Lonestar
09-01-2010, 07:19 PM
Q&A: Contract "loyalty" is a double-edged sword
By Jeff Legwold
The Denver Post
POSTED: 09/01/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT
Rams rookie quarterback Sam Bradford (Getty Images file photo)
Today's questions about the Broncos come from David Bishop. Send your questions via e-mail to jlegwold@denverpost.com.
Q: Do you think the owners will try to curb the guaranteed salaries of players — both veterans and rookies — with the new collective bargaining agreement? The players will oppose it, no doubt, but to pay someone like Albert Haynesworth the money he was guaranteed, and then he refuses to participate in team drills, is absurd. The current system allows players to break a contract, but not the owners.
A: David, I would argue the owners, or the teams in general, "break" the contracts more than the players do.
Often a player is released before his contract is up, but more often a player holds out because he's cranky about the document he once thought was OK to sign. A player could have two or three years remaining on his deal when he is released, and he doesn't receive his base salary for the remaining years on the deal in that scenario, unless it is specifically written into his deal.
In the NFL, virtually all players receive their base salaries in a pay cycle that runs during the regular season — so it's their base salary divided by 17 weeks. They receive stipends to attend offseason workouts as well as training camp and into the preseason.
That's why it's always intriguing during a contract squabble between a player and a team to hear the team officials going on and on about how the player has a contract and we expect him to honor that contract.
But as soon as the player doesn't fit into the team's plans, it releases him no matter how many years he has remaining on the contract, which isn't really honoring the contract, either.
That demonstrates why the guaranteed money a player receives when a contract is signed is so important. Because then, if a player is released with years remaining on his contract, he has already pocketed the guaranteed money.
Folks on the management side in any business certainly will want to limit the amount of guaranteed money they pay — if they can. In football, the concern is always a long-term injury that prevents the player from performing after he receives guaranteed money or a decline in effort or motivation because money was paid before his performance.
I think in any new collective bargaining agreement that comes down, the rookies will take the biggest hit in terms of contract size and ability to secure guaranteed money. Sam Bradford, by virtue of being the No. 1 pick in the draft last April, entered the league this season as one of the highest-paid players before he had played a single down.
Veteran players don't begrudge Bradford for taking advantage of the system, but they grumble plenty about a salary system that pays the elite rookies more than most players.
The league wants two more games each season, and the players want two more games' worth of pay. And there will be plenty of back-and-forth on off season workouts, medical care during the players' careers and after their careers are over, roster size and the rest of it.
They're dividing up a multibillion-dollar pie, and everybody wants what he believes is his share of it.
Jeff Legwold: 303-954-2359 or jlegwold@denverpost.com
Read more: Q&A: Contract "loyalty" is a double-edged sword - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_15953815?source=rsssimplepiebroncos#ixzz0yKJzgb g2
By Jeff Legwold
The Denver Post
POSTED: 09/01/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT
Rams rookie quarterback Sam Bradford (Getty Images file photo)
Today's questions about the Broncos come from David Bishop. Send your questions via e-mail to jlegwold@denverpost.com.
Q: Do you think the owners will try to curb the guaranteed salaries of players — both veterans and rookies — with the new collective bargaining agreement? The players will oppose it, no doubt, but to pay someone like Albert Haynesworth the money he was guaranteed, and then he refuses to participate in team drills, is absurd. The current system allows players to break a contract, but not the owners.
A: David, I would argue the owners, or the teams in general, "break" the contracts more than the players do.
Often a player is released before his contract is up, but more often a player holds out because he's cranky about the document he once thought was OK to sign. A player could have two or three years remaining on his deal when he is released, and he doesn't receive his base salary for the remaining years on the deal in that scenario, unless it is specifically written into his deal.
In the NFL, virtually all players receive their base salaries in a pay cycle that runs during the regular season — so it's their base salary divided by 17 weeks. They receive stipends to attend offseason workouts as well as training camp and into the preseason.
That's why it's always intriguing during a contract squabble between a player and a team to hear the team officials going on and on about how the player has a contract and we expect him to honor that contract.
But as soon as the player doesn't fit into the team's plans, it releases him no matter how many years he has remaining on the contract, which isn't really honoring the contract, either.
That demonstrates why the guaranteed money a player receives when a contract is signed is so important. Because then, if a player is released with years remaining on his contract, he has already pocketed the guaranteed money.
Folks on the management side in any business certainly will want to limit the amount of guaranteed money they pay — if they can. In football, the concern is always a long-term injury that prevents the player from performing after he receives guaranteed money or a decline in effort or motivation because money was paid before his performance.
I think in any new collective bargaining agreement that comes down, the rookies will take the biggest hit in terms of contract size and ability to secure guaranteed money. Sam Bradford, by virtue of being the No. 1 pick in the draft last April, entered the league this season as one of the highest-paid players before he had played a single down.
Veteran players don't begrudge Bradford for taking advantage of the system, but they grumble plenty about a salary system that pays the elite rookies more than most players.
The league wants two more games each season, and the players want two more games' worth of pay. And there will be plenty of back-and-forth on off season workouts, medical care during the players' careers and after their careers are over, roster size and the rest of it.
They're dividing up a multibillion-dollar pie, and everybody wants what he believes is his share of it.
Jeff Legwold: 303-954-2359 or jlegwold@denverpost.com
Read more: Q&A: Contract "loyalty" is a double-edged sword - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_15953815?source=rsssimplepiebroncos#ixzz0yKJzgb g2