Understanding the NFL players' no-trade clause

[Hawkeye0202]

Some fans seem to be confused regarding this clause in Dak's contract. Several times I have read posts saying he can't be traded coz the no-trade clause. That's not true........it's simply a tool that gives players the right to choose where/what team they are traded. More times than not both the player and team have agreed to move on when this clause is used ( teams will sometimes give the player permission to talk to certain teams, usually outside the division)

Can an NFL player prevent a trade from happening?​

Yes. A player may veto a potential trade if they have a no-trade clause in their contract with the team.

What is a no-trade clause?​

A no-trade clause is a stipulation in a contract that allows a player to reject any proposed trade in which they are involved. No-trade clauses may also feature variations, such as provisions stating a list of pre-determined teams a player is willing to waive the no-trade clause for or one that allows a team to only trade a player during a certain period of time.


How does a no-trade clause work?


Definition. A no-trade clause is a contractual clause that allows players to veto trades to certain teams. No-trade clauses are often worked into contract extensions and free-agent contracts as a perk for the players signing such deals.



NFL. The only players I know that have no-trade clauses in their contracts at this current moment are Jalen Hurts, Dak Prescott, Josh Allen, DeShaun Watson, Russell Wilson, and Patrick Mahomes.

A couple of recent examples of players waiving the clause......






Here is a list of players with the clause in 2021........notice at least 5 of the 8 players on the list traded.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I don't see any way any Cowboys players with that clause agrees to be traded.

They have it made in Dallas.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I don't see any way any Cowboys players with that clause agrees to be traded.

They have it made in Dallas.

It's my understanding, GMs/owners hate the clause but agents will sometimes use it as a trade-off for something(s) the team wants.

 

[DuncanIso]

A trade = post June 1 cut.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

A trade = post June 1 cut.

and again (LOL)

 

[DuncanIso]

and again (LOL)

We don’t have to trade Dak to get out of this mess.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

I don't see any way any Cowboys players with that clause agrees to be traded.

They have it made in Dallas.

Players only have the illusion of leverage. Dallas can tell Dak that he is not getting a new contract, and they will bench him this year due to performance which will irreparably damage his future earnings with another team. Or, he can play nice now for a trade and get a new deal when his value will never be higher.

It’s just a matter of if Jerry would stoop to such a level

 

[Coogiguy03]

We don’t have to trade Dak to get out of this mess.

Can we drop him off at McDonald's?? And step on the gas

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Players only have the illusion of leverage. Dallas can tell Dak that he is not getting a new contract, and they will bench him this year due to performance which will irreparably damage his future earnings with another team. Or, he can play nice now for a trade and get a new deal when his value will never be higher.

It’s just a matter of if Jerry would stoop to such a level

This ^^^^^^^but it would rarely get to this point coz you would certainly have a damaged/distracted locker room.

 

[fivetwos]

Doesn’t matter.

What team would trade for a QB with that kind of salary unless he was fully on board with it happening?

The first order of business in that case would be to approach the player and his agent about a trade, clause or not.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Doesn’t matter.

What team would trade for a QB with that kind of salary unless he was fully on board with it happening?

The first order of business in that case would be to approach the player and his agent about a trade, clause or not.

If Atlanta offered Dak 5y 300m, I would think he’d be pretty onboard with that happening. Thats the key in most of these situations. It’s why Russell was happy to go to dilapidating Denver, why Deshaun said “who doesn’t want to play in Cleveland?”, and why Donovan Mcnabb went to Washington with a smile on his face

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Can we drop him off at McDonald's?? And step on the gas

 

[PAPPYDOG]

and again (LOL)

Wouldn't laugh at the above who do you think we have at QB Dan Marino?
All scenarios are in play.........its March the 7th tick tock tick tock......

 

[KingCorcoran]

Players only have the illusion of leverage. Dallas can tell Dak that he is not getting a new contract, and they will bench him this year due to performance which will irreparably damage his future earnings with another team. Or, he can play nice now for a trade and get a new deal when his value will never be higher.

It’s just a matter of if Jerry would stoop to such a level

Benching Dak Prescott because he won’t settle for a contract for less than he thinks he deserves will not “irreparably damage his future earnings with another team”. It will not enhance Jerry Jones’ reputation in the eyes of players and their agents. He would be perceived as an owner that does not want to pay players what they’re worth. In addition, if the better QB is sitting while another QB is starting hardly solidifies the perception he wants to win. Many Cowboys fans question his commitment to winning. If fans already think it, now they’d be convinced of it. A ridiculous stunt like the one you’re suggesting is more stupid than petty. Not unlike many fans, apparently.

 

[Jarntt]

Doesn't everyone know this? I think when people say that, they mean he (or whichever player the discussion is about) won't likely waive it in their opinion. I mean it's not like SF or KC are going to trade for them, it's spots like Washington or AZ

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Doesn’t matter.

What team would trade for a QB with that kind of salary unless he was fully on board with it happening?

The first order of business in that case would be to approach the player and his agent about a trade, clause or not.

You are exactly right .........more times than not, it's not needed it. A player can refuse to report or redo his contract. No team will risk wasting a draft pick on a player who feels that strong about not playing for them.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Doesn't everyone know this? I think when people say that, they mean he (or whichever player the discussion is about) won't likely waive it in their opinion. I mean it's not like SF or KC are going to trade for them, it's spots like Washington or AZ

Most fan/poster probably but you would be surprised some are still confused.

 

[Bowdown27]

Most fan/poster probably but you would be surprised some are still confused.

Ain’t that the truth.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Doesn't everyone know this? I think when people say that, they mean he (or whichever player the discussion is about) won't likely waive it in their opinion. I mean it's not like SF or KC are going to trade for them, it's spots like Washington or AZ

Unless Jerry Jones owns another team in the NFL no one will trade for Dak at the $ he and Todd want.
Guys no insult intended but believing that Dak is a top 10 QB is simply ludicrous.
His trademark is beating up on dog teams and folding like a cheap tent against real teams.
Dak will NOT be traded................

 

[rnr_honeybadger]

I don't see any way any Cowboys players with that clause agrees to be traded.

They have it made in Dallas.

Right? Get paid for producing nothing.