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!

     

Holding out while still under contract

Jmac

By Jmac,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Jmac Grand Master

Jmac

Posted
Posted

This isn't about the "the one who shall not be named", but a general question. How do you feel about the whole 'holding out while under contract' scenerio.

Shouldn't the player honor the contract signed?  Or try and renegotiate without the threat of a hold out?

Opinions please

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KSpan Grand Master

KSpan

Posted
Posted

I think it's the player's prerogative, particularly when it comes to rookie contracts that are slotted and that a player can potentially outperform. If a team can decide that someone is overpaid and cut them, why can't they decide they're underpaid and try their won tactic?

That said, it applies most clearly when someone's perfomrance is consistently on a tier or two above their current contract. If they signed a top-end deal and are griping about it in 2 years, I feel that that is a different story.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NCBlu Experienced

NCBlu

Posted
Posted

Do the team cut them with a contract? Why do the players always have to do things the team don't?

The the has Billions the players Millions so I'ma side with the players, pay them or let them go to a team that will.  

As soon as they are of no use to the NFL they will be kicked to the side with no after though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smithers Grand Master

Smithers

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, philw5289 said:

I don’t blame burns for holding out considering we can terminate the contract whenever we see fit. I’m more annoyed by fitterer A. Not trading him for two 1s and B. Not having a deal done this summer 

5th year option is 100% guaranteed so long as he shows up.  

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      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.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...