Welcome to PatsFans.com

NFLPA won't agree to IR/Trade deadline changes

Discussion in 'NFL Football Forum' started by MoLewisrocks, Aug 11, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    Because they want something in return for doing something that benefits their membership... At first the rule was said to effect players on the 53 in week 1, but apparently it was actually going to allow for one guy injured after practicing in camp to go on a 6 week IR. Now those guys will go on IR in most cases and lots of them will end up without an organization via injury settlement.

    League, union can’t strike deal on IR, trade deadline changes | ProFootballTalk

    They say the issue is trust but just who can't be trusted is debatable. The NFLPA agreed to HgH blood testing, too...only in the year since they haven't agreed to a standard method of testing which is clearly just a stall tactic. They don't give a rats you know what about player safety or rank and file players, it's all politics and billable hours to these guys.

    Going to be interesting to listen to the wailing when 90 man rosters are cut to 53.
  2. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,099
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +235 / 18 / -38

    #50 Jersey

    In a way, the in-season IR doesn't benefit them. In the current system, unless otherwise stated, players who are IRed are get their full salary unless an injury settlement is reached.

    If the NFLPA were to agree to the in season IR, then the player who gets cut when the player on the IR is healthy, doesn't get full pay..

    It's not very logical, I know, but this is the NFLPA we are talking about.
  3. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,608
    Likes Received:
    328
    Ratings:
    +903 / 46 / -48

    Disable Jersey

    How is it not logical for the NFLPA to want more of its members to receive full wages? If that's the only problem, the NFL could just offer to pay full base salary to the player cut to make way for the returning player.
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2012
  4. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,512
    Likes Received:
    270
    Ratings:
    +603 / 6 / -0

    DB, I'm pretty sure that a large proportion of player contracts include a split salary that pays the the player significantly less on IR. (And then there are performance bonuses, etc. which are obviously forfeited.)
  5. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,099
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +235 / 18 / -38

    #50 Jersey

    If they do, then it's something they've just started recently because, in the past, they haven't.

    And, as for Deus remarks, it's not logical to have a star player who had to go onto the IR for 6 weeks, get healthy and then not be able to play until the following year because it costs him significantly more than it does a tail end of the roster player that replace him. And what does it cost him? The inactivity that erodes his skills.. The inability to participate with his teammates to keep sharp..
  6. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,608
    Likes Received:
    328
    Ratings:
    +903 / 46 / -48

    Disable Jersey

    It doesn't cost him money the way it costs the cut player money, which is the issue here. You're claiming that the NFLPA isn't being logical. That's not the case.
  7. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,512
    Likes Received:
    270
    Ratings:
    +603 / 6 / -0

    I'm pretty sure it's a longstanding contract feature. Here's a blog where a player talks about receiving an IR split back in 1990:
    Lionel James’ Severance Story - Dave Pear's Blog

    There was also the dustup with Terry Glenn at the end of his career, where he accused the Cowboys of strong-arming him into adding a split-salary clause, maybe 2007?:
    Why Glenn wants out out Dallas - NFL - Rumors - FanNation

    In general, my impression is that big-money star contracts don't include the split provision, but most of the rank and file contracts do. (Of course, the NFLPA would never give greater weight to the concerns of its wealthiest members, right?)
  8. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,449
    Likes Received:
    116
    Ratings:
    +209 / 4 / -5

    Some old vets too; initially one of Junior Seau's (RIP) contracts with the Pats had a split salary clause, but the Pats found he made such a difference to the team that they waived it.
  9. Fencer

    Fencer Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,656
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +31 / 0 / -13

    Why? I wouldn't be sure of that at all.

    Not going to hit a lot of targets even if you come back part way through the season.
  10. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,512
    Likes Received:
    270
    Ratings:
    +603 / 6 / -0

    Simply because of leverage, the same reason their deals are bigger in general. It's a negotiable contract term.

    I don't know of any stats on this, but anecdotally we have cases like the Terry Glenn example above, where a player signed a big-$$ multiyear FA deal with no split salary clause, then as his health and skills declined the team tried to get that added (with the threat of cutting the player).

    Jason of NYJetscap.com, who seems to have more split salary details than anybody around, says much the same as I did:

  11. supafly

    supafly PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    14,190
    Likes Received:
    225
    Ratings:
    +508 / 3 / -7

    #24 Jersey

    As Mo states in the opening post, I was also under the impression that the new IR rule was going to allow a player hurt during the season to possibly come back later in the yr by being designated as the one "in season IR" guy.

    That isn't the case at all. It seems to only be for anyone who gets hurt in TC after they have already practiced (ex.Peyton Manning last year, not that he'd have been able to come back after 6 weeks anyway, but the Colts screwed up by not PUP'ing him right from the get-go).

    The relationship between the NFL and the union isn't getting any better, that's for sure. In some ways, we're lucky that the idiots could even agree on a new CBA last year, b/c I'm not sure if it would happen today.
  12. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    Split contracts are the exception and not the norm. Usually they go strictly to end of roster guys and vets with injury histories trying to make a roster. I believe our Colts vets had them this year. Guys like Lloyd don't. Stallworth is on a split contract because he is often injured (hammies) and Gaffney isn't. Fiametta and Larson didn't get them. Neither did Branch or Warren or Carpenter or Koppen. Ihedigbo did. Might be a handful of guys on any roster signed to split contracts.

    Some of the stuff being cited is from the 1980's...and relates to the accounting on severance and the Glen situation sounds like he was asked to restructure to a split contract after he made a ton of money in a year in which he barely played. That's not uncommon...

    And the player who gets cut gets his full pay if he's a vested vet on the roster week 1. And if he's not he's not getting full pay if he's cut under any circumstances, as back of the roster guys often are.

    A guy like Garrard would represent the classic benefit of a short term IR for a guy injured in camp. Miami may part company with him rather than wait 4-6 weeks to see if he can come back and be on the hook for his full salary regardless. And he was leading their QB competition in camp. Again this was for guys who get injured in camp and are either going on IR and/or facing getting cut with an injury settlement. Garrard may be good to go in 4-6 weeks but if Miami walks away now he won't see a fraction of what he signed for because he wasn't on the week 1 roster. Who knows, might have prolonged Warren's career here. His hip was said to be recoverable in 6-8 weeks but they IR'd him because they weren't in a position to carry him and find out and that was the only option. Following season they cut ties. You could salvage a guy coming back from an off season procedure who had a setback in camp rather than have to fish or cut bait which often ends up with guys departing.

    And we're talking 32 players max as there would only be one exemption per team for these guys's IR'd in camp.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>