Quote Originally Posted by Patler View Post
From the team's perspective, should the Packers be bound to follow a negotiable term in the same way that teams like Cleveland, Detroit, TB, etc. think is a good idea? If it's negotiable, it's negotiable; and maybe more successful organizations who seldom find themselves in those positions really do have better approaches.

My personal opinion, when a contract really is guaranteed, offset should be automatic. The player should be embarrassed to double dip for failing.
No, they are not bound, but if they don't follow the precedent, moving to terms more favorable to them (and less favorable to labour) without offering something in return, they are bound to get some push back. Which they are.

Taking "labour's" approach, maybe the team failed to provide the player with the necessary opportunity to succeed, and should be embarassed? See: Lions, Detroit. Collecting a (relatively) little extra money seems fair payment for the 2-3 years of your very short career the drafting team burned through.