StevieInferior Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I usually don't trust this site, but everything makes since given everything coming out of all the sources: A league source tells us that agents Carl and Kevin Poston could be facing some significant fallout in connection with the grievance filed by Redskins linebacker LaVar Arrington resulting from an allegedly missing $6.5 million roster bonus in his December 2003 contract extension. Per the source, the NFLPA is likely to pursue discipline against the Postons, based on their startling admission that they did not read the final draft of Arrington's contract before it was signed. Though the NFLPA is backing the grievance on Arrington's behalf, support for the player doesn't prevent the union from taking action against the agents who were in position to prevent the whole brouhaha merely by taking the time to read the final deal. For example, even though the NFLPA supported receiver Terrell Owens' grievance resulting from his non-free agency status, the NFLPA hadn't (and still hasn't) ruled out imposing discipline upon agent David Joseph for failing to take steps to void Owens contract, despite receiving notice from the NFLPA of the impending deadline. In Joseph's case, the agent denied (through Owens) ever receiving the notice from the NFLPA. As to the Postons, they're now conceding that they didn't read the deal -- after initially arguing that the Redskins pulled a switcheroo following the approval of the final deal. Presumably faced with incontrovertible evidence of their initials and/or signatures on the contract and its individual pages, the Postons are now adopting the "we didn't read it" position as a fallback. Though the NFLPA might try to wave this flag in the grievance proceeding for Arrington's sake, the union most likely will not ignore a gift-wrapped case of gross negligence against the agents. We're also hearing that the Postons have burned bridges in D.C., making the team likely to shy away from any of their clients on draft day. Indeed, word is that if the Postons manage to land tight end Kellen Winslow, who is one of the few remaining blue-chippers without an agent, the Redskins will not draft him. That sentiment is echoed in other league circles. As we reported on Tuesday, an increasing number of teams don't want to deal with the Postons. And that's bad news for them -- and for anyone they represent. http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom [Giants fan] Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Someone explain this whole thing to me. Fine, the agents didn't read it but did the Redskins actually intentionally leave the $6.5 million out of the contract or did they just forget? I mean, if it was agreed upon and the Skins' FO wirtes up the contract, shouldn't it have been in there? Can someone clear this up. How could this happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I wouldn't trust that site, either. I won't believe this thing is put to rest until a more reputable source is found. To be fair, though, that is the most straight-forward piece I've ever read from that site. Just-the-facts style, no cheap shots, no snide remarks. I can't speak for the content, but the tone is certainly a cut above what usually springs from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Tom, maybe the Poston's just made it up to make the deal sound more appealing? Sounds crazy, sure, but certainly more plausible than the team pulling a switch on the final contract and faking initials and signatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanders 83 Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I would imagine the Rams are sick of dealing with the Postons. Does anyone remember the contract they were demanding last year? 27 signing bonus, and 7 years for 80 something million, FOR A TACKLE!! Maybe Sexton can be the next agent to be blackballed by teams around the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay87 Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 The Postons are the greediest agents in the NFL, I hope they get kicked out of the organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Hog Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 This is what gets me about the whole situation: Assuming the article is true (and we don't know if it is at this point), why would Lavar not clear this up with his agents before filing a grievance? The obvious answer I believe is that if he indeed got them to admit one on one that they screwed up, he wouldn't really have a good chance to recoup the money from them. The grievance gives him the best to get his 6.5M, but at the same time, it casts a bad shadow on the organization. Personal interest at the expense of the team's integrity is not something that sits well with me. Regarding Tom's inquiry about whether or not the front office intentionally tried to pull a fast one on LA and his agents: I don't know.......my guess is that it quite possibly could have been a misunderstanding between the parties. I don't think that an organization, who was done a big favour in terms of helping their cap, would have tried to purposely do something that could easily start creating bad feelings with their star player. I'll side with the front office on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco Bell Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Originally posted by Jay87 The Postons are the greediest agents in the NFL, I hope they get kicked out of the organization. They are probably the most greedy because they have to divide all the money they earn. Even so, they still suck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaganaut Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Problem is that the Postons poison their players against the team as in Lawyer Milloy, Arrington and others. Arrington got off on a really bad foot with the Skins until Snyder played super hardball with him on his signing bonus. He didn't holdout and Snyder said "Redskins don't hold out" which was a prophetic statement. Snyder is a real badass when it comes to agents and he has to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 why would Lavar not clear this up with his agents before filing a grievance? Who do you think told him to file? who told him that they didn't mess up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Hog Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 What I'm saying is that maybe extra precaution should have been taken regarding the matter. Obviously the agents are going to tell him to file, and I guess in a way you can't fault LA for taking their advice. Afterall, they are his agents, and they were hired for a reason. Bottom line is that whether LA wins or loses the case, you don't know what type of effect this incident will have in future negotiations with free agents down the road. It immediately puts out a red caution flag saying "be weary of the Redskins in contract negotiations." It might be enough to make some think twice and shy away from coming here, who knows. That's where my problem rests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I'm reminded of the fact that Poston mistakenly reported that the contract was for 80 million. He was exactly 6.5 off the other reported figure of 74.5 At this stage, it's looking like Poston just completely misread the whole thing and miscalculated twice. 68 million sounds like the correct number. I highly doubt the Skins tried to pull a switcheroo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF4L Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Originally posted by Rejuvenated Canadian Hog What I'm saying is that maybe extra precaution should have been taken regarding the matter. Obviously the agents are going to tell him to file, and I guess in a way you can't fault LA for taking their advice. Afterall, they are his agents, and they were hired for a reason. Bottom line is that whether LA wins or loses the case, you don't know what type of effect this incident will have in future negotiations with free agents down the road. It immediately puts out a red caution flag saying "be weary of the Redskins in contract negotiations." It might be enough to make some think twice and shy away from coming here, who knows. That's where my problem rests. I don't think so. The players will come. Lavar better fall into line with his teamwork and on-field performance, or this goup will get rid of his a$$. At least I hope they will. Joe Gibbs doesn't do prima donnas very well. And I'm glad of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Lavar filed so that the NFL will prove that the Poston's were negligent. Then, he can take that ruling and file a civil suit against the Poston's for the $6.5mil in question. Lavar has gotten some good advice, but I doubt it's from the Postons. More than likely a "deep throat" within the league office. Here is to hoping Winslow chooses someone other than the Postons to represent him. I'd hate to think the Redskins would avoid a player of his caliber just because of the agent who represents him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinamatic Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I cant foresee that the Skins pulled a switcharoo. Think about it. How easy would that be to get caught. Everything is in print and in writing. The Postons had to sign it as well as the Skins. Lavar should sue the Postons for the money.:secret: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citigent Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 if someone is dumb enough not to read a contract beforethey and their client sign, they deserve to lose the right to be an agent, and if it ends up that lavar is missing money the ponsons should pony it up just for their stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinker Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 It would be ridiculously stupid for Snyder to switch contracts or try to trick LaVar into signing a contract. The Postons claim there is a missing $6.5 million roster bonus in 2006, but the contract the Skins sent to the NFL HAS a $6.5 million roster bonus in 2006. What they must have done is just added the whole thing up wrong and mislead LaVar about the total value. When LaVar sees all the facts, he'll be fine witht he Skins - He's still getting a guaranteed $20 million after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 right or wrong in this instance, I am really getting sick and tired of talk about Arrington's MONEY! :mad: ever since we took him at #2 in 2000 there has been nothing but issues around his contract. Geez.................... when are we going to start talking about this guy making championshp caliber plays on the field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I'll be happy when they start to talk about what an impact Arrington is on the Redskins and the league. That he's the best outside linebacker in the league and his statistics back it up. Today, he's a highly paid...overated...overhyped...liability on the defensive side of the ball. Launches....misses tackles...free lances...over pursues.... fails to wrap up.... plays undisciplined..... plays with to much emotion that results in personal fouls for late hits and piling on penalities. Does that sound like the #1 OLB in the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Originally posted by thinker It would be ridiculously stupid for Snyder to switch contracts or try to trick LaVar into signing a contract. The Postons claim there is a missing $6.5 million roster bonus in 2006, but the contract the Skins sent to the NFL HAS a $6.5 million roster bonus in 2006. What they must have done is just added the whole thing up wrong and mislead LaVar about the total value. When LaVar sees all the facts, he'll be fine witht he Skins - He's still getting a guaranteed $20 million after all. Bingo right here. The Poston brothers are trying to cover their butts. Aren't these guys actually lawyers, or am I thinking of someone else? - Yea, sure, lawyers never lie. It would be awesome to see all the other teams/players in the NFL to boycott them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzSkinsFan63 Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Originally posted by Tom [Giants fan] Someone explain this whole thing to me. Fine, the agents didn't read it but did the Redskins actually intentionally leave the $6.5 million out of the contract or did they just forget? I mean, if it was agreed upon and the Skins' FO wirtes up the contract, shouldn't it have been in there? Can someone clear this up. How could this happen? You tell me...None of it makes sense. Here we have 2 agents claiming foul and getting burned in the process. Why on Earth would the Skins lie about the total value believing full and well that the Postons would review the final contract that they had to sign. not only that the Skins announced it as a 64.7 mil deal or whatever it was. This sounds more to me like the Postons screwed up but want to blame Snyder so they won't get sued by Arrington for 6.5 mil. They sure took a damn long time to come forward about it. I'm assuming it took this long for Lavar to get wind of it himself and when he asked them they played dumb. Another explanation is Snyder submitted the final contract for thier signing and left it out to see if they would catch it and they didn't...(Sorry this one is hard for me to believe also) Snyder the man with the checkbook holding out on Lavar? It has to be one of those 2 scenarios because I honestly don't think for one second they pulled some kind of switheroo on the contract. Way to risky as hell and the Polstons should have some evidence if they did that and they won't. Which of those scenarios sound more plausible to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Why in the world would a team include TWO 6.5 million roster bonuses in the SAME year? That's what they are claiming. Why not make it one 13 million bonus? Or two separate years. That's part of what makes it preposterous. and unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 The Poston's screwed LaVar... The Redskins didn't... And something tells me LaVar knows damn well what happened with the whole situation and is filing so the NFLPA finds the Poston's as negligent... I agree completely with you, cskin... I'm fairly certain LaVar knows... why else would he say that this wouldn't effect his relationship with the team? Obviously if a company owed you money, you'd damn well take issue with them if they weren't going to go about fixing it... Why would LaVar not care? Think about it... It makes alot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 It was obvious from the beginning. Agents are paid to read contracts among other things. The good ones do it. The Redskins are not going to trick their big time player. How does a team go about obscuring the details gaining them $6.5 million? Hmm? Absurdity abounds...But with this league office Lavar will probably win his grievance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I think this is clearly the Redskins' fault. Afterall, Daniel Snyder has an incredible reputation for being stingy, underpaying, and leaving oodles of space in his cap every year. Seriously, it doesn't jibe with Snyder's history, reputation, and in the long run would be far more detrimental to the organization than the saving of 6.5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.