CJ and the Titans

[Tony Oday]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Titans-running-back-Chris-Johnson-misses-Titans-opening-minicamp-042910

I still hate when players do this...he signed in 08...had one amazing year...now wants to get paid as the TOP guy...ok you want to get paid as a top guy I say that you have a performance based contract...get hurt you make league minimum...

[Tarlam!]

I agree with you, Tony. One great season does not a career make. I hate seeing players get too big for their cleats.

But the flaw is that teams can and do cut players at will. Rarely do contracts go there full tenure.

With the CBA being renegotiated, possibley they could figure out a way to avoid these types of scenarios. I dunno, it's too high a science for me.

[Tony Oday]

but he got $7million guarenteed....that is good for one year of production in my opinion...do the same thing or at least close to this year and you pay the guy.

[Tarlam!]

Tony, I was agreeing with you. Completely. Totally. Utterly.

[mission]

$550,000 tho guys... it sounds more like the Titans are doing one of those "hey, you signed it and we cant afford you anyway" type of dealios.

If this was TT, I can't imagine him paying a guy who ran for 2000 yards $550,000 for the year... that's less than Bush and a bunch of other clowns isn't it?

I'm not one to support a primadonna (if that's the case) holding out, but they should at least restructure his deal.

I'd think it'd be in their best interest... they could probably sign him for less than market value (since he wants something now) and save themselves some money down the road TT style.

Hard to blame the guy in this case.. at least for me. Seems like a cash strapped team just trying to rent the guy for another year.

[Tarlam!]

You make a valid point, Mission, but this guy is quoted on NFL.com as saying he wants to be the highest paid offensive player in the league IIRC. I read it a few days ago.

I doubt even TT does that deal.

[Tony Oday]

$550,000 tho guys... it sounds more like the Titans are doing one of those "hey, you signed it and we cant afford you anyway" type of dealios.

If this was TT, I can't imagine him paying a guy who ran for 2000 yards $550,000 for the year... that's less than Bush and a bunch of other clowns isn't it?

I'm not one to support a primadonna (if that's the case) holding out, but they should at least restructure his deal.

I'd think it'd be in their best interest... they could probably sign him for less than market value (since he wants something now) and save themselves some money down the road TT style.

Hard to blame the guy in this case.. at least for me. Seems like a cash strapped team just trying to rent the guy for another year.

WHOA there he got $7million signing bonus and the contract averages 2.4 million over 5 years...he plays this year as the third year to prove he is legit, which I think he is, he would have averaged over $2.5 million per year on his rookie contract and then sign a huge extention...

[mission]

ok so im kinda (mostly) wrong about the holdout part at least

still think the titans could maybe help themselves a bit more in the long run here somehow.

[pbmax]

$550,000 tho guys... it sounds more like the Titans are doing one of those "hey, you signed it and we cant afford you anyway" type of dealios.

If this was TT, I can't imagine him paying a guy who ran for 2000 yards $550,000 for the year... that's less than Bush and a bunch of other clowns isn't it?

I'm not one to support a primadonna (if that's the case) holding out, but they should at least restructure his deal.

I'd think it'd be in their best interest... they could probably sign him for less than market value (since he wants something now) and save themselves some money down the road TT style.

Hard to blame the guy in this case.. at least for me. Seems like a cash strapped team just trying to rent the guy for another year.

WHOA there he got $7million signing bonus and the contract averages 2.4 million over 5 years...he plays this year as the third year to prove he is legit, which I think he is, he would have averaged over $2.5 million per year on his rookie contract and then sign a huge extention...
Its an excellent point Tony. And one that people who wish to defend Johnson will ignore. The base salary for this year will be the only figure batted about.

But as Brandt is fond of saying at NFP, its about the assignment of risk, not whether you earned it previously or will earn it in the future. Right now, with no extension, Johnson is at the greater risk. But in less than a year, the Titans will be at risk of losing him. So there should be some common ground. Assuming that Johnson wanting to be the top paid offensive player (incl QBs) is just posturing.

[bobblehead]

As soon as he refunds the $7 million the Titans gave him to sign said contract I would say he has a right to void it....until then live with it.

I honestly think this should be in the "new" CBA. If a player wants out of a deal all he has to do is pay back all guaranteed money....same as a team can waive a contract and eat the money already paid out.

[mission]

But as Brandt is fond of saying at NFP, its about the assignment of risk, not whether you earned it previously or will earn it in the future. Right now, with no extension, Johnson is at the greater risk. But in less than a year, the Titans will be at risk of losing him. So there should be some common ground. Assuming that Johnson wanting to be the top paid offensive player (incl QBs) is just posturing.

Exactly.

It's business both sides. I don't have a contract per se, but when my sales matched the entire staff's combined, I started hearing from our competitors with offers. When my company didn't budge and didn't want to even come close to matching, away I happily went.

My company didn't move, they didn't have to pay me more, they stood their ground maybe as an example to the rest of the sales team. But they *did* lose about 50% of their new business.

So I don't know... :idea:

[3irty1]

I don't blame him for asking. Yeah he signed a rookie contract based on little more than where he was drafted and he proved to be a steal. He probably deserves more money.

That said If I were the Titans I wouldn't give him anything.

[Lurker64]

The 30% rule really makes this a lot more difficult than it would be otherwise.


The 30-percent rule, found in Article XXIV, Section 8 (b) of the CBA, states that renegotiations/extensions entered into in the 2010 league year may not increase per year from 2009 to 2010 or beyond more than 30 percent of the 2009 salary. For example, if the 2009 salary is $2M, the maximum available in 2010 is $2.6M, in 2011 it’s $3.2M, etc.

Johnson's salary from his rookie contract was $385,000 last year, which means that the maximum increase in salary (without a CBA) he could receive would be $115,000 per year. I don't think that's the kind of raise that Chris Johnson is looking for.

The dodge that teams could use is that


According to Article XXIV (7)(b)(iv) of the CBA, a signing bonus (or a payment that is treated as a signing bonus) does not count toward the rule.

So if the Titans wanted to give Chris Johnson, say, a five year extension worth $40 million , they would have to put roughly $37 in signing bonus. But a team would be crazy to structure a contract in which 80% plus of the total contract value were guaranteed in the signing bonus.

So it's kind of a no-win for anybody.

[Brandon494]

Dude almost broke the single season rushing record. Pay the man his money.

[Scott Campbell]

I generally don't agree with the player in these situations, but this is one of those exceptions. Both years were great, not just this year. He's an amazing player. The shelf life of RB's is ridiculously short, and he's got to get paid before the tread is worn off those tires.

I think the Titans are going to have to pay him, but I don't know how they'll get around the 30% rule.

[channtheman]

Anyone got any input as to what the purpose of the 30% rule is? It doesn't make any sense to me.

[Lurker64]

Anyone got any input as to what the purpose of the 30% rule is? It doesn't make any sense to me.

It had two purposes:
1) Prevent a team from dumping a huge and disproportionate percentage of a contract into an uncapped year presuming that the cap would return. (For example, were Albert Haynesworth a free agent this year instead of last, the Redskins could have signed him to that 7 year $100 million dollar deal by putting $95 million in the uncapped year, and having him play for peanuts the rest of the time).

2) It was negotiated as a quid pro quo with the players in CBA negotiations. The NFLPA presuming that an uncapped year would be a massive windfall for the players, they gave up as consideration "but there is a limit to how much contracts can grow in an uncapped year."

[gbgary]

he should probably make more. tell him if he has another good year then they'll redo do it again long-term. man...i'd love a 30% raise. i'd get me a z06. :D you only live once.

[falco]

I generally don't agree with the player in these situations, but this is one of those exceptions.

+1

[channtheman]

Anyone got any input as to what the purpose of the 30% rule is? It doesn't make any sense to me.

It had two purposes:
1) Prevent a team from dumping a huge and disproportionate percentage of a contract into an uncapped year presuming that the cap would return. (For example, were Albert Haynesworth a free agent this year instead of last, the Redskins could have signed him to that 7 year $100 million dollar deal by putting $95 million in the uncapped year, and having him play for peanuts the rest of the time).

2) It was negotiated as a quid pro quo with the players in CBA negotiations. The NFLPA presuming that an uncapped year would be a massive windfall for the players, they gave up as consideration "but there is a limit to how much contracts can grow in an uncapped year."

Ahhhh, that makes a lot more sense now. Thanks for the explanation.

[steve823]

I say the packers trade jarret bush and derrick martin for him. seems reasonable.