Jump to content
New York Mick

Should Players Be Able To Retire Then Comeback For The Playoffs?

Recommended Posts

Two resent players they've been suggesting that might do it are Gronk and Long. Is it an unfair advantage to have players sitting on the back shelf staying healthy waiting for the playoff? Not sure how I feel about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. They didn’t play all year and their bodies aren’t in football shape. You can tear a ligament or break a bone a lot faster when you aren’t conditioned to take the hits that you’ll be taking come playoff time. — don’t get me wrong..that certainly can happen anyway but when you’re not there physically then you just aren’t there. They say the only way to get into “football shape” IS to take some licks. That usually comes for players in training camp.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Drums said:

Good question. It should be in line with the trade deadline in my opinion. 

I like that idea. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

let em.  it would serve gronk right to sit out the season, come back in the playoffs, and then be responsible for a game ending fumble or worse.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're free agents.  If a team wants to take the risk of bringing in a player for the stretch run or the postseason who hasn't been practicing with the team or participating in team workouts for nearly a full calendar year, have at it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jetsfan80 said:

They're free agents.  If a team wants to take the risk of bringing in a player for the stretch run or the postseason who hasn't been practicing with the team or participating in team workouts for nearly a full calendar year, have at it. 

I thought if you retire you have to sit out a year before you could go to another team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rangerous said:

let em.  it would serve gronk right to sit out the season, come back in the playoffs, and then be responsible for a game ending fumble or worse.

Or he could come in play three games and be one of the reason the Pats win another SB. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, New York Mick said:

I thought if you retire you have to sit out a year before you could go to another team?

Hmm, maybe.  So the Patriots still technically own the rights to Gronk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, New York Mick said:

Two resent players they've been suggesting that might do it are Gronk and Long. Is it an unfair advantage to have players sitting on the back shelf staying healthy waiting for the playoff? Not sure how I feel about it. 

No, but feel free to get busted and suspeded for Peds the first four games of the year and comeback for the Superbowl and earn MVP honors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Crusher said:

No, but feel free to get busted and suspeded for Peds the first four games of the year and comeback for the Superbowl and earn MVP honors. 

Who did that? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, New York Mick said:

I thought if you retire you have to sit out a year before you could go to another team?

Favre said he was retiring then went to the Vikes..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Hmm, maybe.  So the Patriots still technically own the rights to Gronk?

I’m 90% sure but a could be wrong. @Sperm Edwards is good with contract stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, New York Mick said:

I thought if you retire you have to sit out a year before you could go to another team?

You don't really have to  officially "retire" to sit out.  You can sit out as a free agent and sign a contract whenever you want. I think.  I could be wrong though.

With that said, the idea of having a deadline to sign players would make sense - if one doesn't already exist.

Bottom line though - I'm sure there's a work around if you really wanted to let a guy sit out all year until the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Savage69 said:

Favre said he was retiring then went to the Vikes..

After he used the Jets for a year. That was the only reason he came here was because he couldn’t go directly to the Vikes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, New York Mick said:

I’m 90% sure but a could be wrong. @Sperm Edwards is good with contract stuff. 

Just found this:  https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/pittsburgh-steelers-nfl-features-news-blog-long-form/2016/3/5/11158958/nfl-101-how-cuts-retirements-and-trades-affect-the-salary-cap

 

Quote

Just like anything else in the NFL, though, there is a "but" for this rule, too: if the player retires with time remaining on his contract, then chooses to come back into the league later, he is not a free agent. Contracts apply, in most cases, to accrued seasons, not calendar years. If the player doesn't play, he doesn't accrue a season. Therefore, his return to the field would put him back under the control of the same team, unless that team chooses to cut him. This rule is part of the reason why Barry Sanders chose to retire: the Lions refused to cut him, and he decided he'd rather stop playing altogether than play another season for Detroit. Conversely, Brett Favre retired, and then the team chose to cut him while he was retired. He was then able to return to the league later as a free agent.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gronk was set to hit free agency after 2019.  So if he comes back at any point this year, he'd come back as a Patriot. 

If he sits out a full season, then elects to come back in 2020, he'd still come back as a Patriot, since he wouldn't have accrued a season (like Le'Veon Bell when he sat out last year).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

So the Pats can just sit on Gronk not that he’d sign with another team anyway. It would be hilarious if he signed with the Chiefs and beat the Pats in the playoffs :)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CBA already has a rule preventing this from happening past like week 8

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question of whether  he comes back to play for the Pats  isn't really an issue. He won't  play for a different team. 

That said, if he wants to come back and play for the Pat's right off his couch, let him. IMO gronk retired because it was him who was getting dominated by younger, faster defenders, not the other way around. That will only be a bigger issue if he comes back not in football shape  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Gronk was set to hit free agency after 2019.  So if he comes back at any point this year, he'd come back as a Patriot. 

If he sits out a full season, then elects to come back in 2020, he'd still come back as a Patriot, since he wouldn't have accrued a season (like Le'Veon Bell when he sat out last year).

Yeah Gronk isn’t done he still had like 700 yards last year and his blocking both in-line and downfield still looked tremendous I think he was worried Belichick would cut or trade him

 

My guess is he’s back by week 4 or 5

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, More Cowbell said:

The question of whether  he comes back to play for the Pats  isn't really an issue. He won't  play for a different team. 

That said, if he wants to come back and play for the Pat's right off his couch, let him. IMO gronk retired because it was him who was getting dominated by younger, faster defenders, not the other way around. That will only be a bigger issue if he comes back not in football shape  

How was he getting dominated?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

The question of whether  he comes back to play for the Pats  isn't really an issue. He won't  play for a different team. 

That said, if he wants to come back and play for the Pat's right off his couch, let him. IMO gronk retired because it was him who was getting dominated by younger, faster defenders, not the other way around. That will only be a bigger issue if he comes back not in football shape  

He’s a millionaire involved with a good franchise that has access to the best trainers. He could easily be in good enough shape to play three important games. He could come back at the end of the season and have two weeks before the first game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Philc1 said:

CBA already has a rule preventing this from happening past like week 8

Are you sure about that? I keep hearing he’ll comeback for the playoffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Hmm, maybe.  So the Patriots still technically own the rights to Gronk?

I believe so 80. That way they can't "retire" then bolt to another team if they "unretire".

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No if you don't play a certain amount of games or on a teams 53 man roster for so many weeks or after a deadline. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, New York Mick said:

Are you sure about that? I keep hearing he’ll comeback for the playoffs. 

Perhaps that could just be "wishful" thinking on Gronks part. There HAS to be something in the CBA that covers this one would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thai Jet said:

Perhaps that could just be "wishful" thinking on Gronks part. There HAS to be something in the CBA that covers this one would think.

Sports talk are the ones saying it. I’m assuming they’d know the rules. I have no clue what the rules are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like that idea. 

Right.@Drums has it right. There simply has to be some sort of rule. Exploitation of systems is usually the precursor to change. With a thing like this it would be great to have some foresight to cut off potential advantage to one team or a another.

It’s not surprising that the scumbag pats will be the ones to play around with this one.




Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Barry McCockinner said:

We're talking about professional football. You've got to be kidding. Waaah, it's not fair. Grow some nuts.

So it’s ok to deflate footballs? Video other team’s practices and calls? use PED? Put bounties on players? ETC

It was a question of how it should be handle numbnuts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with it as long as there is no evidence the player was working with the team as a potential return player because it is unfair to have that person effectively on the roster but never activated and gain an extra roster player while other teams have to rely on their fifty-three man roster all year. If the player engages in team activities during the season then the player needs to be paid under his contract and counted as either a roster player or on the practice squad. If a team wants to bet its playoff run on somebody who has maybe been keeping in competitive shape through the year but not playing then let them take that chance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, New York Mick said:

Sports talk are the ones saying it. I’m assuming they’d know the rules. I have no clue what the rules are. 

Neither do I Mick but you know it HAS to be a written, sensible rule somewhere in the CBA. Otherwise you'd have guys jumping ship all over the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rex-n-effect said:

I don't have a problem with it as long as there is no evidence the player was working with the team as a potential return player because it is unfair to have that person effectively on the roster but never activated and gain an extra roster player while other teams have to rely on their fifty-three man roster all year. If the player engages in team activities during the season then the player needs to be paid under his contract and counted as either a roster player or on the practice squad. If a team wants to bet its playoff run on somebody who has maybe been keeping in competitive shape through the year but not playing then let them take that chance. 

That’s the issue. A team like the Pats will bend or break the rules to their advantage any chance they get. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...