Fatmancryin
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2018
- Messages
- 953
- Reaction score
- 1,657
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Anyone able to sum up?
Source: WR Malcolm Mitchell has filed a grievance vs. Patriots | Boston Sports JournalThe details of the grievance are unclear, but by the looks of things, it’s likely Mitchell is arguing he was injured on August 6, which is when he was waived by the Patriots. Injured players are not supposed to be released. They are supposed to be placed on IR, either directly or after clearing waivers following being designated waived/injured.
Per the CBA, the initial grievance amount of $252,000 is 40 percent of his 2018 salary ($630,000). The grievance amount of $252,000 now counts against New England’s cap. If Mitchell wins his grievance, then remaining $378,000 will eventually hit the Patriots cap. If Mitchell loses his grievance, then the Patriots will receive a credit.
I hope he gets his money if he deserves it.Well I hope he gets his money ......
Source: WR Malcolm Mitchell has filed a grievance vs. Patriots | Boston Sports Journal
I'm hoping that Miguel will fact check me on this.
Looking at OTC, it's not clear to me precisely what Mitchell's salaries for 2018 & 2019 would have been, but it appears that he's been paid $1.39M (for his two years) on an original 4-year contract with a total value of $2.92M. The $2.92M includes a signing bonus of (I think) about $575M. So, it seems to me that Mitchell may have had about $950k or so left on his contract.
Mitchell is claiming that he was hurt and that is what led to his release where as the Patriots are saying it was performance.
Anyone else hear that Mitchell was hurt again? I hadn't.. And that's the sort of thing that usually comes out.
If he was still hobbled from the injury last season and was unable to perform because of that injury, they can't legally terminate his contract (without his consent in an injury settlement). The CBA specifies that a player who is unable to perform the requirements of his contract due to an injury sustained in performance of that contract cannot have the contract terminated.
This is the same reason Darboh went back to the Seahawks IR after he failed his physical with the Patriots; the Seahawks could never have legally cut him in the first place since he wasnt able to perform. Note that Darboh, like Mitchell, practiced in training camp, so that's not hard and fast evidence that it was performance-based.
Generally it's in the league's best interest to settle these sorts of grievances (which is almost certainly what happened with Darboh) because if it goes to arbitration and the league gets a ruling against them, the plaintiff is usually going to come out much wealthier than he would have been just getting his salary on IR.
If he was still hobbled from the injury last season and was unable to perform because of that injury, they can't legally terminate his contract (without his consent in an injury settlement). The CBA specifies that a player who is unable to perform the requirements of his contract due to an injury sustained in performance of that contract cannot have the contract terminated.
This is the same reason Darboh went back to the Seahawks IR after he failed his physical with the Patriots; the Seahawks could never have legally cut him in the first place since he wasnt able to perform. Note that Darboh, like Mitchell, practiced in training camp, so that's not hard and fast evidence that it was performance-based.
Generally it's in the league's best interest to settle these sorts of grievances (which is almost certainly what happened with Darboh) because if it goes to arbitration and the league gets a ruling against them, the plaintiff is usually going to come out much wealthier than he would have been just getting his salary on IR.
I don’t think the present day Patriots are one of these teams. In the past, yeah, no doubt.