The Cowboys retained rights to Ryan Williams?

[jobberone]

I went back to look at the 'six week' rule for players on the IR since I was confused over it.

Players placed on the designated IR can be activated to practice six weeks after being placed on IR and returned to the active roster to play 8 weeks after being placed on the IR. Only one player per team may be placed on the designated IR each calendar year. This is a new policy enacted in 2012. Before then no player could return from the IR.

They must have a major injury and placed on the designated IR that day. The six weeks rule above does not apply to players placed on the non-designated IR by definition. If not placed on the designated IR that day then they are may not return even when healthy. They may reach an injury settlement though and sign with another team who must pick up their old contract.

That clears up the confusion surrounding a return to the active roster when healthy after being on IR.

That's my understanding as I said before.

I think this is what your were talking about @xwalker when you mentioned the six week rule. Since Williams was not placed on the designated to return IR then I was discussing the rules for him.

Sorry to labor so much about this but I wanted to understand the issue.

 

[xwalker]

I went back to look at the 'six week' rule for players on the IR since I was confused over it.

Players placed on the designated IR can be activated to practice six weeks after being placed on IR and returned to the active roster to play 8 weeks after being placed on the IR. Only one player per team may be placed on the designated IR each calendar year. This is a new policy enacted in 2012. Before then no player could return from the IR.

They must have a major injury and placed on the designated IR that day. The six weeks rule above does not apply to players placed on the non-designated IR by definition. If not placed on the designated IR that day then they are may not return even when healthy. They may reach an injury settlement though and sign with another team who must pick up their old contract.

That clears up the confusion surrounding a return to the active roster when healthy after being on IR.

That's my understanding as I said before.

I think this is what your were talking about @xwalker when you mentioned the six week rule. Since Williams was not placed on the designated to return IR then I was discussing the rules for him.

Sorry to labor so much about this but I wanted to understand the issue.

No, I'm not referring to the designated for return IR spot.


There are 3 ways that a player that is on IR or that received an injury settlement can return to that team that same year.
1. Designated for Return IR: This is limited to 1 player. If a player is eligible for the PUP, then a team would not waste the 1 Designated-IR spot on that player. This cannot be used until after the initial cut to 53. The player must be on the initial 53, but can then be moved to the DFR-IR and another player can be signed to replace him.

2. The player receives an injury settlement: The player must then wait 6 weeks plus the amount of time equal to the number of weeks pay for the injury settlement to return to the that team. They can sign with another team without the extra 6 weeks wait.

3. The player goes on IR and is then cut when healthy: The player must wait 6 weeks to return to that team from the time he was cut. He can sign with another team immediately.

Note: The 6 weeks are regular season weeks, not preseason weeks.

 

[jobberone]

No, I'm not referring to the designated for return IR spot.


There are 3 ways that a player that is on IR or that received an injury settlement can return to that team that same year.
1. Designated for Return IR: This is limited to 1 player. If a player is eligible for the PUP, then a team would not waste the 1 Designated-IR spot on that player. This cannot be used until after the initial cut to 53. The player must be on the initial 53, but can then be moved to the DFR-IR and another player can be signed to replace him.

2. The player receives an injury settlement: The player must then wait 6 weeks plus the amount of time equal to the number of weeks pay for the injury settlement to return to the that team. They can sign with another team without the extra 6 weeks wait.

3. The player goes on IR and is then cut when healthy: The player must wait 6 weeks to return to that team from the time he was cut. He can sign with another team immediately.

Note: The 6 weeks are regular season weeks, not preseason weeks.

1. is correct but is not for anyone on PUP. I said that. Any player at any time may be placed on the IR but only ONE may be designated for return. But as you said, there is no reason to put someone on IR if you put them on the PUP since you are betting they will return. There is many weeks to get that right and if not then they will not be eligible to return from IR to the active roster if they exhaust their PUP time. If you exhaust your weeks of PUP then you must put the player on IR or reach an injury settlement. Obviously if they return from PUP they could still go on IR.

2. Not for non-vested players. If they are waived injured and not picked up by another team then they must go on IR. They may get an injury settlement but they MAY NOT resign with the old team by definition. They can if not waived injured but that is just a cut. You cannot cut injured players (legally). We cut and resign players fairly often just not injured.

3. No unless you are talking about a player on the designated for return IR. If the team wants to waste that one exemption by cutting the player after they return then that's their decision but its a poor one IMO.

Prior to 2012 there were no exceptions to the IR rule. Once a player was on IR then they could not play again that year for that team. All this was done to keep players from being stashed on the IR for a week or more then returning to the team. And this happened at one time.

This is all cut and dry. You may only designate one player per team per year to return from IR; as you stated. Otherwise they cannot play for that team again that year. This declaration is one sentence.

If you have an official site of the NFL stating players on the non-designated IR can return I'd like to see it. There is adulterated info all over the web authored by people who interpret the rules themselves. I think you are confusing the weeks rule from the PUP and applying it to the IR but that's just an opinion based on an educated guess.

You can have the last word. If I return then anyone can bench me for a day. I'm not only bored but my guess is quite a few other are with this.

 

[xwalker]

1. is correct but is not for anyone on PUP. I said that. Any player at any time may be placed on the IR but only ONE may be designated for return. But as you said, there is no reason to put someone on IR if you put them on the PUP since you are betting they will return. There is many weeks to get that right and if not then they will not be eligible to return from IR to the active roster if they exhaust their PUP time. If you exhaust your weeks of PUP then you must put the player on IR or reach an injury settlement. Obviously if they return from PUP they could still go on IR.

2. Not for non-vested players. If they are waived injured and not picked up by another team then they must go on IR. They may get an injury settlement but they MAY NOT resign with the old team by definition. They can if not waived injured but that is just a cut. You cannot cut injured players (legally). We cut and resign players fairly often just not injured.

3. No unless you are talking about a player on the designated for return IR. If the team wants to waste that one exemption by cutting the player after they return then that's their decision but its a poor one IMO.

Prior to 2012 there were no exceptions to the IR rule. Once a player was on IR then they could not play again that year for that team. All this was done to keep players from being stashed on the IR for a week or more then returning to the team. And this happened at one time.

This is all cut and dry. You may only designate one player per team per year to return from IR; as you stated. Otherwise they cannot play for that team again that year. This declaration is one sentence.

If you have an official site of the NFL stating players on the non-designated IR can return I'd like to see it. There is adulterated info all over the web authored by people who interpret the rules themselves. I think you are confusing the weeks rule from the PUP and applying it to the IR but that's just an opinion based on an educated guess.

You can have the last word. If I return then anyone can bench me for a day. I'm not only bored but my guess is quite a few other are with this.

Let's just move on from Designated for Return IR and the PUP. I think we all know how those work.

If a player is waived injured, then 1 of 2 things happen:
1. He receives an injury settlement equal to the number of weeks that he is expected to be unable to play.

If he receives an injury settlement, then:
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/what-is-an-injury-settlement/
Injury settlements can also give a team a chance at getting a player back during that same season. There is a rule in place that the team (agreeing to a settlement) can’t resign that player until a minimum of six weeks passes following the amount of weeks of the initial settlement. So for our MCL example, the team cannot resign that player for the first eleven weeks. For a player who did a three week/3 game settlement, his team can’t sign him back until after week nine. However, the player is free to sign with another team.

The 6 weeks that I'm referring to is in the paragraph above. I am not referring to or confusing it with the time to return from Designated IR or PUP.

It's possible that this only applies to vested veterans. If you have something showing that to be true, then please share.



2. He ends up on IR, either immediately or after clearing waivers.

Players on IR can be cut when healthy or receive and injury settlement. I'm not certain of the exact details, but I know that a couple of years ago Nate Livings was initially on IR and then cut. I don't know if he was just cut when he got healthy or if he got a settlement. I assume that they just waited until he was healthy; otherwise, they could have given him the settlement from day 1.


@Bluefin might have some more input on this.

 

[xwalker]

I consider it a given that Ryan Williams was signed with a split contract clause.

It's become pretty standard from the third round onward to have splits in the first couple of seasons in rookie deals.

Given Ryan Williams' injury history, it would seem to be a given his deal would have splits in the event he landed on injured reserve again.

I wonder if there is a difference between PUP and IR when it comes to split contracts. I can't figure out why they didn't just put him on the PUP.

 

[Bluefin]

I wonder if there is a difference between PUP and IR when it comes to split contracts. I can't figure out why they didn't just put him on the PUP.

The split is designed to protect the team in case a player misses an entire season, or most of it, due to an injury.

It's primary function is for off-season and training camp injuries with young players (3rd rd and later rookie contracts, non-vested veterans).

There's a chance a PUP player will be able to play during the regular season at some point, so that would likely prevent the split clause from being used.

When Tyrone Crawford missed all of 2013 due to injury, I wondered if he had a split in his contract. Everyone is proceeding under the assumption that Crawford will become an unrestricted free agent after this season, but if their was a split salary in 2013, he didn't accrue a season of service towards free agency.

That would mean he would become a restricted free agent next off-season instead of unrestricted. They touched on this briefly on Cowboys Break during the week and none of them were sure of Crawford's contract status. Nick Eatman and Bryan Broaddus plan on looking into it.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Wow, 6 page thread over a guy that has never taken a snap with the team and probably never will

lol

 

[jobberone]

Let's just move on from Designated for Return IR and the PUP. I think we all know how those work.

If a player is waived injured, then 1 of 2 things happen:
1. He receives an injury settlement equal to the number of weeks that he is expected to be unable to play.

If he receives an injury settlement, then:
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/what-is-an-injury-settlement/
Injury settlements can also give a team a chance at getting a player back during that same season. There is a rule in place that the team (agreeing to a settlement) can’t resign that player until a minimum of six weeks passes following the amount of weeks of the initial settlement. So for our MCL example, the team cannot resign that player for the first eleven weeks. For a player who did a three week/3 game settlement, his team can’t sign him back until after week nine. However, the player is free to sign with another team.

The 6 weeks that I'm referring to is in the paragraph above. I am not referring to or confusing it with the time to return from Designated IR or PUP.

It's possible that this only applies to vested veterans. If you have something showing that to be true, then please share.


2. He ends up on IR, either immediately or after clearing waivers.

Players on IR can be cut when healthy or receive and injury settlement. I'm not certain of the exact details, but I know that a couple of years ago Nate Livings was initially on IR and then cut. I don't know if he was just cut when he got healthy or if he got a settlement. I assume that they just waited until he was healthy; otherwise, they could have given him the settlement from day 1.


@Bluefin might have some more input on this.

Doesn't matter. Non-vested players who are waived injured (as in the whole topic here) end up on IR if not claimed by another team because it is a rule. They must be placed on IR. They CANNOT go back to the roster because they have been on IR. They cannot be offered an injury settlement until they clear waivers first. That's fair to the player and all the other teams especially the lousy ones.

Here are the new rules which allows for one player per team to return from the IR ratified 8/30/2012; it also pushed back the trade deadline:

• Only players with a “major injury” who are placed on the IR list after 4 p.m. EST on Tuesday, September 4, 2012, or during the season are eligible to be reactivated later in the season.
  
• A major injury is described as an injury that renders the player unable to practice or play football for at least six weeks — or 42 calendar days — from the date of injury.
  
• A player who is placed on the IR list after 4 p.m. EST on Tuesday, September 4, 2012, must be immediately “designated for return” at the time he is placed on the list. That designation must appear on that day’s Personnel Notice.
  
• That designated player is eligible to return to practice if he has been on the IR list for at least six weeks from the date he was placed on Reserve. He is eligible to return to the active list if has been on the IR list for at least eight weeks from the date he is placed on Reserve.

This is for the designated for return IR. Anyone else cannot come back to the team once they are on IR. As you said, only one person per team can return from the IR. Therefore if someone gets 'healthy' while on IR, they still can't go to the active roster of the same club.

You can waive a vested veteran who does not have to clear waivers but you have to reach a settlement first if they are injured. They can leave anytime they want though as they aren't required to insist on one. Most just stay in the trainers room for the rest of the year and milk the IR.

Anyone can be cut (waived) or placed on IR and there are no restrictions on the numbers; just pay the cap consequences. If a player is cut then they can be resigned if they clear waivers assuming they must pass thru waivers.

Ok, someone bench me because I obviously can't help myself. I'm sure there are a myriad of volunteers. Just get in line.

 

[conner01]

Wow, 6 page thread over a guy that has never taken a snap with the team and probably never will

lol

The conversation over the rules is much more interesting than the player has been
It amazes me how some guys here really
Know and understand the CBA
Now if they could just teach the media
It also amazes me how few people in the media understand it at all

 

[AbeBeta]

Wow, 6 page thread over a guy that has never taken a snap with the team and probably never will

lol

This is what happens when mods don't understand the rules.

 

[AbeBeta]

The split is designed to protect the team in case a player misses an entire season, or most of it, due to an injury.

It's primary function is for off-season and training camp injuries with young players (3rd rd and later rookie contracts, non-vested veterans).

There's a chance a PUP player will be able to play during the regular season at some point, so that would likely prevent the split clause from being used.

When Tyrone Crawford missed all of 2013 due to injury, I wondered if he had a split in his contract. Everyone is proceeding under the assumption that Crawford will become an unrestricted free agent after this season, but if their was a split salary in 2013, he didn't accrue a season of service towards free agency.

That would mean he would become a restricted free agent next off-season instead of unrestricted. They touched on this briefly on Cowboys Break during the week and none of them were sure of Crawford's contract status. Nick Eatman and Bryan Broaddus plan on looking into it.

Hmmm. I know that split deals are common for rookies drafted outside the first and second round. But I doubt you'd force that anything but year one.

Also, is that really true about accruing a season? Can you recall any cases where that happened?

 

[Bluefin]

Hmmm. I know that split deals are common for rookies drafted outside the first and second round. But I doubt you'd force that anything but year one.

I've read that it varies by team and some agents will fight very hard against it, but it's becoming more common to see split salaries in year two along with year one.

I'll try to listen to all the Cowboys Break shows this week and see if they follow-up on Tyrone Crawford's contract status.

Also, is that really true about accruing a season? Can you recall any cases where that happened?

The most recent case where it looks to have happened is with Darrion Weems last year.

If Weems had received his full salary, he would have accrued a season towards free agency and been a restricted free agent last off-season.

Instead, he was an exclusive rights free agent, which indicates there was a salary split because he was on the roster (active for 2 gms, then IR for 14 gms) all season. Players need to be on a roster for a minimum of 6 games at full pay in order to accrue a season of service towards free agency.

 

[AbeBeta]

I've read that it varies by team and some agents will fight very hard against it, but it's becoming more common to see split salaries in year two along with year one.

I'll try to listen to all the Cowboys Break shows this week and see if they follow-up on Tyrone Crawford's contract status.



The most recent case where it looks to have happened is with Darrion Weems last year.

If Weems had received his full salary, he would have accrued a season towards free agency and been a restricted free agent last off-season.

Instead, he was an exclusive rights free agent, which indicates there was a salary split because he was on the roster (active for 2 gms, then IR for 14 gms) all season. Players need to be on a roster for a minimum of 6 games at full pay in order to accrue a season of service towards free agency.

Weems wasn't on an active roster long enough when he came into the league in 2012 to accrue a season. He was in 2013. In 2014 he was on IR. He's slated to be RFA in 2016. That'd be three accrued seasons for RFA

 

[Bluefin]

Weems wasn't on an active roster long enough when he came into the league in 2012 to accrue a season. He was in 2013. In 2014 he was on IR. He's slated to be RFA in 2016. That'd be three accrued seasons for RFA

You're right.

There's still no way to know for certain whether or not there was a split salary in Darrion Weems' 2014 contract.

If Weems received his full salary last year and accrues a season this year, he will become a restricted free agent next off-season (Dallas may try to reach an extension this pre-season if they're confident Weems has turned a corner).

If there was a split salary last year and Weems didn't accrue a season of service, he'll again be an exclusive rights free agent next off-season.

Word will eventually get out at some point.

 

[Nightman]

I've read that it varies by team and some agents will fight very hard against it, but it's becoming more common to see split salaries in year two along with year one.

I'll try to listen to all the Cowboys Break shows this week and see if they follow-up on Tyrone Crawford's contract status.



The most recent case where it looks to have happened is with Darrion Weems last year.

If Weems had received his full salary, he would have accrued a season towards free agency and been a restricted free agent last off-season.

Instead, he was an exclusive rights free agent, which indicates there was a salary split because he was on the roster (active for 2 gms, then IR for 14 gms) all season. Players need to be on a roster for a minimum of 6 games at full pay in order to accrue a season of service towards free agency.

Didn't it happen with Leary as well?

 

[Bluefin]

Didn't it happen with Leary as well?

Yes.

In his case, Chris Jones' too, they weren't on the roster for six games as rookies so they didn't accrue a season towards free agency.

 

[AbeBeta]

Didn't it happen with Leary as well?

Leary only bad 2 games active in 2012. So that's not a year

 

[xwalker]

Doesn't matter. Non-vested players who are waived injured (as in the whole topic here) end up on IR if not claimed by another team because it is a rule. They must be placed on IR. They CANNOT go back to the roster because they have been on IR. They cannot be offered an injury settlement until they clear waivers first. That's fair to the player and all the other teams especially the lousy ones.

Here are the new rules which allows for one player per team to return from the IR ratified 8/30/2012; it also pushed back the trade deadline:

• Only players with a “major injury” who are placed on the IR list after 4 p.m. EST on Tuesday, September 4, 2012, or during the season are eligible to be reactivated later in the season.
• A major injury is described as an injury that renders the player unable to practice or play football for at least six weeks — or 42 calendar days — from the date of injury.
• A player who is placed on the IR list after 4 p.m. EST on Tuesday, September 4, 2012, must be immediately “designated for return” at the time he is placed on the list. That designation must appear on that day’s Personnel Notice.
• That designated player is eligible to return to practice if he has been on the IR list for at least six weeks from the date he was placed on Reserve. He is eligible to return to the active list if has been on the IR list for at least eight weeks from the date he is placed on Reserve.

This is for the designated for return IR. Anyone else cannot come back to the team once they are on IR. As you said, only one person per team can return from the IR. Therefore if someone gets 'healthy' while on IR, they still can't go to the active roster of the same club.

You can waive a vested veteran who does not have to clear waivers but you have to reach a settlement first if they are injured. They can leave anytime they want though as they aren't required to insist on one. Most just stay in the trainers room for the rest of the year and milk the IR.

Anyone can be cut (waived) or placed on IR and there are no restrictions on the numbers; just pay the cap consequences. If a player is cut then they can be resigned if they clear waivers assuming they must pass thru waivers.

Ok, someone bench me because I obviously can't help myself. I'm sure there are a myriad of volunteers. Just get in line.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/what-is-an-injury-settlement/
Injury settlements can also give a team a chance at getting a player back during that same season. There is a rule in place that the team (agreeing to a settlement) can’t resign that player until a minimum of six weeks passes following the amount of weeks of the initial settlement. So for our MCL example, the team cannot resign that player for the first eleven weeks. For a player who did a three week/3 game settlement, his team can’t sign him back until after week nine. However, the player is free to sign with another team.

I can't find anything that indicates the above rule only applies to vested veterans. The vested or not vested issue applies to the waiver process; however, if a player takes an injury settlement, then it seems that the above rule applies.

As stated in your first paragraph, non-vested players can be given an injury settlement after clearing waivers.

The issue with Ryan Williams is that he did not take an injury settlement. The question then becomes whether or not he could reach an settlement at a later date.

 

[jobberone]

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/what-is-an-injury-settlement/
Injury settlements can also give a team a chance at getting a player back during that same season. There is a rule in place that the team (agreeing to a settlement) can’t resign that player until a minimum of six weeks passes following the amount of weeks of the initial settlement. So for our MCL example, the team cannot resign that player for the first eleven weeks. For a player who did a three week/3 game settlement, his team can’t sign him back until after week nine. However, the player is free to sign with another team.

I can't find anything that indicates the above rule only applies to vested veterans. The vested or not vested issue applies to the waiver process; however, if a player takes an injury settlement, then it seems that the above rule applies.

As stated in your first paragraph, non-vested players can be given an injury settlement after clearing waivers.

The issue with Ryan Williams is that he did not take an injury settlement. The question then becomes whether or not he could reach an settlement at a later date.

We're talking about Williams being on the IR and not coming back from an injury settlement. People on the IR can't come back unless they are designated for return by the end of the day they are put on IR. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE IR. Williams was on IR, SO HE CAN'T COME BACK THIS YEAR BECAUSE HE WASN'T DESIGNATED TO RETURN. There is no issue regarding him not TAKING AN INJURY SETTLEMENT because that isn't relevant for him since it didn't happen and it was not the topic to start with and what I addressed. You're speaking in hypotheticals and while that is fine we have been debating returning from IR not what ifs about injury settlements.

So to talk about injury settlements. Yes, there is what you're talking about with an injury settlement for a non-major injury. If the team decides the player has a nonmajor injury that will result in not being able to play for say three weeks (less than 7 which is major) the player and club have a five day window to reach an agreement as to the number of weeks of compensation. If they agree in time then the player is released with the settlement. Most will have to pass thru waivers but the player is not automatically returned to the team for IR BECAUSE they are not waived injured (a get around the system move). If they don't sign with another team then rules apply as to how quickly they can be resigned to the parent club.

There is NO rule that precludes injury settlements for major injuries but that gets more sticky and much of the time teams end up having to put them on IR due to the weeks of compensation and the difficulty negotiating with the player and agent; but not always. So as a practical matter they are generally viewed as a separate issue but only because of compensation and the difficulties and time constraints. The league does review all this and these transactions have to be above board.

Finally, you can't force a player to take an injury settlement and in his case I could easily prove thru a second opinion it would take until next year for the player to recuperate from the aggravation of his preexisting injury. So my educated guess is they could not and likely did not want to give him an injury settlement because they want him back. That's a good choice on their part IMO.

Now since the latter part which addresses just injury settlements is something we agree on then can we end the debate on good terms?

 

[Doomsday101]

His chance of coming back are as good matt Johnson. As long as he is not being counted as part of the 80 man roster really not concerned with Ryan Williams.