Twitter: Fisher about Cowboys adding language after the contract was agreed on

Mr_437 said:

Jerry agreed to the exact contract structure Denver had matching the contract, Stephen changed the language.

Click to expand...

you didnt even watch the video lol , and your as dumb as randy !
there was no change, that same clause is in all the dallas contracts, and it is in the cba!
So even if it isnt in the contract, they can still void it using those terms because it is in the CBA !

Sounds to me like his agent who happens to live in denver, maybe wanted randy on the broncos, so he pointed that clause out and said hey randy look
they slipped this in at the last minute!!.

These are probably standard contracts for all players, and the only difference is about money and length, and incentives.
Randy is a dummy , he didnt find that clause, and the agent knew it was standard, but told randy it was a last minute thing by jones and it worked like a charm!

Mr_437 said:

Jerry agreed to the exact contract structure Denver had matching the contract, Stephen changed the language.

Click to expand...

Stephen grabs the contract, a bottle of whiteout, and a magic marker when nobody is looking

DandyDon52 said:

you didnt even watch the video lol , and your as dumb as randy !
there was no change, that same clause is in all the dallas contracts, and it is in the cba!
So even if it isnt in the contract, they can still void it using those terms because it is in the CBA !

Sounds to me like his agent who happens to live in denver, maybe wanted randy on the broncos, so he pointed that clause out and said hey randy look
they slipped this in at the last minute!!.

These are probably standard contracts for all players, and the only difference is about money and length, and incentives.
Randy is a dummy , he didnt find that clause, and the agent knew it was standard, but told randy it was a last minute thing by jones and it worked like a charm!

Click to expand...

Problem with the "its standard and in every contract" argument is that Jane Slater has reported, along with others, that Dak's contract does not have that clause.

How is that possible if its standard for all contracts?

And if Dak objected and the Cowboys removed it, then was not Gregory in his rights to object and request for it to be removed also?

Beast_from_East said:

Problem with the "its standard and in every contract" argument is that Jane Slater has reported, along with others, that Dak's contract does not have that clause.

How is that possible if its standard for all contracts?

And if Dak objected and the Cowboys removed it, then was not Gregory in his rights to object and request for it to be removed also?

Click to expand...

I took what fish said about it being in the current cba, that putting it in the contracts is just to clarify it for the player.
So even if it is not in the contract they could still void the contract using the cba.

Why would dak not have it in his contract, could be because they didnt think he needed reminding.
But daks contract could still be voided if he violated those same clauses in the cba.
I dont think dak would object to it because he knows not to do those things, and in 5 years no suspensions or trouble with him.

Lets say the denver contract did not have that clause, they could still void his contract if he got suspended for substance abuse using the cba clauses.

Beast_from_East said:

Problem with the "its standard and in every contract" argument is that Jane Slater has reported, along with others, that Dak's contract does not have that clause.

How is that possible if its standard for all contracts?

And if Dak objected and the Cowboys removed it, then was not Gregory in his rights to object and request for it to be removed also?

Click to expand...

No, the simple fact of it not being in Dak's contract is not a reason if it is already part of the CBA and the contract specifically has to follow and adhere to the CBA. In effect, placing it in the contract legally speaking is nothing more than emphasizing something already agreed upon. I do not believe the agent but even his story does not refute Mike Fisher. The agent was dumbfounded and caught off guard and in a hurry. He wanted RG in Denver and like many people caught in a situation just took the easy way out and got what he wanted. RG wanted to be in Denver until he got guilted into going back to Dallas. If you cannot have loyalty to a team that did something no one else would for you than what value do you really have. He did it out of long term resentment but I feel it is horribly misplaced. This is a situation completely of his making. I am glad RG is no longer a Cowboy if that is where his head is at and he will get his money so he loses nothing. I wish him all the best.

We often sign people for the fear of losing the status quo. When someone shows you who they are believe them. I would rather have HOF Von Miller using up the rest of his tank on us than having to pray that RG will actually show up. If we could get Wagner too then all the better. If we're that close we can make the room and these are short contracts so go for it. D would be the best we have had since #1 with Ware. Need to still sign Jayron and then the draft is free to bolster OL and depth at DT, CB/S, RB. As stupid as it sounds there will be FA WR out there for vet mins that will solve that problem as well. I expect this to be Zeke's last year and possibly Tyron. With how much we have restructured Tyron they may have to let him play out 2023 too because some of his dead cap goes into 2024.

How many times did Randy get suspended for trouble and this team stood by him?

Its almost a joke.... Bye Randy

No one knows anything.

The clause that the Cowboys use is referencing the CBA. Article 4, Section 9. Other teams may not use that language but they can still enforce it under the CBA. That includes the Broncoes. Either he wanted to go there or his agent misled him.

I was amazed at how the Cowboys staff stuck by RG. I would have cut my losses long ago right or wrong. Talk about going above and beyond Cowboys offered this guy all the support he needed.

I am sorry JJ and SJ. It apparently wasn’t your fault. Gregory stuck it to JJ. IF JJ did not stick with Gregory through the last few suspensions (especially the last one) then he would not be in the NFL. Even if he came cheap would any team had taken a chance on him. JJ lost out on about what 3 seasons waiting on him to clean up. He should own his rights for every game or year he lost out on. Injury is one thing.

DandyDon52 said:

you didnt even watch the video lol , and your as dumb as randy !
there was no change, that same clause is in all the dallas contracts, and it is in the cba!
So even if it isnt in the contract, they can still void it using those terms because it is in the CBA !

Sounds to me like his agent who happens to live in denver, maybe wanted randy on the broncos, so he pointed that clause out and said hey randy look
they slipped this in at the last minute!!.

These are probably standard contracts for all players, and the only difference is about money and length, and incentives.
Randy is a dummy , he didnt find that clause, and the agent knew it was standard, but told randy it was a last minute thing by jones and it worked like a charm!

Click to expand...

Insults...really? You butthurt about a man choosing what's best for him? You the dummy for being so caught in this with your sensitive azz lil bih. I didn't have to watch the video I have different info. The Cowboys language is different from the CBA/other teams as the Cowboys void contracts if a player is fined, but the standard is a suspension. The clause wasn't in Dak's contract for the record. It's too easy to get fined and put $28M in jeopardy...it's just not good business.

DandyDon52 said:

I took what fish said about it being in the current cba, that putting it in the contracts is just to clarify it for the player.

Lets say the denver contract did not have that clause, they could still void his contract if he got suspended for substance abuse using the cba clauses.

Click to expand...

If this is correct, Dallas is at a disadvantage by placing it in the contract instead of just referencing the CBA.

My question is if it's already in the CBA and enforceable without being in the Cowboys contract per Fish, why not remove it when the agent asked?

Imagine this being your take.....

As if being fed up with a man child is a bad thing.

Mr_437 said:

Perhaps, but it is said that Stephen wouldn't take it out. It's not good business to have your money voided if you get fined which happens all the time, Cowboys are doing extra.

It's in a PFT article, or on another thread by @blueblood70.

Click to expand...

they should be doing extra with certain player but the fact is its in every contract Dallas has written in recent history unless its taken out an d a player like RG shouldn't take issue with it and we need this protection for a player with history. Fact is if RG is concerned about it taken effect, we did the right thing,. players who know this wont effect them sign quickly. Randy has no confidence in himself why should we? all this hate toward Jonses is ridiculous you see how he went to bat for Zeke in 2017 cost him 1million dollars and a lot of headaches , RG should be lucky to have Jonses on his side as he has been the money was dollar for dollar match and outside of the clause. i say he does owe Jerry something for standing by him all this time and if an incident occurs jerry would still be there clause or not to make sure RG is being treated fairly. If the suspension was wrong i guarantee Jerry not implementing the clause..got it yet. Wake up this is just reason to pile on the jonses. its not big deal, nothing to see but here are the sharks circling once again.

again, RG has an issue with the clause because he feels deep down it may cost him money. That is a red flag guys this is the first complaint from a player about this that we have heard of and its in 99% of he contracts signed here..ironic huh? a plyer who tends to get in trouble has and issue with money being taken for getting in trouble? it means hes not sure he can stay out of trouble.

D4KADON said:

Randy Gregory is

1. an idiot for having such an idiotic agent who didn’t know that
Clause was there in his previous contract

2. an idiot not reading his previous contract

3. is an idiot for not questioning his agent after he clearly didn’t know about the clause


Sounds like he is an idiot here and his heart wasn’t in staying in Dallas

After all we did for him, good riddance

Click to expand...

His agent is lying, I think. Gregory wanted to go to Denver (we can speculate why) but the Cowboys had put up with him for 4 years so he worried about the bad publicity due to his backstabbing of Jerry. They made up this crap about inserting the clause. It is an excuse. If is a reflection of Gregory's bad character.

Creeper said:

His agent is lying, I think. Gregory wanted to go to Denver (we can speculate why) but the Cowboys had put up with him for 4 years so he worried about the bad publicity due to his backstabbing of Jerry. They made up this crap about inserting the clause. It is an excuse. If is a reflection of Gregory's bad character.

Click to expand...

Bingo. This is it

Beast_from_East said:

Problem with the "its standard and in every contract" argument is that Jane Slater has reported, along with others, that Dak's contract does not have that clause.

How is that possible if its standard for all contracts?

And if Dak objected and the Cowboys removed it, then was not Gregory in his rights to object and request for it to be removed also?

Click to expand...

if randy objected, given his past history of being suspended, then Dallas was within their rights to ask for a behaviour clause. if Randy plans to not get suspended because of bad behaviour, then he should have just said "no problem, you don't have to worry about that"

this is a fact, Fish is affiliated with THE TEAM and the Jones family going way back. He's entrenched into that sphere. Do you guys think for 1 second he will ruin that relationship and trust by telling the truth on twitter and youtube? HELL NO. He's protecting his livelihood. In contrast, Ed Werder. whom also goes way back with the team but no longer is affiliated with them, can state the facts without fear of reprisal. Just read what Ed states over on twitter and it becomes crystal clear. Im moving on now. We need 2 sign Wagner and Miller,Kearse,Armstrong!!

CowboysFaninHouston said:

if randy objected, given his past history of being suspended, then Dallas was within their rights to ask for a behaviour clause. if Randy plans to not get suspended because of bad behaviour, then he should have just said "no problem, you don't have to worry about that"

Click to expand...

its HOW it was done man..

VaqueroTD said:

So if anyone here has walked through downtown Denver recently, I’ll give you a hint of what is painted or displayed at practically every street corner. With his history… ya know what I’m saying…

Click to expand...