel when in fact he said he called around and no one was interested..

**edit** It also implied There were no serious trade talks because Belichick didn't want to trade Cassel to McKid instead of McKid saying no... I'm just, sayin'

[Dirk]

I guess it's all on how you look at it. And of course the context of which it was being said. The comments before and after etc. etc. etc.

Saying that "we had a good player. We had Jay Cutler". Is just not choosing the proper words IMO. Something like We Have, should have been used.

In talking about improving the team, it's always thought of as having someone you are comfortable with instead of "starting over" as an improvement. Even say if both QBs were exactly the same in talent. Not saying that they are.

But I see your side of it spike. I just didn't think it was all that bad.

[Lonestar]

The shots over the bow have just started by the Mc Dipshit crowd will be interesting to see just how minute they will intrepet just one more reporters fodder to fill space and sell advertising space.
Over under on posts in just one more attempt to smear Josh by the. Mc dummy crowd will be 280 by 11pm.

[omac]

Seriously? They threw a lot of things out there..

1st. McDaniels compared Cassel to someone who would have improve the team significantly..

2nd. he said, "We had a good player. We had Jay Cutler." So Cutler is a good player but Cassel would have improved the team Significantly..

3rd. It said NE could have received a better trade then they did, Implying Bemichick did in fact take a less pick to help Pioli out..

4th. It even suggests Belichick was lying when he said he hadn't received any offers better then the 2nd from KC and also that there were teams asking about Cassel when in fact he said he called around and no one was interested..

"I was around when we traded Drew Bledsoe. I was around when we had to release Lawyer Milloy. I saw how Bill handled that and handled the team and never lost focus on what we were trying to do every day, which is improve.

I'm kind of thinking this was his way of justifying trying to trade Cutler.

[TXBRONC]

"I was around when we traded Drew Bledsoe. I was around when we had to release Lawyer Milloy. I saw how Bill handled that and handled the team and never lost focus on what we were trying to do every day, which is improve.

I'm kind of thinking this was his way of justifying trying to trade Cutler.

I could see where that might be true.

[BigDaddyBronco]

So why would NE turn down a 1st round pick for Cassel to get a 2nd round pick for Cassel and Vrabel?

Doesn't it make sense that if NE had real negotiations going on with TB and Denver for a 3-way that they could use that as leverage to get more than a 2nd round pick from KC?

IMHO, either the negotiations with TB and Denver never got serious or the media reports of what the 3-way deal would involve are incorrect. Something doesn't add up.

[CoachChaz]

So why would NE turn down a 1st round pick for Cassel to get a 2nd round pick for Cassel and Vrabel?

Doesn't it make sense that if NE had real negotiations going on with TB and Denver for a 3-way that they could use that as leverage to get more than a 2nd round pick from KC?

IMHO, either the negotiations with TB and Denver never got serious or the media reports of what the 3-way deal would involve are incorrect. Something doesn't add up.

Dude, I already tried using this when it all first happened. Unfortunately, it's a logical question and rebuttal, therefore it is immediately discarded because it intereferes with threads that make up names for our coach

[BigDaddyBronco]

Dude, I already tried using this when it all first happened. Unfortunately, it's a logical question and rebuttal, therefore it is immediately discarded because it intereferes with threads that make up names for our coachIt never made sense to me that they were talking Cutler for Cassel straight up with NE getting a 2nd rounder. Now this elevates it to a 1st rounder.

Other reports (maybe from the DET trade) had Denver getting TWO firsts and Cassel, and NE getting a 2nd rounder.

All of this looks like media generated hype or message board generated rumors to me, and we are willing to use these rumors to hang McDaniels? :confused:

I guess the whole basis of the Cook/Cutler argument is flawed. Everything that happend after is words and hurt feelings.

[buffsroam]

DANA POINT, Calif. - The Patriots always seem to be at the epicenter of NFL intrigue, and it's no different with the league's latest soap opera - the spat between new Broncos coach Josh McDaniels (the former Patriots offensive coordinator) and Pro Bowl quarterback Jay Cutler.


I guess the world revolves around Boston.

[WARHORSE]

McDaniels insists the Broncos didn't initiate talks on a three-way trade involving Cassel, and he said at the NFL owners' meetings yesterday, "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel to me. Why would he want to do that?"


"Because it would help our team," said McDaniels. "He knew and does know that I've coached the player. He saw what happened this past year.

"I don't know that I would want to do that with any of our players - send him to a guy that had coached them and had success with them. That would improve their team significantly.

"I can't speak for him. I just know that's one of the reasons why we never came up with the scenario. It just didn't make any sense. We had a good player. We had Jay Cutler."

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Why in the world would Belicheat trade Cassell to us???

Because, under McLIARs thinking, bringing in Cassell would have been SIGNIFICANTLY improving our team........becaaaaaaaaauuse.........he COACHED him.

McBRILLIANT.


Wonder why the Cutlerwhiners cheerleaders are so slow to pick up.........

[Lonestar]

Wonder why the Cutlerwhiners cheerleaders are so slow to pick up.........


perhaps because they are not stupid enough to beleive it.. enjoy talking to yourselves..

[CoachChaz]

It never made sense to me that they were talking Cutler for Cassel straight up with NE getting a 2nd rounder. Now this elevates it to a 1st rounder.

Other reports (maybe from the DET trade) had Denver getting TWO firsts and Cassel, and NE getting a 2nd rounder.

All of this looks like media generated hype or message board generated rumors to me, and we are willing to use these rumors to hang McDaniels? :confused:

I guess the whole basis of the Cook/Cutler argument is flawed. Everything that happend after is words and hurt feelings.

Here's something else just just never made any sense to me. When Bowlen interviewed McD, I have to assume that at some point in the conversation, there was discussion about Cutler and him being the future of the franchise. That being said...it's my assumption that McDaniels most likely reiterated that he was excited about the chance to work with a guy like Cutler. I mean...what candidate would say, "I dont ,like him. If Hired I want to get rid of him." and have a chance at getting the job?

Looking at all that, is McD really the kind of guy or coach that would go through that, then turn around and do the opposite...intentionally? Say what you will about him, but I just dont see it. I'd have to think Bowlen would be more involved if McD had blatantly lied to him like that. So add that to a scenario where NE could get a first, but take a high 2nd instead and that there is no founded proof that when the idea was discussed, it was ALL McD's doing and it just ends up being one big miscommunication.

[fcspikeit]

I guess it's all on how you look at it. And of course the context of which it was being said. The comments before and after etc. etc. etc.

Saying that "we had a good player. We had Jay Cutler". Is just not choosing the proper words IMO. Something like We Have, should have been used.

In talking about improving the team, it's always thought of as having someone you are comfortable with instead of "starting over" as an improvement. Even say if both QBs were exactly the same in talent. Not saying that they are.

But I see your side of it spike. I just didn't think it was all that bad.

I didn't really say it was my side.. I'm just sayin' If you bring in a RB and say, he will improve the team significantly. What else can that mean except you feel the new guy is better then what you had before? Maybe he didn't mean to say it that way? Either way he should watch how he words things, especially with all this going on...

[fcspikeit]

It never made sense to me that they were talking Cutler for Cassel straight up with NE getting a 2nd rounder. Now this elevates it to a 1st rounder.

Other reports (maybe from the DET trade) had Denver getting TWO firsts and Cassel, and NE getting a 2nd rounder.

All of this looks like media generated hype or message board generated rumors to me, and we are willing to use these rumors to hang McDaniels? :confused:

I guess the whole basis of the Cook/Cutler argument is flawed. Everything that happend after is words and hurt feelings.

At the time of your writing this, who was trying to hang McDaniels?

[fcspikeit]

DANA POINT, Calif. - The Patriots always seem to be at the epicenter of NFL intrigue, and it's no different with the league's latest soap opera - the spat between new Broncos coach Josh McDaniels (the former Patriots offensive coordinator) and Pro Bowl quarterback Jay Cutler.


I guess the world revolves around Boston.

It is funny that as soon as things start to look up another report comes out of the Boston media that is damaging to Mcdaniels.. I really think Belichick is trying is damnedest to hurt McDaniels..

Still the quotes from McDaniels is what done the most harm...

[fcspikeit]

Here's something else just just never made any sense to me. When Bowlen interviewed McD, I have to assume that at some point in the conversation, there was discussion about Cutler and him being the future of the franchise. That being said...it's my assumption that McDaniels most likely reiterated that he was excited about the chance to work with a guy like Cutler. I mean...what candidate would say, "I dont ,like him. If Hired I want to get rid of him." and have a chance at getting the job?

Looking at all that, is McD really the kind of guy or coach that would go through that, then turn around and do the opposite...intentionally? Say what you will about him, but I just dont see it. I'd have to think Bowlen would be more involved if McD had blatantly lied to him like that. So add that to a scenario where NE could get a first, but take a high 2nd instead and that there is no founded proof that when the idea was discussed, it was ALL McD's doing and it just ends up being one big miscommunication.

Well I never thought they turned down a 1st, I always thought it was a 2nd.. Also, McDaniels said he never took the idea to Bowlen because it never got that far... No one really knows what he would have said if the idea was presented to him..

[fcspikeit]

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2009/03/25/wild_ride_for_bronco/

Did McDaniels really say this? None of the other articles that quote him from this interview have him saying this... This is the main part I am questioning..


McDaniels insists the Broncos didn't initiate talks on a three-way trade involving Cassel, and he said at the NFL owners' meetings yesterday, "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel to me. Why would he want to do that?"

Well, why wouldn't he?

"Because it would help our team," said McDaniels. "He knew and does know that I've coached the player. He saw what happened this past year.

"I don't know that I would want to do that with any of our players - send him to a guy that had coached them and had success with them. That would improve their team significantly."

That is comparing Cassel to a guy who would significantly improve the team..

Therefore McDaniels felt Cassel would have significantly improved our team.. What has he been saying all along? He has said from the beginning he would look into all trades he felt could improve the team.. How else could that be taken accept that McDaniels would have traded Cutler for Cassel? Why wouldn't he if he felt Cassel was going to significantly improve the team?

Then it even suggest the reason there was no trade was because Belichick didn't want to trade Cassel to McDaniels...

If he did say that, I have no doubts he would have done more then just talk trade, if he wouldn't have been to late to the dance, and Belichick wouldn't have said no that is..

I don't know what to believe.. They listed it as his quotes but it is funny no one else reported this part of the interview.. So maybe he didn't really say that?

He was also quoted as saying there would never be a scenario where trading Cutler would improve the team.. (It's in my sig) I haven't seen that from any of the other articles either so I'm not entirely sure he even said that...

Can't they be sued if the writer list's something as a quote when the person didn't really say that? Normally you can look over the authors opinions and thoughts to read the quotes of the person in question, then form your own opinion from what the person actually said.. The problem here is that there are so many contradictory quotes from McDaniels they don't add up. If he really was quoted saying both those statements, there is no way both could be the truth...

It's to bad we couldn't have seen his entire interview.. At least then we would know for sure what he did and didn't say...

[TXBRONC]

Did McDaniels really say this? None of the other articles that quote him from this interview have him saying this... This is the main part I am questioning..



That is comparing Cassel to a guy who would significantly improve the team..

Therefore McDaniels felt Cassel would have significantly improved our team.. What has he been saying all along? He has said from the beginning he would look into all trades he felt could improve the team.. How else could that be taken accept that McDaniels would have traded Cutler for Cassel? Why wouldn't he if he felt Cassel was going to significantly improve the team?

Then it even suggest the reason there was no trade was because Belichick didn't want to trade Cassel to McDaniels...

If he did say that, I have no doubts he would have done more then just talk trade, if he wouldn't have been to late to the dance, and Belichick wouldn't have said no that is..

I don't know what to believe.. They listed it as his quotes but it is funny no one else reported this part of the interview.. So maybe he didn't really say that?

He was also quoted as saying there would never be a scenario where trading Cutler would improve the team.. (It's in my sig) I haven't seen that from any of the other articles either so I'm not entirely sure he even said that...

Can't they be sued if the writer list's something as a quote when the person didn't really say that? Normally you can look over the authors opinions and thoughts to read the quotes of the person in question, then form your own opinion from what the person actually said.. The problem here is that there are so many contradictory quotes from McDaniels they don't add up. If he really was quoted saying both those statements, there is no way both could be the truth...

It's to bad we couldn't have seen his entire interview.. At least then we would know for sure what he did and didn't say...

In the short run Cassel probably would be better than Jay because of his familiarity with the offense but would he be better for the team in the long run? I don't think he would.

Some of the Cutler bashers point to Cassel's going 11-5 as a starter without any regard for who he lost too. While it is true that a win is win most of his wins came against inferior teams. The teams that were as good or better than he lost too. Which tells me that two things:

1.) For the most part the Patriots had easy schedule.

2.) Cassel wasn't very good at beating teams that were as good or better than his team.

[fcspikeit]

In the short run Cassel probably would be better than Jay because of his familiarity with the offense but would he be better for the team in the long run? I don't think he would.

Some of the Cutler bashers point to Cassel's going 11-5 as a starter without any regard for who he lost too. While it is true that a win is win most of his wins came against inferior teams. The teams that were as good or better than he lost too. Which tells me that two things:

1.) For the most part the Patriots had easy schedule.

2.) Cassel wasn't very good at beating teams that were as good or better than his team.



Well I agree, I don't think Cassel would have been an improvement.. But that doesn't really matter.. This is about what McKid thought, rather he was right or wrong on Cassel being an improvement, the question is, did he think he was an improvement? From this you would have to say yes he thought Cassel would be an improvement over Cutler. Meaning Cutler's feeling of McKid wanting Cassel instead of him for what ever reason, was correct..

McKid has made it sound like the trade talks were more of a consideration then a possibility.. Maybe it didn't get that far because as he said, He didn't think Belichick would trade Cassel to him.. But if this is true.. He would have clearly done more then considered the trade if given the chance because he thought trading for Cassel would have improved the team significantly... In other words, he didn't say no to this trade like some want to believe..

That is of course if he said all this? I'm not sure that he did... The Boston Globe might have just been trying to make McKid look bad.. After all, they were rumored to have leaked the trade info to begin with..

[WARHORSE]

Did McDaniels really say this? None of the other articles that quote him from this interview have him saying this... This is the main part I am questioning..



That is comparing Cassel to a guy who would significantly improve the team..

Therefore McDaniels felt Cassel would have significantly improved our team.. What has he been saying all along? He has said from the beginning he would look into all trades he felt could improve the team.. How else could that be taken accept that McDaniels would have traded Cutler for Cassel? Why wouldn't he if he felt Cassel was going to significantly improve the team?

Then it even suggest the reason there was no trade was because Belichick didn't want to trade Cassel to McDaniels...

If he did say that, I have no doubts he would have done more then just talk trade, if he wouldn't have been to late to the dance, and Belichick wouldn't have said no that is..

I don't know what to believe.. They listed it as his quotes but it is funny no one else reported this part of the interview.. So maybe he didn't really say that?

He was also quoted as saying there would never be a scenario where trading Cutler would improve the team.. (It's in my sig) I haven't seen that from any of the other articles either so I'm not entirely sure he even said that...

Can't they be sued if the writer list's something as a quote when the person didn't really say that? Normally you can look over the authors opinions and thoughts to read the quotes of the person in question, then form your own opinion from what the person actually said.. The problem here is that there are so many contradictory quotes from McDaniels they don't add up. If he really was quoted saying both those statements, there is no way both could be the truth...

It's to bad we couldn't have seen his entire interview.. At least then we would know for sure what he did and didn't say...

The man talks in circles.


Its no wonder Cutler comes away thinking one thing and McD another after meetings. He cant keep track................who knows what the hell hes thinking now.


He should just close his mouth.............get Cutler in camp............and clean this mess hes made.

Focus on the defense.

[BroncoWave]

He said that the TRADE would improve our team significantly. You are acting like Cassel is the only thing we would have gotten in return. Have you people forgotten that we would have recieved draft picks as well?

God that is a stupid statement to hang McDaniels on. You all know good and well that he wasn't trying to say that Cassel alone would significantly improve our team. If you're going to criticize McDaniels at least be honest about it.

[Shazam!]

Cassel would've ran the offense from day 1 with no learning curve. That's the difference. Despite Cutler's ability I understand why McD would want his own guy. Not siding with McD or against Cutler, but you need a little touch in the patriots system. Cutler will have to learn not to rely on his cannon. I can not kill McD for wanting his own guy, especially that he's young, experienced, and like it or not can be considered as much of a franchise QB as Cutler.

It doesn't matter though does it? The longer this is going on, the more it is Cutler staying. So good.

[Simple Jaded]

Trading Cutler for Cassell and an unknown player does not "significantly improve" this team.......stop playin.......

[WARHORSE]

He said that the TRADE would improve our team significantly. You are acting like Cassel is the only thing we would have gotten in return. Have you people forgotten that we would have recieved draft picks as well?

God that is a stupid statement to hang McDaniels on. You all know good and well that he wasn't trying to say that Cassel alone would significantly improve our team. If you're going to criticize McDaniels at least be honest about it.


McDaniels insists the Broncos didn't initiate talks on a three-way trade involving Cassel, and he said at the NFL owners' meetings yesterday, "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel to me. Why would he want to do that?"

Well, why wouldn't he?

"Because it would help our team," said McDaniels. "He knew and does know that I've coached the player. He saw what happened this past year.



Count me as one of the stupid ones.

I dont see anything about a TRADE.


"Because it would help our team.............He knew.....and DOES know.......that Ive COACHED THE PLAYER. HE SAW WHAT HAPPENED THIS PAST YEAR."

Does that sound like someone trying to explain that Belichick doesnt want McD to get Cassell and some draft picks in a TRADE because it would significantly help the Broncos, or does it sound like someone explaining Belichick doesnt want McD to get the specific player of Cassell, due to the fact that he feels he turned Cassell into a substantial player?

[WARHORSE]

Cassel would've ran the offense from day 1 with no learning curve. That's the difference. Despite Cutler's ability I understand why McD would want his own guy. Not siding with McD or against Cutler, but you need a little touch in the patriots system. Cutler will have to learn not to rely on his cannon. I can not kill McD for wanting his own guy, especially that he's young, experienced, and like it or not can be considered as much of a franchise QB as Cutler.

It doesn't matter though does it? The longer this is going on, the more it is Cutler staying. So good.


Ok, lets say thats really how he looked at it.

How do you explain the fact that we are letting go of the franchise player with three years on his contract left after the signing bonus has been accounted for, and bringing in a guy under a one year contract at 14.7 mill? One of two things is going to happen the following uncapped year: You will have to pay him 20% more on top of the 14.7 mill, or sign him to a long term contract with how much guaranteed...........30+ mill?

This being a one year player?

How does that help your team?

Shouldnt you be trying to pay that 14 + mill to someone like Peppers?

[fcspikeit]

He said that the TRADE would improve our team significantly. You are acting like Cassel is the only thing we would have gotten in return. Have you people forgotten that we would have recieved draft picks as well?

God that is a stupid statement to hang McDaniels on. You all know good and well that he wasn't trying to say that Cassel alone would significantly improve our team. If you're going to criticize McDaniels at least be honest about it.

Dream on...

He didn't say "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel and draft picks to me." He said, "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel to me."

When asked why he said, "Because it would help our team," He was clearly talking about Cassel there, not draft picks..

Then he went on to compare Cassel to a "player" that would improve the team significantly..

"I don't know that I would want to do that with any of our players - send him to a guy that had coached them and had success with them. That would improve their team significantly."

He says send "him" not him and draft picks.. The significant improvement he is talking about is from the player, not any picks that may or may not have been included in the trade. Even if there had been picks included, they sure as hell wouldn't have came from NE..

Our trade with Tampa or Detroit for Cutler and picks would have barely concerned NE.. Their part would have been Cassel for a pick, either one of our existing or newly acquired picks in the Cutler trade.. Whatever we received for trading Cutler would have been none of NE's business.

In fact, from the sounds of it, Either Tampa or Detroit would have traded whatever for Cassel and then we would have traded Cutler to them for Cassel, which may or may not have included additional picks. Either way, it's obvious he was talking about Cassel significantly improving the team in that Quote..

[DenverBronkHoes]

I wanna see what McNipples can do with a Pro Bowl QB now.....

we all know what he did with a 3rd string benchwarmer............

Whats the matter McPervert?...... CHICKEN?????

(somebody que the chicken sound...... and somebody else do the dance)

[BroncoWave]

Dream on...

He didn't say "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel and draft picks to me." He said, "I don't think Bill Belichick wanted to trade Matt Cassel to me."

When asked why he said, "Because it would help our team," He was clearly talking about Cassel there, not draft picks..

Then he went on to compare Cassel to a "player" that would improve the team significantly..

"I don't know that I would want to do that with any of our players - send him to a guy that had coached them and had success with them. That would improve their team significantly."

He says send "him" not him and draft picks.. The significant improvement he is talking about is from the player, not any picks that may or may not have been included in the trade. Even if there had been picks included, they sure as hell wouldn't have came from NE..

Our trade with Tampa or Detroit for Cutler and picks would have barely concerned NE.. Their part would have been Cassel for a pick, either one of our existing or newly acquired picks in the Cutler trade.. Whatever we received for trading Cutler would have been none of NE's business.

In fact, from the sounds of it, Either Tampa or Detroit would have traded whatever for Cassel and then we would have traded Cutler to them for Cassel, which may or may not have included additional picks. Either way, it's obvious he was talking about Cassel significantly improving the team in that Quote..

Yes, but Bellichick KNEW that Cassel isn't the only thing Denver would have gotten for Cutler. He knew that we were also going to get some draft picks as well. Use some common sense.

[WARHORSE]

Yes, but Bellichick KNEW that Cassel isn't the only thing Denver would have gotten for Cutler. He knew that we were also going to get some draft picks as well. Use some common sense.


McDaniels said he never spoke with Belichick.


More common sense?

[BroncoWave]

McDaniels said he never spoke with Belichick.


More common sense?

Regardless, when McDaniels said that Bellichick wouldn't want to make a trade that would make Denver "significanty better", I'm pretty sure McD was talking about the entire trade making his team better.

In all reality though, it's all speculation and without actually hearing him use that quote in context, that's something pretty stupid to hang him on. Of course I guess I should be used to people using stupid logic to hang McD by now though.