On Now
Coming Up

Blogs

For now, still waiting

Posted by Darren Urban on April 26, 2011 – 7:07 am

I know a lot of people want to know what is going on after yesterday’s court ruling. As of now, everything seems to remain in limbo. There will be a handful of players showing up to team facilities across the league, but it’s not like, for instance, John Lott is going to be putting everyone through the paces suddenly. Every report I have read says players aren’t going to be able to work out, not until more of the legal path is traveled and further sorted.

The same goes for offseason moves. As of now, the new league year has yet to start, so there are still no trades/signings/etc. As I have said before, something had to happen in the legal arena for this process to move forward, and that’s what Monday was. So now we move forward, although it’s impossible to know what the timetable is or how quickly the labor issue will be resolved. Regardless, it is moving forward, which is a good thing.

UPDATE: As I said, we wait.


Tags:
Posted in Blog | 43 Comments »


43 Responses to “For now, still waiting”

  1. By Fred on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    could this mean we could go after or at lest talk to free agents

  2. By lg on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    can they sign free agents now

  3. By VoiceofReason on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Thanks for the info, Darren. But now that the lockout has lifted, such that GMs and players can speak to one another, is there some reason why teams cannot at least contact free agents and start dialogue? Can’t see this breaching any CBA, as there isn’t one…

  4. By Nick Pepe on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Just agree already. I know there is a lot at stake, but if you can’t agree on how to split billions of dollars then both sides are being greedy. Both sides are at fault. And it is starting to get annoying. And the sentiment that the fans feel will only snowball after the draft. Right now, everyone can talk, ponder, speculate and wish about their respective teams draft. But once that is over then there is nothing to look forward to until this is resolved and that will not go over well with die-hard, impatient fans.

    Nick Pepe
    Frustrated Lifetime Member

  5. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    LG, Fred –

    RE: Free agents now

    No.

  6. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    VoiceofReason –

    RE: Lockout lifted

    The NFL’s stance is that they are still looking to appeal and want that sorted out.

  7. By Mike Ellingboe on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    @Darren,

    Sounds like the lockout is “over” in ruling only; if the players aren’t allowed to work out and if free agency hasn’t been opened up what exactly is the difference between now and before the judge’s decision?

  8. By jocards on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Darren

    The draft is right around the corner and I’m getting the feeling that the Cards will select Gabbert if he’s still available at #5. I think they’d still need to sign a FA QB, assuming there is a free agency period. To me Skelton has not shown enough to believe firmly that he is the QB of the future. What is your feeling on whether or not they’ll draft Gabbert if he is still on the board at five? I am beginning to believe that being as QB is clearly a need for this team that unless they do not believe in Gabbert, they should take him….even though I am aware that there are many needs for this team. I think they should then perhaps sign Bulger as a FA….Your thoughts?

  9. By MikeG on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Hey Darren–Hope all is good!—What do you think of the Card’s having no
    scheduled prime time games??? I think it could help them, no short weeks to prepare. I’m sure coach Whiz likes those standard Sunday Games–No distractions in preparation. Also–Do you like the fact the NFL draft is covered for 3 days??? Seems kind of over the top????

  10. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    jocards –

    RE: QB situation

    I have thought all along they will get a veteran QB regardless of who they select at No. 5. Whether they take Gabbert will depend, I suppose, on who is there with him. Personally, I would not.

  11. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    MikeG –

    RE: Primetime games/draft over three days

    Whiz talked about the non-primetime lineup: http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and-events/article-2/Assessing-The-2011-Schedule/8eea59b9-9b9b-4b0a-a518-401a17815c3e

    As for the draft, I prefer it the old over-two-days way, but it is what it is.

  12. By MikeG on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Also Darren, Under Whiz’s coaching era — Which player do you think has been the best draft choice by the Card’s to this point????— Given the players production and the round he was chosen. Card’s have some pretty good ones!!!

  13. By VoiceofReason on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Darren,

    So the NFL is essentially self-imposing a continued lockout despite being enjoined from doing so?

    I’m ribbing you a little bit — it is certainly a double-edged sword here.

    Here’s betting guys like Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder are having conversations with free agents as we speak, understanding that the inevitable– judge’s denial of the Motion to Stay — is about to occur.

  14. By VoiceofReason on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    And on the draft, I agree 100% with Darren, albeit for purely selfish reasons. I always enjoyed the “holiday weekend” that was draft weekend. Getting up at the crack of dawn on Saturday, heading out to Jackson’s on Third for the Draft Party, and being there literally all day. The Thursday night idea broke that up.

  15. By jocards on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Darren -

    RE: QB situation

    Thanks for the straight forward reply. When you say that you personally would not select Gabbert is it due to reservations about him as a player? Is it due to the fact that the team has many other needs? Is it faith in Skelton as a future viable starter? Or is all or none of the above?

  16. By Brian E. on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Hey Darren,
    Loking long term, do you think that P. Peterson will turn safety? I have heard you mention that a few times now. If so, what do you think happens to the current starters? They are both obviously pro bowl caliber players and I’m sure the Cards would like to keep them both.

  17. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    MikeG –

    RE: Top pick

    Tie between Breaston and Hightower would be my vote.

  18. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    jocards –

    RE: Gabbert

    For me, it’s reservations about the player, without regard to the Cards at all. Just not sure about him. I could be 100 percent wrong.

  19. By lets talk cardinals on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Darren,

    If the Cards pick up P. Peterson do you a scenario where they put him at Safety & A. Wilson at Lb? Just a thought & I mean a few times a game. I’m very interested to get you point of view.

  20. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Brian E –

    RE: Peterson/safety

    I think many people around the NFL think Peterson would eventually be a safety. But it might not be until a few years, when the Cards may be looking for a safety anyway.

  21. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Lets Talk –

    RE: Wilson at LB

    Adrian may be used closer to the line of scrimmage once in a while, but he won’t be a linebacker.

  22. By ross on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Darren, I knew you loved Timmy.

  23. By B on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Haha!Go players!!!

  24. By Billy Thomas on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Darren-

    Are you surprised that the owners are not using this small opening to grab great players and potentially use players in trade negotiations? I expected them to let the lifted lockout keep going for a week so they could do the whole big time free agent thing, as well as potentially make trades for draft picks using players?

    Also, based on what people are saying about Judge Nelson’s opinion having almost no legal loopholes to appeal, do you expect the appeal to work, and if not what happens then?

    I know these are all of the big questions I think everyone is asking, but I wondered what you thought of these things. Thanks alot!

  25. By Darren Urban on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Billy –

    RE: Questions

    1) I’m not surprised because I expected all along that this had to fully play out in the courts. It hasn’t yet.
    2) I have no idea what happens next, legally. I’m just a writer, not a lawyer. Smarter people than me have to figure that out.

  26. By cisco on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    I seen somewhere at work that the Cards might think about trading their #5 pick? I was wondering if that was true?

  27. By Jim in Missouri on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Agree completely on Gabbert, Darren.

    I’ve watched him for the last 2 years at Missouri, and he has yet to impress me. He’s physically impressive, but put up ordinary numbers despite playing in a spread offense against a weak schedule. He can’t throw the deep ball and will grab the title of Captain Checkdown away from Matt Leinart in a heartbeat. Plus, whenever he’s gotten hit at all or knocked around, he folds like origami. If he wasn’t 6-foot-5 and built strong, he would be a third-rounder at best.

    Not to beat this question into the ground, Darren, but even though the “start of the league year” hasn’t arrived, there’s no CBA and the lockout has been lifted. What would the repercussions be if the Cardinals contacted FAs and even signed a couple (or at least developed gentlemen’s agreements)? Is there a rule in place that would prohibit that? I understand that, as a unit, the NFL doesn’t want that to happen. But why wouldn’t the Cardinals (or any team) do what’s in their best interests, to get players by any means possible within the rules?

  28. By bluepitt on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    Billy,
    Ill tell you what happens now, our beloved game and League is no more if we don’t win the appeal, and the lock out continues. The judge just set the precedence for players to get sue happy over anything and everything they feel is hindering them from getting paid! It will be the base case for all NFL unfair practice litigation. You will hear Brady VS the NFL sited in every case involving labor issues.

  29. By bluepitt on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    oh and once the precedence is set, most all courts side with the past ruling or base the new ruling off of the past one.

  30. By Jeff Gollin on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    I don’t understand why the players – on their own – don’t simply set up a shadow training regimen at another local facility (complete with trainers) so that they can continue their off-season regiment along fairly normal lines.

    When you divide the cost among the participating players, it can’t be all that much; plus it’s in the players’ own best interests to stay in the best off-season shape possible.

    Going one step farther, what’s to prevent the various position units to set up informal training sessions to work on teamwork and techniques?

    This whole thing seems to be boiling down to (a) the League and teams not wanting the players to further their own interests by staying in shape and honing their skills and (b) the players seeking to “maintain & improve the physical product” – i.e. their skills and conditioning.

    I’m willing to bet that a few teams are informally encouraging their players to do just that and that they will be the teams who have a leg up on their competition going into next season.

    I don’t understand why it wouldn’t be in the Cardinals’ best interests to take out the necessary liability insurance policies and invite their players (“members of the Cardinal family”) to make use of their training facilities. It would be good for team morale.

    Let the negotiations on the big issues continue; but let’s avoid the petty posturing that can only work against the interests of both the player and the team.

  31. By carlo7000 on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    dear darren
    do you think graves and ken could do the mistake and trade down even if patrick peterson is still on the board????

  32. By cards62 on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    Darren

    I guess this means if we wanted to we could trade for players during the draft.
    Is my thinking correct?

    Thanks

  33. By D on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    I don’t think the Cards will have to worry about a QB at 5 because both will be gone by then, and maybe Miller too, that leaves Peterson and Quinn and then you have to sit back and let the phone ring, because Peterson is the best player in the draft and a few teams really like him…

  34. By Eazy E on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    They(NFLPA) have said you should contact agents for free agents that you intend to acquire though and I kinda like this new primetime draft.

  35. By kaleb on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    Darren – Greetings from Afghanistan. So the new buzz is that the redskins are trying to trade up for gabbert. They are also trying to part ways with Donovan. We could get mcnabb in a 5 round drop and still get either Peterson or Amukumora for a DB. I know I keep bringing it up but another rookie QB makes me nervous, and i just think Don would be a perfect situation to allow our talented young arms to develop. I mean the guys loves AZ, how has this not been thought of.

  36. By Darren Urban on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    Jim in Missouri –

    RE: “Best interests”

    I don’t know the details. Ultimately, I think you’d have to think, big picture, what exactly the “best interests” of a team exactly are.

  37. By Darren Urban on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    Carlo –

    RE: Peterson

    Anything is possible.

  38. By Darren Urban on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    cards62 –

    RE: Trading for players during draft

    As of 11:55 a.m. Wednesday, no.

  39. By Darren Urban on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    Kaleb –

    RE: McNabb

    First, we appreciate all you do serving our country. Thank you.

    But the Cardinals will not be getting McNabb.

  40. By clssylssy on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    Darren:
    It seems that Coach Whisenhunt prefers veteran players in such key positions as QB, and given the fact that we already have two decent, allbeit, undeveloped QB rookies, do you really think the Cards will try to snag a QB with our 5th choice. I’ve been reading a lot lately about the fit between the Cards and Matt Hasselback, and it makes sense. What do you think? None of the QB draftees really seem all that exciting and to have another “green” QB seems self- defeating.
    Also, by ignoring Judge Susan’s ruling, it would appear that the Owners are demonstrating clearly their contempt for her and have no interest in the fans being able to enjoy a regular season and getting what they have paid for in season tickets. Is this the sentiment of all the Owners or just a few, Jerry Joneses bullying the rest? Where does the Cardinal Organization fall in this contempt of court and disrespect for the fan?

  41. By Darren Urban on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    clssylssy –

    RE: QB

    I think you have a fair assessment on the situation.

    As for the ruling, I’m not going to pretend to know what is going on exactly. It is business for both sides. Period.

  42. By whoknowsnothing on Apr 27, 2011 | Reply

    if Free Agency starts tomorrow the Cardinals should jump at the chance and sign atleast one of the Falcons OL free agents.

  43. By Barry Bond on Apr 30, 2011 | Reply

    Way to go Cardinals! As stated by ESPN and NFL network last year the Cardinals have the worst quarterbacks in the NFL on their roster and there is NO change. Another wasted season without a REAL quarterback. No change here passing on Blaine Gabbert, Andy Dalton, Christian Pounder and the list goes on. This means they are also passing on Larry Fitzgerald with NO quarterback that can get him the ball and that includes Hall and Skelton with another 5-11 season at best. What happen to the pass rusher and quarterback sacker we were suppose to go after too? I give up, Whisenhunt and Graves has got to GO or I am out of here. What a shame for Fitzgerald? In 2012 maybe Tom Brady will be his quarterback? One thing for sure it will not be Anderson, Hall or Skelton!!!

Post a Comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 447 other followers