PDA

View Full Version : curtis fires agent?


detroit4life
03-05-2007, 07:05 PM
http://blog.mlive.com/highlightreel/2007/03/kowalski_curtis_may_have_fired.html

i guess he headed home to salt lake city but reports are he fired condon becuase he was to preoccupied with Quinns workout while he was in detroit

WMD
03-05-2007, 07:12 PM
Please stay away from Drew Rosenhaus...

detroit4life
03-05-2007, 07:14 PM
i think he has to wait 5 days before signing with another agent if this is actually true. If thats the case i wonder if he'd negotiate himself or wait the full 5 days showing he went back to his home and not to another visit should be a good sign for us tho

Scotty D
03-05-2007, 07:19 PM
Giants thread says he is in New York. Lets sign that McDonald guy instead. He seems like more of a #3 anyways.

detroit4life
03-05-2007, 07:22 PM
we're looking for a #2 and to move furrey to #3. Kowalski says he was on a plane to salt lake city so im not sure he went to NY id think that he woulda gone straight from detroit if he was

Scotty D
03-05-2007, 07:25 PM
we're looking for a #2 and to move furrey to #3. Kowalski says he was on a plane to salt lake city so im not sure he went to NY id think that he woulda gone straight from detroit if he was

I think Furrey has earned #2, and I never liked the idea bringing in Curtis to the #2.

Xiomera
03-05-2007, 07:27 PM
McDonald is a nice backup plan. And not signing Curtis would keep hope alive for those of you hoping for CJ, lol.

WMD
03-05-2007, 09:50 PM
I'm not hoping for Calvin Johnson, but I would not complain at all if we picked him.

TacticaLion
03-05-2007, 10:00 PM
I'm not hoping for Calvin Johnson, but I would not complain at all if we picked him.I would... a lot... not just because i'd rather use the pick in different ways, but also for what it COULD do to Roy and the player he is.

Might just be me.

detroit4life
03-05-2007, 10:07 PM
i agree thats one thing that holds me off on CJ knowing it would most likely piss off roy

TacticaLion
03-05-2007, 10:12 PM
i agree thats one thing that holds me off on CJ knowing it would most likely piss off royI just think about the "value" of the #2 pick... and what we need... and how much we could get INSTEAD of drafting CJ.

Like Willis... and additional 2nd and 3rd round picks...

WMD
03-05-2007, 10:15 PM
What about the pick of Mike Williams two years ago? Don't you think that pissed him off? If he doesn't like it, he can go.. as talented as Roy is, Calvin Johnson has the tools to be the best WR in the League in a short amount of time. Just dominant.

WMD
03-05-2007, 10:19 PM
I mean, of course I want to trade down and address a position of higher need.. but if nothing happens... Calvin is not a bad choice.

Aard
03-05-2007, 10:59 PM
The argument as to whether the Lions might select Calvin Johnson is academic. Oakland will pick CJ #1 overall.

The Raiders will then set their sights on Drew Stanton or Troy Smith in the second round.

JaMarcus cost himself a lot of money; he shouldn't have Supersized all those Happy Meals.

TacticaLion
03-06-2007, 07:57 AM
The argument as to whether the Lions might select Calvin Johnson is academic. Oakland will pick CJ #1 overall.

The Raiders will then set their sights on Drew Stanton or Troy Smith in the second round.

JaMarcus cost himself a lot of money; he shouldn't have Supersized all those Happy Meals.I'll quote you on that one when the draft comes.

Addict
03-06-2007, 11:07 AM
The argument as to whether the Lions might select Calvin Johnson is academic. Oakland will pick CJ #1 overall.

The Raiders will then set their sights on Drew Stanton or Troy Smith in the second round.

JaMarcus cost himself a lot of money; he shouldn't have Supersized all those Happy Meals.

Porter is staying, Moss may stick around, and they're picking CJ? Riiiight. I agree with tactical: draft day come, one of us is going to eat a nice big plate 'o words.

Aard
03-07-2007, 11:12 AM
Porter is staying, Moss may stick around, and they're picking CJ? Riiiight. I agree with tactical: draft day come, one of us is going to eat a nice big plate 'o words.

Hey, I hope you're right. I'd rather have CJ available at #2 so Detroit has two more options with the #2 pick: either select CJ, or trade down to someone who wants the receiver badly enough.

I'm good with either of those two choices.

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 12:57 PM
Hey, I hope you're right. I'd rather have CJ available at #2 so Detroit has two more options with the #2 pick: either select CJ, or trade down to someone who wants the receiver badly enough.

I'm good with either of those two choices.No... i'm not good with either of those two choices. It shouldn't be "either select CJ, or trade down"... it should be "either select GAdams, or trade down". CJ isn't an option... i'm sorry.

Aard
03-07-2007, 02:57 PM
No... i'm not good with either of those two choices. It shouldn't be "either select CJ, or trade down"... it should be "either select GAdams, or trade down". CJ isn't an option... i'm sorry.

For you he's not.

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 03:04 PM
For you he's not.http://www.mlive.com/lions/weblog/index.ssf?/mtlogs/mlive_lions/archives/2007_02.html

There are a lot of players worthy of the No. 2 pick but none that really excite the Lions. The two quarterbacks? Donít really want them. Adrian Peterson? Not if Kevin Jones is still on track? Calvin Johnson? The Lions wonít be taking a receiver in the first round in Marinelliís lifetime.

Shut up. Get over yourself. CJ will NOT be drafted by the Lions.

Aard
03-07-2007, 04:01 PM
http://www.mlive.com/lions/weblog/index.ssf?/mtlogs/mlive_lions/archives/2007_02.html



Shut up. Get over yourself. CJ will NOT be drafted by the Lions.

Go back a couple posts and read where I actually said the Lions would NOT be drafting CJ.

I have an opinion. You have a differing opinion. Both of our opinions are supported and refuted by the opinions of others. That's how it works.

I haven't been here long, Tacky, but my first impression of you was somewhat positive when I first began to read the threads. But, hey, I'm open to new ideas and changing my mind when warranted, and it's happening again. Now I think you're a self-promoting blowhard who can't stomach a divergent voice.

Yesterday I didn't have much of an emotional investment whether the Lions took CJ or not. Now I hope it happens just to send you into a hissy fit.

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 05:19 PM
Go back a couple posts and read where I actually said the Lions would NOT be drafting CJ.

I have an opinion. You have a differing opinion. Both of our opinions are supported and refuted by the opinions of others. That's how it works.

I haven't been here long, Tacky, but my first impression of you was somewhat positive when I first began to read the threads. But, hey, I'm open to new ideas and changing my mind when warranted, and it's happening again. Now I think you're a self-promoting blowhard who can't stomach a divergent voice.

Yesterday I didn't have much of an emotional investment whether the Lions took CJ or not. Now I hope it happens just to send you into a hissy fit.So far, i've heard you make some bold statements... statements that lack reason and/or research. Will Oakland draft CJ? No one really knows. Is it reasonable to interrupt an argument, claiming that it's "academic", because YOU seem to think CJ WILL be drafted over JaMarcus? No. Saying "Hey, I think Oakland will draft CJ over JaMarcus" is one thing... but telling everyone else in the thread that the argument shouldn't exist is unnecessary... especially without a link/source (and because Oakland may very well draft JaMarcus).

Then, you respond to my "CJ isn't an option for the Lions" post (which is a known fact: the Lions WILL NOT draft a WR) with:
For you he's not.
Ok, chief. What do our opinions have to do with what the Lions do in the draft? Nothing. The Lions have made it clear that they WILL NOT DRAFT A WR, and I gave a source that supports that claim.

So... that whole "For you he's not" comment... who were you referring to? Were you trying to suggest that he's still an option for the Lions? He isn't. None of the rest matters.

I apologize for the excessive "rudeness"... simply because you're a Lions fan and this is an internet forum. I get tired of bold and sourceless claims... predictions that are both unreasonable and unnecessary (and that interrupt a conversation). I do NOT have a problem accepting a different opinion... but I DO have a problem listening to random and unreasonable "truths".

WMD
03-07-2007, 05:28 PM
So because Kowalski said it, it's 100% guaranteed? I don't think the Lions will pick CJ but I wouldn't say that based on something Kowalski said in his blog.

Anyways, that's false.. Marinelli will likely be alive for another 20+ years, I'm sure we'll pick a Round 1 Receiver in that time. KOWALSKI, HOW COULD YOU? YOU LIAR!

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 05:33 PM
So because Kowalski said it, it's 100% guaranteed? I don't think the Lions will pick CJ but I wouldn't say that based on something Kowalski said in his blog.

Anyways, that's false.. Marinelli will likely be alive for another 20+ years, I'm sure we'll pick a Round 1 Receiver in that time. KOWALSKI, HOW COULD YOU? YOU LIAR! The difference? It isn't Kowalski's opinion... it's information taken from Marinelli. All we have as fans are sources... and Kowalski is a trusted Lions source. He and the coaches have said that the Lions will NOT draft a WR, and I believe that.

detroit4life
03-07-2007, 06:30 PM
i just dont see them taking him hes a great player and i would love him in detroit but the direction marinellis trying to go is hard nosed football and adding another flashy and potential pro bowl reciever isnt exactly hard nosed football.

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 06:48 PM
i just dont see them taking him hes a great player and i would love him in detroit but the direction marinellis trying to go is hard nosed football and adding another flashy and potential pro bowl reciever isnt exactly hard nosed football.True. Marinelli seems to be trying to build "his" defense, and still sees a lot of holes in it.

They could draft a WR in round 4-7, but NOT rounds 1-3.

detroit4life
03-07-2007, 09:26 PM
i truly hope they go defense mostly in day one the only offensive player i'd be happy with is stanton in the second or an OG. but i hope they adress DE CB MLB in day one unless they are able to get a FA MLB.

TacticaLion
03-08-2007, 12:00 AM
i truly hope they go defense mostly in day one the only offensive player i'd be happy with is stanton in the second or an OG. but i hope they adress DE CB MLB in day one unless they are able to get a FA MLB.I agree 100%. One 2nd round pick (Stanton or OG) is good, but the rest need to fill our huge defensive holes... as you said, MLB, CB and DE (not as big, but we could use an upgrade... which is why I think Bazuin will be the pick).

Addict
03-08-2007, 04:30 AM
I agree 100%. One 2nd round pick (Stanton or OG) is good, but the rest need to fill our huge defensive holes... as you said, MLB, CB and DE (not as big, but we could use an upgrade... which is why I think Bazuin will be the pick).


Don't forget, we've got some safety issues too. Kennedy flat out sucks.

I'll just remind you of my mannequin on wheels-idea.

TacticaLion
03-08-2007, 11:08 AM
Don't forget, we've got some safety issues too. Kennedy flat out sucks.

I'll just remind you of my mannequin on wheels-idea.HAHAHA! That idea is great... talk about intimidation.

I do think Kennedy is a problem, but a problem that will be with us next year. IF we try to fix the position, it'll be done in later rounds... unless we package our 5th round picks to move up and snag someone.

Aard
03-08-2007, 01:41 PM
http://blog.mlive.com/highlightreel/2007/03/curtis_to_hire_new_agents_may.html

More info on Kevin Curtis and his FA status, from Bill Emkow @ mlive. The last paragraph has me puzzled; what is Emkow saying here?

Those who know Curtis say he would prefer to play for a West Coast team. Problem is, the San Francisco 49ers and San Diego Chargers haven't shown any interest in him. And teams that have dealt with Curtis over the past week have thought his judgment and actions awkward at best.

WTH? Could this be based on anything Curtis might have said or done (or NOT said, or NOT done) during his visit to Detroit? And -- again -- what does it mean? Especially the "at best" zinger at the end of the paragraph, like Emkow is being charitable describing KC's judgment and actions as merely "awkward".

ETA: Sorry, it looks like the original author of the piece was Adam Schefter over at NFL.com. The original article had one more paragraph at the end:

It's hard to believe Curtis is going to get more money by switching agents. But those who know him say money has not been the driving force behind these decisions. It is the unpredictable behavior of an indecisive wide receiver struggling to figure out where he wants to continue his football career.

TacticaLion
03-08-2007, 02:07 PM
*sigh*... I hope we still land him. He'll really give Martz' offense an explosive, speed WR. And, Furrey in the slot... those 3 will be great.

Pocket
03-08-2007, 03:14 PM
I kinda hope they get him as well, but I'm not sure if they will. McDonald is probably the next candidate for the job.

Aard
03-08-2007, 10:31 PM
http://www.mlive.com/lions/weblog/index.ssf?/mtlogs/mlive_lions/archives/2007_03.html#243165

Killer weighs in on the Kevin Curtis story:

You have to wonder: What is Kevin Curtis thinking?
There is a report that receiver Kevin Curtis plans on visiting the Eagles on Friday and, if it's true, you have to figure this means the Lions are in danger of losing him. It appeared from the outset -- and every indication on both sides suggested -- that Curtis would sign with the Lions.

Curtis fired his agent, Tom Condon, slightly before or slightly after he left his meeting with the Lions. The motive for the firing is unclear; some speculation has it that Curtis wanted to sign with Detroit but Condon was urging him to go elsewhere while others suggested Curtis wanted more options to consider. (If that was the case, why did he cancel his trip to the Giants?)

It's a puzzling situation, but Curtis' actions -- going to Minnesota before visiting Detroit and now going to Philly -- would seem to indicate that reuniting with Mike Martz isn't that big of a deal after all.

Or is it? Are these visits an attempt by Curtis to get the Lions to loosen up their purse strings? If Curtis wants to go to another team because he wants to be the No. 1 receiver, that's one thing. But if he goes to another team because the Lions go cheap on him, that's a significant misstep.

It would mean the Lions would be just 1-for-3 in acquiring their top targets in free agency. They got Dewayne White, but never had a shot at London Fletcher. The front office has to a lot better job than that if they're going to help this coaching staff.

wingboy2999
03-08-2007, 11:31 PM
Fords need to loosen up and give Curtis the money he deserves. Maybe overpay a little bit. But I don't see use losing him because he is told he'd be a #1 WR. Because I don't see a team where he could be a #1.

TacticaLion
03-09-2007, 09:19 AM
Fords need to loosen up and give Curtis the money he deserves. Maybe overpay a little bit. But I don't see use losing him because he is told he'd be a #1 WR. Because I don't see a team where he could be a #1./agreed.

Pay the man. Give him what he wants, make him happy, and let him prove it on the field. Put some clauses in his contract... "if you suck, you get nothing"... that type of thing. But, sign him.

Mythos
03-09-2007, 07:41 PM
I don't see the Curtis signing as being that critical. I thought the offense's problems were on third and short and TD% from the red zone. I don't see Curtis having an impact on either of those.

Aard
03-13-2007, 11:37 AM
Now that the Lions have signed Shaun McDonald, is there still any effort on their part to sign Kevin Curtis? Does it still make sense to pursue him?

TacticaLion
03-13-2007, 03:23 PM
Now that the Lions have signed Shaun McDonald, is there still any effort on their part to sign Kevin Curtis? Does it still make sense to pursue him?Nope... I don't think so.

Apparently, the problem with signing him before was money... money that he could probably get on another team. Now that we've filled his spot, there's no reason to pay him close to what he wants and hace McDonald (or Furrey) pushed to a 4th WR.

We've got RWilliams-McDonald-Furrey-MWilliams... we're all set at the WR position.

Addict
03-14-2007, 01:25 PM
[quote] "if you suck, you get nothing"... that type of thing

For some reason, I doubt he'll take that offer.

Would be great though. "in case you think you can cash in and suck, think again, you'll repay you're entire salary +30%"-clausule, that would've made us huge loads of money with Harrington and Charles Rogers.

Addict
03-14-2007, 01:27 PM
YAY posted it twice!

TacticaLion
03-14-2007, 05:09 PM
For some reason, I doubt he'll take that offer.

Would be great though. "in case you think you can cash in and suck, think again, you'll repay you're entire salary +30%"-clausule, that would've made us huge loads of money with Harrington and Charles Rogers.A lotta players take a deal like that... fill certain standards or you wont get paid the full contract. If the player is confident, he'll do it. If he hesitates, forget him.