ScottieC
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 3,012
- Reaction score
- 4
There are enough references to show there exist confusion about this.
Not saying you are wrong but proof is in the pudding as they say.
Rather than a two moth old article show me an article tomorrow about
Jurevicius being actived off PUP. Or better yet, one of PATs pup guys
now practicing. At least one should be if you are right.
Goodness. 6 Weeks = 6 Weeks, 6 Games = 6 Games.
I'm done. Sorry for the confusion. Don't ask Felger to clarify.
And of course I may be dead wrong.
From the NFLPA - Concerning pay:
Section 2. Physically Unable to Perform: Any player placed on a Physically Unable to Perform list (“PUP”) will be paid his full salary while on such list. His contract will not be tolled for the period he is on PUP, except in the last year of his contract, when the player’s contract will be tolled if he is still physically unable to perform his football services as of the sixth regular season game.
This is about pay exclusively.
Here's one by Len Pasquarelli:
Key statement:
By definition, Jones must sit out the first six weeks of the regular season if he goes onto the PUP list. Because the Lions have a bye week in that stretch, he could conceivably miss only five games.
Link: ESPN - Jones likely to go on PUP list, miss at least five games - NFL
Again the confusion seems to lie in the NFLPA definition based on PAY and of course the Wiki entry that seems to be wrong as well.
I think that it has led to widespread confusion. Even among the Football "experts".
Again, I could be wrong.
Last edited: