That's a pretty good deal. Seems like a lot at first blush but in a couple years he's going to be a relative bargain.
NFL: Offseason Thread
- Thread starter Mr Janny
- Start date
That's a pretty good deal. Seems like a lot at first blush but in a couple years he's going to be a relative bargain.
I'm hoping that it speaks to a positive, albeit very early, relationship with Cousins, as Diggs deal would run past Cousins current contract. This could be used as incentive for Cousins to restructure a long-term deal in the final year of his current contract - that's assuming things go well.
Could be, although I'm guessing it's unrelated. I think this has more to do with the Vikings seeing an opportunity with a player who is willing to trade the chance to hit a bigger payday in free agency in exchange for long term security.
I can understand where the players come from with long term deals, but I think it's a short sighted proposal for them. Look at Tyron Smith with the Cowboys. He signed a long term deal and now he isn't even close to the highest paid LT in the league annually. Or Andrew Luck, who has four years left on his current deal. Assuming he gets back to where he was pre-injury, he'll be a steal by the final year of his contract at 21 million.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,709
- 33,665
- 113
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,709
- 33,665
- 113
And this particular dispute seems so stupid. They've admitted that the sticking point is over the new helmet rule. The Bears want to include language that would allow them to void the contract if the player is disciplined for violating the new helmet rule. The problem is, that nobody really knows how it's going to be enforced, and based on league history, there might be some really questionable application of the rule initially. I don't blame Smith and his agents for not wanting that language in the contract at all. And you'd think the Bears could pretty easily include a clause that exempted on the field stuff.
I thought the language being disputed just meant the bears couldn't dock pay for players being suspended under that rule.
I was a Viking fan growing up in the Chicagoland area, and hated the bears with a passion. But even I sympathize with my Bear-fan friends because they have been just a complete cancer to that org.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,709
- 33,665
- 113
I'm fairly sure I read something to the affect the language of the contract being proposed said they could void the contract for violation of on the field rules. The new helmet rule was the example given.
Hmm I haven't seen anything that strongly worded. I'm trying to just focus on the Cubs and assume that while I'm distracted roquan will sign.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,709
- 33,665
- 113
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...-have-much-to-say-about-roquan-smith-holdout/
"Smith has yet to agree to terms because the Bears want to be able to void his future guarantees if he’s suspended for on-field behavior. Smith has refused to accept that term given the current uncertainty surrounding the new helmet rules, which could in theory trigger widespread flags, fines, ejections, and suspensions."
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,709
- 33,665
- 113
agreed. Seems to me like the last thing you want a young defensive player to be worrying about is if a hit is going to cost him his contract. Yardage penalty? Sure. A fine? Okay. But his whole contract? That seems like a recipe for disaster.
I thought I read in the Sun-Times that Smith wanted the Bears to pay any fines he might incur if he used his helmet as a weapon.
Sorry, it was in the Chicago Tribune (per Steve Rosenboom):
"The reason Smith hasn’t been on the field gaining valuable NFL reps — at a game speed he has never experienced — centers on contract language that would prevent the Bears from taking back some guaranteed money if he is suspended under the new NFL rule that prohibits players from initiating contact with their helmets, according to Tribune reporting over the weekend.
He wants his money to be protected if he fails to play the game by the rules."
"This is some kind of big thinking by a rookie’s agency that presumably has been approved by the rookie. This is the agency’s job – get all the money possible and protect every dollar possible. Several players have won such language in new contracts, so I don’t blame the agency."
"The reason Smith hasn’t been on the field gaining valuable NFL reps — at a game speed he has never experienced — centers on contract language that would prevent the Bears from taking back some guaranteed money if he is suspended under the new NFL rule that prohibits players from initiating contact with their helmets, according to Tribune reporting over the weekend.
He wants his money to be protected if he fails to play the game by the rules."
"This is some kind of big thinking by a rookie’s agency that presumably has been approved by the rookie. This is the agency’s job – get all the money possible and protect every dollar possible. Several players have won such language in new contracts, so I don’t blame the agency."
Notably Tremaine Edmunds, a fellow first round pick who's repped by the same agency as Smith. So a precedent has already been set. I don't see why the Bears are digging in on this. Just get the kid in camp while there's still time to get him up to speed.
Yep, god I wish they would sell the team but it will never happen. Their team President Ted Phillips is a dope as well.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,709
- 33,665
- 113
Here's a great take, regardless of how you feel about the terms of the contract:
"Like the Jets, the Bears don't seem to grasp the importance of their selection in these negotiations. A first-round pick is supposed to sell jerseys, inspire hope and potentially alter the course of the franchise in a positive way. Getting caught up in the weeds with two high-character guys over pedantic contract negotiations is the type of thing that sets a bad precedent, and the sort of stuff you only see from franchise uninterested in moving towards a brighter future."
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...y-negotiations-with-roquan-smith-sam-darnold/
"Like the Jets, the Bears don't seem to grasp the importance of their selection in these negotiations. A first-round pick is supposed to sell jerseys, inspire hope and potentially alter the course of the franchise in a positive way. Getting caught up in the weeds with two high-character guys over pedantic contract negotiations is the type of thing that sets a bad precedent, and the sort of stuff you only see from franchise uninterested in moving towards a brighter future."
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...y-negotiations-with-roquan-smith-sam-darnold/
