New York Jets, Haason Reddick Contract Saga No Longer About Fines. Game checks are now on the line, to the tune of $852,941 for each game missed.

[More Cowbell]

2 minutes ago, LionelRichie said:

what is the significance of week 10?   how do you know that's the deadline for showing up? 

I think that is so he can have an accrued season.

[C Mart]

32 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I think that is so he can have an accrued season.

Yes. Then he can become an UFA in '25. 

If he doesn't show up this season then his existing contract rolls over to '25 and he's right back into having a $14m unguaranteed contract for '25 

[C Mart]

1 hour ago, LionelRichie said:

does anyone know the actual rules for when Reddick needs to report to get credit for the season?   I keep seeing 6 weeks but is that accurate?   if so, what is it based on?    why does a player get credit for a full season by playing less than 1/2?   

Disclosure: I am not an attorney and this language states Veterans w/fewer than 3 accrued season, which Reddick exceeds...

ARTICLE 8
VETERANS WITH FEWER THAN THREE ACCRUED SEASONS
Section 1. Accrued Seasons Calculation:
 (a) For the purposes of calculating Accrued Seasons under this Agreement, a
player shall receive one Accrued Season for each season during which he was on, or should
have been on, full pay status for a total of six or more regular season games (which shall
include any games encompassed in any injury settlement, injury grievance settlement or
injury grievance award), but which, irrespective of the player’s pay status, shall not include
games for which the player was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List, (ii) the
Reserve PUP List as a result of a nonfootball injury, or (iii) a Club’s Practice Squad. 

https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/website/PDFs/CBA/March-15-2020-NFL-NFLPA-Collective-Bargaining-Agreement-Final-Executed-Copy.pdf

[C Mart]

15 hours ago, C Mart said:

Edit

[JetsMetsDevilsPA]

Just trade the guy already.  That last thing we want is for this post to hit 41 pages.

[batman10023]

2 hours ago, Frankie Green said:

I thought of this, but if it were the case, why would that agent then trash the Jets. Doesn't add up imo

the trashing was many months ago i thought.

[batman10023]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If Reddick did drop his agent, and he was following his agent's advice all this time (and has proof of it, like texts & such saying things particularly bad like [the agent] knows people inside 1 Jets Drive so he knows and/or guarantees the Jets will cave & Douglas is just posturing); and following said advice was based upon those representations; might Reddick have/file a lawsuit against his now-former agent? 

Bunch of ifs there, admittedly, but if all that: what say our resident JN lawyers?

the agent wasn't born yesterday.   doubt he's going to have that type f stuff in texts or emails.

 

[batman10023]

2 hours ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

That would be funny but I don’t think agents drop players

its bad for business

only situation might be with AB because he was a total headcase I think Rosenhaus dumped him IIRC

what's worse for business is having a star player get taken to the cleaners by a GM.  

I would think he would tweet or something like that if he fired the agent.  

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, batman10023 said:

the agent wasn't born yesterday.   doubt he's going to have that type f stuff in texts or emails.

 

I've seen more stupidity from more experienced professionals than I care to admit. The kinds of things said - in writing - where you want to turn to them and ask if they recently had their brains vacuumed out of their heads.

I'm not saying such a paper trail likely exists in this case (or if that even happened in the first place) but people say and do dumb things, especially when boasting and egos are involved. Even more so when asked point blank by the client via a text. Hardly impossible to imagine Reddick's Bob Sugar puffing him up so his client doesn't communicate weakness to anyone.

And if such things were said and can be shown, is Reddick still responsible for himself in the end, or is it actionable enough for the agent to have to assume some liability there?

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

Feels as though Jets have already moved on in their minds.

If he shows, he shows, and it's like a bonus.

If not, que sera sera.

[RoadFan]

Eff Reddick.  I’m tired of reading about him.

T’would be nice to just enjoy watching the Jets mollywhop Denver and not see this thread if WM4 has an off day or a d-lineman has an injury scare…

[EM31]

At some point soon and maybe we are actually beyond that point it will be about scorched earth from the Jets and indirectly from the NFL when it comes to Reddick and his residual market value.  Destroy whatever is left of his career.  Take him to court if the opportunity arises, for example if he magically has an injury two minutes after showing up.  I would think that this approach extends to the agent/agency as well.  Just stop bidding on players represented by that agent.  Pretty soon the message will get across that the Agent participated in putting Reddick into the poor house and if you use the same agency then you are less likely to get paid than if you use someone else.

The NFL writ large does not want this to spread and in fact they do not want this to happen ever again.  Their own actions and nobody else's will determine if this ends up as a winning strategy for the player.  Plenty of owners and GMs would like to have taken a shot with Colin Kaepernick, maybe even the Jets but none of them did because of a collective decision by the NFL which made him radioactive.

[batman10023]

18 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I've seen more stupidity from more experienced professionals than I care to admit. The kinds of things said - in writing - where you want to turn to them and ask if they recently had their brains vacuumed out of their heads.

I'm not saying such a paper trail likely exists in this case (or if that even happened in the first place) but people say and do dumb things, especially when boasting and egos are involved. Even more so when asked point blank by the client via a text. Hardly impossible to imagine Reddick's Bob Sugar puffing him up so his client doesn't communicate weakness to anyone.

And if such things were said and can be shown, is Reddick still responsible for himself in the end, or is it actionable enough for the agent to have to assume some liability there?

i think it would have to be pretty bad for him to be able to come after the agent.  

gross negligence or something like that - otherwise you would hear a lot more about this type of stuff

 

[Matt39]

18 hours ago, EM31 said:

At some point soon and maybe we are actually beyond that point it will be about scorched earth from the Jets and indirectly from the NFL when it comes to Reddick and his residual market value.  Destroy whatever is left of his career.  Take him to court if the opportunity arises, for example if he magically has an injury two minutes after showing up.  I would think that this approach extends to the agent/agency as well.  Just stop bidding on players represented by that agent.  Pretty soon the message will get across that the Agent participated in putting Reddick into the poor house and if you use the same agency then you are less likely to get paid than if you use someone else.

The NFL writ large does not want this to spread and in fact they do not want this to happen ever again.  Their own actions and nobody else's will determine if this ends up as a winning strategy for the player.  Plenty of owners and GMs would like to have taken a shot with Colin Kaepernick, maybe even the Jets but none of them did because of a collective decision by the NFL which made him radioactive.

Redick can rush the passer so he’ll always have a team willing to sign him. Antonio Brown same thing. Pac man kept getting signed. Revis uncle sat out a year and still was signed. Haynesworth. I don’t think the nfl cares that much about anything besides ability to play. 

[#27TheDominator]

Scorched earth?  If it's the Jets vs. CAA?  I am leaning towards CAA.  The NFL doesn't really want that battle.  Getting there will probably mean that the contracts are guaranteed.

Reddick will have somebody waiting to sign him, but not for a ton of money.  Ngakoue just signed a practice squad deal.  I don't think he will be stuck on his couch if he wants to play, but there also aren't teams lining up to pay him a ton of money.

[Waka Flocka Flacco]

21 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If Reddick did drop his agent, and he was following his agent's advice all this time (and has proof of it, like texts & such saying things particularly bad like [the agent] knows people inside 1 Jets Drive so he knows and/or guarantees the Jets will cave & Douglas is just posturing); and following said advice was based upon those representations; might Reddick have/file a lawsuit against his now-former agent? 

Bunch of ifs there, admittedly, but if all that: what say our resident JN lawyers?

Close to unthinkable. These representation agreements are all going to contain conspicuous and ironclad disclaimers of guarantees. Future predictions like the Jets will cave are not statements of fact so there's no cause for misrepresentation even if he's completely making up the part about knowing people. Agency law generally limits principals' remedies on the theory of hey you hired the guy. You don't really see anybody getting popped for anything besides outright stealing.

[EM31]

26 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Redick can rush the passer so he’ll always have a team willing to sign him. Antonio Brown same thing. Pac man kept getting signed. Revis uncle sat out a year and still was signed. Haynesworth. I don’t think the nfl cares that much about anything besides ability to play. 

And plenty of people thought that Colin Kaepernick could still play QB in this league yet he never got another sniff.  It is not bad personal behavior a la Albert Hanesworth or even Michael Vick that is the concern here.  If it was I would agree that the NFL would have no compelling interest.

[Plen T]

32 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Redick can rush the passer so he’ll always have a team willing to sign him. Antonio Brown same thing. Pac man kept getting signed. Revis uncle sat out a year and still was signed. Haynesworth. I don’t think the nfl cares that much about anything besides ability to play. 

They got signed for peanuts 

Reddick is looking for a massive contract 

[Matt39]

4 minutes ago, EM31 said:

And plenty of people thought that Colin Kaepernick could still play QB in this league yet he never got another sniff.  It is not bad personal behavior a la Albert Hanesworth or even Michael Vick that is the concern here.  If it was I would agree that the NFL would have no compelling interest.

Kapernick was benched for Blaine Gabbert and was offered contracts from Baltimore and Denver.

[Trotter]

19 hours ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

Feels as though Jets have already moved on in their minds.

If he shows, he shows, and it's like a bonus.

If not, que sera sera.

Yup and mainly because if the depth thus roster has

If this was the roster of 3 years ago, the jets basically give him whatever he wants

different times now for the better - except we still have  the whole jd is horrible take

[slimjasi]

39 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Redick can rush the passer so he’ll always have a team willing to sign him. Antonio Brown same thing. Pac man kept getting signed. Revis uncle sat out a year and still was signed. Haynesworth. I don’t think the nfl cares that much about anything besides ability to play. 

The issue is that he wants top dollar. 

Taking a year off at age 30 is a risky strategy for him, to say the least. 

I'm sure he'll get contract offers, but I'm not so certain they will be anywhere near what he is currently holding out for. 

[AFJF]

20 hours ago, JetsMetsDevilsPA said:

Just trade the guy already.  That last thing we want is for this post to hit 41 pages.

How do you trade a player that nobody else wants?

Unless a team that loses an edge rusher is desperate or Reddick drops his price, that's the situation as of now.

[EM31]

20 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

Scorched earth?  If it's the Jets vs. CAA?  I am leaning towards CAA.  The NFL doesn't really want that battle.  Getting there will probably mean that the contracts are guaranteed.

Reddick will have somebody waiting to sign him, but not for a ton of money.  Ngakoue just signed a practice squad deal.  I don't think he will be stuck on his couch if he wants to play, but there also aren't teams lining up to pay him a ton of money.

Honestly I don't really even think it would be about Reddick any more.  The concern here is allowing a precedent to be set where this strategy has any semblance of success.  The precedent of a player simply walking away in the middle of a contract because the market has moved after he signed it.  From the point of view of the NFL it has to be crystal clear that this strategy turns out to be a disaster for the player and the agent both or there will be dozens or even hundreds of players lined up tomorrow to do the same thing.  Why would they not?

I think the NFL vs. CAA is precisely what the NFL will feel is needed because the current strategy has the potential to change the way business is conducted for everyone.  All of the owners and GMs have a vested interest in the outcome of this case.

Fully guaranteed contracts are an objective that gets negotiated away by the players every time that the CBA is revised because the players want other things more.  Maybe next time it will be different but if history is a guide the players always seem to find one or more other things that are more important to them.

[EM31]

19 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Kapernick was benched for Blaine Gabbert and was offered contracts from Baltimore and Denver.

So you feel Kaepernick was not blackballed by the league?

[Matt39]

2 minutes ago, EM31 said:

So you feel Kaepernick was not blackballed by the league?

Why are we talking about Kapernick. He was offered contracts and turned them down and took the Nike money. Irrelevant to Reddick.

[EM31]

7 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Why are we talking about Kapernick. He was offered contracts and turned them down and took the Nike money. Irrelevant to Reddick.

I am not sure how I can break it down for you any more simply than I have already done.

[BreeceHallofFame]

17 minutes ago, EM31 said:

So you feel Kaepernick was not blackballed by the league?

No his mediocre play did not justify the media circus around him. Did Tebow get black balled?

[#27TheDominator]

25 minutes ago, EM31 said:

Honestly I don't really even think it would be about Reddick any more.  The concern here is allowing a precedent to be set where this strategy has any semblance of success.  The precedent of a player simply walking away in the middle of a contract because the market has moved after he signed it.  From the point of view of the NFL it has to be crystal clear that this strategy turns out to be a disaster for the player and the agent both or there will be dozens or even hundreds of players lined up tomorrow to do the same thing.  Why would they not?

I think the NFL vs. CAA is precisely what the NFL will feel is needed because the current strategy has the potential to change the way business is conducted for everyone.  All of the owners and GMs have a vested interest in the outcome of this case.

Fully guaranteed contracts are an objective that gets negotiated away by the players every time that the CBA is revised because the players want other things more.  Maybe next time it will be different but if history is a guide the players always seem to find one or more other things that are more important to them.

I don't think this makes any sense. 

There are rules about holding out.  They are in the CBA.  The owners and NFLPA both agreed to it.  What kind of legal action do you think is going to be successful beyond these extremely high non-discretionary fines?

Guaranteed contracts are not part of the CBA, but if you push this sh*t too far, you can bet that when the player has the leverage they will be asking for and getting them. It's already started.

Kind of interesting that you seem so offended that a player wouldn't play when they have outpaced their contract, but the owners simple cut the player when they aren't playing up to the contract.  All the sh*t that you are worried about has already been considered and handled and going "scorched earth" is not something that the owners - who LOVE the status quo - are going to be looking for.

Reddick is not going to get some great windfall from this.  Other players are not likely to look at this and follow the "Reddick model."  What he will probably get is out of the last year of a deal he didn't like and not have to play for the two teams that tried to force him to.   

[EM31]

35 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

I don't think this makes any sense. 

There are rules about holding out.  They are in the CBA.  The owners and NFLPA both agreed to it.  What kind of legal action do you think is going to be successful beyond these extremely high non-discretionary fines?

Guaranteed contracts are not part of the CBA, but if you push this sh*t too far, you can bet that when the player has the leverage they will be asking for and getting them. It's already started.

Kind of interesting that you seem so offended that a player wouldn't play when they have outpaced their contract, but the owners simple cut the player when they aren't playing up to the contract.  All the sh*t that you are worried about has already been considered and handled and going "scorched earth" is not something that the owners - who LOVE the status quo - are going to be looking for.

Reddick is not going to get some great windfall from this.  Other players are not likely to look at this and follow the "Reddick model."  What he will probably get is out of the last year of a deal he didn't like and not have to play for the two teams that tried to force him to.   

The legal action was specifically mentioned in relation to the possibility of Reddick showing up and then magically "acquiring" an injury right way as several people have mentioned as being a possibility.  In that case the Jets could challenge whether or not this is a legitimate injury and their obligation to pay him salary for those weeks.

Every CBA negotiation starts with the players wanting a list of things and the owners wanting as list of things.  Guaranteed contracts are always on the players list.  Always. Every time they have chosen to negotiate that objective away in favor of other things that they have deemed to be more important.  In other news the sun came up this morning.

The point I am making here and yes I deliberately chose somewhat inflammatory language to do so but the point is that from an NFL perspective it has to be made crystal clear to the world that this was a losing approach for the player.  Fines and a LOWER than hoped for next contract are the ONLY way to do that.  CAA are not blameless in this and there are plenty of ways that the NFL writ large can make it clear that the Agent/Agency which went down this path are going to pay a price.

The NFL is not just a club for billionaires.  Yes it is that but it is also a club that feeds players, advertisers, media outlets and yes agents.  Everyone eats very well but in order to do so they have collectively agreed to a set of rules which spell out behaviors and expected rewards for participation.  This holdout is is not just Dak wanting to break the record for a QB contract, it is attempting to change one of the foundational rules which directly or indirectly feed everyone.  Nobody cares about Reddick at this point.  It is all about making sure there isn't another Reddick.

[#27TheDominator]

32 minutes ago, EM31 said:

The legal action was specifically mentioned in relation to the possibility of Reddick showing up and then magically "acquiring" an injury right way as several people have mentioned as being a possibility.  In that case the Jets could challenge whether or not this is a legitimate injury and their obligation to pay him salary for those weeks.

Every CBA negotiation starts with the players wanting a list of things and the owners wanting as list of things.  Guaranteed contracts are always on the players list.  Always. Every time they have chosen to negotiate that objective away in favor of other things that they have deemed to be more important.  In other news the sun came up this morning.

The point I am making here and yes I deliberately chose somewhat inflammatory language to do so but the point is that from an NFL perspective it has to be made crystal clear to the world that this was a losing approach for the player.  Fines and a LOWER than hoped for next contract are the ONLY way to do that.  CAA are not blameless in this and there are plenty of ways that the NFL writ large can make it clear that the Agent/Agency which went down this path are going to pay a price.

The NFL is not just a club for billionaires.  Yes it is that but it is also a club that feeds players, advertisers, media outlets and yes agents.  Everyone eats very well but in order to do so they have collectively agreed to a set of rules which spell out behaviors and expected rewards for participation.  This holdout is is not just Dak wanting to break the record for a QB contract, it is attempting to change one of the foundational rules which directly or indirectly feed everyone.  Nobody cares about Reddick at this point.  It is all about making sure there isn't another Reddick.

Looked at that way it seems more reasonable.  I look at it like this.  The owners are winning.  They always have been.  It is not in their best interests to go looking for a fight.  CAA is pretty ******* big.  Picking a fight with them is a huge mistake.  Both from an individual team basis (they will steer players away) and from a league basis.  Unlike the players, CAA is not going anywhere.  They will have as long a career span as the owners.  Unlike Reddick, they will not turn into a pumpkin at 35 years old and be unable to find work.   

[BreeceHallofFame]

Just now, #27TheDominator said:

Looked at that way it seems more reasonable.  I look at it like this.  The owners are winning.  They always have been.  It is not in their best interests to go looking for a fight.  CAA is pretty ******* big.  Picking a fight with them is a huge mistake.  Both from an individual team basis (they will steer players away) and from a league basis.  Unlike the players, CAA is not going anywhere.  They will have as long a career span as the owners.  Unlike Reddick, they will not turn into a pumpkin at 35 years old and be unable to find work.   

What’s your point in the end? 

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, BreeceHallofFame said:

What’s your point in the end? 

In the end of what?  

I don't understand the point of all this faux rage at Reddick.  The Eagles moved him, at a steep discount, because he was not happy with his deal.  We can't act surprised now that he is not happy with his deal.  We took a risk and so far it hasn't paid off.  Every move that we make from here should be to maximize what we can get from that 2026 3rd.  IMO we do not benefit from going to war with Reddick and his people and that will only make us look like douchebags to the upcoming FA class.  OTOH, we also do not benefit from caving and giving Reddick a new deal when he has not done anything in accordance with our stated policy.  My point is continue wait it out.  Time is more on the team's side than his.

[BreeceHallofFame]

12 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

In the end of what?  

I don't understand the point of all this faux rage at Reddick.  The Eagles moved him, at a steep discount, because he was not happy with his deal.  We can't act surprised now that he is not happy with his deal.  We took a risk and so far it hasn't paid off.  Every move that we make from here should be to maximize what we can get from that 2026 3rd.  IMO we do not benefit from going to war with Reddick and his people and that will only make us look like douchebags to the upcoming FA class.  OTOH, we also do not benefit from caving and giving Reddick a new deal when he has not done anything in accordance with our stated policy.  My point is continue wait it out.  Time is more on the team's side than his.

No one will trade for Reddick because he doesn’t want to play unless he is overpaid 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, Waka Flocka Flacco said:

Close to unthinkable. These representation agreements are all going to contain conspicuous and ironclad disclaimers of guarantees. Future predictions like the Jets will cave are not statements of fact so there's no cause for misrepresentation even if he's completely making up the part about knowing people. Agency law generally limits principals' remedies on the theory of hey you hired the guy. You don't really see anybody getting popped for anything besides outright stealing.

Probably this is the case, but I think in certain areas if you follow your paid advocate's advice and it turns out to be poor advice, it's actionable. I think Reddick would have to show that no other agent could/would reasonably give the same advice to a client and not have it end badly like this, though, which he won't be able to prove (others have held out and it paid off, which is what he hoped would happen in his Jets holdout). 

But if there was something egregious, like telling Reddick there's no additional risk to holding out vs. holding in (maybe a bad example, since this hardly hidden knowledge; I mean, we all knew it); and had he communicated - or failed to communicate - this incorrectly to his client, I'd think that'd be more actionable. He'd probably have to show why he's to be absolved as an ignoramus if everyone else knew this stuff, though.

[#27TheDominator]

31 minutes ago, BreeceHallofFame said:

No one will trade for Reddick because he doesn’t want to play unless he is overpaid 

What is this in response to?  I do not understand why you seem to think you are educating me when I have been pointing out that they aren't going to be able to trade Reddick since the beginning.  It isn't that he insists on being overpaid, but he sure doesn't want to play for $14M per.