Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Remember that time Derrick Brown got on twitter....


TheCasillas
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 4Corners said:

I don’t think your franchise QB looking to cash a big paycheck responding to respectful criticism with a homophobic insult is a very good look. 

How is 'eat a dick' a homophobic insult? Pretty big reach, but clever framing by certain parties wanting to drive his value down.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Panther'sBigD said:

How is 'eat a dick' a homophobic insult? Pretty big reach, but clever framing by certain parties wanting to drive his value down.  

I don't know that the framing of it as this or that really matters that much.

That he chose to respond to a random no-name fan in such an angry manner for all the world to see is the really stupid part.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, you're talking about a 9 figure contract with lots of complicated clauses, structuring, guaranteed money, incentives, possible outs, etc. Thinking you can handle that unless that's what you actually do for a living with ample experience is just nuts. Surely he's going to have at least a contract attorney look over any deal he negotiated before he puts ink to paper.

Lamar is looking for a fully guaranteed contract like Watson got. If it's truly fully guaranteed there's not a lot more to it than total $ and years on the deal. Others have negotiated their own contracts in the past. I completely agree he should have some help from contract lawyer(s) and/or an agent but I also kinda get not wanting to give the agent their 5% or whatever the going rate is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
    • You're really gonna pass up the opportunity to make a joke about skidmarks in underwear here?  Alright fine.
×
×
  • Create New...