UFL accused of unfairly nixing Brahmas addition

[GregParks]

For those who haven't been following, it all started with this post from Battlehawks QB Brandon Silvers:



Matty Fresh gave it some more context a little later:



Matt Seybert's brother(?) then posted this:



Wade Phillips was asked about it today and he seemed to indicate there was some issue that was eventually resolved



So what does this all mean? Clearly, the nefarious way to look at it is Moose Johnston is trying to tip the scales in favor of the USFL team, Birmingham. I'm not sure I believe that. But what's the rationale, then, for San Antonio not being able to sign a random tight end, yet they're able to sign another player? Clearly there isn't a freeze on rosters, nor should there be. I get wanting to prevent against a team juicing the roster before the championship game, potentially recruiting top-level guys out there for one game. But this clearly ain't it. 

[4th&long]

The rules would apply to both teams - any teams. 

I don't know what the rules per se are but there's no us vs them here... its one set pf rules.  And they are likely designed to avoid the appearance of stacking late.

Brandon Silvers isn't even on SA.  What's his beef?  A brahma?

>> San Antonio Brahmas head coach Wade Phillips was asked about this tweet today during "Wednesdays with Wade" on @SASportsStar. He would go on to say "the league talked to us, we talked to them, and we worked things out"  <<

Drama for the cameras?
 

[MarkNelson]

The reason for disallowing the Brahmas addition is unknown. When asked the league had nothing to say. I am still hopeful the league can clarify this situation, but I doubt they will without more questions being asked, or having this out in mainstream media. 

[4th&long]

https://pfnewsroom.com/news/san-antonio ... ntroversy/

>>After Matt flew out to Arlington, the league ended up vetoing his signing. While the UFL hasn’t made any statements on the situation, we’re told it is likely due to a personnel scenario. Since San Antonio is missing a wide receiver, Birmingham voiced to the league that the Brahmas should only be able to sign someone who plays the same position.

 It’s extremely unfortunate for Seybert, who went all the way out to Arlington. He had already begun partaking in team meetings prior to the news being broken to him that he couldn’t actually sign. Clearly, this entire situation was mishandled at some point, and Seybert got the short end of the stick.

 Because of this ruling, the San Antonio Brahmas had to pivot, signing WR Tavonn Salter instead. <<

Let the games begin!!! It's WAR!  Well FB ...

[MarkNelson]

Yeah, read all of that. The league doesn't want to talk about this, possibly, because the reason they would not accept the player was "personal", in other words it was a matter of privacy. Which could mean anything.

[4th&long]

Yeah, read all of that. The league doesn't want to talk about this, possibly, because the reason they would not accept the player was "personal", in other words it was a matter of privacy. Which could mean anything.

I don't see anything indicating it was personal but maybe that will come out.

[MGB01]

Roster manipulation--the "who" involved is irrelevant--is it, Akers suddenly shows back up on Saturday and now you've not only got a receiver back but an extra TE as well, and they'll merely drop an extra DB (they have 10). Here you're replacing a WR with another.

All they had to do was drop a DB for a TE in the first place, no nontroversy.

[GregParks]

The latest, per James Larsen:



The idea that San Antonio should only be able to replace a receiver with a receiver is, of course, ridiculous - it's their roster, they should be able to build it how they choose. Look up and down the transaction wire this season and you'll see positions being switched out for other positions all the time. Unless there's something in writing that this is the rule for championship week, it continues to smell fishy.

[MGB01]

Unless you're using a specified list to get around it. That looks to be the issue.

Remember they also had a guy just mysteriously retire the week of the XFLCG, so that no doubt raised some eyebrows that led to this--not right away since Tisdale was replaced with Trevon Coley, so what gives a week later?

[4th&long]

Looks like they don't want the teams using "off roster" squads to beef up in playoffs.  Only in case of injury,

Here's the article link again.

https://pfnewsroom.com/news/san-antonio ... ntroversy/

>>After Matt flew out to Arlington, the league ended up vetoing his signing. While the UFL hasn’t made any statements on the situation, we’re told it is likely due to a personnel scenario. Since San Antonio is missing a wide receiver, Birmingham voiced to the league that the Brahmas should only be able to sign someone who plays the same position.Because of this ruling, the San Antonio Brahmas had to pivot, signing WR Tavonn Salter instead.  <<

Seems appropriate. Or at least reasonable rule.