McCarthy on the WR's

[vince]

I do disagree with this part of Vince's post:

FACT: The definition of a contract is: a binding agreement between two or more persons or parties; especially, one legally enforceable.

FACT: While contracts are occassionally renegotiated, NEITHER PARTY is obligated to change the agreement after the fact. Conversely, both player and team are legally obligated to abide by the terms of the contract that is mutually agreed upon.

Binding? Hardly. The team can cut the player at any time.

I don't have a problem with a guy wanting to renegotiate. I do have a problem with a guy who has had one good year and has three years left on his contract wanting to renegotiate.

That's part of every contract, Harv. That's why players negotiate for guaranteed money, rather than a guaranteed spot on the team. If you're not good enough, or in some cases, if you've negotiated too much back-end compensation, every player knows that the contract includes the possibility of being cut. It's right in the agreement. Because someone gets cut does not mean that the team did not hold up its end of the agreement.

[HarveyWallbangers]

That's part of every contract, Harv. That's why players negotiate for guaranteed money, rather than a guaranteed spot on the team. If you're not good enough, or in some cases, if you've negotiated too much back-end compensation, every player knows that the contract includes the possibility of being cut. It's right in the agreement. Because someone gets cut does not mean that the team did not hold up its end of the agreement.

That's true, but don't tell me these agreements are binding. It's also understood that if a player far exceeds the terms of his contract, he will get his contract renegotiated (in a majority of the cases). I don't like the attitude that a player never has a right to renegotiate their deal. I think there's a gray area when this is appropriate, and Walker wasn't one that should have been clamoring for a new deal yet. However, he had performed for three years like he did in 2004 and had a year left or two left on his contract, it would be understandble (and I think fair) for the team to renegotiate.

[vince]

That's part of every contract, Harv. That's why players negotiate for guaranteed money, rather than a guaranteed spot on the team. If you're not good enough, or in some cases, if you've negotiated too much back-end compensation, every player knows that the contract includes the possibility of being cut. It's right in the agreement. Because someone gets cut does not mean that the team did not hold up its end of the agreement.

That's true, but don't tell me these agreements are binding. It's also understood that if a player far exceeds the terms of his contract, he will get his contract renegotiated (in a majority of the cases). I don't like the attitude that a player never has a right to renegotiate their deal. I think there's a gray area when this is appropriate, and Walker wasn't one that should have been clamoring for a new deal yet. However, he had performed for three years like he did in 2004 and had a year left or two left on his contract, it would be understandble (and I think fair) for the team to renegotiate.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the contract isn't "binding." How isn't it? If a team doesn't pay a player or otherwise meet the terms of their agreement, you can bet your bottom dollar that the player's agent would have a lawsuit filed promptly...and they'd win that suit in court. That's a legally "bound" agreement.

Are you referring to when players hold out and don't fulfill their responsibilities according to an agreement? When that happens, there are resolutions in the NFL Players agreements that dictate the repercussions of such actions on the part of the players, which include the right of teams to impose substantial fines and other penalties. I'm sure you're aware of those, so I'm not sure what you mean by your statement about the agreements not being "binding."

I agree that a player has a right to renegotiate a deal at any time. However, the team doesn't have an obligation to agree with their position. That's a negotiation. Some tactics are more effective than others in those renegotiations. I don't doubt that Thompson's unwillingness to renegotiate with Walker motivated Walker to want to move on. He would have an unbound ability to do that at the end of the contract to which he had previously agreed.

Players have the right to negotiate shorter term contracts up front as well. Most prefer the relative security and higher guaranteed upfront money that comes with longer-term contracts at the time they sign them.

The system, starting with the draft is, no doubt, set up to favor the teams, and the legal ramifications of a team owning exclusive rights to negotiate with a player is beyond my understanding. But the structure has withstood legal challenge and questioning for many years now.

The bottom line is that each player chooses whether they want to engage in the profession of football. By doing so they become very well compensated for their services, by almost any standard. And they accept the risks of their trade and the parameters of the agreements they sign on their own free will. While there are many circumstances that dictate that it might make sense to renegotiate, any team has every right to expect that both parties will fulfill the terms they agreed upon - especially when the party seeking to renegotiate uses selfish, bad faith tactics to the detriment of the other. That's not how to get a deal renegotiated.

[Bretsky]

"Renegotiating a contract with 2 years left on it is absolutely unheard of, and renegotiating a contract with 1 year left on it is extremely rare. There are too many unknowns with the salary cap and injuries for that to occur - especially with a lot of unfulfilled years left on a previous agreement... "

If memory serves me right I think Chad Johnson reworked his deal with 2 years left. I'm by no means advocating the 3yr rework.

Not even sure I'd redo it at 2. But if I'm the GM I'm communicating with JW and letting him know GB will take care of him. A bit of ego massaging.


Where the heck is Patler when ya need him. I think renegotiating with 2 years left has been done a couple times in the past few years.

Keep in mind, I do feel JW is a difference maker; you don't want to lose those for a measley #2. It's just rough for me to stomach how the whole situation was dealt with on both sides.

B

[vince]

"Renegotiating a contract with 2 years left on it is absolutely unheard of, and renegotiating a contract with 1 year left on it is extremely rare. There are too many unknowns with the salary cap and injuries for that to occur - especially with a lot of unfulfilled years left on a previous agreement... "

If memory serves me right I think Chad Johnson reworked his deal with 2 years left. I'm by no means advocating the 3yr rework.

Not even sure I'd redo it at 2. But if I'm the GM I'm communicating with JW and letting him know GB will take care of him. A bit of ego massaging.


Where the heck is Patler when ya need him. I think renegotiating with 2 years left has been done a couple times in the past few years.

Keep in mind, I do feel JW is a difference maker; you don't want to lose those for a measley #2. It's just rough for me to stomach how the whole situation was dealt with on both sides.

B

OK, maybe I got a little carried away with the "absolutely unheard of" remark. I'll go with "extremely rare" for 2-year reneg's and "uncommon" for 1-year reneg's. Am I allowed to do that?

But I'm sticking with the "never been done" on the 3 year reneg's until Patler proves me wrong...