Dooms contract broken down (bleacher report)

[broncobryce]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/424177-what-denver-broncos-elvis-dumervil-will-actually-get-paid

The reports have come in and Elvis Dumervil will be a Bronco for the next six years, making a whopping $61.5 million in the process. CBSSports.com stated that $43.168 million was guaranteed through injury, although if you want the best overview here are the actual figures .

Sports fans hear these numbers then complain about how overpaid athletes are, and how real workers like themselves should be getting the money instead. Yet Dumervil will not see every penny of this contract, not even the "guaranteed" portion. In fact, he won't ever see the majority of all of it.

The contract is made up of rolling guarantees from year to year, meaning if Dumervil is still on the roster each year, he receives a guaranteed bonus. However, if he is released by the team before these points in time, he does not receive any of it. This year Dumervil received a $2.5 million signing bonus and a minimum base salary. His signing bonus is the only actually guaranteed portion of his contract at this point.

The contract then stipulates the first day of the next league year, Dumervil will get a $6 million bonus and an $8 million salary that's "guaranteed for skill." So if a lockout happens Dumervil's salary for 2012 (2013+ depending on the length of the lockout, but this is unlikely) is voided. 2012 also happens to be the year in which Dumervil is paid the most in terms of bonuses.

Guaranteed for skill means that the Broncos still have to pay him his annual salary (once it's been awarded as a guarantee through incentives) even if they cut him as long as he was released because he wasn't considered good enough. In terms of injury insurance, CBSSports reports that $43.168 million of the contract is guaranteed against injury. This means the Broncos still have to pay him even if he's hurt, but this is only insured when he has reached these certain points in the contract. So again, if Dumervil under-performs or gets injured, all the Broncos have to do is release him before the annual bonuses are given out.

Also, if Dumervil gets suspended, arrested, retires, gets hurt off the field, or any other non-injury or playing ability related incident occurs, the Broncos don't have to pay him the remainder of his contract. Thus in actuality, Dumervil is pretty much playing on a one-year $3 million or 2-year $17 million contract.

So why does the media report these "guaranteed" NFL contract numbers and treat them as the player is actually getting all this money? Players and agents use them as leverage for future contract relations, owners use them to complain about how high players salaries are, while the sports media uses them to boost ratings, website hits, and newsstand sales.

(What gets your attention better, a one-year, $3 million contract or a SIX-YEAR, $61.5 MILLION CONTRACT THAT HAS $43.168 million GUARANTEED AGAINST INJURY?).

This leaves us loyal fans to argue and complain about these astronomical annual salaries, which the majority of us will never touch even if we combined our lifetime income. The fact is NFL contracts are not as cut and dry as everyone thinks and they do not have the luxury of signing long-term contracts and sitting back like NBA/MLB players knowing they have nothing to lose. It's just aeasier to think that they are.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

You mean it's incentive laden and performance based? Who'd have thunk it... :confused:

All contracts sound great and look great with the proper media spin, but as this article explains, it's just not true...

[broncobryce]

Maybe Xanders knows what he's doing afterall?! I expect Doom to live up to it.

[Lonestar]

You mean it's incentive laden and performance based? Who'd have thunk it... :confused:

All contracts sound great and look great with the proper media spin, but as this article explains, it's just not true...

I was thinking that the Donks had lost their mind last night when I read the details.

But what caught my eye where all the dates and time frames tied to money.

Just so I hope he earns very penny of it if he does then we have one hell of a player. If not and does turn out to be a one trick pony well we are not out a gazillion dollars.

Again I hope he does indeed turn into that special OLB that we need here and can play in all phases of the game not just passing downs.


Maybe Xanders knows what he's doing afterall?! I expect Doom to live up to it.

I was saying in a noter thread that PAt seemed to want to keep the power structure separate and it does not surprise me that Xman and I suspect Joe Ellis had Pats blessing about this one.

I like the HC not being the money man he can sit back and not take the heat if the player does not get everything.


Much better than having a drunken sailor spending money in a whorehouse eh?

[Tned]

Much better than having a drunken sailor spending money in a whorehouse eh?

Sounds like fun...

[Lonestar]

Sounds like fun...
alas I do not drink, nor frequent houses of ILL repute.

You can have my share.

[Tned]

While the details in this article might be accurate, it is important to note that Bleacherreport lets anyone post articles and this was written by someone with no bio and that has only written three other articles on Bleacherreport. This article is no different than a post/article one of you writes on BroncosForums.

Hopefully, a reliable media source will provide us details of the contract, which might mirror what this guy "Jim" wrote, and might not. Time will tell.

[rcsodak]

While the details in this article might be accurate, it is important to note that Bleacherreport lets anyone post articles and this was written by someone with no bio and that has only written three other articles on Bleacherreport. This article is no different than a post/article one of you writes on BroncosForums.

Hopefully, a reliable media source will provide us details of the contract, which might mirror what this guy "Jim" wrote, and might not. Time will tell.

Wonder how they get this "info", when everybody knows the Broncos don't release contract details.



Much better than having a drunken sailor spending money in a whorehouse eh?
Let's not let this become political. :elefant:

[Tned]

Wonder how they get this "info", when everybody knows the Broncos don't release contract details.


He might not have any more info then the rest of us and just filled in the blanks with assumptions. Who knows? Like I posted earlier, I just thought the 'article' should be taken with a grain of salt, since it was written by some guy that just created an account on bleacherreport and posted something he wrote. No different then if you or I had posted it here or one of us created an account on Bleacherreport and posted an 'article'.

[TXBRONC]

You mean it's incentive laden and performance based? Who'd have thunk it... :confused:

All contracts sound great and look great with the proper media spin, but as this article explains, it's just not true...

I think Tned hit the nail on the head. This guy could be right on the money but it someone that just recently starting writing for bleacher report. For all we know it could be Jr. :D

[Tned]

I think Tned hit the nail on the head. This guy could be right on the money but it someone that just recently starting writing for bleacher report. For all we know it could be Jr. :D

In that 'article', the author claims that the best source for the numbers is the PFT/Florio article. That would indicate that he was using that as his source. However, the conclusions he reaches go way beyond what Florio wrote. For instance, he says that the terminology about "the first day of the next league year" means that if there is a lockout, the contract is voided. Unless I missed it, there is no evidence of that in the PFT article he claims to have used as his source.

I would assume that they put in terminology like "the first day of the next league year" so that the extension would go into effect after any possible lockout. In other words, rather than stipulating salaries for 2011, 2012, etc., it refers to the extension beginning (and salary being guaranteed) the first day of the next league year, which could be 2011, 2012, or 2015 for all we know.

Now, obviously I am making assumptions as to what the contract details we have seen mean, but the best I can tell, the author of the above quoted article is also making his own assumptions rather than reporting actual facts about the contract.

[TXBRONC]

In that 'article', the author claims that the best source for the numbers is the PFT/Florio article. That would indicate that he was using that as his source. However, the conclusions he reaches go way beyond what Florio wrote. For instance, he says that the terminology about "the first day of the next league year" means that if there is a lockout, the contract is voided. Unless I missed it, there is no evidence of that in the PFT article he claims to have used as his source.

I would assume that they put in terminology like "the first day of the next league year" so that the extension would go into effect after any possible lockout. In other words, rather than stipulating salaries for 2011, 2012, etc., it refers to the extension beginning (and salary being guaranteed) the first day of the next league year, which could be 2011, 2012, or 2015 for all we know.

Now, obviously I am making assumptions as to what the contract details we have seen mean, but the best I can tell, the author of the above quoted article is also making his own assumptions rather than reporting actual facts about the contract.

If the terminology means if there is lockout Dumervil's contract is void then Dumervil's agent made a huge mistake.

Nevertheless that doesn't make sense to me. To not be on the roster the next season means to me you were either were traded, retired, or released.

It sounds like this guy made as big of assumptions as anyone here.

[Lonestar]

Broncos' Dumervil still carries underdog mentality
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
POSTED: 07/24/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT


Elvis Dumervil has a deal that will give him $43.168 million in guaranteed money. ( Cyrus McCrimmon, The Denver Post )
For all his new money that includes an NFL-record guarantee among pass rushers, Elvis Dumervil still will be the Broncos' lowest-paid starting outside linebacker this season.

Dumervil led the league with 17 sacks last season and will make $3.168 million this season. Robert Ayers had zero sacks last year and will draw $5.12 million in 2010.

Not that Dumervil will have trouble playing catch-up. He will make $14 million in 2011, $14 million in 2012 and $12 million in 2013, all of which is guaranteed against injury. The turning point in the agreement came late Wednesday, when Broncos general manager Brian Xanders told Dumervil's agent, Gary Wichard, the team would guarantee the $12 million in 2013 against injury.

That brought Dumervil's total guarantee to $43.168 million, eclipsing the $42 million the Chicago Bears gave Julius Peppers in March for tops among NFL pass rushers.


"It was a great day for Elvis and a great day for the Broncos. I think that he is deserving of it, and he's deserving of it because he's been a very, very talented and important player, and what he did last year really was the cherry on top," Broncos coach Josh McDaniels said. "He has also been a really good presence and leader in the locker room for us off the field, and with the way he handled himself through this negotiation.

"Elvis and Chris (Kuper), both to their credit, they were here for our camps, did all those things, helped us improve in the offseason. They had to endure some waiting and some patience," McDan-iels said.

"I think it's a model for anybody. I don't think we need a lot of players to be examples for other players. They just did a great job of really having some patience and doing their part, handling themselves with maturity. I wouldn't expect anything different from anyone in the locker room."

Now that Dumervil has all that loot coming his way, the first expectation should be that his sack totals will go down.

As much as the switch last season from 4-3 defensive end to 3-4 outside linebacker provided Dumervil with an element of pass-blitz surprise, his production last year and riches in the next six years will remove the chances opponents will underestimate him.

Dumervil counters by suggesting it would be a mistake to underestimate his lifelong attachment to his role as undersized underdog.

"It's going to be tough, but a lot of teams passed on me before the Broncos selected me with the 126th pick," Dumervil said. "I'm wanting to show these other teams what they missed out on. I'm obsessed with that. I feel bitter about those decisions.

"Now I want to prove to other teams that the Broncos were right in wanting to reward me by extending me. I'm just getting started. I don't play the game for money. It's nice to know I don't have to have to worry about taking care of my family, but I love the game."

For all the scouting, film study and secretive nature in the NFL evaluation process, dominant talent can be found almost by accident. Dumervil led the NCAA with 20 sacks and 10 forced fumbles in his senior season at Louisville.

He was still there in the fourth round when the Broncos nabbed him.

Ayers had a career-best four sacks his junior season at Tennessee, three as a senior. He was drafted in the first round.

Note to NFL war-room czars: When you are on the clock, how about taking one last look at the stat page before making that next pick?

Still, Dumervil figures to become marked by opposing protection schemes this season. He will be marked first by the left or right tackle, then by the tight end. And if not the tight end, then a nearby guard or running back.

All those blockers could mean Dumervil will occasionally need someone else — a teammate taking on fewer blockers — to reach the quarterback.

"We have guys all over," Dumervil said. "You have Robert Ayers, who I think had a tremendous offseason. And Jarvis Moss had a real good offseason as well. And I think we have a really smart coaching staff. I'm sure I'm not going to be just at one point. I'm sure I'm going to be moved around.

"If my sack totals are down and other guys make plays, that's what it's all about. It's not about the numbers all the time. It's about how effective I can be in terms of freeing someone up."

Lindsay H. Jones contributed to this story.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_15589623


Sounds to me like someone else picked up on this Guarantee vs non guarantee.

It appears in this report 2013 is only guaranteed agains injury not against being traded or cut.

[TimTebow15MVP]

who cares.

[broncobryce]

who cares.

Me.

[Tned]

Sounds to me like someone else picked up on this Guarantee vs non guarantee.

It appears in this report 2013 is only guaranteed agains injury not against being traded or cut.

Nobody said there wasn't a difference between what is guaranteed for injury and what is guaranteed in general. The point I was making was about the author. If I have evaluated this wrong, and this guy is actually a well known, accomplished NFL writer, please let me know. To me, it appears this guy has just put a bunch of his assumptions/guesses into an article and presented them as fact.

For instance, this 'author' equates the "skills" guarantee to being an incentive. In fact, in NFL contracts when they have a skill guarantee it refers to money being paid even if a players skill deteriorate -- an injury bonus is of course self explanatory. It does not mean that a portion of a contract becomes guaranteed if a certain skill is achieved (an incentive for reaching some statistical mark). The 'author' is not familiar with common terms used in NFL contracts, which puts into question his other assumptions, like the rolling guarantees.

The reason that Doom's extension is considered a big deal by the press is because few teams are extending players (with big contracts) right now, partially because of uncertainty and partially because of complicated rules during this uncapped year:


There is a little-known rule in the NFL's collective bargaining agreement that is having a big-time impact on the New York Jets' stalled negotiations with star cornerback Darrelle Revis -- and it likely will sabotage any chance of signing Revis to a contract extension before the start of the season.

It's called the "reallocation rule,” and it explains, in part, why the Jets’ offer to Revis includes virtually no fully guaranteed money. By “fully” guaranteed, we mean it’s guaranteed against skill and injury, ensuring the player gets paid no matter what.

The rule states that, when doing a contract extension in an uncapped year, future guarantees against skill and injury must fit under the team’s 2009 salary cap. In the Jets’ case, that doesn’t leave much at all, as they had only about $300,000 in leftover cap space -- a relative drop in the bucket. They can offer more than that for skill or injury, but not both.

Read the rest here (http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/jets/post/_/id/686/why-a-revis-extension-probably-wont-get-done)

In essence, the Broncos coudl ONLY fully guarantee Dooms extension in an amount equal to the guaranteed part of his 2009 or 2010 salary (not sure which applies) and any fully guaranteed (deteriorating skill and injury) guarantees that went beyond this 2009/2010 guaranteed salary would retroactively apply to their 2009 cap (or possibly the 2010 cap as they extended his 2010 salary, this isn't clear, but I believe it all applies to the 2009 salary and cap). If they didn't have $43 guaranteed left in their 2009 cap, then they couldn't give him the guaranteed extension.

If you do some googling on the reallocation rule and D’Brickashaw Ferguson's new contract, you will find a lot of articles discussing these problems teams have in this uncapped year with guaranteed money.

So, while it is 'possible' that these are built in 'outs' for the team to void Doom's contract, it is more likely that it is simply creative contract work to get around some of the unusual uncapped year CBA rules.

[Tned]

Here is another article that helps explain why the Broncos couldn't guarantee Dooms contract for skill (nothing to do with incentives) and injury, even if they wanted to:


The 2011, 2012, and 2013 salary guarantees for skill highlight the guarantee reallocation rule of the uncapped year. The reason why the Jets could not guarantee these salaries for skill and injury is because Ferguson's 2009 salary of $2.9 million was not fully guaranteed -- only $680,000 of this 2009 salary was guaranteed. The reallocation rule in essence says that unless the salary in the final capped year is fully guaranteed, then any future year salary guarantees for skill and injury will be reallocated into the final cap year. Had the Jets guaranteed the $22.9 million of future year salaries for skill and injury, then that $22.9 million would have been retroactively reallocated to the Jets' salary cap of 2009. The Jets finished the 2009 league year with $376,000 in cap space and therefore could not have afforded the $22.9 million reallocation. The deal, therefore, would have been denied by the NFL Management Council. Therefore, the Jets were able to get around the reallocation rule by guaranteeing the amounts for either skill or injury, but not both.

The Eagles incurred retroactive rellocation in their renegotiation with quarterback Kevin Kolb, where $2.1 million of his salaries in 2010 and 2011 were guaranteed for skill and injury, resulting in that $2.1 million being allocated to 2009. However, because the Eagles finished the 2009 league year with $4 million in cap space, they could afford the reallocation of this guarantee.

http://aaronschatz.com/under-cap/2010/under-cap-cash-budgets

In Ferguson's case, they Jets reportedly let Ferguson choose whether he wanted the contract guaranteed for primarily for skiill or injury and he chose skill, likely with the logic he could purchase his own injury policy.

We don't know if Doom was given the choice between skill and injury or if that was the Broncos choice. If it was Doom's choice, and he chose primarily injury guarantee, then that might indicate he has no fear of his play dropping off (skill) to the point of being cut and losing his contract. However, this is not at all clear, since we don't know if it was the Broncos choice or Dom's choice to guarantee mostly against injury.

[Lonestar]

Not that it fully explians it BUT IIRC the broncos had loads of cap space last year. Something that a lot of folks were touting when whining about the lack of progress by Josh in resigning he. IIRC it was in excess of 20 mil.

That said I don't know who is right or wrong. I hope I never find out and will hope that Doom will earn every last dime of his money.

I still do not think he is more than a small DE playing a OLB role that is much more than a pass rusher that he is now. While some feel he is worth this much money just for getting sacks, I do not, right or wrong I will never change that position. I hope he does indeed GROW into the job, and earns his money.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Lonestar]

Let me add. Almost everytime an artcile is written on the bleacher report it has been automatically poo pooed especially if it has something posistive in it.

Frankly some of what I have read there puts some of the local reports to shame.

Yes yes, beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Tned]

Let me add. Almost everytime an artcile is written on the bleacher report it has been automatically poo pooed especially if it has something posistive in it.

Frankly some of what I have read there puts some of the local reports to shame.

Yes yes, beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

FWIW, I didn't poo poo the article because it was on the bleacher report, I pointed out that the guy that wrote it has only written three other articles besides this one and that basically anyone can write and post an article on the bleacher report.

What that means is that some of the things on the bleacher report could be great and other things total crap, just like posts/articles people write here, or on Mania or the Mane.

Did you look at the author's bio or other articles?

[Lonestar]

No did not kinds limited on band width here on blackberry.

Were they good?

That partcular one looked like a fresh perspective to me.

So since you read the bio I'm guessing you know it was not me as your previous posts seemed to allude to.

What I was saying is that while there maybe inacuracies there, I see as many in other report nationwide as well as local bias.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Tned]

No did not kinds limited on band width here on blackberry.

Were they good?

That partcular one looked like a fresh perspective to me.

So since you read the bio I'm guessing you know it was not me as your previous posts seemed to allude to.

What I was saying is that while there maybe inacuracies there, I see as many in other report nationwide as well as local bias.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

My previous post alluded to it being you? :confused: I never alluded to it being you that wrote it. You seriously need to stop reading between the imaginary lines that you, and only you, see.

The only thing I have pointed out is that it was some guy that created an account on Bleacher Report and has posted a total of four articles.

[Tned]

Just my imagaination you had to post JIM in those articles a couple of vtimes while poo poing the report. Yep I get it you post the name of all the bleacher guys each time you try to refute them.

Maybe I missed those posts.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I have never tried to 'refute' a BR article before. I am not even trying to refute this one, just making sure it is clear that this is some 'guy' who is named Jim Butterfield that created an account on bleacher report (like someone would register here or on the Mane) and has written three before this one.

There are some questionable facts/assumptions in that article, and I have provided links to other articles about things like the rules on guarantees this year, and the fact that a 'skills guarantee' has nothing to do with incentives.

I am not sure why you are getting so defensive over this guys article.

[NorCalBronco7]

What Tneds saying is BR isnt exactly to pinnacle of objective sports journalism. It has about the same credit as a forum post. Not to say you dont get several imformative articles from there, just that they are typically just fans.

[Lonestar]

What Tneds saying is BR isnt exactly to pinnacle of objective sports journalism. It has about the same credit as a forum post. Not to say you dont get several imformative articles from there, just that they are typically just fans.


I get that but also believe the may be just as reliable as MOST of the east coast writers that supposedly have inside sources.

in some cases have as good articles as some of the local writers.

in The past the common comment has been "OH bleacher report its crap" and discounting it because of where it is from. Yet words that flow from Petter King and ESPN IF they match the beliefs of the poster are automatically believed and given unimpeachable status.

I like to read them for what they are and NOT automatically dismiss them like some do.

For all we know this "Jim" guy maybe someone inside the camp with insights none of us have.

Time will tell.

I saw it from the first report from PFT IIRC as not the standard contract that we have always seen. maybe it is or maybe it is a new way of saying roster bonus.

Time will tell.

[Tned]

I get that but also believe the may be just as reliable as MOST of the east coast writers that supposedly have inside sources.

in some cases have as good articles as some of the local writers.

in The past the common comment has been "OH bleacher report its crap" and discounting it because of where it is from. Yet words that flow from Petter King and ESPN IF they match the beliefs of the poster are automatically believed and given unimpeachable status.

I like to read them for what they are and NOT automatically dismiss them like some do.

For all we know this "Jim" guy maybe someone inside the camp with insights none of us have.

Time will tell.


I suggest rather than blindly defending this guy, you click on the link, go to Bleacher Report and check out his body of work.



I saw it from the first report from PFT IIRC as not the standard contract that we have always seen. maybe it is or maybe it is a new way of saying roster bonus.

Time will tell.


It's almost identical to the Ferguson contract and many are expecting it to be a blueprint for the Revus contract. I'm assuming by now you have googled and read about CBA mandated bonus reallocation in extensions signed in an uncapped year. I'm assuming you have googled and read about the cash flow implications of 'when' a bonus becomes guaranteed. I'm assuming you have read about what a 'skills guarantee' is and that it has nothing to do with incentives and does not imply an incentive based contract.

If my assumptions are wrong, you might want to check out Google and do some research and not just rely on this guy on BR.

[Lonestar]

I suggest rather than blindly defending this guy, you click on the link, go to Bleacher Report and check out his body of work.



It's almost identical to the Ferguson contract and many are expecting it to be a blueprint for the Revus contract. I'm assuming by now you have googled and read about CBA mandated bonus reallocation in extensions signed in an uncapped year. I'm assuming you have googled and read about the cash flow implications of 'when' a bonus becomes guaranteed. I'm assuming you have read about what a 'skills guarantee' is and that it has nothing to do with incentives and does not imply an incentive based contract.

If my assumptions are wrong, you might want to check out Google and do some research and not just rely on this guy on BR.

Seemed like some decent writing there


Unless you missed it I do not have the band width nor time to worry about it. I spend about a tenth of the amour of time here I used to.

With rare exceptions like right now I'm on a Blackberry network and most of theta time is late at night trying to bore my self to sleep, setting at stop lights, waiting for doctors or in the oval office.

[TXBRONC]

While the details in this article might be accurate, it is important to note that Bleacherreport lets anyone post articles and this was written by someone with no bio and that has only written three other articles on Bleacherreport. This article is no different than a post/article one of you writes on BroncosForums.

Hopefully, a reliable media source will provide us details of the contract, which might mirror what this guy "Jim" wrote, and might not. Time will tell.


I think Tned hit the nail on the head. This guy could be right on the money but it someone that just recently starting writing for bleacher report. For all we know it could be Jr. :D

Jr it wasn't Tned that tied it to you it was me. It wasn't meant to purposely violate protocol or to be hurtful. It was meant in jest.

[Tned]

Seemed like some decent writing there


Unless you missed it I do not have the band width nor time to worry about it. I spend about a tenth of the amour of time here I used to.

With rare exceptions like right now I'm on a Blackberry network and most of theta time is late at night trying to bore my self to sleep, setting at stop lights, waiting for doctors or in the oval office.

In the time it took to repeatedly defend this guys article, you could have visited BR and read his other articles. You could have googled to become more informed about the complexities of extensions in the uncapped year.

Hey, but if you would rather just defend Jim's article. It's cool.

[Lonestar]

In the time it took to repeatedly defend this guys article, you could have visited BR and read his other articles. You could have googled to become more informed about the complexities of extensions in the uncapped year.

Hey, but if you would rather just defend Jim's article. It's cool. on this you can have the last word as usual.

[TXBRONC]

on this you can have the last word as usual.

Maybe you just did. :whoknows:

[turftoad]

:focus: