What I was saying is that at the end of this year he's a third year player according to the CBA, because he didn't report by August 8. If he's a third year player according to the CBA can he be contractually obligated to the "fifth year" option on his contract? He hasn't even been in the league 4 years to enter the fifth year, again only according to the legalese of the CBA. Again, according to the CBA after his third year, which will be after this year because he lost this year's eligibility already, the team has a right to a fifth year option. We would have to lose that option because his fourth year of contract is gone, but his fifth year of player eligibility is still 2 years away. But then the team wouldn't have the fifth year option they should have. So they must have the fifth year option we already exercised, but on a third year player. Which makes no sense.
My point after all that, was that his contact years and his player eligibility years won't match. I don't know, and last time we had this conversation no one else did either, how the language of the contract reads as far as specifying years of the contract or player eligibility years for the fifth year option, or if that's directly from the CBA and uses his player eligibility years or contact years.
Basically the math turned weird and no one knows how much of a legal leg he'll have to stand on it next year he throws another fit saying he can't play on fifth year option if he's not a fourth year player earning his fifth year of eligibility. Maybe that's the Gambit he's playing. Maybe (big hairy stupid conspiracy theory maybe) he wants off the Rams and his agent thinks that if he sits out this year he can't be a third year player in a fifth year of contact, so he hits restricted agency knowing that somebody will price the Rams out of the market for him.
That was long... And confusing. Sorry.
when it counted.
