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.

[jgb]

6 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

In fairy tale land he doesn't play the Jets retain his rights and franchise tag him. Can you imagine his face.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

That would be freaking hilarious! But like you said fairy tale because then it makes the Jets the bad guys and FAs would be watching.

[slats]

Just now, jgb said:

Instead of playing 17 games for 14M, he will be playing 6 for free.

The whole thing is stupid, lol. Dude could showcase himself on this defense and have teams lining up for him next year, instead he’s decided to become toxic. 

[Matt39]

9 minutes ago, Green Ghost said:

One other thing about this discussion I don’t understand is why so many here continue to say Reddick is being “fined” over $800 grand every week?
He’s not being fined that amount, he’s simply not getting paid the weekly salary he would’ve been entitled to had he reported and agreed to work/play for the Jets.

Why would he be liable to pay back weekly paychecks to a company he never worked for?

 

I’d imagine because he’s under contract and his Eagles contract didn’t include a no trade that they bypassed.

[Alka]

14 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

And with the amount of games he would have to play to accrue a season, his compensation would just about just cover the fines. He's going to end up playing 6 games for peanuts.

If he decides to sit out the year, I was told his salary cap allocation from this year would roll over to next year. So if I am understanding this correctly, the Jets would not have to set aside part of the basic cap for his holdout if he holds out again. It would be covered by the roll over from this year. I would just keep the guy under contract until he reports whether that's this year or next year. No way would I trade him for anything less than what we paid.

 

How about if the Jets were offered a 4th round draft pick in 2025, and another 5th round draft pick in 2026?

Would that even out the loss of our 3rd round draft pick in 2026?

[jgb]

Just now, slats said:

The whole thing is stupid, lol. Dude could showcase himself on this defense and have teams lining up for him next year, instead he’s decided to become toxic. 

Once he chose hold out instead of hold in you knew this transcended rationality. We are in emotion land now.

[Mr. Rogers]

3 minutes ago, jgb said:

Instead of playing 17 games for 14M, he will be playing 6 for free. Saleh should put him in as gunner on punts.

If this wasn't a surefire way to get personal fouls every punt, I'd love that. 

It's going to be very interesting if Reddick does report with no actual intention to try/play. Do the Jets end up in arbitration with the NFLPA and Reddick if Reddick simply feigns injury or doesn't try on the field while he gets his 6 weeks?

I'm not sure the Jets would have any recourse at that point. Ultimately keeping players motivated is on the team with their contract. At least he'd help our comp pick equation the next year.

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Rogers said:

If this wasn't a surefire way to get personal fouls every punt, I'd love that. 

It's going to be very interesting if Reddick does report with no actual intention to try/play. Do the Jets end up in arbitration with the NFLPA and Reddick if Reddick simply feigns injury or doesn't try on the field while he gets his 6 weeks?

Man, that would be doubling down on dumb for him. Not only hold out where most see him as in the wrong but also dog it for 6 games when he finally reports?

[Trotter]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Rogers said:

If this wasn't a surefire way to get personal fouls every punt, I'd love that. 

It's going to be very interesting if Reddick does report with no actual intention to try/play. Do the Jets end up in arbitration with the NFLPA and Reddick if Reddick simply feigns injury or doesn't try on the field while he gets his 6 weeks?

I'm not sure the Jets would have any recourse at that point. Ultimately keeping players motivated is on the team with their contract. At least he'd help our comp pick equation the next year.

if this goes to week 10 this has to be his play. The Jets are not giving him a contract probably based on his actions already but certainly if he holds out till week 10.

His only hope if free agency and I just don't see him taking the chance on injury over the last 7 games.

I see the Jalen Ramsey bad back injury in his future. 

[Green Ghost]

7 minutes ago, slats said:

Jets aren’t releasing him. If he really opts not to report for the entire season, they’ll suck whatever value they can out of him. This is the same GM that, rather than release Zach Wilson, he held out until someone was willing to pay half of his remaining $5M salary. This is not a guy who just gives assets away. 

Yeah, I tend to agree they won’t release him, but I think if it went into next year they’d take what they could get in a trade, if for no other reason than to simply wash their hands of him.

 

[slats]

3 minutes ago, jgb said:

Once he chose hold out instead of hold in you knew this transcended rationality. We are in emotion land now.

Which was also colossally stupid. As a player who never played for the team, his absence was not missed. By not showing up, he became less of a distraction, giving him less leverage. Players “hold in” at the team’s discretion, though, usually with the idea that negotiations are moving forward but, if they hit the wall, the team can still put him on the DNR list, keep him off the 53, not pay him, and still retain his rights. That’s where the 49ers and Aiyuk found themselves right before Aiyuk caved and accepted the contract that had been on the table for over a month rather than start losing game checks. 
 
Reddick could’ve saved himself a lot in fines, though. 

[Green Ghost]

8 minutes ago, jgb said:

Once he chose hold out instead of hold in you knew this transcended rationality. We are in emotion land now.

Can a player continue to “hold in” once the season begins?
 

[jgb]

27 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

Other gms loveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Joe Douglas, he keeps taking their problems over for them and paying them draft picks and resources to do so.

Go Joe Go!

Tally ho!

No worries some of the guys here think even if Reddick never reports he will have to mail the team a check for $6M after the season. Joe so crafty!

[jgb]

1 minute ago, Green Ghost said:

Can a player continue to “hold in” once the season begins?
 

I dunno. @slats?

[slats]

Just now, jgb said:

I dunno. @slats?

Again, hold in’s are at the team’s discretion. I can’t imagine a team paying a player who refuses to play. Just seems like another pointless hypothetical to me. 

[Green Ghost]

3 minutes ago, jgb said:

I dunno. @slats?

If I read @slats reply to you correctly in a quote right after I asked my question, a player can only hold in at the teams discretion?

EDIT (answered while I was typing this)

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, slats said:

Which was also colossally stupid. As a player who never played for the team, his absence was not missed. By not showing up, he became less of a distraction, giving him less leverage. Players “hold in” at the team’s discretion, though, usually with the idea that negotiations are moving forward but, if they hit the wall, the team can still put him on the DNR list, keep him off the 53, not pay him, and still retain his rights. That’s where the 49ers and Aiyuk found themselves right before Aiyuk caved and accepted the contract that had been on the table for over a month rather than start losing game checks. 
 
Reddick could’ve saved himself a lot in fines, though. 

Joe probably would’ve thrown him a “make nice” mill/mill-and-a-half before the season started if he held in and hit the gym hard and stayed in great shape.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

Two different types of fines. Illegal hits governed by Article 46. Hold-outs by Article 42. The NFL is the party to 46, the team to 42. Accordingly, they both have totally different payment conditions.

I can only report what the CBA itself says. It seems you can indeed escape a team fine by finding a way off that team before you collect another paycheck. But escaping  league fine would require retirement.

Again, the CBA lays out plainly that Article 42 fines are owned by the team and don’t transfer with the contract, but the team can still enforce deductions from owed moneys “by the Club” (not “any Club”). My guess is this is so a player is never put into a position to pay more money in fines than he earned by the club. Which would violate employment laws in most if not all states.

Perhaps they could pursue an arbitration case to garnish wages from the players next team, but that mechanism is not specifically enumerated in the CBA. 

Yeah I wouldn't think the fine could exceed what will be earned - which is why I also suggested he could get out of them by retiring; fines being more like a lien against future earnings (hence the formula for the maximum amounts being fined must be at a minimum equalled or exceeded if the player fulfills the minimum number of games to accrue that season) - but even still a fine has to keep coming off the earnings until it's paid (if the player is still playing & getting paid, of course). If he is retired - officially or hasn't shown up to anything since his last payment - then I'd guess in some sense he's not "in" the league anymore and then wouldn't be subject to its CBA (or however the legal nuance of that would work).

Regardless, yes it has to come off future earnings Reddick owed $5MM even (just for ease of discussion, presume it's all mandatory). The Jets don't keep it like docking his pay, but rather they act as a pass-through, paying the league on Reddick's behalf (so the league doesn't have to go chasing the player to collect the fines after the team pays him in full).

I'd never say never - for example, as I just mentioned, I'm surprised that hold-ins are even a thing that immunes the player from preseason fines - but I'd think the spirit of it is the fine is that the fines' terms (and having them stick) are mandated by the league not the team, so it would follow the player. I did see that "the club" wording but does it say collected by the club or must be collected by the club as in the next club that pays him (so long as the player is in the league). So the language might be ambiguous enough to permit otherwise, even if unintentionally, but I'll leave that to you to better interpret, as the only bar I've ever passed serves booze.

Even if it was a permissible loophole, really it seems this would only happen following a trade, as he'd still be under contract with the Jets until he shows up for 6+ games.

Where it'd get really messy (or interesting, depending on one's POV) is if he holds out the whole 2024 season, and then continues to hold out again next year just like this one with the team not releasing or trading him. I'm guessing he'd then accrue another offseason of identical fines in 2025 which would effectively make him retired. I think it's unlikely to get that far, but then it was unlikely to get this far in the first place, lol.

[BCJet]

6 minutes ago, slats said:

Which was also colossally stupid. As a player who never played for the team, his absence was not missed. By not showing up, he became less of a distraction, giving him less leverage. Players “hold in” at the team’s discretion, though, usually with the idea that negotiations are moving forward but, if they hit the wall, the team can still put him on the DNR list, keep him off the 53, not pay him, and still retain his rights. That’s where the 49ers and Aiyuk found themselves right before Aiyuk caved and accepted the contract that had been on the table for over a month rather than start losing game checks. 
 
Reddick could’ve saved himself a lot in fines, though. 

 

Its likely going to go down as the most ill-advised hold out in the history of the league.  When Leveon did this, he was only 26 whereas Reddick is already 30.  How you can possibly look at the landscape of the league and think that by sitting out DURING the season you will improve your situation enough to not only get another long term, high priced contract at 31 but ALSO make up the 8+ million you are giving up????  The math isnt math-ing here and its unfortunately hurting the Jets along with himself.

[Green Ghost]

3 minutes ago, jgb said:

Joe probably would’ve thrown him a “make nice” mill/mill-and-a-half before the season started if he held in and hit the gym hard and stayed in great shape.

I don’t think a make nice million was ever going to solve this. I’m fairly certain you don’t believe it would have either.

 

[jgb]

40 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yeah I wouldn't think the fine could exceed what will be earned - which is why I also suggested he could get out of them by retiring; fines being more like a lien against future earnings (hence the formula for the maximum amounts being fined must be at a minimum equalled or exceeded if the player fulfills the minimum number of games to accrue that season) - but even still a fine has to keep coming off the earnings until it's paid (if the player is still playing & getting paid, of course). If he is retired - officially or hasn't shown up to anything since his last payment - then I'd guess in some sense he's not "in" the league anymore and then wouldn't be subject to its CBA (or however the legal nuance of that would work).

Regardless, yes it has to come off future earnings Reddick owed $5MM even (just for ease of discussion, presume it's all mandatory). The Jets don't keep it like docking his pay, but rather they act as a pass-through, paying the league on Reddick's behalf (so the league doesn't have to go chasing the player to collect the fines after the team pays him in full).

I'd never say never - for example, as I just mentioned, I'm surprised that hold-ins are even a thing that immunes the player from preseason fines - but I'd think the spirit of it is the fine is that the fines' terms (and having them stick) are mandated by the league not the team, so it would follow the player. I did see that "the club" wording but does it say collected by the club or must be collected by the club as in the next club that pays him (so long as the player is in the league). So the language might be ambiguous enough to permit otherwise, even if unintentionally, but I'll leave that to you to better interpret, as the only bar I've ever passed serves booze.

Even if it was a permissible loophole, really it seems this would only happen following a trade, as he'd still be under contract with the Jets until he shows up for 6+ games.

Where it'd get really messy (or interesting, depending on one's POV) is if he holds out the whole 2024 season, and then continues to hold out again next year just like this one with the team not releasing or trading him. I'm guessing he'd then accrue another offseason of identical fines in 2025 which would effectively make him retired. I think it's unlikely to get that far, but then it was unlikely to get this far in the first place, lol.

Yeah it’s ambiguous enough that I had to consider the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution to clarify — you can’t charge someone to work/refuse to work for you. The only way, IMHO, the NFL could take the position that future wages from another team can be taken to pay off Article 42 fines Reddick incurs on the Jets, would be to abandon the extraordinarily profitable legal fiction that the 32 NFL teams are bona fide competitors and admit they are all part of a larger organism/single employer. This would thus also waive its anti-trust exemption.
 

They’re not giving up the Golden Goose because of Hasaan Reddick, or for Woody’s bottom line, for that matter.

[jgb]

4 minutes ago, Green Ghost said:

I don’t think a make nice million was ever going to solve this. I’m fairly certain you don’t believe it would have either.

 

You are right. Probably would’ve taken tacking on another year mostly/fully guaranteed. But boy in hindsight Reddick has to be thinking how $15.5M for 17 games sure beats $0 for 6.

[Trotter]

7 minutes ago, Green Ghost said:

I don’t think a make nice million was ever going to solve this. I’m fairly certain you don’t believe it would have either.

 

We will never know but I would love to see or hear a transcript of the conversation with JD, Reddick and his agent when the trade was being discussed. JD is not a stupid guy and had to leave those conversations feeling pretty confident they were working this out.

What the hell changed to me is fascinating. Possible all the negotiation was done with Reddick';s agent and when it got back to Hassan - he said no way? Probably unlikely.

Hassan agrees, comes to NY for a day and then says F it - I aint doing this?

Just so bizarre.

[C Mart]

15 minutes ago, Mr. Rogers said:

If this wasn't a surefire way to get personal fouls every punt, I'd love that. 

It's going to be very interesting if Reddick does report with no actual intention to try/play. Do the Jets end up in arbitration with the NFLPA and Reddick if Reddick simply feigns injury or doesn't try on the field while he gets his 6 weeks?

I'm not sure the Jets would have any recourse at that point. Ultimately keeping players motivated is on the team with their contract. At least he'd help our comp pick equation the next year.

I think the Jets can then suspend him for "Conduct detrimental to Club"...Not an expert of stipulations..NFLPA would probably initially challenge.. 

[Green Ghost]

13 minutes ago, jgb said:

You are right. Probably would’ve taken tacking on another year mostly/fully guaranteed. But boy in hindsight Reddick has to be thinking how $15.5M for 17 games sure beats $0 for 6.

For sure. I can’t pretend to understand his reasoning, other than maybe a mixture of pride and sense of self worth? Financially it makes no sense.

The one thing I’ll give him credit for  is that even though this all seems very foolish, he at least hasn’t been out and about trashing the team or JD publicly. In fact, both sides have handled this very well in terms of not airing any dirty laundry.

[jgb]

Just now, Green Ghost said:

For sure. I can’t pretend to understand his reasoning, other than a mixture of pride and sense of self worth. Financially it makes no sense.

The one thing I’ll give him credit for though is even though this all seems very foolish, he at least hasn’t been out and about trashing the team or JD publicly. In fact, both sides have handled this very well in terms of not airing any dirty laundry.

Has to be emotionally-rooted after his announcement press conference. Seems he feels Jets lied to him in some way.

[bicketybam]

11 minutes ago, jgb said:

Has to be emotionally-rooted after his announcement press conference. Seems he feels Jets lied to him in some way.

My guess is the Jets feel like he or his agents lied to them. At this point it doesn't really matter. He either shows up for 6 games and gets paid next to squat or he loses a year and is still handcuffed to the Jets. Those are two terrible options for him.

[jgb]

7 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

My guess is the Jets feel like he or his agents lied to them. At this point it doesn't really matter. He either shows up for 6 games and gets paid next to squat or he loses a year and is still handcuffed to the Jets. Those are two terrible options for him.

I can see Jets threatening up until training camp to hold his rights next off season but I doubt they actually would take it much beyond that. Bad juju to be party to an athlete giving up 20% of his earning years — even if it’s from self-destructive behavior. I’d think they trade him for whatever they can get at that point.

[bicketybam]

2 minutes ago, jgb said:

I can see Jets threatening to hold his rights up until training camp next off season but I doubt they actually would take it much beyond that. Bad juju to be party to an athlete giving up 20% of his earning years — even if it’s from self-destructive behavior. I’d think they trade him for whatever they can get at that point.

Its bad juju to say you would do something and then reneg, costing the Jets a future draft pick and the unused cap space this year. The only instance where JD should be ok trading him is if they get back what they traded for him. To me that's fair and I wouldn't fault the Jets for that. 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

Thanks! Now I see it. Yeah sure he can always agree to pay. But the question remains what if he is on a new team, is never paid a cent by the Jets, and refuses to pay? I don’t see an automatic mechanism for the NFL to garnish wages from his new team. It could be in there somewhere (the thing is nearly 500 pages) but it seems the Jets would need to get a wage garnishment order from either a court or, if allowed under the CBA which I don’t know, via the non-binding arbitration process established by the league.

But the fact is an employer cannot get from a employee more than it pays him (except for criminal acts like theft). It’s unconstitutional. 

Because unlike most employer/employee relationships there's a CBA in place, and since revenue collectively shared by all 32 teams' incomes from being in the league (TV deals, ticket sales, merchandise, etc.), and that this collective/shared revenue is what funds the salary cap-limited payments to players, and since the league can levy fines independent of the team (e.g. something as innocuous as taunting) in some sense is Reddick also an employee of the NFL and not merely the NYJ?

His contract is just with the Jets, but then again Jets don't operate as purely independent employer in many ways, and it's the league not the team that's mandating this fine. Seems more that the league/CBA is mandating that the Jets enforce this fine (and is permitting that the team enforce the non-mandated fines as well). 

Being a CBA situation may make that employer/employee relationship somewhat different than an independent random person (or company) hiring someone. I really know nothing about what's in the contract, though. Admittedly, it'd definitely be interesting if he could get out of it by getting paid only by another team rather than the Jets. I doubt that was the intent, but those cba bylaws (like any laws) may have enough wiggle room that they're subject to interpretation. 

[bicketybam]

6 minutes ago, jgb said:

I can see Jets threatening up until training camp to hold his rights next off season but I doubt they actually would take it much beyond that. Bad juju to be party to an athlete giving up 20% of his earning years — even if it’s from self-destructive behavior. I’d think they trade him for whatever they can get at that point.

On a side note, did you get a chance to look at Appendix A, NFL Player Contract? Section 7 mentions payment of both types of fines being made in cash on demand OR by means of deduction. 

[Matt39]

1 hour ago, Mr. Rogers said:

If this wasn't a surefire way to get personal fouls every punt, I'd love that. 

It's going to be very interesting if Reddick does report with no actual intention to try/play. Do the Jets end up in arbitration with the NFLPA and Reddick if Reddick simply feigns injury or doesn't try on the field while he gets his 6 weeks?

I'm not sure the Jets would have any recourse at that point. Ultimately keeping players motivated is on the team with their contract. At least he'd help our comp pick equation the next year.

Probably up to the league if they want to step in or not. Goodell could put him on the exempt list indefinitely, but I’m sure they don’t want the media blowback that would cause (who are extremely pro player). This seems to be a one off so I’m sure they’ll let the Jets and Redick handle it unless they see this becoming a problem league wide.

[The Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, Trotter said:

if this goes to week 10 this has to be his play. The Jets are not giving him a contract probably based on his actions already but certainly if he holds out till week 10.

His only hope if free agency and I just don't see him taking the chance on injury over the last 7 games.

I see the Jalen Ramsey bad back injury in his future. 

But then the Trent Williams Scenario plays out and they NFI him... And he loses the accrewed season. 

[bicketybam]

At this point the fine money is really not that important. He will either pay it when he reports and plays the rest of the season for next to nothing, or he will forgo 14.5 million and still be contractually bound to the Jets. I'm not on some crusade to get Woody some money back (but the charitable part would be nice.) I just want to see this guy get hammered for his actions. Either of the two scenarios is enough hammering for me. He's ****ed himself pretty hard.

[jgb]

5 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

On a side note, did you get a chance to look at Appendix A, NFL Player Contract? Section 7 mentions payment of both types of fines being made in cash on demand OR by means of deduction. 

I didn’t but point me to it and I’ll take a look. 

[bicketybam]

4 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

Probably up to the league if they want to step in or not. Goodell could put him on the exempt list indefinitely, but I’m sure they don’t want the media blowback that would cause (who are extremely pro player). This seems to be a one off so I’m sure they’ll let the Jets and Redick handle it unless they see this becoming a problem league wide.

He would be violating section 2 of his contract to the team which states that he agrees to  "give his best efforts and loyalty to the Club."

And as I think someone pointed out, it would be career suicide if he went out there and half-assed it. If that what he intenda to do he should just retire.