You are just biased and full of insultive poop now...you know nothing about the meeting of minds and don't care. That is purely stupid...doesn't change the role of a negotiator for an offered contract. That is ignoring the terms of the contract to be signed and they are totally dependent on the party making a contractual provisions.
You can not get around that fact and it isn't just a convenience of saying it is protecting the party to negotiate rights. You are not even on the level of what is best for the benefit of the Cowboys to start with. If one instead argues the facts of negotiated enrichment, already, then one really doesn't understand elements of law.
Time elements are significant and can nullify a contract offered thus creating unjust enrichment. Here, the player has to meet the requirements of the negotiated and offered conditions.
Otherwise, one is just assuming a biased and false view.
Underlying and desired elements are relevant. In football, protection of desired team goals are fully dominant here. The Cowboys can alter their offers if desired, but that doesn't make your arbitrary stance right.
Be biased and wrong if you wish to approach and attempted discussion if you choose. That although, is nothing but a display of one's convenience and not true elements of a negotiated contract...no matter who is doing the talking on execution of one.
If you don't read, then don't run off at the mouth. You would prefer to remain ignorant. Law is the conerstone of America. You really don't have a clue...
