FEATURED Free Agency 2026 thread

Reality said:
Personally, I don't care because I agree that a deal is not done until it is signed and submitted to the league.

That said, there is more to this than "oh no, they went back on their word".

This impacted several teams and players starting with the Raiders obviously thinking they had more cap room so they made offers to other players believing that.

When the trade fell through days later, those agents/players they had agreed to deals, but not yet signed then had to worry if the that caused the Raiders to back out of their deals now some of those teams that were interested in them may have already moved on to other players which means fewer opportunities and demand which will hurt their contract offers.

Even players like Gary for example who the Cowboys traded for had to worry, what if the Cowboys now make a deal to get Crosby will they still be interested in him or would they still offer the same trade deal.

The one thing the other teams and especially the other players gained from this was that the still-recovering excuse (whether legitimate or not doesn't matter for this discussion) the Ravens provided took away the Raiders leverage in what they were asking for in return, so it made them more willing to keep Crosby.

The removal of Crosby off the market alone could have had a huge impact on the market.

This could have very easily turned into a domino situation of backed-out-of deals which would have created a few cap problems for teams, but could have led to a lot of money being lost by the players.

I fully believe the NFLPA will push for fines from this for the Ravens if they find any sort of angle and the fact the Ravens were negotiation with Hendrickson the whole time makes it sound like Crosby was their plan B and was likely used as leverage in their negotiation with Hendrickson.

When you factor in the other teams and players that could have been impacted, the NFLPA will have a strong argument in the courts for CBA tampering, manipulation, etc. violations they can claim impacted their members (players) financially.

Again, I'm not saying I care, but I'm saying the NFLPA will most definitely use this to their advantage.
Click to expand...
I agree.
And the fact that the Ravens rushed out and said we were hoping to pair Crosby and Hendrickson has CYA written all over it.
 
Stash said:
If you want to choose to be willfully ignorant, I can’t stop you.

But the Ravens backed out of an agreed upon deal for a top pass rusher and signed another top pass rusher the next morning.

If you want to look the other way on that, that’s your prerogative.
Click to expand...
It's not willful ignorance inasmuch as it's looking for evidence before tarring and feathering an organization. I mean, we know our guys lie but that doesn't mean they all do every time. Thanks for the contract link but it still doesn't answer the question about Crosby being rejected due to the physical both sides knew was part of the deal clincher. I want to know how that was something nefarious because then the Raiders have a contention they can make and if they were wronged, of course they make it. All we've heard from Crosby's doctor/surgeon is that he's ahead of his recovery schedule. Word is it was the long-term health the Ravens were concerned about. Is there a rebuttal that says his long-term prognosis actually looks good? That's what I entered the chat with. Logical question here, not emotion.
 
Sooo. No CB's and no LBers bought in so far, and not alot left. (Not alot of difference makers).So it's all on a draftpick compromised draft. We need starters at Corner, LBer, still at Edge, we need depth all over. Def. Not busting the Budget and looks like a 2 year rebuild at this point.
Now, trade period is not over - but the anticipation of what would happen "Busting the Budget" does not match the results to date ....i would.imagine as is the norm around here, they will still sign a few depth pieces to the roster.
but call me - not disappointed, but def. Not stoked by what they have not achieved.
MEH.
 
Reality said:
I wasn't even thinking about Crosby being upset nor did I think he would file a complaint of any kind. I'm guessing he's happy staying with the Raiders.

I was thinking the NFLPA is going to want to use this (and it's a valid argument) as leverage against the NFL because the fallout of the announcement combined with the Ravens backing out days later heavily impacted other players and also the free agent market overall.
Click to expand...
They will probably need to take a look at the entire ‘legal tampering’ period. Right now nothing is binding until the start of the league year and official start of FA.
 
MarcusRock said:
It's not willful ignorance inasmuch as it's looking for evidence before tarring and feathering an organization. I mean, we know our guys lie but that doesn't mean they all do every time. Thanks for the contract link but it still doesn't answer the question about Crosby being rejected due to the physical both sides knew was part of the deal clincher. I want to know how that was something nefarious because then the Raiders have a contention they can make and if they were wronged, of course they make it. All we've heard from Crosby's doctor/surgeon is that he's ahead of his recovery schedule. Word is it was the long-term health the Ravens were concerned about. Is there a rebuttal that says his long-term prognosis actually looks good? That's what I entered the chat with. Logical question here, not emotion.
Click to expand...
That’s just it. The Ravens can (and did!) say whatever they want. Zero proof required.

Every physical is subjective and any team can find any reason to pass or fail any player.

Do you honestly believe that they just coincidentally signed a player at the exact same position the day after they backed out of the trade?

If you do, I have a bridge to sell you.
 
MikeT22 said:
They will probably need to take a look at the entire ‘legal tampering’ period. Right now nothing is binding until the start of the league year and official start of FA.
Click to expand...
Just label every trade and free agent signing as "pending physical." I used to see that all the time and now don't since it's an unspoken formality.
 
Stash said:
That’s just it. The Ravens can (and did!) say whatever they want. Zero proof required.

Every physical is subjective and any team can find any reason to pass or fail any player.

Do you honestly believe that they just coincidentally signed a player at the exact same position the day after they backed out of the trade?

If you do, I have a bridge to sell you.
Click to expand...
They did need an edge rusher which is why they traded for one. Beyond the Crosby physical due diligence it would also be doing due diligence to contact Hendrickson's people to say they may get involved if they don't like what they see in Crosby's medicals. Heck, it could have been why Hendrickson set his decision deadline that day to give the Ravens time to beat all other offers and perhaps that's what happened if they didn't already have an offer on his desk which wouldn't be a bad plan. But to say the Ravens would hatch up a scheme and risk the bad PR among owners and the public or someone finding out to save their draft picks that the NFL maybe could take away anyway is a lot of leaping to make just based on opportunistic optics that "every filthy, lying scum would jump at that." They have opted out of signings on smaller scales in the past. How much more careful would you be on a larger scale? A wise book says "he that is faithful in little, is faithful in much." The Ravens have precedence of operating that way (and avoiding being burned) on their side. Crosby's not special in that regard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 10,132 (members: 72, guests: 10,060)
Robots: 1,994

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
475,026
Messages
14,577,135
Members
24,214
Latest member
whoami2066
Back
Top