OJ Howard On The Trading Block Per Report

[RobertWeathers]

If Gronk shows up, the Patriots have to pay him (or cut him or trade him). They can’t hold him hostage indefinitely on some list.

He’s under contract with the Patriots, and the contract works 2 ways. He has to show up to get paid, but if he shows up they have to pay him (or cut him or trade him).

(I believe there is a small window of a couple weeks where they can wait if he comes back in the middle of the season, but they can’t keep him away permanently.)

Unless Gronk files a grievance with the NFLPA and ask for an arbitration hearing which would be predicated on the NEP telling him they are not removing him from the reserve/retired list they don't have to do a damn thing.

In theory if the arbitrator rules in favor of Gronk, then the NEP would need to release/trade him. In that event, the NEP are also eligible to recoup any signing bonus/guarantees they paid Gronk.

 

[XLIX]

Unless Gronk files a grievance with the NFLPA and ask for an arbitration hearing which would be predicated on the NEP telling him they are not removing him from the reserve/retired list they don't have to do a damn thing.

The CBA spells it out quite clearly that if a retired player returns the following season, they have to pay him or cut him. Now, of course, the usual November 30 deadline remains in effect and, as I said above, I believe they have a grace period of a couple weeks if he just shows up mid-season (but don't quote me on the grace period part).

They can't just hold the guy hostage for the rest of his life if he decides to come back.

(vi) Retirement. Should a Forfeitable Breach occur due to player’s retirement, a Club may demand repayment of all Forfeitable Salary Allocations attributable to the proportionate amount, if any, for the present year and the Forfeitable Salary Allocations for future years. If the player fails to repay such amounts, then the Club may seek an award from the System Arbitrator pursuant to Article 15, for repayment of all Forfeitable Salary Allocations attributable to present and future years. Repayment of Forfeitable Salary Allocations attributable to future League Years must be made by June 1st of each League Year for which each Forfeitable Salary Allocation is attributable. If the player returns to play for the Club in the subsequent season, then the Club must either (a) take the player back under his existing contract with no forfeiture of the remaining Forfeitable Salary Allocations, or (b) release the player and seek repayment of any remaining Forfeitable Salary Allocations for future League Years

 

[RobertWeathers]

The CBA spells it out quite clearly that if a retired player returns the following season, they have to pay him or cut him. Now, of course, the usual November 30 deadline remains in effect and, as I said above, I believe they have a grace period of a couple weeks if he just shows up mid-season (but don't quote me on the grace period part).

They can't just hold the guy hostage for the rest of his life if he decides to come back.

(vi) Retirement. Should a Forfeitable Breach occur due to player’s retirement, a Club may demand repayment of all Forfeitable Salary Allocations attributable to the proportionate amount, if any, for the present year and the Forfeitable Salary Allocations for future years. If the player fails to repay such amounts, then the Club may seek an award from the System Arbitrator pursuant to Article 15, for repayment of all Forfeitable Salary Allocations attributable to present and future years. Repayment of Forfeitable Salary Allocations attributable to future League Years must be made by June 1st of each League Year for which each Forfeitable Salary Allocation is attributable. If the player returns to play for the Club in the subsequent season, then the Club must either (a) take the player back under his existing contract with no forfeiture of the remaining Forfeitable Salary Allocations, or (b) release the player and seek repayment of any remaining Forfeitable Salary Allocations for future League Years

2020 is not subsequent to 2018.

As I said, its in the CBA which allows for Gronk to go to arbitration and force the NEP to do something. If Gronk wins then they cut/trade/recoup bonus.

 

[mgteich]

There are 10s of 1000s of fans who have already given up on the 2020 season.

Might as well blow it up and get picks.

God forbid they have any patience whatsoever and see how Stid, younger players and 2020 draft picks develop.

If I knew that Gilmore wouldn't be playing in 2020, I still would keep him. That's not a reason trade him for a pick or two. Gilmore will be valuable for long after 2021

Your argument with regard to tanking would not lead us to trade Gilmore. It might lead you to trade Edelman and perhaps Hightower.

 

[BUSTAMOVE]

I am in full agreement that we need a TE. If the Bucs are giving up on their 2017 - 19th pick even with Brady on board then that raises major red flags.
I would take a gamble on a low fourth because he does have blocking skills. His receiving skills must be a major concern because teaming up Howard and Brate in a 2 TE set would make TB a happy camper if Howard has the skills.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If I knew that Gilmore wouldn't be playing in 2020, I still would keep him. That's not a reason trade him for a pick or two. Gilmore will be valuable for long after 2021

Your argument with regard to tanking would not lead us to trade Gilmore. It might lead you to trade Edelman and perhaps Hightower.

Huh? Trading the DPOY for draft picks doesn't exactly improve your defense or your chances of winning in 2020.

 

[XLIX]

2020 is not subsequent to 2018.

The passage I quoted discusses what happens if a player misses an entire season then returns the subsequent year. 2019 was the full season that Gronk missed and 2020 is the subsequent year.

As I said, its in the CBA which allows for Gronk to go to arbitration and force the NEP to do something. If Gronk wins then they cut/trade/recoup bonus.

I do not believe for a single second the Patriots would be so belligerent as to disregard something spelled out so clearly in the CBA and force an arbitration hearing that they don't have a rat's chance in hell of winning. They could stall for a little while- and it is tough to give specifics given the fluid nature of this season's offseason schedule - but ultimately, they would have a small period of time to either piss or get off the pot. They wouldn't be able to keep Gronk away for an extended period of time.

 

[mgteich]

. but ultimately, they would have a small period of time to either piss or get off the pot. They wouldn't be able to keep Gronk away for an extended period of time.

If Gronk, un-retires I would expect that the team would be given several weeks before he counts against the cap, especially since the medical facilities aren't open. Eventually, they would need to let Gronk go. Of course, they could trade him to DET or WASH for a conditional 2021 seventh or whatever we can get.

 

[XLIX]

If Gronk, un-retires I would expect that the team would be given several weeks before he counts against the cap, especially since the medical facilities aren't open. Eventually, they would need to let Gronk go. Of course, they could trade him to Chicago for a conditional 2021 seventh.

The unique nature of this season certainly throws a wrench into things and please note I did mention that if he unretired midseason that they would have a couple weeks worth of grace period before they had to make a move. However, I don't believe they could stall so long that if he showed up at the start of training camp they would be able to bring it all the way to the regular season (even in a potentially shortened preseason).

And they couldn't trade him to Chicago for a conditional seventh without the Bears actually agreeing to that trade, and why would the Bears be willing to take on NE's headache? Then they would be the ones in limbo, on the hook for his salary and cap hit.

 

[mgteich]

The unique nature of this season certainly throws a wrench into things and please note I did mention that if he unretired midseason that they would have a couple weeks worth of grace period before they had to make a move. However, I don't believe they could stall so long that if he showed up at the start of training camp they would be able to bring it all the way to the regular season (even in a potentially shortened preseason).

And they couldn't trade him to Chicago for a conditional seventh without the Bears actually agreeing to that trade, and why would the Bears be willing to take on NE's headache? Then they would be the ones in limbo, on the hook for his salary and cap hit.

1) Gronk could NOT show up for camp if the team hasn't approved him medically to do so. I agree that the patriots couldn't stall all though camp.

2) Obviously, another team could either be working with Gronk or not. If not, then they cut him before the season started with no cost to them.

3) If Gronk really, really wants to go to TB/TB, then it is up to TB to decide when they want to have him on the team, working with Tom on the TB/TB playbook. Obviously, this week would be best for the patriots.

[As an aside, if this happens, we will for decades be discussing just how much Gronk screwed the team by deciding late in 2019 to retire and then coming back just to play for Brady. Many will say that Gronk earned the right to skip a season. OK I guess. However, I don't know any other player for whom patriot fans would think this to be acceptable. Gronk fans, yes. Brady fans, yes. Patriot fans, NO]

Personally, if this happens, I go back to having Coates and Francis as my favorite patriot TE's, not the White Tiger.

 

[Chevrolet]

The passage I quoted discusses what happens if a player misses an entire season then returns the subsequent year. 2019 was the full season that Gronk missed and 2020 is the subsequent year.
I do not believe for a single second the Patriots would be so belligerent as to disregard something spelled out so clearly in the CBA and force an arbitration hearing that they don't have a rat's chance in hell of winning. They could stall for a little while- and it is tough to give specifics given the fluid nature of this season's offseason schedule - but ultimately, they would have a small period of time to either piss or get off the pot. They wouldn't be able to keep Gronk away for an extended period of time.

Pay him and lets see if he shows up to training camp with brian hoyer as his QB

 

[XLIX]

Pay him and lets see if he shows up to training camp with brian hoyer as his QB

That's a legit option. Patriots could certainly use improvement at the TE position. Of course, that puts NE about $8 million over the cap so you can't quite simply take him back in a vacuum. You'd have to make other roster moves.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The passage I quoted discusses what happens if a player misses an entire season then returns the subsequent year. 2019 was the full season that Gronk missed and 2020 is the subsequent year.

I don't read it that way. 2018 was his last accrued year. 2019 is subsequent to 2018.

I do not believe for a single second the Patriots would be so belligerent as to disregard something spelled out so clearly in the CBA and force an arbitration hearing that they don't have a rat's chance in hell of winning. They could stall for a little while- and it is tough to give specifics given the fluid nature of this season's offseason schedule - but ultimately, they would have a small period of time to either piss or get off the pot. They wouldn't be able to keep Gronk away for an extended period of time.

Sure but if we are talking CBAs, arbitration, etc there is a legal process.

Gronk formally applies for reinstatement. He then wins arbitration and reports to the NEP. Once those three things happen the NEP don't need to do a damn thing.

Go back and look at the Lions/Calvin Johnson situation. He retired officially in March of 2016 and around that time he asked the team for his release. They said no. He stayed retired in 2017. After the 2017 offseason the Lions got some calls on Calvin. The gave him permission to strike a deal. He never did. That was that.

Gronk is a flake. They aren't going to waste their time unless he proves he is serious.

 

[mgteich]

.

Gronk is a flake. They aren't going to waste their time unless he proves he is serious.

tell us how you really feel

 

[RobertWeathers]

tell us how you really feel

I love Gronk.

Hes just a flake.

 

[XLIX]

I don't read it that way. 2018 was his last accrued year. 2019 is subsequent to 2018.

The paragraph opens up by talking about how it is referring to players who have incurred a forfeitable breach. 2018 was not a forfeitable breach by Gronk since he played the full season.

If you go into the CBA, the paragraphs leading up to the one I quoted talk about if a player misses camp.... then if he misses camp plus some of the regular season... then if they miss the post season... which led into the paragraph I quoted where a player misses an entire season.

Gronk formally applies for reinstatement. He then wins arbitration and reports to the NEP. Once those three things happen the NEP don't need to do a damn thing.

NE wouldn't have to do a damn thing - except give him over $500,000 per game, give him a roster spot, and figure out a way to bring the team under the cap since Gronk coming back puts them $8 million over.

Gronk doesn't need to "apply" for anything. Yes there would be paperwork involved, but he doesn't need anyone's permission to do this. If he shows up, the Patriots have to honor his contract or cut him (trading him would be part of honoring his contract since they still have that right). It's all there in black and white.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The paragraph opens up by talking about how it is referring to players who have incurred a forfeitable breach. 2018 was not a forfeitable breach by Gronk since he played the full season.

If you go into the CBA, the paragraphs leading up to the one I quoted talk about if a player misses camp.... then if he misses camp plus some of the regular season... then if they miss the post season... which led into the paragraph I quoted where a player misses an entire season.

NE wouldn't have to do a damn thing - except give him over $500,000 per game, give him a roster spot, and figure out a way to bring the team under the cap since Gronk coming back puts them $8 million over.

Gronk doesn't need to "apply" for anything. Yes there would be paperwork involved, but he doesn't need anyone's permission to do this. If he shows up, the Patriots have to honor his contract or cut him (trading him would be part of honoring his contract since they still have that right). It's all there in black and white.

No.

Thats the process but gloss over it if you'd like.

 

[XLIX]

No.

Thats not the process but gloss over it if you'd like.

I gave the exact quote from the CBA. If you have something in the CBA to the contrary, please share.

 

[holyredeemer]

I just look at how strong we are in the secondary Gilmore is or is turning 30 we are taking about a second which we don’t have a fourth where you can get a good player or package it to move up or into next year and Howard who physically is more gifted than any tightend we have.
I don’t think Tampa would do it honestly but it’s the most Belichick kind of trade I can think of.
To trade a player a year early who will never have a high of value and most certainly not ever be as dominant as he was last season.
Combine that with the emergence of JC Jackson a stacked secondary and Joejuan Williams being drafted in the second last season.
It makes sense from a team building stand point.

I’m not at all disagreeing with the conversation of trading Gilly. I understand where your head is at. Two things in play here.

1. If Bill is trying to remain competitive and shoot for a SB THIS year, then you don’t trade Gilmore unless you’re gonna get a player of similar impact somewhere else. Now, I understand we’re not going to get a guy that has as BIG of an impact as Gilly, but something close. Gilmore hasn’t shown any signs of slowing down. Age be damned, he seems to me like the kinda guy that can go to 35-36 if he takes care of himself and can avoid the injury bugs that the older cats tend to get. If this is what Bill is planning (winning now) then you keep Gilly.

2. Bill is looking towards the future and wanting to have a SB contender 2-3 yrs down the rd. If that’s the case, you trade Gilmore for a king’s ransom and nothing less. Look at what has been given up for Diggs, Hopkins, Tunsil etc. lately. Granted, those are offensive players, but you don’t have to look too far back to see the impact a stud corner made on a super bowl caliber team. Revis was that guy for us. If the Bucs are all-in now, and they want Gilly, they pay BIG or gtfo.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I gave the exact quote from the CBA. If you have something in the CBA to the contrary, please share.

I really don't know what you are debating.

Again, there are steps Gronk can be forced/needs to take before NEP is required to do anything and they most certainly aren't just going to cut Gronk a check and rework a number of contracts just to accommodate his $9m hit. Those steps govern and are in alignment with the CBA language you cite.

If you don't think the NEP aren't going to exhaust that process to the fullest you are not being realistic.