Should guaranteed money be revoked when

Somebody decides they just don’t want to play?

This guy was on a one year contract for $5 million…$4.5 million guaranteed. The second they say that they pull something like this, I think the guarantee money should be pulled. I don’t know when this “guaranteed” money is paid, but i hope it’s not until AFTER the season as motivation for guys like this. If he had ANY other job and simply refused to work, he would be fired. This is the second “you aren’t playing me enough so I’m not playing” excuse this year.

Roger Staubach never made more than $160k per year ($695k today) and this guy gets a guarantee of almost 8 times that amount (in today’s money) . Time for the NFL to send a wake up call to anybody with guaranteed money. They take a risk guaranteeing money, knowing the player may face injury (hello Aaron Rogers), but I think they expect performance, regardless of how limited, in return for guaranteeing money. If they refuse to perform, then they are refusing the guarantee.

It depends upon how the contract was written, the money is already out the door. One thing is for sure, the players reputation is established and this will follow him around now.

Since it’s happened twice this year, perhaps the NFL negotiators will specify that guaranteed money will be paid AFTER the season ends. If it’s a one year contract, get one years performance out of the player. If other players complain, blame this guy

The NFL cannot unilaterally do that. It would require the agreement of the players’ association, or at least in individual player negotiations.

Yep, he just ended his future earning potential.

This guy has a one year contract for $5 million - $4.5 million of that “guaranteed” And I get it - if the blows out his Achilles in the first game andn is out of the season, the guarantee protects him. But if a play refuses to perform on the field if he is able, then he is not performing the requirements of his contract. I think the two players who refused to play this year may have screwed the pooch for other players going forward.

Pride is a funny thing - a team says ‘we will pay you a guarantee of $4.5 million this year, even if you ride the bench for every game’, then they are willing to pay them to be available if needed. IF not, it’s a helluva payday for drinking Gatorade on the sideline. But these guys refused because…they weren’t being used enough. They were able…they were just butt hurt and refused. I had heard that a 5 year NFL contract was really 5 one year contracts…not sure if that’s accurate or not, but if they are guaranteed then maybe the NFL will apply it for that first year - and pay it out even if they don’t play due to injury or trade. B they should be just as able to not hold up their end if the player refuses to hold up his end.

I mean, if Shanahan was able to tell to tell this guy “You are being asked to go in -if you don’t, you just gave up your guaranteed money…do you feel that strong about this?”. That might be a way to soothe their bruised ego.

I know he likely won’t be offered a nickle in guaranteed money from any other team (well, Cleveland might), but it seems shitty that if a team negotiated in good faith and was stood up by the player, the player shouldn’t benefit.

The running joke around here (but actually true) is that a Mizzou produces the perfect back up QBs. 10-15 year career of wearing a visor and holding a clipboard

Have you seen these ‘bring in the backup’ commercials from Progressive?

Super funny!!

I agree, but guaranteed means guaranteed. That’s a risk the team is willing to take. Until 10-15 years ago, there were no NFL guaranteed contracts. Even then, they were limited to certain terms and certain level draft choices. Not sure if that’s still the case. So, I suspect any language has to be negotiated with the NFLPA. This case isn’t helping that.

And I have an idea that these two guys who refused to play will accelerate negotiations regarding performance for guarantees.

It’ll be ammo for owners in the next contract negotiation for sure.

KC, I get where you are coming from, but I think this would be an overreaction to a situation that - at least to me - seems very rare.

You refer to this happening twice this year. I assume the second instance you are thinking of is where Colts quarterback Anthony Richardson said he needed to come out of the game for a play because he was winded. I posted before that was not a good look at all for him, but I don’t thin that comes anywhere near to what De’Vondre Campbell did here.

If what you describe got put into place, I could see some coaches abusing that rule to get players in when they should not be. For example, you just got your bell rung or took a shot to your knee and aren’t sure the extent of injury, if any, a coach could come back and casually mention to the player that he might want to think about his guarantees before not going back into the game.

Side comment: I remember reading a story many years ago where Tony Dorsett talked about how he got his bell rung and wasn’t totally collected, yet was told to get back into the game.

Overall, here is how I think the 49ers should handle the situation:

I’m thinking of anothr guy…although I don’t think he had any guaranteed money

The other one was Deshaun Watson walking off the field on fourth down. At first I thought what an ass, but as it turned out there were 12 men in the huddle and there would have been a penalty and he knew it, and he knew they would be penalized and he didn’t want to use the final time out. I don’t know what happens in that situation…if they snap the ball and a flag is throw, can teh defense refuse the penalty take over on downs?

But both of these guys apparently felt they weren’t being used enough and decided not to play. Odd logic, but it is what it is.

Thanks. I had forgotten about that guy. More evidence that I don’t follow sports as closely as I used to.

Update:

perhaps he can get a job a a Jiffy Lube or fast food restaurant because I don’t think he will have much leverage in the NFL