Kiwanuka speaks out against NFL contracts.

[Bugg]

Guarantee the contracts. Then if you cut a player, you could give the team the option to clear that contract from their cap if they want the room - or not, if they don't - depending on the team's financial situation. That's a basic framework that would need to be tweaked. Wealthier teams could take more advantage of that than poorer teams. Maybe throw in some sort of luxury tax for the teams looking to clear cap room to spend more to balance it out. 

 

You could also write language into contracts that if players sign with another team after being cut, they would have to pay back their previous team (if they were making $5M from the old team, and $2M from the new, the old team would be on the hook for $2M less, and the player would still have his $5M guarantee).

This is so sensible that the owners would never go for it. And sadly too many agents like Drew Rosenhause love touting the huge ass ( and totally unguaranteed and really meaingless) big contracts they get for their clients. OR pretend they get for their clients.

And bigger than that; that the NFL does not have decent health care programs for retirees is a national disgrace. Wouldn;t take that uch effort on the part of the owners and the NFLPA to do that. And inexplicably and emnarrassingly neither seems to care. The beating these players take means they will have a rough go of it later in life.

[RutgersJetFan]

Except you made comments that were reliant on me not having made points that I already had

[Bugg]

MLB sucks.  Lets not let the NFL become the MLB.

 

As far as hating Revis?  Why not?  We are Jets fans, and we want what is best for the Jets.  Revis's actions were not that.  I'm not a fan of Darrelle Revis the business man and couldn't care less about his bottom line.  My interest in the NFL is in the Jets success, not player's financial futures.

Revis is at least honest about his greed.The owners with the cap pretend theer is something good and honorable about supressing players' salaries. Which is crap. It's an elaborate game to hold down labor costs. If you gave them decent health care and injury settlements at the end of their careers, it might be understandable. But they don't.

[Larz]

poor baby

[Bleedin Green]

 

Took you long enough.

 

I feel so honored.

[j4jets]

"I don't think its right"? The f*ck you talking about? sh*thead didn't complain much when he signed up for the $8.5mil signing bonus. Now he's crying cuz he's not making $8.5mil every yr. He knew his guaranteed portion was $11mil and not a penny above that if cut. He signed the freaking deal so STFU, Mr. Kiwanuka. Maybe you should have opted to not sign that deal until the G-Men fully guaranteed all of the contract. Im pretty sure he wasn't going to get a $21mil guarantee, but he if Mr. B*tching is adamant about guaranteed contracts, Im sure G-Men could have given him $15mil over 4 years, FULLY guaranteed. But he wanted more and now is b*tching about it.

 

These punk know exactly what they sign up for. To b*tch about it afterwards is pretty silly, cuz they always have the option to stay their ground for a fully guaranteed contract. But they don't, cuz they want more money...much more money. And when the dust settles and they realize they are on the wrong side of the 30, all of a sudden somehow fully guaranteed contract talks pop up. He signed up for an $11mil guaranteed contract. Deal with it and stfu. No sympathy for a player making millions, complaining about not making even more...even if he has a pregnant wife (sure he can relocate, but he knows no one is willing to pay $5mil per for him).

[RutgersJetFan]

[CTM]

meh.. the signing bonus is the contract, for all intents and purposes. These guys get a huge chunk of change up front in exhcange for the lopsidedness during the contract.

 

If they guarantee the contracts, the signing bonuses will shrink and then the players will complain about that

[JohnnyLV]

he also risks his brain, unlike the rest of us. 

 

He doesn't have to play

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

Skipped the thread, I assume in four pages this has come up. It's a fair point but Kiwanuka is perhaps not the best guy to be making it, because at the end of the day it's not the owners holding his paper, it's our left tackle. Kiwanuka was all set to be a top five, top ten pick under the old rookie wage scale. Then he woke up one day in Mobile and decided to be somebody, got the ever-loving sh*t kicked out of him, and had his lunch money stolen. That depressed Kiwanuka's career earnings a lot more than the non-guaranteed contract system has.

[Bugg]

Marvin Miller repeatedly offered MLB the chance to make everyone a free agent at the end of the year. And foolishly the MLB owners refused. None of these guys realize if every player had to justify his salary each year the salaries would go down. Owning a North American sports franchise is the last bastion of stupid mindless communism on earth. Instead they'd rather watch Mark Texeira ground weakly into the shift again, or Brad Richards eff up the power play(which will probably come to an end only because the NHL in a moment of clarity realized buyouts made life way simpler; but they ahd 2 lockouts to keep a team in Arizona that nobody there cares about), or what ever it is Mark Sanchez has been doing since he got here. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Just out of curiosity, if Kiwanuka was worthy of his prior contract, then why would he have to take a pay cut? I mean, surely he could have refused and someone else would have offered him as much or more, right?

 

I get the rookie stuff (especially for RBs who often never get the opportunity to cash out before they get beat up or get deemed "old" at age 28-30), and even that doesn't measure up to college football as far as compensation.  But once you're established like Kiwanuka? If you're worth what you're scheduled to make, one of two things is going to happen: 1) You'll play out your deal; 2) You'll get cut, but someone else will offer you as much or more, and your new deal will come with gobs more cash up front or additional guarantees.  The only way he won't get paid that amount - by his original team or by a new one - is if he's not worth it.

 

And though it's mentioned over and over as though it was some sort of proven fact, contracts like this (that aren't fully guaranteed, and are one-sided in this regard) aren't exactly unprecedented outside of football.  It happens all the time.

[#27TheDominator]

Just out of curiosity, if Kiwanuka was worthy of his prior contract, then why would he have to take a pay cut? I mean, surely he could have refused and someone else would have offered him as much or more, right?

 

I get the rookie stuff (especially for RBs who often never get the opportunity to cash out before they get beat up or get deemed "old" at age 28-30), and even that doesn't measure up to college football as far as compensation.  But once you're established like Kiwanuka? If you're worth what you're scheduled to make, one of two things is going to happen: 1) You'll play out your deal; 2) You'll get cut, but someone else will offer you as much or more, and your new deal will come with gobs more cash up front or additional guarantees.  The only way he won't get paid that amount - by his original team or by a new one - is if he's not worth it.

 

And though it's mentioned over and over as though it was some sort of proven fact, contracts like this (that aren't fully guaranteed, and are one-sided in this regard) aren't exactly unprecedented outside of football.  It happens all the time.

 

This is his reasoning:

 

 

 

He knew other teams would be interested in his services had he turned down the reduction and accepted his release, but his wife was preparing to give birth to a baby boy in April. He could not leave the area and had to accept the situation, one he feels is a growing issue in the NFL landscape.

 

 

Kiwanuka finished in the top 10 in quarterback hits (14) for his position last season, according to Pro Football Focus. He was also a top-20 coverage defensive end.

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2014/06/giants_mathias_kiwanuka_not_happy_with_paycut_thinks_more_needs_to_be_done_to_protect_players.html

 

Doesn't seem like a stretcht that he could do better than $1.5M

[Sperm Edwards]

This is his reasoning:

 

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2014/06/giants_mathias_kiwanuka_not_happy_with_paycut_thinks_more_needs_to_be_done_to_protect_players.html

 

Doesn't seem like a stretcht that he could do better than $1.5M

 

 

Then that's on him if he values being there for his wife at that dollar amount.  He has earned enough money so far that he can afford to make that financial decision.  As a percentage, few married men could afford to pass up on an extra $3M because their wives are pregnant.  It was his decision.  The team is not compelled to act one way or another because this is when a player and his wife decided to do their family planning.  

[#27TheDominator]

Then that's on him if he values being there for his wife at that dollar amount.  He has earned enough money so far that he can afford to make that financial decision.  As a percentage, few married men could afford to pass up on an extra $3M because their wives are pregnant.  It was his decision.  The team is not compelled to act one way or another because this is when a player and his wife decided to do their family planning.  

 

No.  It's on the system.  He is right.  The system sucks.  He is not saying the Giants violated the rules, he is saying he doesn't like the rules.  He signed a 4 year deal and has a choice of a more than 50% pay cut or moving his pregnant wife.  Not exactly an easy choice. The team is not compelled because of the unfair system.  Especially when you consider that they have to artificially keep contracts down.  Kiwanuka's "family planning" was made in the middle of the deal, right when you'd responsibly expect it. 

[Sperm Edwards]

No.  It's on the system.  He is right.  The system sucks.  He is not saying the Giants violated the rules, he is saying he doesn't like the rules.  He signed a 4 year deal and has a choice of a more than 50% pay cut or moving his pregnant wife.  Not exactly an easy choice. The team is not compelled because of the unfair system.  Especially when you consider that they have to artificially keep contracts down.  Kiwanuka's "family planning" was made in the middle of the deal, right when you'd responsibly expect it. 

 

The system is imperfect, and there are few (who don't maximally profit from it) who would argue otherwise. But there would be multiple downsides to any system.

 

I'm not trying to sound as crass as this is going to come out, but they could have planned the pregnancy at a different time, or could have taken measures to see to it that she didn't get pregnant specifically during this time.  I don't know how bad of dirtbags the Mara/Tisch or Reese are, but they seem to get a pass here as being so much better people than our owner/GMs.

 

If he couldn't afford to take a $3M pay cut, then he'd say to his wife that she can stay behind and she should call her mom or her sister to stay with her until he gets settled in with a new deal with a new team, and if she gives birth before that, he'll fly home from wherever he is with no notice (like players often do in the middle of a season).

 

And this is just specific to Kiwanuka.  The most common crime I've seen repeated is that only 1 side is bound to the deal and the other side can opt out, and the nonsense about how no contracts outside the NFL operate anything like this. One-sided opt-out clauses are quite common, and you'd probably know this better than I would.

[#27TheDominator]

The system is imperfect, and there are few (who don't maximally profit from it) who would argue otherwise. But there would be multiple downsides to any system.

 

I'm not trying to sound as crass as this is going to come out, but they could have planned the pregnancy at a different time, or could have taken measures to see to it that she didn't get pregnant specifically during this time.  I don't know how bad of dirtbags the Mara/Tisch or Reese are, but they seem to get a pass here as being so much better people than our owner/GMs.

 

If he couldn't afford to take a $3M pay cut, then he'd say to his wife that she can stay behind and she should call her mom or her sister to stay with her until he gets settled in with a new deal with a new team, and if she gives birth before that, he'll fly home from wherever he is with no notice (like players often do in the middle of a season).

 

And this is just specific to Kiwanuka.  The most common crime I've seen repeated is that only 1 side is bound to the deal and the other side can opt out, and the nonsense about how no contracts outside the NFL operate anything like this. One-sided opt-out clauses are quite common, and you'd probably know this better than I would.

 

Look, the guy can do what he wants and he knew the system.  Nobody is arguing that, but you agree that it is at least "imperfect."  You family planning argument is ridiculous.  He is an NFL player - his potential career span probably equates pretty well with his wife's child bearing years.  Yes she could stay behind, yes he could fly in, but the guy signed a 4 year deal and they had him.  

[Sperm Edwards]

Look, the guy can do what he wants and he knew the system.  Nobody is arguing that, but you agree that it is at least "imperfect."  You family planning argument is ridiculous.  He is an NFL player - his potential career span probably equates pretty well with his wife's child bearing years.  Yes she could stay behind, yes he could fly in, but the guy signed a 4 year deal and they had him.  

 

It's also just bad timing. Sometimes that happens in life.

 

I don't think it was a ridiculous argument.  He has millions of dollars on the line.  Couples decide to have kids or not have kids over situations with a lot less money at stake.  Some put it off for months; others for years.  Some, like Cromartie, decides to have a kid because it's Thursday.

 

And of course it's imperfect.  But that argument presumes there is a perfect system that is perfect for the players, their employers, the fans, each team as a whole, and the sport in general. 

[#27TheDominator]

It's also just bad timing. Sometimes that happens in life.

 

I don't think it was a ridiculous argument.  He has millions of dollars on the line.  Couples decide to have kids or not have kids over situations with a lot less money at stake.  Some put it off for months; others for years.  Some, like Cromartie, decides to have a kid because it's Thursday.

 

And of course it's imperfect.  But that argument presumes there is a perfect system that is perfect for the players, their employers, the fans, each team as a whole, and the sport in general. 

 

People made the same arguments to defend the "old" system where teams could stash guys forever without ever really paying them.  It's a crooked deal, though much moreso for young kids like Troy Davis then guys that have made their money for years like Kiwanuka

[Sperm Edwards]

People made the same arguments to defend the "old" system where teams could stash guys forever without ever really paying them.  It's a crooked deal, though much moreso for young kids like Troy Davis then guys that have made their money for years like Kiwanuka

 

Well, this is better than that old system.  I'm sure there is a better system, even if it's only tweaking the current one.  The notion that this system cannot be improved upon has not been put forth by anyone, myself included, and it is not a point I'm arguing for.

 

My points were twofold:

 

1. That Kiwanuka was not trapped beyond the perceived trap he felt he was in.  If he'd been cut outright, without the Giants offering him any pay cut, I'm sure he would have found a way to deal with his situation. The planet would not have imploded, his kid would still be born, and life would go on.  I'm also sure it would have been difficult and unpleasant for him to be looking for a job with his wife this close to delivery, but he's famous, there are only so many people in the world better than he is, and finding a new team is part of what he has an agent for.  It's not as though he'd be cold-calling teams himself or knocking on their doors with his hat in his hands.  Likewise, the team could choose its timing better; they could have told him this on March 2nd (or August 2nd, for that matter).  But crappy as the team looks right now, I'm sure there are players who have also picked and chosen times to stage holdouts when it squeezes the team the most (when the team's decent options are all or mostly gone, or waiting until March FA and the draft are in the books).  What do they say, all's fair in peepee and poopie? (I may be getting my cliché wrong).  

 

2. This "one-sided" contract, where one side can end the contract and the other can't, is not unique to the NFL.

[T0mShane]

Gotta admit, I really thought that getting a cap floor, a rookie wage scale, and an incremental increase in the cap was going to equal a player's side victory, but the owners' lawyers kicked the players' lawyers ass in Faustian manner. Slippery ****s.

[#27TheDominator]

Well, this is better than that old system.  I'm sure there is a better system, even if it's only tweaking the current one.  The notion that this system cannot be improved upon has not been put forth by anyone, myself included, and it is not a point I'm arguing for.

 

My points were twofold:

 

1. That Kiwanuka was not trapped beyond the perceived trap he felt he was in.  If he'd been cut outright, without the Giants offering him any pay cut, I'm sure he would have found a way to deal with his situation. The planet would not have imploded, his kid would still be born, and life would go on.  I'm also sure it would have been difficult and unpleasant for him to be looking for a job with his wife this close to delivery, but he's famous, there are only so many people in the world better than he is, and finding a new team is part of what he has an agent for.  It's not as though he'd be cold-calling teams himself or knocking on their doors with his hat in his hands.  Likewise, the team could choose its timing better; they could have told him this on March 2nd (or August 2nd, for that matter).  But crappy as the team looks right now, I'm sure there are players who have also picked and chosen times to stage holdouts when it squeezes the team the most (when the team's decent options are all or mostly gone, or waiting until March FA and the draft are in the books).  What do they say, all's fair in peepee and poopie? (I may be getting my cliché wrong).  

 

2. This "one-sided" contract, where one side can end the contract and the other can't, is not unique to the NFL.

 

So you are complaining about Kiwanuka while agreeing with him?  Life would go on, so he should just smile and live with it?  He doesn't like the system.  He's right.  I understand the whole idea of not feeling sorry for a young millionaire, but let's think about who is saving the $3M he isn't getting.  John Mara is worth $500M and why?  It's not that sweet, sweet Girl with the Dragon Tattoo money. 

[RutgersJetFan]

Gotta admit, I really thought that getting a cap floor, a rookie wage scale, and an incremental increase in the cap was going to equal a player's side victory, but the owners' lawyers kicked the players' lawyers ass in Faustian manner. Slippery ****s.

#jobcreators

[Larz]

Gotta admit, I really thought that getting a cap floor, a rookie wage scale, and an incremental increase in the cap was going to equal a player's side victory, but the owners' lawyers kicked the players' lawyers ass in Faustian manner. Slippery ****s.

 

but the players got one a days

 

lol

[ZachEY]

I'm just curious why a pregnant woman can't move?

[RutgersJetFan]

I'm just curious why a pregnant woman can't move?

 

I'm not sure but I think it has something to do with bears.

[ZachEY]

I'm not sure but I think it has something to do with bears.

 

grizzly, polar, or the other kind?

[RutgersJetFan]

grizzly, polar, or the other kind?

 

Now you're just being ridiculous. Everyone knows that polar bears are indigenous to the Arctic Circle.

[SenorGato]

Gotta admit, I really thought that getting a cap floor, a rookie wage scale, and an incremental increase in the cap was going to equal a player's side victory, but the owners' lawyers kicked the players' lawyers ass in Faustian manner. Slippery ****s.

 

 

Totally. If you take less money through your physical prime, we will tooooooootallly make up for it later. Cross my heart! Also, a salary cap is a good thing. PLUS we're MAKING teams spend at least just under it! 

[Larz]

the one dynamic that will never change is the players need the NFL more than the NFL needs the players

 

 

the skill level in college football is very high, it is probably similar to the NFL in the 80's, so "scrubs" in todays era would be enjoyable to watch, and I think the players have little leverage

 

I cheer for the logo, not the dude

 

ask NHL players what happens if you take the owners to the wall.  they win

[JohnnyLV]

Kiwanuka is an idiot. 

 

THe salary cap is not going away from football. It is what makes the game so popular. 

 

So he needs to think it through. If contracts were fully guaranteed like in baseball, then the teams would need to prepare for dead money with every player, and significant dead money at that. So they would  need to keep a larger reserve against that. Teams could not afford to push any significant dollars into the future, so signing bonuses would be dramatically lowered and eliminated for many contracts such as for depth players. Option years would become very common and would be one way to the club. Base salaries would be much lower as well because of the risk. Contract would have more incentives tied directly to performance. In the end, NFL players would make significantly less as a group, except for a few QBs, and significantly less money towards the cap would be spent. Teams would be more willing to sign rookies and UDFA for depth rather than third contract veterans.

[#27TheDominator]

Kiwanuka is an idiot. 

 

THe salary cap is not going away from football. It is what makes the game so popular. 

 

So he needs to think it through. If contracts were fully guaranteed like in baseball, then the teams would need to prepare for dead money with every player, and significant dead money at that. So they would  need to keep a larger reserve against that. Teams could not afford to push any significant dollars into the future, so signing bonuses would be dramatically lowered and eliminated for many contracts such as for depth players. Option years would become very common and would be one way to the club. Base salaries would be much lower as well because of the risk. Contract would have more incentives tied directly to performance. In the end, NFL players would make significantly less as a group, except for a few QBs, and significantly less money towards the cap would be spent. Teams would be more willing to sign rookies and UDFA for depth rather than third contract veterans.

 

No bonuses and lower base salaries?  No money for depth?  Sounds like the owners would love this, but they don't.  Teams are already more willing to sign rookies and UDFA for depth and they actually have clauses in the agreement about that.  Have for years.  The game is so popular because of speed and violence.

[SenorGato]

THe salary cap is not going away from football. It is what makes the game so popular. 

 

 

 

#proleshateproles

[Larz]

No bonuses and lower base salaries?  No money for depth?  Sounds like the owners would love this, but they don't.  Teams are already more willing to sign rookies and UDFA for depth and they actually have clauses in the agreement about that.  Have for years.  The game is so popular because of speed and violence.

 

speed and violence sure, but not having a team buy a dynasty helps, especially with a freakin 32 team league.  having hope in june sure helps popularity

[Sperm Edwards]

So you are complaining about Kiwanuka while agreeing with him?  Life would go on, so he should just smile and live with it?  He doesn't like the system.  He's right.  I understand the whole idea of not feeling sorry for a young millionaire, but let's think about who is saving the $3M he isn't getting.  John Mara is worth $500M and why?  It's not that sweet, sweet Girl with the Dragon Tattoo money. 

 

I'm actually surprised at your response that attributes comments or thoughts to me that aren't there.  That's not your style:

 

- I never complained about Kiwanuka.

- I never said I don't feel sorry for him because he's a young millionaire.  

- I never suggested Mara is more deserving of a saved $3M than Kiwanuka.

 

What I am saying: 

 

Kiwanuka had 2 choices: to take a pay cut or to seek employment elsewhere.  That is the situation, not a complaint about him.  He claims he could easily get the $4.5M he was due to get (or something like that; I'm not re-reading the thread to find his exact words).  Perhaps more, since it's a new contract he'd be getting and he's not locked in to negotiating with only his present team.  New larger contract, new larger bonus, new additional guarantees.  That's if he's worth it on the open market, as he claims. 

 

He made his decision, and his decision is that the temporary added comfort+convenience for himself and his wife is worth $2.175M.   ($2.175M is the base amount of the cut, so it's maybe more, if someone would have offered him more than his scheduled contract amount).  His base salary was cut to $1.5M, but he also gets a $700K roster bonus as part of the deal and can earn another $125K back as well.  Still a significant pay cut, but nearly a million dollars different than what's reported.

 

I think the timing by the Giants sucks, but this may have been in the works for some time.  Kiwanuka may have had some hints to this for some time and now is just when they dropped the hammer.  Not saying that's what happened, but there are possibilities like this that I'm sure Kiwanuka isn't going to just blurt out.  If it comes out that Reese purposely timed this because of the timing of the last weeks of Mrs. Kiwanuka's pregnancy, then it's pretty disgusting.  He's basically using her to get to him.  Like in a movie when the hero won't give in to torture, so the bad guy brings out someone he cares about (his child, his friend, etc.) to get the hero to break.  I'm not saying this is what happened either, but the timing makes it look like it happened, and therefore may make the decision worse than it actually was.  You know, correlation not being the same as causation and all that.  

 

On the flip side, there are many players for whom this is a dream scenario.  Kiwanuka is 31.  If he played out his contract he likely wouldn't get offered much of anything on a subsequent deal at age 33.  If he was ever going to really cash out again, that ability diminishes with each passing year. I'm not suggesting the Giants did this as some sort of favor to him, since he chose the pay cut. But I am suggesting that the same scenario is not the tragedy to someone else that it's being presented by Kiwanuka.  What Tannenbaum did to Clemens was far worse IMO, because the season was about to begin like a week later.  

 

Lastly, this money doesn't even necessarily go to Mara, as you're suggesting.  Presumably they did this to create cap space rather than saving the owners' dollars (I'm willing to go with that, since there are far easier ways for a team owner to save money, starting a cheaper option at CB than DRC).  Well what is this cap space for? It's to have available money to pay other players.  So this ill-gotten $2.1-2.2M is ultimately going from Kiwanuka to another player, or spread to multiple players, not from Kiwanuka to Mara.