Hassan Reddick Holding Out, Requests Trade

[Bobby816]

Can't see him playing week 1 if he doesn't report this week.

And I don't see him reporting this week.

[Biggs]

5 minutes ago, jgb said:

Well said but it’s no use. They are stuck on this as some sort of ethical issue because Haasan “broke a contract.” First of all, breaking a contract isn’t an ethical issue but let’s put that aside.

No contract was even broken here. All contracts respect the fundamental right to withhold services. As they must, because to do otherwise would be illegal. Illegal terms in contracts are, you guessed it, also illegal. So their argument is that Hassan broke a contract by violating an imagined term that appears no where in the contract and would be unconstitutional even if it did.

I mean, what’s the use of debating people with such a fundamental misunderstanding of how contracts work?

This is abslutely spot on.  But there is something else here.  His contract was actually designed by both sides to be renegiotated this year.

[jgb]

6 minutes ago, Biggs said:

This is abslutely spot on.  But there is something else here.  His contract was actually designed by both sides to be renegiotated this year.

That I cannot speak to as I’m not that plugged into the specifics of his time with the eagles, but it would indeed be a very common strategy seen in many bandaid extensions that basically force a renegotiation by various mechanisms (usually by making not renegotiating be devestating to the cap).

[ARodJetsFan]

21 minutes ago, jgb said:

Well said but it’s no use. They are stuck on this as some sort of ethical issue because Haasan “broke a contract.” First of all, breaking a contract isn’t an ethical issue but let’s put that aside.

No contract was even broken here. All contracts respect the fundamental right to withhold services. As they must, because to do otherwise would be illegal. Illegal terms in contracts are, you guessed it, also illegal. So their argument is that Hassan broke a contract by violating an imagined term that appears no where in the contract and would be unconstitutional even if it did.

I mean, what’s the use of debating people with such a fundamental misunderstanding of how contracts work?

The merits of what is and isn't in Reddick's contract really isn't the unerlying issue here, as I see it.

It seems that Reddick doesn't want to play on his existing contract, a little bit of an assumption on my part, but I think it's a reasonable assumption, given everything that's transpired up until now.

Reddick doesn't want to report to the team without a new deal in place.

The Jets won't negotiate with a player who's holding out and JD wants Reddick to report to the team and start participating in camp, before he starts negotiating with him.

What's happened prior to this, really doesn't matter a whole lot at this point, this is where we are right now.

I don't think the Jets are being unreasonable, as for Reddick, well you can draw your own conclusions, I've made my feelings about him pretty well known.

How will it end?

God only knows.....

[jgb]

15 minutes ago, ARodJetsFan said:

The merits of what is and isn't in Reddick's contract really isn't the unerlying issue here, as I see it.

It seems that Reddick doesn't want to play on his existing contract, a little bit of an assumption on my part, but I think it's a reasonable assumption, given everything that's transpired up until now.

Reddick doesn't want to report to the team without a new deal in place.

The Jets won't negotiate with a player who's holding out and JD wants Reddick to report to the team and start participating in camp, before he starts negotiating with him.

What's happened prior to this, really doesn't matter a whole lot at this point, this is where we are right now.

I don't think the Jets are being unreasonable, as for Reddick, well you can draw your own conclusions, I've made my feelings about him pretty well known.

How will it end?

God only knows.....

Pretty much agree with this and as I’ve said Haasan may well be making a very bad choice against his own interest but it’s not a moral issue and it’s his right to make it and I’d expect an NFL GM to anticipate the possibility 

[bicketybam]

32 minutes ago, jgb said:

Well said but it’s no use. They are stuck on this as some sort of ethical issue because Haasan “broke a contract.” First of all, breaking a contract isn’t an ethical issue but let’s put that aside.

No contract was even broken here. All contracts respect the fundamental right to withhold services. As they must, because to do otherwise would be illegal. Illegal terms in contracts are, you guessed it, also illegal. So their argument is that Hassan broke a contract by violating an imagined term that appears no where in the contract and would be unconstitutional even if it did.

I mean, what’s the use of debating people with such a fundamental misunderstanding of how contracts work?

The Collective Bargaining Agreement grants players specific rights relevant to their individual contracts, such as the ability to hold out from training camp in exchange for the payment of fines for doing so. The employer doesn't sue the player for breaching his contract. 

I'm just making it clear for everyone else, not you.

[jgb]

Just now, bicketybam said:

The Collective Bargaining Agreement grants players specific rights relevant to their individual contracts, such as the ability to hold out from training camp in exchange for the payment of fines for doing so. The employer doesn't sue the player for breaching his contract. 

I'm just making it clear for everyone else, not you.

Yes it’s a pretty standard liquidated damages clause that for whatever reason the parties agreed to call “fines.”

[Jet Nut]

14 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Bet there is nothing that says if he's traded he has to play.

NFL contracts are designed to be redone.  Both sides know this.  The Jets do it all the time.  Players restructure all the time for the benifit of the teams cap.  This contract was designed to be restructured this year.  That's why it has no guaranteed money left on it.  You can play dumb but I know you aren't.  

You can doubt he would redo for less money but in fact NFL players end up playing for less money all the time when they can't perform up to their contracts.   Teams actually force them to do it.

He has to play or quit the deal he agreed on.  But he’s being fined and won’t be paid because he’s under contract.  
Contracts can be redone.  They don’t have to be redone.  The bonus portion has absolutely nothing to do with a contract having to be redone.  
NFL deals are not guaranteed so if players suck the deal can be redone or ripped up and players released.  It sucks but that’s what the NFL union agreed to in their CBA.  They don’t have a clause that says because they pay is front loaded they can redo their deals when they’d like more money.  
 

[Jet_Engine1]

31 minutes ago, jgb said:

Well said but it’s no use. They are stuck on this as some sort of ethical issue because Haasan “broke a contract.” First of all, breaking a contract isn’t an ethical issue but let’s put that aside.

No contract was even broken here. All contracts respect the fundamental right to withhold services. As they must, because to do otherwise would be illegal. Illegal terms in contracts are, you guessed it, also illegal. So their argument is that Hassan broke a contract by violating an imagined term that appears no where in the contract and would be unconstitutional even if it did.

I mean, what’s the use of debating people with such a fundamental misunderstanding of how contracts work?

That entire argument is based on the nonsensical notion that the "Jets" are treating this as some ethical issue or something. The Jets entire position on Reddick has been to the effect of, "He has a current contract. We expect him to report. Until he does, we are focusing on the players that are here". Guys are conflating their own emotions or opinions of Jets fans or YT guys with reality. 

 

Reddick was traded.

He stated he would let the agents handle the contract stuff and was here to "play football for the team and fans, no matter what happens". 

He has yet to report to any Minicamp, OTA, or TC practice. It is now August 19th

A week ago, he said on Twitter/X he "has requested a trade". 

WHY would the Jets just arbitrarily hand a guy they barely know, without knowing what kind of shape he is in or what his mindset is, a contract? 

This would make sense as a hold-out if he was still with the Eagles as they have a relationship with him. The Jets don't know the guy.

SO, here we are. 

 

IF he had showed up to a few practices and shown that he is still looking to and able play (Eagles peeps have said his play took a nosedive at the end of last season), not cash in a last contract a la Trumaine Johnson, maybe they would have worked something out. Instead, he went to Japan to cosplay Yasuke and go to Cat Cafes.

 

Meanwhile, the Jets are saying nothing and doing what they need to do to get their players ready for the season. All the handwringing from either set of parties on internet boards is nonsense. **** ethics and contractual law, dude is either going to show up, or he isn't. But not showing up, not practicing, not working out isn't going to get him anything.

 

It's like the Revis 2010 Holdout but substituting some facts in that scenario... like if the team didn't know Revis, didn't know his work ethic at the time, and didn't know how he would really fit with the team.

 

If dude showed up during Minicamps and OTA's and practiced while having his agent negotiate stuff, dude probably would have gotten something. Instead, he ghosted them.

 

 

[Biggs]

16 minutes ago, ARodJetsFan said:

The merits of what is and isn't in Reddick's contract really isn't the unerlying issue here, as I see it.

It seems that Reddick doesn't want to play on his existing contract, a little bit of an assumption on my part, but I think it's a reasonable assumption, given everything that's transpired up until now.

Reddick doesn't want to report to the team without a new deal in place.

The Jets won't negotiate with a player who's holding out and JD wants Reddick to report to the team and start participating in camp, before he starts negotiating with him.

What's happened prior to this, really doesn't matter a whole lot at this point, this is where we are right now.

I don't think the Jets are being unreasonable, as for Reddick, well you can draw your own conclusions, I've made my feelings about him pretty well known.

How will it end?

God only knows.....

The Eagles, Jets and Reddick all knew his deals guarantees ran out before this year.  There was an expectation when the deal was signed that he would have a new contract this year when he signed the last deal or be cut and be an FA.   If he sucked he wouldn't be playing for 15 million this year.  He would be getting vet minimum or something much less than 15 million for a 1 year prove it deal.  The guy is a top performer who is worth a great deal more.

The Jets leaked that Reddick would report without a new contract.  There are people on this board arguing that he's somehow a bum for not honoring a contract.   

There's also the issue of negiotating a new longer term deal with a lame duck GM.   Reddick and his agent may not believe that JD who's contract is expiring this year can make a good faith deal of more than 1 year for his services.   

Reddick is in a hard spot because of the rules favor the Jets.  Reddick may believe that JD is also up against the wall and are willing to push him for a trade to a team with a GM who can actually negiotate a longer term deal than JD can.  If the Jets don't make the playoffs JD is done.  JD has a lot of insentive to put the best team on the field he possibly can.   JD isn't free of pressure.  He's in the same position Reddick is.  If the Jets make the playoffs and do well he's going to get a very big deal.  If they don't he's another guy with a poor resume looking for a job as an FA.  I expect Woody to get involved and cave at some point.

[Biggs]

12 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

He has to play or quit the deal he agreed on.  But he’s being fined and won’t be paid because he’s under contract.  
Contracts can be redone.  They don’t have to be redone.  The bonus portion has absolutely nothing to do with a contract having to be redone.  
NFL deals are not guaranteed so if players suck the deal can be redone or ripped up and players released.  It sucks but that’s what the NFL union agreed to in their CBA.  They don’t have a clause that says because they pay is front loaded they can redo their deals when they’d like more money.  
 

Correct.  There is nothing unethical about what the player is doing.   He's not breaking his word.  He's not working and they aren't paying him.

[Biggs]

36 minutes ago, ARodJetsFan said:

The merits of what is and isn't in Reddick's contract really isn't the unerlying issue here, as I see it.

It seems that Reddick doesn't want to play on his existing contract, a little bit of an assumption on my part, but I think it's a reasonable assumption, given everything that's transpired up until now.

Reddick doesn't want to report to the team without a new deal in place.

The Jets won't negotiate with a player who's holding out and JD wants Reddick to report to the team and start participating in camp, before he starts negotiating with him.

What's happened prior to this, really doesn't matter a whole lot at this point, this is where we are right now.

I don't think the Jets are being unreasonable, as for Reddick, well you can draw your own conclusions, I've made my feelings about him pretty well known.

How will it end?

God only knows.....

We don't know if the Jets are being reasonable or unreasonable.  It's very rare to have a lame duck GM negiotating long term contracts.  It's very rare to have a GM on an expiring contract.

[bicketybam]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

Yes it’s a pretty standard liquidated damages clause that for whatever reason the parties agreed to call “fines.”

That said, it's extremely punitive for the player to hold out. Does anyone know the monetary end result for Reddick if he sits out the year? Would it end up costing him money? We know that the Jets would still retain his rights.

If the Jets had been able to sign Clowney as a FA, Reddick wouldn't be our problem. I believe that was the move they wanted to make to replace Huff.

At the end of the day I think Reddick needs the Jets more than the Jets need him. Saleh will rotate his guys and try to create pressure with what they have. As long as the defense can keep teams under 21, they won't panic. I believe they are fully prepared to go into the season sans Reddick. 

[bicketybam]

5 minutes ago, Biggs said:

We don't know if the Jets are being reasonable or unreasonable.  It's very rare to have a lame duck GM negiotating long term contracts.  It's very rare to have a GM on an expiring contract.

Reddick is not getting a long term contract with the Jets. If he or his agents believed he was, they are idiots. You just have to look at how the team is constructed to see how the chances of that happen were slim to none. He was always to be a one year rental.

[nycdan]

2 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

That said, it's extremely punitive for the player to hold out. Does anyone know the monetary end result for Reddick if he sits out the year? Would it end up costing him money? We know that the Jets would still retain his rights.

If the Jets had been able to sign Clowney as a FA, Reddick wouldn't be our problem. I believe that was the move they wanted to make to replace Huff.

At the end of the day I think Reddick needs the Jets more than the Jets need him. Saleh will rotate his guys and try to create pressure with what they have. As long as the defense can keep teams under 21, they won't panic. I believe they are fully prepared to go into the season sans Reddick. 

If Reddick sits out the year, he gets paid $0 and his contract rolls into next year.  He loses an entire healthy year and ends up right back where he started, a year older with his rights still retained by the Jets and with a red flag on his character (that may mean more to some teams than others).  It really would be an awful outcome for him and could only occur if he puts his pride FAR above any sense of rational judgment.

I think at this point the only play they have in waiting is to hope the Jets start out slow and he looks like the difference between losing and winning a few games.  IMO that is a very tenuous gamble because if the Jets start out 5-1 or even 4-2, which seems very likely given their schedule, he is going to have to make his decision at that point.  Honestly, if we beat SF, we have a very reasonable shot at 5-0 (TEN, NE, DEN, MIN).  Barring an injury, Reddick's position probably crumbles to dust.  And even if there is an injury, that's not really a good look for a guy showing up to basically 'take advantage' of it.

I honestly would love to know if his agents are pushing this approach, or if he is and they are quietly trying to bring him around.  They are douche-nozzles, but even so, they have to know this isn't likely to go their way.

[ARodJetsFan]

43 minutes ago, jgb said:

Pretty much agree with this and as I’ve said Haasan may well be making a very bad choice against his own interest but it’s not a moral issue and it’s his right to make it and I’d expect an NFL GM to anticipate the possibility 

Fair enough.

[Biggs]

35 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

Reddick is not getting a long term contract with the Jets. If he or his agents believed he was, they are idiots. You just have to look at how the team is constructed to see how the chances of that happen were slim to none. He was always to be a one year rental.

Did Reddick have a no trade?  Did he have to approve the move to the Jets?  I really don't know.  If he did I agree with you.  If he didn't I disagree with you.  

Implied in your comment which I agree with JD probably didn't want to pay him 15 for this year and gave him a lower offer guaranteed for this year.  JD loves prove it cheap deals.  

[bicketybam]

2 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Did Reddick have a no trade?  Did he have to approve the move to the Jets?  I really don't know.  If he did I agree with you.  If he didn't I disagree with you.  

I'm not sure whether he had a no trade or not is relevant. The Jets reportedly offered him a two year deal. I thinks that's as far as the Jets wanted to go. Maybe if he came to camp and then went out and had a 15 sack all pro year, maybe they would entertain a 3 year deal but I think that was highly unlikely. Reddick's best shot at one last big contract was playing this year and showing he can still play at a high level. Then he hits FA and goes and gets the best deal he can. It's almost like he's afraid to play out his last year before FA because he doesn't think he can put up the numbers. He's unwilling to bet on himself.

[jgb]

26 minutes ago, nycdan said:

If Reddick sits out the year, he gets paid $0 and his contract rolls into next year.  He loses an entire healthy year and ends up right back where he started, a year older with his rights still retained by the Jets and with a red flag on his character (that may mean more to some teams than others).  It really would be an awful outcome for him and could only occur if he puts his pride FAR above any sense of rational judgment.

I think at this point the only play they have in waiting is to hope the Jets start out slow and he looks like the difference between losing and winning a few games.  IMO that is a very tenuous gamble because if the Jets start out 5-1 or even 4-2, which seems very likely given their schedule, he is going to have to make his decision at that point.  Honestly, if we beat SF, we have a very reasonable shot at 5-0 (TEN, NE, DEN, MIN).  Barring an injury, Reddick's position probably crumbles to dust.  And even if there is an injury, that's not really a good look for a guy showing up to basically 'take advantage' of it.

I honestly would love to know if his agents are pushing this approach, or if he is and they are quietly trying to bring him around.  They are douche-nozzles, but even so, they have to know this isn't likely to go their way.

I wouldn’t argue it’s only pride, though. He’s 30 and I’m sure the risk of getting seriously injured without any guaranteed money into the future is weighing in his calculus. I get the Jets don’t want to set a precedent here but their position “show up if you want to talk to us,” seems more prideful looking from the outside IMHO.

My best guess is they both compromise in some way. Maybe they convince him to at least report and attend meetings but not practice while they work out the financials. If I had to guess a bandaid one-year extension with say half of the 2nd year salary guaranteed may be enough.

[ARodJetsFan]

1 hour ago, Biggs said:

We don't know if the Jets are being reasonable or unreasonable.  It's very rare to have a lame duck GM negiotating long term contracts.  It's very rare to have a GM on an expiring contract.

There are  a lot of "unknowns & what ifs" @Biggs and none of us really know, what was said between Reddick's agents & Joe Douglas.

We can make assumptions & inferences based on what's been reported, but at the end of the days they're still assumptions.

Asking Reddick to report to the team & get into camp, so contract negotiations can start and/or resume isn't unreasonable, in my view.

You say we don't know if the Jets are being reasonable or unreasonable - I don't see how having a GM, on the last year of his deal affects the reasonableness of JD's requirement for Reddick to report to the team, one way or the other.

Whether Douglas is on the last year of his deal, or the first year of a new multi-year deal, his mandate still seems to be a reasonable one.

[ARodJetsFan]

15 minutes ago, jgb said:

My best guess is they both compromise in some way. Maybe they convince him to at least report and attend meetings but not practice while they work out the financials. 

A hold-in, which is what you're describing, should have been Reddick's first choice, that's just my opinion of course..

Why his agents would advise him any differently, I don't have a clue.

I can say with a pretty high degree of certainty, Reddick would have had far better results going this route, then what he's been getting with his current approach.

[Biggs]

19 minutes ago, ARodJetsFan said:

There are  a lot of "unknowns & what ifs" @Biggs and none of us really know, what was said between Reddick's agents & Joe Douglas.

We can make assumptions & inferences based on what's been reported, but at the end of the days they're still assumptions.

Asking Reddick to report to the team & get into camp, so contract negotiations can start and/or resume isn't unreasonable, in my view.

You say we don't know if the Jets are being reasonable or unreasonable - I don't see how having a GM, on the last year of his deal affects the reasonableness of JD's requirement for Reddick to report to the team, one way or the other.

Whether Douglas is on the last year of his deal, or the first year of a new multi-year deal, his request still seems to be a reasonable one.

Reasonable is subjective.  JD is responsible for the roster, the finances of the roster and there is a PR role in responding to the fans and press regarding these public holdouts.  PR is even used as a  tactic in contracts.  

If JD made a lowball 2 year offer before the trade that was rejected as reported, he is sleeping in the bed he made.   If he did that, it's not unreasonable for Reddick and his agent to believe JD is never going to negiotate an acceptable offer to them regardless of if or when he shows up. 

He was traded because he wanted more money and a longer term guaranteed deal.  JD knew that when he traded for him.  

[jgb]

28 minutes ago, ARodJetsFan said:

A hold-in, which is what you're describing, should have been Reddick's first choice, that's just my opinion of course..

Why his agents would advise him any differently, I don't have a clue.

I can say with a pretty high degree of certainty, Reddick would have had far better results going this route, then what he's been getting with his current approach.

Agree if i was his agent I’d start with hold-in. Two reasons: engender some degree of goodwill with your new team and also then you have something to escalate to (hold out) if you don’t like the way things are going.

[ARodJetsFan]

13 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Reasonable is subjective.  JD is responsible for the roster, the finances of the roster and there is a PR role in responding to the fans and press regarding these public holdouts.  PR is even used as a  tactic in contracts.  

If JD made a lowball 2 year offer before the trade that was rejected as reported, he is sleeping in the bed he made.   

Again, your assuming he made a low-ball offer.

Maybe Reddick's asking price is unreasonable.

There's no way to know for certain.

[Biggs]

1 minute ago, ARodJetsFan said:

Again, your assuming he made a low-ball offer.

Maybe Reddick's asking price is unreasonable.

There's no way to know for certain.

That's why a trade is good for both sides.

[ARodJetsFan]

4 minutes ago, Biggs said:

That's why a trade is good for both sides.

Could very well be, but that would be unprecedented.

Trading for a player, that player never reports to his new team and is then traded away again, in the same off-season.

I've never heard of it happening, in the NFL before.

[bicketybam]

Just now, Biggs said:

That's why a trade is good for both teams.

I'll take a second for Reddick. Doesn't even have to be next year. Douglas will have turned a 3rd into a second and it wouldn't have cost him a penny. Basically it would be on Reddick's dime 😅 That would be a 3D chess move!

[jgb]

11 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

I'll take a second for Reddick. Doesn't even have to be next year. Douglas will have turned a 3rd into a second and it wouldn't have cost him a penny. Basically it would be on Reddick's dime 😅 That would be a 3D chess move!

Would call it more a “turning lemons into lemonade” move but yeah it would be an OK result except then we didn’t do anything to replace Huff for this season.

[BigRy56]

 

[bicketybam]

2 minutes ago, BigRy56 said:

 

We should have traded for this guy.

[bicketybam]

14 minutes ago, jgb said:

Would call it more a “turning lemons into lemonade” move but yeah it would be an OK result except then we didn’t do anything to replace Huff for this season.

Trading a 3rd for a 2nd is more than an ok result 😅

[Claymation]

2 hours ago, Bobby816 said:

Can't see him playing week 1 if he doesn't report this week.

And I don't see him reporting this week.

So you don't think he is in shape?

All he has to do is pin his ears back and rush the QB.

[jgb]

2 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

Trading a 3rd for a 2nd is more than an ok result 😅

The whole point was to replace Huff’s production. I would like to do whatever is necessary to win as much as possible this year and next 

[C Mart]

Reference for Reddick issue...

Sep 13, 2023

Chris Jones 'super pleased' with new Chiefs deal after holdout

Adam Teicher, ESPN Staff Writer

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- If he had to do his holdout over, Chris Jones says he might have changed what he called his "vacation spot'' this summer to St. Joseph, Missouri, where the Chiefs staged training camp.

Otherwise, Jones appeared pleased with the results of his holdout, which ended this week when he and the Chiefs agreed to an incentive-laden, one-year contract to replace the season he had left on his remaining deal. Jones should be able to recoup the more than $3 million he lost in mandatory fines and the paycheck he didn't get for missing last week's season opener.

"I'm super pleased with how it turned out," Jones said Wednesday shortly before he joined the Chiefs at practice. "I'm back in the building. I'm excited to be back, thankful for the organization. They [were] able to boost my salary up to make up for the fines and everything. I'm super grateful for that."

Coach Andy Reid said the plan was for Jones to play Sunday against the Jacksonville Jaguars. Along with Jones' return, star tight end Travis Kelce, who missed the Chiefs' Week 1 loss with a hyperextended knee, rejoined practice as a limited participant Wednesday.

Jones said the negotiations on a new contract never got contentious, and he repeated the statement he has made several times that he would prefer to play his entire career for the Chiefs.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38393214/chris-jones-super-pleased-new-chiefs-deal-holdout

[Bobby816]

18 minutes ago, Claymation said:

So you don't think he is in shape?

All he has to do is pin his ears back and rush the QB.

I think in shape and in meaningful game day shape are 2 different things.

And since he's not here, he wont have enough time to get in meaningful football shape before week 1.

 

Quite frankly I don't think our sides are even talking. I think he isn't coming this week. Meaning even if he showed up early next week. He would have less than 2 weeks to get in game day shape for a very meaningful Week 1.

 

I think too many things have to happen for him to play week1.