Snead on negotiations with Aaron Donald: 'No movement'

[Picked4td]

I don't get how you figure a team lives up to their end of the bargain even when cutting a player though. If player X signs a 5 year 50 million contract with 10 million garunteed all up front in the first year and the team cuts him after the one season then essential it was a one year 10 million dollar contract. To me by the team cutting player X they didn't live up to their end of the contract. That's why I have no problem with guys holding out, not honoring their signed contract. Until all NFL contracts are 100% garunteed, I have zero issue with players holding out. The CBA overwhelmingly benefits the owners.

because the team didnt agree to paid the player 50m over 5 years, they agreed to pay the player 50m over 5 years if the player as long as the player's production level remains worth that price. is it unfair to the player? yea sure but thats why they try to get as much guaranteed as possible. an example of the team not living up to their end of the deal would be only paying 5m of that 10m up front and never paying him the other 5m.

if you and me agreed to a contract that you would cut my grass for $20 or $30 if you can do it in 1hr and it takes you more than an hr to cut my grass, me paying you $20 is me living up to my end of the deal even though you didnt get the full $30. Its literally in the contract that the player has to earn that other 40m, and if they fail to do so well so be it. If teams truly werent living up to their end of the deal you would see them getting sued and shit left and right.

 

[Merlin]

Mitigated with an insurance policy paid for by Donald.

Exactly. If I were in his shoes I'd tell the Rams "sign me now or there is no way I stay in horns when my time's up," and then attempt to meet them half way since they're signing me to a new contract 2 years early.

And if I were in Demoff's shoes I'd go longer term than Suh's contract with the biggest DT signing bonus ever, but hopefully a smaller annual cap hit.

 

[FRO]

because the team didnt agree to paid the player 50m over 5 years, they agreed to pay the player 50m over 5 years if the player as long as the player's production level remains worth that price. is it unfair to the player? yea sure but thats why they try to get as much guaranteed as possible. an example of the team not living up to their end of the deal would be only paying 5m of that 10m up front and never paying him the other 5m.

if you and me agreed to a contract that you would cut my grass for $20 or $30 if you can do it in 1hr and it takes you more than an hr to cut my grass, me paying you $20 is me living up to my end of the deal even though you didnt get the full $30. Its literally in the contract that the player has to earn that other 40m, and if they fail to do so well so be it. If teams truly werent living up to their end of the deal you would see them getting sued and crap left and right.

So if the player over performs the 50 million dollar contract, what is his recourse? We both know the team isn't going to voluntarily give more money. That's why I have no problem with the player holding out and not honoring the contract. I get your point of the team getting out of a contract when the player underperforms it. To me when a player holding out when he over performs the contract is in the same boat as a team cutting a guy for underperforming it. I think we're all in agreement that Donald is worth much more than he is getting paid.

 

[Picked4td]

So if the player over performs the 50 million dollar contract, what is his recourse? We both know the team isn't going to voluntarily give more money. That's why I have no problem with the player holding out and not honoring the contract. I get your point of the team getting out of a contract when the player underperforms it. To me when a player holding out when he over performs the contract is in the same boat as a team cutting a guy for underperforming it. I think we're all in agreement that Donald is worth much more than he is getting paid.

But if a guy under performs he's not giving back that guaranteed money either. I've made my case about hold outs earlier so I won't post it all again but long story short, don't sign a long deal if you think the best deal you can get is less than your worth. Sign short deal, prove your worth, get long deal at your worth. Obviously for rookies it's different which is why in the other post I said I understand Donald being upset and holding out but in his case it's useless with the team having him under their control for 4 more years if they wish

 

[Riverumbbq]

Teams already carry player insurance for team protection for those higher salary guys. If a player is injured on the field while already under contract, his salary is guaranteed. Donald can also carry private insurance for his own personal coverage as many college players do. As far as what kind of policy, that's up to him, his insurance company and his ability/willingness to pay for whatever they believe is his worth. These kinds of policies are strictly the responsibility of the player. As I said, if injury is his only concern he can partially mitigate this by purchasing an injury protection plan.

 

[FRO]

But if a guy under performs he's not giving back that guaranteed money either. I've made my case about hold outs earlier so I won't post it all again but long story short, don't sign a long deal if you think the best deal you can get is less than your worth. Sign short deal, prove your worth, get long deal at your worth. Obviously for rookies it's different which is why in the other post I said I understand Donald being upset and holding out but in his case it's useless with the team having him under their control for 4 more years if they wish

We just have different viewpoints on the issue, which is totally fine. Thank you for being civil through the debate. That can be extremely rare for message boards.

I do agree on the short term deals and I think Trumaine has benefited huge from the franchise tag. If I were a player in my prime I would definitely stick to one to two year deals, unless a team was offering an exorbitant amount of garunteed cash. Big long term deals in the NFL are meaningless unless that signing bonus is huge.

 

[Riverumbbq]

So if the player over performs the 50 million dollar contract, what is his recourse? We both know the team isn't going to voluntarily give more money. That's why I have no problem with the player holding out and not honoring the contract.

If that $50.mil. player is so concerned that he may over-perform his contract, then he should sign a shorter contract, it's just that easy. Players sign long-term for the same reasons teams do, ... to protect their investment and financial future. There is no gun to the head forcing a player to sign long-term, but players like tons of up-front guaranteed signing/bonus money that come with those big contracts. Same reason players dislike being franchise tagged, they are only protected for that single season.

 

[12intheBox]

If that $50.mil. player is so concerned that he may over-perform his contract, then he should sign a shorter contract, it's just that easy. Players sign long-term for the same reasons teams do, ... to protect their investment and financial future. There is no gun to the head forcing a player to sign long-term, but players like tons of up-front guaranteed signing/bonus money that come with those big contracts. Same reason players dislike being franchise tagged, they are only protected for that single season.

And yet, as we have here, drafted first round rookies have no choice as to structure at all.

 

[Riverumbbq]

And yet, as we have here, drafted first round rookies have no choice as to structure at all.

Teams didn't do that to the rookie players, ... blame the players union for agreeing if you don't like it.

 

[FRO]

If that $50.mil. player is so concerned that he may over-perform his contract, then he should sign a shorter contract, it's just that easy. Players sign long-term for the same reasons teams do, ... to protect their investment and financial future. There is no gun to the head forcing a player to sign long-term, but players like tons of up-front guaranteed signing/bonus money that come with those big contracts. Same reason players dislike being franchise tagged, they are only protected for that single season.

I get what you are saying and if I were a player I would do what you're suggesting. My overall point is that teams cut players all the time not honoring the "signed contract" and players hold out for more money not honoring the "signed contract". That's why I won't beat up a player that holds out. It's just how the game is played in the NFL. You don't see holdouts in any other sport unless a player is pushing for a trade.

 

[12intheBox]

Teams didn't do that to the rookie players, ... blame the players union for agreeing if you don't like it.

The teams did do that - along with the players association - an association, I might add - that Aaron Donald had no say in whatsoever at the time the CBA was signed. You argue free market - that players should sign shorter term contracts if thats what they want - but he, in fact, had no choice in the length of this contract.

That same CBA outlined rules and remedies for players who failed to report to camp - the bargaining agreement specifically contemplated that players would do it from time to time - that it would be their leverage. The teams and the players understood that this very thing would and does happen.

The team isn't upset with Donald, Donald isn't upset with the team - this is a 9 figure deal we are talking about - they are complicated and they are slow to come together. Its just business on all ends - let it run its course.

 

[Riverumbbq]

The teams did do that - along with the players association - an association, I might add - that Aaron Donald had no say in whatsoever at the time the CBA was signed. You argue free market - that players should sign shorter term contracts if thats what they want - but he, in fact, had no choice in the length of this contract.

That same CBA outlined rules and remedies for players who failed to report to camp - the bargaining agreement specifically contemplated that players would do it from time to time - that it would be their leverage. The teams and the players understood that this very thing would and does happen.

The team isn't upset with Donald, Donald isn't upset with the team - this is a 9 figure deal we are talking about - they are complicated and they are slow to come together. Its just business on all ends - let it run its course.

The players union did not have to agree to this when negotiating with the league, but they did. Donald should take it up with them. They set it up this way to reward veteran players. All teams have a CAP, the money would be paid out anyway, but this is what the players voted for.

 

[12intheBox]

The players union did not have to agree to this when negotiating with the league, but they did. Donald should take it up with them. They set it up this way to reward veteran players. All teams have a CAP, the money would be paid out anyway, but this is what the players voted for.

And the owners voted for a system that contemplated that players would not report to training camp during contract negotiations. Everyone knew situations like this would come up - they wrote contingencies into the CBA to cover this specific issue.

Still - AD was not even a part of the CBA at the time it was signed and didn't even have one of the 1700 or so votes. To tell him to honor his contract and take up any issues with the NFLPA doesn't seem all that fair to me. He is professionally represented and he is following the advice of the professionals he has hired to handle this business transaction.

 

[Riverumbbq]

And the owners voted for a system that contemplated that players would not report to training camp during contract negotiations. Everyone knew situations like this would come up - they wrote contingencies into the CBA to cover this specific issue.

Still - AD was not even a part of the CBA at the time it was signed and didn't even have one of the 1700 or so votes. To tell him to honor his contract and take up any issues with the NFLPA doesn't seem all that fair to me. He is professionally represented and he is following the advice of the professionals he has hired to handle this business transaction.

He can take it up with his union. If you recall, it was the older vets who wanted this, not the rookies. Just his luck that there were more vets than rookies doing the voting. Thing is, once Donald does sign his 2'nd contract, he'll be very, very, very happy about his union's previous decision. Can't have it both ways ...

 

[12intheBox]

He can take it up with his union. If you recall, it was the older vets who wanted this, not the rookies. Just his luck that there were more vets than rookies doing the voting. Thing is, once Donald does sign his 2'nd contract, he'll be very, very, very happy about his union's previous decision. Can't have it both ways ...

Of course it was the vets. They voted in their own self interest - as you would expect. But what is it you think he could or should take up with his union? And what would their response be?

"I have outplayed my contract and want more money while I'm in my window"

"You should hold out - it's your best leverage and it's contemplated in the CBA we signed with the owners"

 

[Riverumbbq]

Of course it was the vets. They voted in their own self interest - as you would expect. But what is it you think he could or should take up with his union? And what would their response be?

"I have outplayed my contract and want more money while I'm in my window"

"You should hold out - it's your best leverage and it's contemplated in the CBA we signed with the owners"

No one is denying Donald's right to hold out, although some might suggest it's a bad move. It's also the right of the Rams to ignore Donald if that is their decision. IMO, It's a bad precedent to set for the future should the Rams cave to his demands. I'd suggest Donald present an alternative plan to his union for future consideration by the league, otherwise, sit out and don't get paid, or report for duty and play.
There will come a time when annual CAP raises are no longer automatic, that will translate to less player money available. Television & advertisement revenue fall with less viewership, and ratings have fallen somewhat, it will be interesting to see how players and agents react to smaller income when the time comes. jmo.

 

[dieterbrock]

The rookie cap is relatively new and with that it is becoming a common practice for teams to re-sign high achievers after the 3rd year. The Rams have agreed he deserves a new deal.
The idea that Donald is "under team could control for 2 years +" is just not reality. They need to put a player exercised opt out in the rookie deals with team protection for year 4 to prevent hold outs

 

[Ramzheart]

Snead hasn't given up hope. "There is hope," he said. "There's hope that he'll be a Ram a long time."

He hopes!? There should be no hope involved! He hasnt given up?! Sounds like there's a little less confidence in that statement. I thought I remember quotes of "we will get him done" and he will be a ram a long time...