Don't know if this is new, but FYI in case: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/19/3508414/miami-dolphins-top-pick-dion-jordan.html
"Pass-rusher Dion Jordan, the Dolphins’ No. 3 overall pick in the NFL Draft, says he’s finalizing a contract and doesn’t expect to be a holdout."
It's hard to tell what he means by that, whether he's just being optimistic or whether he will take control of the negotiations if his agent doesn't have the deal done in time. It does appear his agent has already balked at the idea of inserting offset language into the contract, though. If Dion Jordan intends to wrest control of the negotiation away from his agent in the next 24 hours then indeed he'll be in camp on time.
The Dolphins have zero impetus to cave on the offset language now. Dion did his agent a massive disservice by removing negotiating leverage. On another note, you were right about Aponte and Dion's agent coming to a frosty showdown on this bull**** language, I mean offset language, again.
Hopefully, because if he misses any camp, even when he returns he is out of contact drills for 3 days minimum.
yep CK called it a long time ago..it´s stupid imo, you pick a guy 3rd overall after you traded up nine spots to get him, i would think you expect him to be here for a while and don´t be a bust
“It’s not finalized yet, but I’ll be there,” he promised. Datta boy, tell your agent you don't care and you just wanna play ball you freaking maniac praying mantis avatar mother grabber.
This makes me feel better about him getting in on time but at the same time...I'm still skeptical. It's possible he doesn't know any details about his own contract negotiation and he's just being optimistic, and once the agent explains the situation to him he'll allow the agent to continue to control things. Anything could happen. I won't feel better until he signs on the dotted line.
not that I disagree, but if you were the #3 overall pick, you'd also expect to be so good that the offset language shouldn't be a dealbreaker. Again, I agree that it's silly, but I can see both sides.
IDK, I don't think it's so stupid. The language is there to protect the team, to a certain degree. Unless he's a colossal bust (see VY or Vernon Gholston), the team has some recourse, as usually, some team will bite on these guys that wash out of one place... If the guy is a stud, then there is no issue either...but carrying dead money on a guy you cut is a 'hidden' pitfall for the fiscal health of NFL teams...
The offset language has nothing to do with "dead money". Dead money is there for almost all released players. The offset language simply says, "if you get cut before your rookie contract is up, any new contract you sign offsets what we owed you anyway in guaranteed money." So, for example, let's say Jordan receives $20 million guaranteed as part of his contract with the Fins. Then he is cut 3 years later having received $15 of the $20 million guaranteed dolalrs. Jordan then signs with another team and gets $4 million guaranteed. With the offset language the Fins would only owe him $1 million cash. Has nothing to do with the cap. The cap figure has already been accounted for.
The Rule of Two states that there would be only two Sith at one time, a Master and an Apprentice. Im the master. but the kracken is a student of the game he will be top dog soon.
Excellent example. And if he signs with another team, not working out for Miami or whatever, for only 1 million, or vet minimum, Miami pays the 4 million to him or whatever it would be that would add up to what he signed for. The only way he would "lose" money is if he signs with another team for, in that example, 15 million. WOW big check. And he wouldn't get the 5 million from the Miami deal.
Wait a second here..on the NFL network ticker it says and I quote, Dion Jordan says he "will not hold out and miss training camp even though he's unsigned" Is that new??? I love this fu&$in kid if true..lol..please be one of those dudes that just wants to be a great football player without the limelight.
However, it does affect the cap as whatever we would have to pay him after cutting him DOES count against the cap for that year,...
as I said, any salary we would have to pay him, after we cut him counts against the cap. That makes it a significant issue...
Well then the quote their saying he said is different than what we heard today..ticker says, "Jordan says he will not hold out, even if unsigned" end quote.
"It’s not finalized yet, but I’ll be there,” he promised" Lets see if this kid means what he says..I hope he does it without being signed,lol...
Re: Fins & Dion Jordan expected to reach deal before training camp Whoa. Keep it in your pants there, champ. Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2
The thing that doesn't get enough attention with the offset issue is the fact that the player's new team would likely only offer the player the veteran's minimum, and the player would not seek more than that because it literally will not affect his bottom line, and if anything the player would probably PREFER to have the team that just cut him get stuck with the bill. It's a lot like the amnesty situation in the NBA. People that cover the NBA get it. They understand. When you amnesty a player you are still paying out the rest of his guaranteed contract. That player will in turn not seek much money from their new team, because they're being paid by their old team. Except in that situation I don't think there are offsets, so it'll be even more pronounced in the NFL. You cut a player still owing him about $3 million in guaranteed salary, unless his market value is MORE than $3 million (and if that's the case, why did you cut him?) then whichever team grabs him is guaranteed to offer the veterans minimum and the player has zero incentive to ask more. Zero. In fact as I said he is incentivized to do the opposite because he will want to stick it to his old team...or make himself cheaper for his new team as a measure of good faith. So teams aren't fighting about $3 million in the fourth year should they end up having to cut the guy. No no no. That would actually be semi-reasonable. Teams are fighting about like $400-500k in that fourth year. That's it. That's it. And you can say, well yeah but that goes for the player too. It should not be a big deal for the player eiither. Maybe so. But the logistics of the situation ensure that it is MORE important to the player than the team. In the event of busthood, a player will have made over the course of his career $15 to $20 million. That's lifetime earnings. Given that, compare the worth of $400-500k to that player, versus the worth of $400-500k to a team that has payroll in excess of $125 million EVERY YEAR. If the player gets a contract without offset language, he's almost guaranteed to be kept through the full four years of the contract. That's a good thing. There's a stigma associated with a team cutting you Because they don't view you to be worth the money. It's not as attractive a look as when you just have an expiring contract. But if you're SO BAD that the team would cut you because they want the roster spot, even knowing you'recollecting $3+ million from them for services you're no longer able to render because you've been cut...that player probably wont get much money from his next team. We are talking vet's minimum, maybe a little more. But like I said, a dollar to a player is worth way more than a dollar to a team. And then there's the fact that the lack of offset language likely means the dismissal never happens, which is a good thing. This whole situation is set up so players have more incentive to dig in than teams, and the only thing keeping the teams interested in doing this is pressure from the top of the league, and a competitive will to ALWAYS come out ahead. It's the one thing left to fight about now that the new CBA enacted a rookie wage scale. So every team wants to walk into the room feeling like they've got the biggest dick because they owned that one remaining battle and the other teams around them didn't. That's all it boils down to.
What if the team plans to only play hardball for 4 days after camp? Do those 4 days really and truly mean more than the offset language?