Giants: Burress released

Unless you are not truly a Giants fan or have been sleeping all Friday afternoon, you have already heard the news that the Giants released Burress.

The timing is a little strange in my opinion and it leaves several questions up in the air. First we should examine the reasons that the Giants decided to cut Burress instead of waiting to see how the legal process might resolve itself.

There is only one set of circumstances under which the Giants would have taken Burress back:

• The legal case against Burress was settled with incidental or no jail time, mostly probation
• Burress showed a willingness to blend back into the team and participate in off season work outs
• Burress promised that he had turned the page on his rebellious team behavior and agreed to abide by all team rules of Colonel Coughlin's regime
• NFL suspension was to be moderate, allowing Burress to miss only a small portion of the 2009 season.

If you're into Boolean algebra, these conditions have to be "anded" together. All of them had to be true in order for the Giants to take Burress back. If you're not into Boolean algebra, consider them lights on a Christmas tree where if one goes out, they all go out. Everything needed to fall into place perfectly in order for Burress to come back. In fact, in my opinion, nearly all of them will break the wrong way and turn against Burress. Let me explain:

• It was apparent from the delay in the March 31 court date and its postponement to June 15 that the court case is unlikely to be resolved quickly, thereby preventing Burress from participating in workouts with the team. Furthermore, the reason that the case was not resolved is that the Manhattan DA is not willing to make a deal that does not have some significant jail time in it - at least 6 months to 1 year. This knocks out the first two conditions above. Burress will likely get a fair amount of jail time and even if his lawyer is successful at limiting it, resolution will not be swift. The wheels of justice grind very slowly... throw a penalty flag against the DA for delay of game.
• As far as Burress turning the page on his rebellious behavior, getting in line and being more compliant with team rules, it is apparent from his conduct that not only is he not becoming more conciliatory, rather he is becoming more intransigent and difficult. Specifically, Burress is contesting the fines that the Giants levied against him and filed a grievance with the league to try and recover the withheld bonus payment. It is certainly a reasonable action for Burress to take - he has a right to protect his compensation. But apparently, the Giants were trying to negotiate a settlement with him on some of these matters and Burress was completely inflexible, refusing to budge and showing great anger at the organization for attempting to do this. Furthermore, the email that his agent, Rosenhaus sent around to all the NFL teams informing them that Burress could be available in a trade, while not illegal, certainly left a strong message to the team that Burress himself was not interested in staying with the team.
• Finally, the Giants may have had a little birdie from the league whisper in their ear that the NFL suspension would not be slight and would be as long as the jail sentence, which means that Burress would probably not be available for the entire 2009 season.

If the Giants are reading the tea leaves correctly on this matter, they probably did the right thing by cutting him. The only question I have is: why do it now? Why not wait until these matters actually resolved so they could deal with facts on the table instead of assumptions. If they are not resolved by the time training camp comes around, the Giants could cut him then, but what is the advantage of taking this action now? While the Giants ownership and management want to win, they also want to win with some class and dignity. Imagine the circus that would revolve around the team if Burress were to show up at mini camp in June with this still unresolved. It probably wouldn't have been much better if they cut him right before that mini camp, because that's all people would be talking about... and I'm not talking about the press and the media, I'm talking about the players and the coaches. Giants probably wanted to resolve this now and get the hoopla and craziness out of the way, so the team could concentrate on the off-season conditioning program, on their needs for the draft and on preparing for the season.

Giants: Burress update

I am sure you already know, so this is not a news flash for you, but the Burress case has been postponed until June 15. Brafman, Burress lawyer, is apparently trying to negotiate a deal with the NY DA that will avoid jail time completely and the NY DA is insisting on some jail time. That part you already know, because it has been reported copiously in the media.

My take on this is simple. There is now virtually no chance that Burress will play in 2009. His only hope was that this would get resolved quickly, and that the resolution would involve little or no jail time, that he would get a minimal suspension by the NFL and therefore could theoretically return by around midseason. The court date, where he enters his plea, having been postponed to June, now gives the two sides time to work out a plea arrangement, but I don't think this delay helps Burress. Obviously, a deal could be closed at any moment, but the longer it goes before a deal is made, the less likely it is that Burress will play this year.

If the DA absolutely insists on some jail time, I don't know what leverage Burress has with which to negotiate. The facts in the case seem pretty clear and are not in great dispute. The only thing Burress has on his side is that it will be very costly for NYS to prosecute, he has a very good lawyer, and NYS might actually lose the case if it goes to trial. Doesn't sound like much, but even if that is the Burress side's leverage, NYS could still insist on a minimal sentence of 6 months and 1 year's probation, which is not an unreasonable offer. It just so happens that for someone who is a professional athlete, missing one year of playing time can never be regained and probably will cost him $7M or so.

To me it looks like a very high probability that if Burress puts on a helmet ever again, it will not be in the 2009 season.

Giants: Burress case

Please see this article in ESPN.com about the lawyer for Burress, Ben Brafman, trying to get Burress off with a lesser charge. This is the only way it can work for Plaxico to avoid jail time - if the charges are changed to a 3rd degree gun possession charge before Burress enters his plea next Tuesday. Once the plea is entered, and it is locked in that the charge against him is 2nd degree felony gun possession, he's cooked. This is the charge that carries with it a minimum mandatory sentence of 3 1/2 years. But if the charge is changed to 3rd degree possession, it is still a D-class felony, which means that it can not be plead down to a misdemeanor. But, some of those charged with 3rd degree possession actually avoid jail time and get only probation. It is not a majority of the cases, so even if it is reduced to 3rd degree, Burress is still not home free. There is a fourth degree gun possession charge in NYS that is a misdemeanor. About 25% of those charged with 3rd degree possession are given only probation, while others receive some jail time. NYS in the borough of Manhattan has a very high conviction rate on these gun possession charges, so if it goes to trial, he's in a load of trouble.
But even if the charge gets reduced to 2nd degree gun possession charges, AND he makes a deal where he is on probation for 18 or 24 months, he will surely get suspended by the NFL for violating the personal conduct policy. How long will the suspension be? I would suspect it would be a minimum of 4 games and could be as much as an entire season. If I were a betting man I would guess it would be 6-8 games. This is the best case for Burress and I think it is a low likelihood, even though he does have a very capable criminal lawyer defending him.

I saw some other writers pick up on the same thing that I said earlier - that Reese has said the Giants would welcome Burress back, but Coughlin has been somewhat less that open armed with his statements.