Why have contracts? What good is 5th year option?

[Diehardblues]

I was listening to Mike Florio and on the show they were discussing Jordan Love currently due to get paid about 11 million and how there is no way he will play under that.

I often hear how this player is far outproducing his contract.

It seems no players actually play under the 5th year option.

So this brings me to my question. What is the point of having a CBA that spells out the rules teams can play by. The players agreed to the CBA. So why dont teams play hardball? I am loving what the niners are doing with Aiyuk. Every player that signs does not mean they should get top 5 money at their position.So if he doesnt want to play this year, while hes under contract, PLEASE.... let him suffer the fines and then not play and lose a year's salary.

If I ran the Cowboys, or any team fo rthat matter, I simply would not renegotiate these deals. Zack Martin last year? Not a chance in hell Id have given him more money. Any why would the team that holds to a contract be the bad guy? How are you supposed to deal with the salary cap when agents and players are constantly wanting new deals done before contracts are up. This is really starting to snowball and until some teams say no and stick to their guns, this issue is about to get a lot worse moving forward.

The reason is locking them up before they can become a Free Agent.

 

[Chasing6]

Minor nitpick, but Love isn't playing under his 5th year option. They agreed to a new contract in 2023 that replaced the option year this year.
https://overthecap.com/packers-and-jordan-love-agree-to-new-contract

The CBA allows players the right to ask for an extension after 3 years. Both sides agreed to that.
Some players are worth more than the option, less than, or right around that option.

Love plays a position that AAV is just under 5 times the cap hit this year.
His agent should be wanting a new deal for his client.

Love may holdout, and eat the fines. But he plays a position where if Green Bay doesn't pay him, they can either have an unhappy QB, now on the Franchise tag, or let him walk and another team pays him.
The player, due to his position, and last year play, holds a lot of the cards too.

Dallas could have not paid Martin, which I was fine with. He also could have retired or not reported and now the team would be missing its AP Right Guard. Or maybe he could have come back at some point to get "credit" for the year.

Love will get paid. There is only 1 GM Jethro in the NFL.

 

[Diehardblues]

Minor nitpick, but Love isn't playing under his 5th year option. They agreed to a new contract in 2023 that replaced the option year this year.
https://overthecap.com/packers-and-jordan-love-agree-to-new-contract

The CBA allows players the right to ask for an extension after 3 years. Both sides agreed to that.
Some players are worth more than the option, less than, or right around that option.

Love plays a position that AAV is just under 5 times the cap hit this year.
His agent should be wanting a new deal for his client.

Love may holdout, and eat the fines. But he plays a position where if Green Bay doesn't pay him, they can either have an unhappy QB, now on the Franchise tag, or let him walk and another team pays him.
The player, due to his position, and last year play, holds a lot of the cards too.

Dallas could have not paid Martin, which I was fine with. He also could have retired or not reported and now the team would be missing it's AP Right Guard. Or maybe he could have come back at some point to get "credit" for the year.

Right. Teams have options. This renegotiation process is basically for the best players. There’s a price to be paid if you want to retain them.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I was listening to Mike Florio and on the show they were discussing Jordan Love currently due to get paid about 11 million and how there is no way he will play under that.

I often hear how this player is far outproducing his contract.

It seems no players actually play under the 5th year option.

So this brings me to my question. What is the point of having a CBA that spells out the rules teams can play by. The players agreed to the CBA. So why dont teams play hardball? I am loving what the niners are doing with Aiyuk. Every player that signs does not mean they should get top 5 money at their position.So if he doesnt want to play this year, while hes under contract, PLEASE.... let him suffer the fines and then not play and lose a year's salary.

If I ran the Cowboys, or any team fo rthat matter, I simply would not renegotiate these deals. Zack Martin last year? Not a chance in hell Id have given him more money. Any why would the team that holds to a contract be the bad guy? How are you supposed to deal with the salary cap when agents and players are constantly wanting new deals done before contracts are up. This is really starting to snowball and until some teams say no and stick to their guns, this issue is about to get a lot worse moving forward.

I didn’t hear the conversation buts in the Packers best interest to re-sign him now and be able to spread that money through extra year as opposed to doing what we will have to do with Dak. I don’t think Love and his team care about a deal do they? I would think he’d gamble on himself like Kirk and Dak did.

 

[thunderpimp91]

FRONT LOAD, I stopped right there! Why don't they do this? They wait until the end and load it so a player is making 59 million in one year, do it early while the player is still deserving of it

Front loading deals can come with its own issues though. In theory it sounds great for the team, and situationally it can be. The Dak contract is a great example though.....In 2021 he made $75M, but just a $17M cap hit. Fast forward to this year and he's making "just" $34M, but counts $55M against the cap. Basically the more money you give to a player as bonus money up front the more you can push that cap number to the end of the deal.

Now that player has shown zero signs that he would hold out, but in theory he could with a ton of leverage as he could make significantly more than $34M this year on the open market and the team would have some motivation to cave to the demand as it kick some of that cap number down the road again.

 

[JBS]

First off every team that exercises a 5th year option actually has the player play under it. When they talk about how no one "plays under it" what they are saying is typically the extension happens before that but the extension is added onto the 5th year option and does not replace it.

Second, the "hardball" that the 49ers are doing is pointless. He is going to get the same amount of money regardless. Whether he gets it this year or next year he will still be top 5 at his position (in fact waiting will only make the amount he gets go up), because whether its an extension or a new contract the new money will start at the exact same time.

Finally the idea of playing "hardball" sounds nice but in the end just means players will choose to go somewhere else where and work for someone who is less two faced. Meanwhile if they were to sit out it would not be for an entire year, it would be half the year, just enough to doom the team, but not so long that the player cannot show what they can do in the other half and even if you bench them for it they still get paid. So a couple teams say no and the players will go to the ones that do not, because no one likes working for the kind of boss you describe.

You should run a clinic and educate these …..

 

[Diehardblues]

My point exactly!!!! So what stops Ceedee for example to make 30+ million, then in 3 years, he says I'm not making enough, I want more money

That’s completely within the scope. And the Cowboys can refuse. Lamb then has the choice of trying to force the issue by threatening to sit out and or can play out his contract before hitting FA.

Teams have a choice but must be prepared to move on. The players leverage is only if the teams intend on retaining the player. If so then it’s only about extending them a year early.

 

[charron]

I was listening to Mike Florio and on the show they were discussing Jordan Love currently due to get paid about 11 million and how there is no way he will play under that.

I often hear how this player is far outproducing his contract.

It seems no players actually play under the 5th year option.

So this brings me to my question. What is the point of having a CBA that spells out the rules teams can play by. The players agreed to the CBA. So why dont teams play hardball? I am loving what the niners are doing with Aiyuk. Every player that signs does not mean they should get top 5 money at their position.So if he doesnt want to play this year, while hes under contract, PLEASE.... let him suffer the fines and then not play and lose a year's salary.

If I ran the Cowboys, or any team fo rthat matter, I simply would not renegotiate these deals. Zack Martin last year? Not a chance in hell Id have given him more money. Any why would the team that holds to a contract be the bad guy? How are you supposed to deal with the salary cap when agents and players are constantly wanting new deals done before contracts are up. This is really starting to snowball and until some teams say no and stick to their guns, this issue is about to get a lot worse moving forward.

I agree with you in principle I would hold players to their contract. But also keep in mind these GM's and Head coaches are typically on short leashes to win so they want/need the top players to buy in/be all in. Since the Cowboys do not have a GM that can be held to a win/loss standard you'd think they would play a lot more hardball, but no. Jerry and his yes men are way too soft on the players. They cave too easily to players demands, caving to zekes contract demands 2 years too early was just a waste of cap $.

 

[Chasing6]

GM Jethro waiting for more tea leaves and Love to be the highest paid QB before negotiating with Dak.

 

[Diehardblues]

I agree with you in principle I would hold players to their contract. But also keep in mind these GM's and Head coaches are typically on short leashes to win so they want/need the top players to buy in/be all in. Since the Cowboys do not have a GM that can be held to a win/loss standard you'd think they would play a lot more hardball, but no. Jerry and his yes men are way too soft on the players. They cave too easily to players demands, caving to zekes contract demands 2 years too early was just a waste of cap $.

Yes, but the dilemma and or argument that season which was a contract year for Prescott was can Dak have an effective season without Zeke.

There was concern without our running game Dak couldn’t be as effective. And as owner and GM if you’re trying to provide the public perception Dak is worth the 40 mil you need Zekes production.

These factors all play into it. Like this year if we resign Dak they aren’t going to let Lamb sit out for similar reasons. They can also Tag him. Last year they were afraid with Martin sitting the impact on Dak and offense.

The bottom line is if you are intending on retaining the player then caving in a year earlier doesn’t really make much difference in the long run.

 

[Diehardblues]

GM Jethro waiting for more tea leaves and Love to be the highest paid QB before negotiating with Dak.

Yep, if Love gets near 60 the stage is set for Prescott.

 

[Chasing6]

Yes, but the dilemma and or argument that season which was a contract year for Prescott was can Dak have an effective season without Zeke.

There was concern without our running game Dak couldn’t be as effective. And as owner and GM if you’re trying to provide the public perception Dak is worth the 40 mil you need Zekes production.

These factors all play into it. Like this year if we resign Dak they aren’t going to let Lamb sit out for similar reasons. They can also Tag him. Last year they were afraid with Martin sitting the impact on Dak and offense.

The bottom line is if you are intending on retaining the player then caving in a year earlier doesn’t really make much difference in the long run.

That is a dumb concern. As a GM if you are moving on from a player, then you have a replacement.

That is the problem with GM Jethro he has no long term plan. We often have big holes on the roster and the stars on the team are expected to over come his incompetence.

 

[Reid1boys]

First off every team that exercises a 5th year option actually has the player play under it. When they talk about how no one "plays under it" what they are saying is typically the extension happens before that but the extension is added onto the 5th year option and does not replace it.

Second, the "hardball" that the 49ers are doing is pointless. He is going to get the same amount of money regardless. Whether he gets it this year or next year he will still be top 5 at his position (in fact waiting will only make the amount he gets go up), because whether its an extension or a new contract the new money will start at the exact same time.

Finally the idea of playing "hardball" sounds nice but in the end just means players will choose to go somewhere else where and work for someone who is less two faced. Meanwhile if they were to sit out it would not be for an entire year, it would be half the year, just enough to doom the team, but not so long that the player cannot show what they can do in the other half and even if you bench them for it they still get paid. So a couple teams say no and the players will go to the ones that do not, because no one likes working for the kind of boss you describe.

Im aware of how the 5th year works. But to say what the niners are doing is pointless makes no sense. They will not make Aiyuk in the top 5, they have deebo samuel. Are the Bengals gonna make Tee Higgins even top 10? Nope, they will let him play out his option year and let him walk. Does anyone besides the Eagles have 2 top 10 paid WRs?

The boss I describe??? Uhm, how does following the CBA make anyone a bad boss? My point iss simple. Id play by the rules that both sides agreed to.
The way it works is only the teams have to follow the rules, players disregard the rules when they want.

Just wait and see what happens with Micah. He will demand he remain in the top 3 highest paid defenders EVERY season.

 

[Reid1boys]

My point exactly!!!! So what stops Ceedee for example to make 30+ million, then in 3 years, he says I'm not making enough, I want more money

uhmmmm, Hi, My name is Zach Martin. Nice to meet you.

 

[Chasing6]

My point exactly!!!! So what stops Ceedee for example to make 30+ million, then in 3 years, he says I'm not making enough, I want more money

A real GM with contingency plans.

 

[Reid1boys]

If players can be cut then players can hold out. The 5th year option is basically a cheaper way of tagging a rookie for another year.

In Zach Martin's case we had no choice because our GM had no back up plan for Martin and could not anticipate it happening. Even though O'Cyrus was sitting their staring us in the face in round 2 and we drafted Schoonmaker.

If we drafted O'Cyrus he would not have held out and or we could have traded him.

So wait..... I thought the Chiefs had the master FO. Didnt they have a guy hold out last year that was also under contract??? Hmm, couldnt the Chiefs see that coming?
Ah.... I remember, we only like to criticise Dallas when a player sits out.

 

[Diehardblues]

That is a dumb concern. As a GM if you are moving on from a player, then you have a replacement.

That is the problem with GM Jethro he has no long term plan. We often have big holes on the roster and the stars on the team are expected to over come his incompetence.

Right, it’s a huge flaw with our owner also wearing the GM hat. As a matter fact I’ve argued for years it’s serious conflict of interest.

On one hand he must try and build a roster. On the other hand he must try to hype and promote his product.

As owner he can only hype one season at a time. And since he isn’t held accountable as GM the owners side usually wins out.

He’ll worry about next year, next year. He has the ability from season to season to take on criticism with damage control providing scapegoats to satisfy the lynch mob.

Normally GM’s would be fired. He even said he’d of fired a GM with his record this era. But ultimately his position isn’t at risk. All he has to answer to is public perception.

 

[Chasing6]

So wait..... I thought the Chiefs had the master FO. Didnt they have a guy hold out last year that was also under contract??? Hmm, couldnt the Chiefs see that coming?
Ah.... I remember, we only like to criticise Dallas when a player sits out.

How did it affect their season?

Pretty sure they just signed him to a long term deal.

 

[Reid1boys]

If players can be cut then players can hold out. The 5th year option is basically a cheaper way of tagging a rookie for another year.

In Zach Martin's case we had no choice because our GM had no back up plan for Martin and could not anticipate it happening. Even though O'Cyrus was sitting their staring us in the face in round 2 and we drafted Schoonmaker.

If we drafted O'Cyrus he would not have held out and or we could have traded him.

wait...... im sorry, let me try and remember.... doesnt the CBA allow for players to be cut? Does the CBA says a player has a right, while under contract to not show up for work?

Let a team stop playing a player in week 5 because the player isnt playing up to his contract.... oh right, I forgot, teams never do that. They honor the contract.

 

[Reid1boys]

its give and take.

he has to play to qualify for his 5th year, except he doesn't have to play all the games (I think he can only miss 6 games).

and then the player is taking a risk. holding out for money. but then he doesn't play. comes in cold. under performs, so its going to cost him more money and it may make it difficult to negotiate with due to reputation of holding out.

teams can play hardball. but also, signing a player a year earlier, if you think he is worth it, saves money and cost less. every year the price goes up and if you like the player and he goes into FA, then you are competing.
teams also have the option to franchise which saves on average salary perhaps, but its a big lump sum hit on the cap for one year.

Ah yes.... like the Eages did with AJ Brown. They save a lot of money, didnt they.....smh