Last night on Twitter, Alvin Keels, the agent for Leigh Bodden tweeted the following:

[blackbirdpie id=”134775938784296960″]

He then added:

[blackbirdpie id=”134776637924442112″]

Contrast that with the statement Keels put out when the Patriots released Bodden:

“He’s enjoyed this time in New England, but after meeting with coach (Bill) Belichick this morning, both parties agreed it was time to move on. Leigh still has a strong desire to play football and welcomes his next opportunity to compete for a Super Bowl. Leigh is totally healthy and can contribute right away.”

At the time of the release, there was a lot of hand-wringing over the move, especially on sports radio. Some said Bodden had an attitude problem, others just blasted the move based on the lack of depth in the secondary. (Some print reporters, like Greg A Bedard astutely insisted that something was wrong with Bodden, noting his total lack of speed, especially when contrasted to training camp.) Will those who blasted the release revisit their comments now that this injury has been revealed?

Moreover, do any of them feel misled by the agent and/or Bodden?

Ian Rapoport talked to Bodden last night, (After getting cut, Leigh Bodden needed surgery) and the CB says he nearly signed with the Chiefs before he “came clean” about his health. Bodden also says that the Patriots didn’t believe he was hurt, but that even he didn’t really know how bad it was.

Just kind of a strange situation all around, and one that should be a lesson about blindly lapping up whatever an agent says.

The media links:

ESPN caught out of position – Chad Finn is critical of ESPN for being slow to cover the events at Penn State.

NBA lockout costing broadcasters – Johnny Diaz looks at stations impacted by the cancelled NBA games, such as CSNNE, WEEI and WCVB.

Media Roundup – My SB Nation Boston media column is a look at Penn State talk on local radio, as well as Rodney Harrison and Tony Dungy previewing Patriots/Jets.



10 thoughts on “Leigh Bodden Suddenly Needs Surgery, and Media Links

  1. Why didn't he come clean on the injury. Just from a financial standpoint, wouldn't he be better off staying a Patriot and getting the surgery while still under a contract. I don't know how this works, so someone please explain.


  2. Can a team cut a player who has a diagnosed football-related injury? Isn't there some kind of rule against that? I wonder if either Leigh or his agent shot themselves in the foot here by choosing to hide the severity of his injury. He could be on IR and still collecting a paycheck right now if he or the agent had been more up-front about it. Assuming the Patriots believed he was injured, which it doesn't seem like they did.

    Really strange situation….


    1. Dave,

      I wondered this as well. In summary from what I'll paste below, it looks like if a player could sham an injury this well, they could still get paid. However, where it looks like they are injured, claim to not be, and no tests result in any answers, leading to the player being cut, they have two options: FA or Injury claim. I would assume under this injury claim that a very comprehensive physical would be performed by an independent party?

      Here is what I found from a article:

      Technically, NFL players injured on the job cannot be cut without compensation. The standard NFL contract requires that if a player is injured on the job, and if the player promptly communicates the injury, then he is owed payment for as long as his injury prevents him from playing that season. Normally, the player's agent and the team's general manager try to agree on an injury settlement. They attempt to forecast the number of weeks the player would miss because of injury; the player should get paid for each week he would have played if not hurt. If the injury is long-term, the player can receive up to an additional $300,000 in recognition of not playing in the following season (that amount can be higher and for additional seasons if negotiated as such in the player's contract).

      The player, however, could then file an injury grievance under the NFL's collective bargaining agreement, which is exactly what Zach Thomas did after the Kansas City Chiefs cut him last August without an injury settlement. In his grievance Thomas claims he was suffering from postconcussion symptoms. The Chiefs insist that Thomas, who had a history of concussions, had been cleared to play by team doctors and that his insufficient performance on the field led to his release, not an injury. Thomas lost out on approximately $1 million by being cut. His grievance has not yet been decided.

      Read more:

      Read the article for more comments/thoughts. It basically favors the team, unlike what I understand MLB contracts do, where unless specific attention and clauses are specified (TJ surgery, etc), they receive full salary. (If I am wrong here, please correct.)


    2. Bodden is a vested vet who was on the opening day roster. Therefore his salary for the year was guaranteed no matter what happened. Cut, IRd, whatever, he still gets his whole 2011 salary.


    3. A team can cut any injured player. It's just looked upon as kind of dirty to do so. But the NFL is a business. Just look at Bodden trying to dupe K.C. into signing him up so he can cash in before being I.R.'ed.


  3. I can't wait for all the possible Felger and Mazz reactions to the potential outcome of Sundays game.
    1) Pats win- Felger will likely say that while it is important to notch a win, they need to prove they can beat the Jets in the playoffs. He will say we have seen the pats win in the past but lose when it matters.

    2) Jets win- "I told you the Pats can't beat the Jets when it counts" He will then go on to discuss that this is an indication of what might happen in the playoffs. He will also then go on a diatribe on why Mark Sanchez is a big game QB and Tom Brady is not as clutch as we once thought.


    1. Too bad we can't setup odds here. I'd go moneyline for both of these predictions, sans the last sentence in #2

      Winning_ ++


  4. Is anyone watching D+C on NESN? Looks like they're responding to the F+M Simulcast by doing some graphics behind D+C? Not sure what it is (poster? superimposed?)


Comments are closed.