The Law is back in Detroit....

[Jarv]

I never said he'd play for less money for Bill as a fact - but that some former Bill players had. - obviously that is skewed and he's still unemployed.....

27 months ago I reported Pats were obviously attempting to trade him and his cap hit at the time!

Ok, you never said it as a fact, then you said it as a lie ? I'm confused Nors. How did you exactly phrase the BP discount. I'm sure its in the archives.

 

[Cbz40]

You have said from the beginning Law would sign here for a Parcells discount. If that's not saying less money then what is?

Parcells discount........Law ups the asking price plus 50% Then a 10% discount as a special price for BP.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Parcells discount........Law ups the asking price plus 50% Then a 10% discount as a special price for BP.

Law must be a car salesman on the side

 

[HardHittin'Witten]

looks like it may be the Jets now.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/story/331664p-283430c.html

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Nors,

I think it's interesting that you would shy away from the implications of saying Law would play for less because of Bill but when you imply that other things might happen and they come to fruition, you are loud to the point of obnoxious, in the fact that you "said it first!"

How does one explain this?

 

[djmajestik]

That is one HOT sig you got man!

DJ MJ

 

[Charles]

Nors,

I think it's interesting that you would shy away from the implications of saying Law would play for less because of Bill but when you imply that other things might happen and they come to fruition, you are loud to the point of obnoxious, in the fact that you "said it first!"

How does one explain this?

Not to speak for Nors or answer the question you posed, but I heard Ty Law during a Interview with Sean Salisbury and John Clayton on Game Night (Weekend ESPN radio show) 1 and half weeks ago unequivocally state that he would take less from a contender if a lesser team had a better offer on the table.

He might have been blowing smoke during the interview, but who knows.

I believe Ty Law would take less to play for Parcells if given a chance or role to compete for a starting spot. Infact, I like the idea of having Newman, Henry, Law and Glenn as our CBs. Newman could participate more as a slot or nickel CB, while also handling Special teams chores. He's the purest return guy we have on the team and Parcells has been reluctant to use him on SP because of the thin talent at CB.

The Cowboys usually carry 6 or 7 DBs.

Williams,Newman, Henry, Glenn, Law, Davis and Beriualt/ Reese/Franzier/Thonrton/Williams (whomever excells more on Special teams). That is a blend of talented veterans, youth and experience in the secondary.

That is the best case scenario I can make for Law making our roster. Depending on match-ups guys like Reese, Glenn or Beriault can be inactive game day. The idea is having insurance incase of injury or even poor play.

There is always going to be injuries and poor play. In a perfect world all our DBs will play well and if somehting occurs we'd bring in an up and coming DB, but I've watched the likes of Jones and Franzier etc....

 

[Jarv]

Not to speak for Nors or answer the question you posed, but I heard Ty Law during a Interview with Sean Salisbury and John Clayton on Game Night (Weekend ESPN radio show) 1 and half weeks ago unequivocally state that he would take less from a contender if a lesser team had a better offer on the table.

He might have been blowing smoke during the interview, but who knows.

I believe Ty Law would take less to play for Parcells if given a chance or role to compete for a starting spot. Infact, I like the idea of having Newman, Henry, Law and Glenn as our CBs. Newman could participate more as a slot or nickel CB, while also handling Special teams chores. He's the purest return guy we have on the team and Parcells has been reluctant to use him on SP because of the thin talent at CB.

The Cowboys usually carry 6 or 7 DBs.

Williams,Newman, Henry, Glenn, Law, Davis and Beriualt/ Reese (whomever excells more on Special teams. That is a blend of talented veterans, youth and experience in the secondary.

That is the best case scenario I can make for Law making our roster. Depending on match-ups guys like Reese, Glenn or Beriault can be inactive.

Charles,

It would be nice if...

1) If Law would play for a discounted price.

2) If Law can actually still play at a high level.

3) If Law would be flexible and play FS or where ever BP tells him to play.

4) If Law doesn't want to re-up for more money in 2 years.

5) If Law didn't have the Potsons as agents, whom we do not like to deal with and makes those top 4 If's nearly impossible.

Would it be nice to have Williams,Newman, Henry, Glenn, Law, Davis and Beriualt/ Reese. Absolutley. There were are are still too many "If's" on the board for Jerry and BP to take the risk.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Not to speak for Nors or answer the question you posed, but I heard Ty Law during a Interview with Sean Salisbury and John Clayton on Game Night (Weekend ESPN radio show) 1 and half weeks ago unequivocally state that he would take less from a contender if a lesser team had a better offer on the table.

He might have been blowing smoke during the interview, but who knows.

I believe Ty Law would take less to play for Parcells if given a chance or role to compete for a starting spot. Infact, I like the idea of having Newman, Henry, Law and Glenn as our CBs. Newman could participate more as a slot or nickel CB, while also handling Special teams chores. He's the purest return guy we have on the team and Parcells has been reluctant to use him on SP because of the thin talent at CB.

The Cowboys usually carry 6 or 7 DBs.

Williams,Newman, Henry, Glenn, Law, Davis and Beriualt/ Reese/Franzier/Thonrton/Williams (whomever excells more on Special teams). That is a blend of talented veterans, youth and experience in the secondary.

That is the best case scenario I can make for Law making our roster. Depending on match-ups guys like Reese, Glenn or Beriault can be inactive game day. The idea is having insurance incase of injury or even poor play.

There is always going to be injuries and poor play. In a perfect world all our DBs will play well and if somehting occurs we'd bring in an up and coming DB, but I've watched the likes of Jones and Franzier etc....

That's fair and I can appriciate that. I'd question, if indeed, we could be considered a contender but no matter.

I have no problem with the idea of him doing so. I mean, it makes sense that he would but it really doesn't answer why Nors would back up on this statement yet push ahead on the same exact type of statement should it prove correct. Consistancy is what's at question.

Never the less, thanks for stepping in and trying to answer this.

Nors, I'm really just trying to point out that it leaves a bad taste when you bludgen us with the ones you get right but take this sort of position with the ones that don't come to fruition. I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

 

[Charles]

Charles,

It would be nice if...

1) If Law would play for a discounted price.

2) If Law can actually still play at a high level.

3) If Law would be flexible and play FS or where ever BP tells him to play.

4) If Law doesn't want to re-up for more money in 2 years.

5) If Law didn't have the Potsons as agents, whom we do not like to deal with and makes those top 4 If's nearly impossible.

Would it be nice to have Williams,Newman, Henry, Glenn, Law, Davis and Beriualt/ Reese. Absolutley. There were are are still too many "If's" on the board for Jerry and BP to take the risk.

Well, every team that didn't reach the SuperBowl is full of "IFs".

We are a 6-10 team, the IFs Ty Law presents aren't any bigger than the IFs our 2005 draft class presents. 2 seasons later only Roy Williams appears to be a consistent, quality NFL type starter when most mediots and fans begged that draft as the best in a decade.

3 years later 2005 draft class takes the title. I'd rather take my IFs with a proven commodity (by all accounts Law appears to be healthy), he might not play to his past level, but that could be said for any NFL player... like maybe we've already seen the best Julius Jones has to offer.

He could become the next Anthony Thomas who jumped on the scene in Chitown his rookie season but faded with the weight of Walter Payton legacy on his shoulders (it could be argued the Bears team was horrible his next year ,but Payton toiled on some horrible Bears teams but still carried the load).

Parcells might not like the Poston's or the Rosenhaus type agents, but he better get on the BandWagon if he wants to keep up with the Joneses, because those 2 NFL agents/agencies have had the highest % rise in NFL / Sport clients in the past 5 years because they get their clients money.

 

[JackMagist]

I Soooo wish someone besides the Dallas Cowboys would sign this washed up has been so he will be off the market and we can quit seeing so much talk about him on this board. I would not want Ty Law here with his Poston agents under any circumstances. I didn't want him when he was healthy and I certainly don't want him now.

 

[Jarv]

3 years later 2005 draft class takes the title. I'd rather take my IFs with a proven commodity (by all accounts Law appears to be healthy), he might not play to his past level, but that could be said for any NFL player.

Not to start a flame war here Charles, but, (by all accounts Law appears to be healthy)...Has come from his agent and from the rehab people he hired to bring him back to form.

Not to say he isn't, I just haven't heard it from anybody who isn't PAID by Law. If you have, please let me know because its very posible I may have missed it.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Gotta give you credit Nors for thinking outside the box ...

This is his 'thinking outside the box".

Jerry/Bill (as QUOTED recently): "Free safety was the last priority this offseason."

Nors: "Let's sign (top cover-corner contract seeking) Law and convert him to free saftey".

 

[Charles]

Not to start a flame war here Charles, but, (by all accounts Law appears to be healthy)...Has come from his agent and from the rehab people he hired to bring him back to form.

Not to say he isn't, I just haven't heard it from anybody who isn't PAID by Law. If you have, please let me know because its very posible I may have missed it.

You make an excellent point. Most of the health blurbs are coming from guys on Ty Law's pay role.

If Law is asking for big money, I don't think he is going to show up for work-outs still nursing an injury. It would be counter-productive to do so. Law turned down low ball offers and league minimum offers while he was rehabbing because he knew he'd get healthy enough to work-out and command top dollar.

I guess the proof will be in the type of deal he signs. I wouldn't jump to conclusions like most have. Injuries and poor play could make Law a very valuable commodity during training camp. I've heard him state that he would take less to play for a contender. I think the Cowboys are as much a contender as the Panthers or Falcons were a couple of seasons ago. Plus the Parcells, Bledsoe and Terry Glenn factor. Those are atleast 2 former teammates who can take Law out to dinner...hint hint

 

[LaTunaNostra]

I like how Ty put it a few weeks back re Miami:

Posted on Tue, Jun. 28, 2005

Former Pro Bowl cornerback Ty Law indicated the Dolphins would like to have him visit a second time but made it sound as if the chances of him playing for Miami were remote, at best.


''Now Miami wants me to come back and visit,'' Law said during an interview with Peter King of Sports Illustrated. ``But if you can't afford Patrick Surtain, how can you afford me?''

Surtain was dealt to Kansas City in April for a second-round draft pick in what was largely a salary-cap-driven deal for the Dolphins. In the case of Law, the Dolphins are hoping he will settle for a lesser, short-term contract with the goal of him becoming a free agent next offseason.

But Law is intent on getting the big contract now rather than having to wait.

``The Jets are interested. Kansas City called again. Tampa Bay faxed an offer. Indianapolis is in it. I got an offer, sight unseen for $2.5 million for one year. If I wasn't ready, I'd just take it. But I'm going to be ready to play, and that's not the kind of contract I should get.

``Before they signed Surtain, the Chiefs gave me, like, a $42 million offer. But it was structured so bad that I'd probably only make $10 million before they'd cut me. So I didn't do it.''

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/12001317.htm

This has been his mantra all offseason. Big contract, no short term, no egregious backloading, regardless of the team, (the Pats, Jets, Indy, KC are all contenders, and all have been in talks with him recently), but he hasn't given any sign another ring is what matters most to him.

He also hasn't given good buddy Curtis Martin who has been lobbying for him, any indication he'll take less to play with his old friend on a contender, and vs his old team.

 

[Charles]

I like how Ty put it a few weeks back re Miami:

Posted on Tue, Jun. 28, 2005

Former Pro Bowl cornerback Ty Law indicated the Dolphins would like to have him visit a second time but made it sound as if the chances of him playing for Miami were remote, at best.


''Now Miami wants me to come back and visit,'' Law said during an interview with Peter King of Sports Illustrated. ``But if you can't afford Patrick Surtain, how can you afford me?''

Surtain was dealt to Kansas City in April for a second-round draft pick in what was largely a salary-cap-driven deal for the Dolphins. In the case of Law, the Dolphins are hoping he will settle for a lesser, short-term contract with the goal of him becoming a free agent next offseason.

But Law is intent on getting the big contract now rather than having to wait.

``The Jets are interested. Kansas City called again. Tampa Bay faxed an offer. Indianapolis is in it. I got an offer, sight unseen for $2.5 million for one year. If I wasn't ready, I'd just take it. But I'm going to be ready to play, and that's not the kind of contract I should get.

``Before they signed Surtain, the Chiefs gave me, like, a $42 million offer. But it was structured so bad that I'd probably only make $10 million before they'd cut me. So I didn't do it.''

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/12001317.htm

This has been his mantra all offseason. Big contract, no short term, no egregious backloading, regardless of the team, (the Pats, Jets, Indy, KC are all contenders, and all have been in talks with him recently), but he hasn't given any sign another ring is what matters most to him.

He also hasn't given good buddy Curtis Martin who has been lobbying for him, any indication he'll take less to play with his old friend on a contender, and vs his old team.

Take it for what it's worth but I heard Ty Law on John Clayton and Seasn Salisbury radio weekend show a week and a half ago unequivacally state that he would take less from a contender, if at the same time a lesser team offered a more lucrative contract. He could be lying just as much as the print press could print certain quotes that slant the article......who knows the proof will be in the contract he signs.

Maybe less means he'll take $4 million per with a contender instead of $6 million per with a pretender. I don't know, but I do know him and Sean Salisbury had a very candid conversation. Law stated he'll be ready and doesn't think he should settle for less unless the situation is right (contending team).

 

[Jarv]

Take it for what it's worth but I heard Ty Law on John Clayton and Seasn Salisbury radio weekend show a week and a half ago unequivacally state that he would take less from a contender, if at the same time a lesser team offered a more lucrative contract. He could be lying just as much as the print press could print certain quotes that slant the article......who knows the proof will be in the contract he signs.

Maybe less means he'll take $4 million per with a contender instead of $6 million per with a pretender. I don't know, but I do know him and Sean Salisbury had a very candid conversation. Law stated he'll be ready and doesn't think he should settle for less unless the situation is right (contending team).

I hear ya and belive you saw that Charles, just not sure I belive Ty.

The guy has 3 Superbowl rings, so why would he take less for a contender, but then, why wouldn't he take less at NE ? They are what I consider a contender !

He's out for the last big paycheck of his career, the injury was just bad luck and timing on his part. He wants as much up front or guranteed money he can get. Heck, baring the injury maybe we would have taken him over Henry, although Henry is younger.

Ty has had a great career and he must have worked hard to become the level of player he was. I'd have been on board with him and a big contract 5 years ago, just not now and the current stock pile of CB's we have now.

 

[Dat mans bro]

He's just trying to cash out. i think his order or priority is Cash, then contender. He's good, but getting too old.

anyone see him on Cribs before when the hammock broke that he was sitting on?

 

[blindzebra]

I heard him in an interview too.

He said fair market value several times.

He mentioned that KC can't afford to pay two CBs Surtain money.

He said my role is important, he did not elaborate on this, that could mean he wants to play for a contender, or it more likely means he wants to be the #1 CB.

He said, "I'm NOT GIVING ANY DISCOUNTS."

When asked what it would cost to sign him he said, "My agents handle all that."

So let's see there are many quotes from him about not taking less money, but he says once, I'll take less to play for a contender, and that is the truth?

Don't think so.

 

[Charles]

So let's see there are many quotes from him about not taking less money, but he says once, I'll take less to play for a contender, and that is the truth?

Don't think so.

Confirmed!!!

MY HERO!!. Came to my rescue.

For those who have been around long enough know that BZ and I can't agree on anything