Reality
Staff member
- Messages
- 30,532
- Reaction score
- 69,590
Before anyone chimes in thinking I am pro-player or pro-team, let me be clear in saying I really do not favor either one.
I do not blame players for trying to get the most money they can because their career could end at any point due to injury or decline.
I also do not blame owners who do not want to sign a player to a bad contract that haunts them and their team and salary cap for years.
As I have said many times in the past, I treat players who hold out like injured players. I focus on the players who are practicing and playing. That doesn't mean I don't want a hold out player to return, but I am also not going to dwell on their absence any more than I would if they were injured.
So, with that said ..
Back in the 1990s, the upfront money was referred to as "signing bonus" money when in reality it was just a way for teams to manipulate their salary caps in the coming years.
Over the last several years, the term "singing bonus" has been replaced with a more appropriate and accurate name of "guaranteed money" as it is money the player is guaranteed to receive for signing the contract as long as the player does not violate the contract.
When you hear that a player is making a lower amount than they are worth in a later year of their contract, most people are forgetting that the player is actually making more than that because of the guaranteed money up front that was only paid up front because of the salary cap manipulation but still is pro-rated when it comes to actual salaries.
That's why if a player retires or violates their contract, they have to pay back the remaining pro-rated amount of their already paid guaranteed (signing bonus) money to their team.
For example, if you pay a player $25 million signing bonus and $5 million per year for 5 years, that's a $10m/year salary, and not a $30 million year one salary and $5 million for years 2 through 5.
If you agree to cut 5 lawns cutting one per day for $100 each and the HOA pays you $300 up front, that does not mean that you got paid $300 for cutting one lawn on day one and only $50 per lawn per day after that.
What the NFL needs to do is change how they pay out guaranteed money to players.
Instead of paying players all guaranteed money upfront, it should be paid over the length of the contract.
That way, teams and players (along with the media and fans) have a true understanding of what players are earning each year. That also means that players would have more to risk if they hold out, so the only holdouts would likely be the players who would likely get a huge pay increase over their current contract, not just a moderate increase.
The other thing it would do is lead to shorter contracts as players and their agents would be less likely to sign 5+ year contracts that are rarely ever completed except when the team uses their franchise tags on players.
Instead, rookies would likely be 3-4 year contracts depending on their drafted position and most contract extensions would likely be 2-4 years each time.
Players like Bell, Gordon and Elliott are the tip of the ice berg when it comes to hold outs. A lot more players are going to see that holding out leads to a new higher paying contract with their current team or a trade and new contract with a new team.
In that scenario, I think most people would do the same.
I do not blame players for trying to get the most money they can because their career could end at any point due to injury or decline.
I also do not blame owners who do not want to sign a player to a bad contract that haunts them and their team and salary cap for years.
As I have said many times in the past, I treat players who hold out like injured players. I focus on the players who are practicing and playing. That doesn't mean I don't want a hold out player to return, but I am also not going to dwell on their absence any more than I would if they were injured.
So, with that said ..
Back in the 1990s, the upfront money was referred to as "signing bonus" money when in reality it was just a way for teams to manipulate their salary caps in the coming years.
Over the last several years, the term "singing bonus" has been replaced with a more appropriate and accurate name of "guaranteed money" as it is money the player is guaranteed to receive for signing the contract as long as the player does not violate the contract.
When you hear that a player is making a lower amount than they are worth in a later year of their contract, most people are forgetting that the player is actually making more than that because of the guaranteed money up front that was only paid up front because of the salary cap manipulation but still is pro-rated when it comes to actual salaries.
That's why if a player retires or violates their contract, they have to pay back the remaining pro-rated amount of their already paid guaranteed (signing bonus) money to their team.
For example, if you pay a player $25 million signing bonus and $5 million per year for 5 years, that's a $10m/year salary, and not a $30 million year one salary and $5 million for years 2 through 5.
If you agree to cut 5 lawns cutting one per day for $100 each and the HOA pays you $300 up front, that does not mean that you got paid $300 for cutting one lawn on day one and only $50 per lawn per day after that.
What the NFL needs to do is change how they pay out guaranteed money to players.
Instead of paying players all guaranteed money upfront, it should be paid over the length of the contract.
That way, teams and players (along with the media and fans) have a true understanding of what players are earning each year. That also means that players would have more to risk if they hold out, so the only holdouts would likely be the players who would likely get a huge pay increase over their current contract, not just a moderate increase.
The other thing it would do is lead to shorter contracts as players and their agents would be less likely to sign 5+ year contracts that are rarely ever completed except when the team uses their franchise tags on players.
Instead, rookies would likely be 3-4 year contracts depending on their drafted position and most contract extensions would likely be 2-4 years each time.
Players like Bell, Gordon and Elliott are the tip of the ice berg when it comes to hold outs. A lot more players are going to see that holding out leads to a new higher paying contract with their current team or a trade and new contract with a new team.
In that scenario, I think most people would do the same.
