Reddick Killed Deal that Joe Douglas and Reps had in Place

[EM31]

11 minutes ago, Biggs said:

You do realize that NFL football is a monopoly.  Players are drafted and slotted.  The owners share revenue and don't pay a dime more than their share.  The players only get their salary and bonus.  The owners get a guaranteed revenue and appreciation of their assett.

I understand it is a monopoly.  The Owners get by far the largest slice when you calculate the increase in franchise value that has taken place over time.  But that is an investment for which they paid or for which their daddy's may have paid at some point in the past.  It is the nature of investments that good ones go up in value.

With that said, current earnings are pie which gets divided by the participants and the nature of that division has changed significantly during our lifetimes.  Players have seen a significant rise in their share of that pie as a result of better representing themselves.  The nature of the CBA is collective and fully guaranteed contracts are always part of the players ask and they are always willing to negotiate it away for other things that they deem to be more important.

Veteran players wanted slotted draft salaries as much or more than ownership did.  Veteran players did not want to see so much of "their money" being spent of players who had never played a single down of professional football.  More than a bit hypocritical to try and blame owners for that now.  

[Biggs]

4 minutes ago, peebag said:

Understood.  But it's up to the player and his representatives to get the best contract possible.  Reddick did this and got himself caught in a corner without any wiggle room.  I don't see how that's a Jets FO issue.

Two sides can't agree on a deal.  It happens.  It doesn't make Reddick or JD a bad guy.  Lets not pretend JD didn't trade for him because he thought he was getting a lot of production on a cheap deal with no long term commitment by the Jets.   Let's not pretend that Reddick doesn't want to play on a cheap 1 year rental for less than fair value because the Jets have leverage.  

The problem with the not giving some blame to the Jets GM is he traded for him because he thought he had the leverage to get him to play for less than full value because of the leverage the players gave the owners in collective bargaining.  

The fatal flaw here is that human nature isn't erased by collective bargaining that treats employees differently.  Some players get tagged, some players get fined and coersed into playing for less than full value.  Some of them push back.  Granted many players get paid way more than they produce.  The difference is their is no penalty on the ownership side for overpaying or underpaying.  They are protected by the cap and shared revenue.  The individual player isn't.  

[Biggs]

4 minutes ago, EM31 said:

I understand it is a monopoly.  The Owners get by far the largest slice when you calculate the increase in franchise value that has taken place over time.  But that is an investment for which they paid or for which their daddy's may have paid at some point in the past.  It is the nature of investments that good ones go up in value.

With that said, current earnings are pie which gets divided by the participants and the nature of that division has changed significantly during our lifetimes.  Players have seen a significant rise in their share of that pie as a result of better representing themselves.  The nature of the CBA is collective and fully guaranteed contracts are always part of the players ask and they are always willing to negotiate it away for other things that they deem to be more important.

Veteran players wanted slotted draft salaries as much or more than ownership did.  Veteran players did not want to see so much of "their money" being spent of players who had never played a single down of professional football.  More than a bit hypocritical to try and blame owners for that now.  

You do realize the owners locked the players out to get that. 

[EM31]

13 minutes ago, mfmartin said:

 

No I’m all for non guaranteed contracts. However I’m for players doing what they feel they need to do to get paid. They put in the CBA that he could sit out if he wanted to take on the fines. He did.

You said yourself that this is to try and curb guys outperforming their deals. Good luck with the NFLPA not going after a team trying to hurt a players chances and yes your feelings did get hurt. Most fans should be happy that a top 10 edge is returning to their team. You want to stick it to him. Embarrassing.

 

Free agency is a market based on supply and demand.  I would say that both the supply side and the demand side are impacted by this episode.

Supply - Is he really going to deliver what he and his agent are selling?  Is he still physically able to do so and what the the likelihood that he will remain willing to do so?

Demand - How many GMs want to be within a million miles of this player moving forward?  If there are fewer buyers then the price goes down.

[EM31]

1 minute ago, Biggs said:

You do realize the owners locked the players out to get that. 

Nevertheless a deal was reached.

Or do the owners get to whine about how the players were threatening to withhold their labor via a strike?

Both sides gave up stuff they wanted but a deal was reached.

[Biggs]

2 minutes ago, EM31 said:

Nevertheless a deal was reached.

Or do the owners get to whine about how the players were threatening to withhold their labor via a strike?

Both sides gave up stuff they wanted but a deal was reached.

And yet, no play football no pay for not playing.  

[EM31]

8 minutes ago, Biggs said:

And yet, no play football no pay for not playing.  

The CBA  comes up again soon

Maybe the players will rethink how much they want fully guaranteed contracts of slotted rookie deals or even additional funding for veterans long term benefits.

 

[Plen T]

7 hours ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

Fourth team in FIVE years. I think Stevie Wonder could have seen this coming. 

Except he played for all those teams 

[Biggs]

1 hour ago, EM31 said:

The CBA  comes up again soon

Maybe the players will rethink how much they want fully guaranteed contracts of slotted rookie deals or even additional funding for veterans long term benefits.

 

The players unlike the owners aren't in collusion with each other.  They are in competition with each other for a slice of the pie.  The owners group of 32 have agreed on an even split.

It would be very interesting if each side had shared revenue but teams actually shared their portion based on their record.

[LockeJET]

Trade him to the Lions for a second round pick

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, EM31 said:

What if it isa neither of these things?  What if it is absolute terror at the prospect of what this type of negotiating strategy would mean for the rest of a roster and the rest of the league if it is seen to be successful in any way?

Meh, I think the precedent has been set, with Reddick holding out this long already, that you don't just get because you demand it.

The other side of that coin is FAs (or draftees whose contracts are expiring) may not want to sign veteran contracts here because this is the team that will never readdress a contract that the player's outdone. 

I'm all for playing hardball, but there's also such a thing as too much hardball. Depends on the player, situation, etc. For example, the team's situation changed the moment JJII's Achilles tendon snapped. He's missing for the rest of this season, and it's at best 50-50 that he'll be 100% all of next season, too (if he's ever the same again; no fault of his own). 

Anyway I think it's been established that this isn't a pushover franchise that just automatically caves. Quite the opposite. Even if Reddick's contract gets adjusted some, he's never getting made fully whole again: even if he gets adjusted to wipe out the mandatory fines, he's still missed several games at $800K+ on top of that & he'll never recover from it (nor from other teams that'll be that much warier about signing him, should this adjustment not include guarantees - beyond maybe adding some guarantee$ for injury - for next season).

[nycdan]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

Meh, I think the precedent has been set, with Reddick holding out this long already, that you don't just get because you demand it.

The other side of that coin is FAs (or draftees whose contracts are expiring) may not want to sign veteran contracts here because this is the team that will never readdress a contract that the player's outdone. 

I'm all for playing hardball, but there's also such a thing as too much hardball. Depends on the player, situation, etc.

Anyway I think it's been established that this isn't a pushover franchise that just automatically caves. Quite the opposite.

I don't see the Reddick situation as signalling the team's unwillingness to redo an outperformed contrract.  To the contrary, the team has signaled it is willing, and may still do so.  Reddick comes across as the unreasonable party here much more than the Jets in light of recent events and revelations.

MC2 is a good, recent example of a deal we redid to reflect actual play.  We will probably have another with Quincy this off-season and I see no reason we would balk at doing it.

 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 minutes ago, nycdan said:

I don't see the Reddick situation as signalling the team's unwillingness to redo an outperformed contrract.  To the contrary, the team has signaled it is willing, and may still do so.  Reddick comes across as the unreasonable party here much more than the Jets in light of recent events and revelations.

MC2 is a good, recent example of a deal we redid to reflect actual play.  We will probably have another with Quincy this off-season and I see no reason we would balk at doing it.

 

Yep. There's playing hardball and then there's cutting off your nose to spite your face because #precedentprinciples.

They shouldn't just lay down no matter what, but they also haven't done that here. Getting him in, by giving him a bit back so he can save face a little, should still be in the team's interest. I mean, it's in the team's interest IF he picks up where he left off from his prior pro bowl level & doesn't have soft tissue problems or other nagging injuries for the balance of this season, en route to early-2024 Huff production. If he sucks or is injured I'm erasing these posts and piling on Douglas for his benightedness in caving to this frootloop. 

[Jack Straw]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Meh, I think the precedent has been set, with Reddick holding out this long already, that you don't just get because you demand it.

The other side of that coin is FAs (or draftees whose contracts are expiring) may not want to sign veteran contracts here because this is the team that will never readdress a contract that the player's outdone. 

I'm all for playing hardball, but there's also such a thing as too much hardball. Depends on the player, situation, etc.

Anyway I think it's been established that this isn't a pushover franchise that just automatically caves. Quite the opposite.

If you look back at the Revis negotiations, Woody was caught on Hard Knocks saying something like, "We’re New York. You can’t hustle us." It was supposed to sound tough, but honestly, it always felt more like posturing.

It reminds me of something I see all the time here in NYC. After living in the city for 20 years, I’ve noticed a pattern: someone fresh off the bus from Middle America, trying to act tough by walking through a "do not walk" sign, then slapping a taxi for daring to drive through a green light. They’re not tough—they’re just playing a role, probably based on what they saw in some New York movie.

That’s kind of how Woody comes across in these contract standoffs. It’s like he’s cosplaying the "tough New Yorker" who won’t be bullied, but it feels more like an act than an actual negotiation strategy. Being stubborn for the sake of it doesn’t make you a smarter negotiator—especially if it burns bridges with future free agents.

[bicketybam]

3 hours ago, EM31 said:

contagion

Nice!

[C Mart]

3 hours ago, The Crusher said:

Yeah, Drew probably demanded he cleans all the wax out of his ears first, because dude obviously wasn't listening. 

No idea if the timeframe aligns. I wonder if Rosenhaus was Rob Carpenter's agent at some point

[GenoJet]

4 hours ago, NYs Stepchild said:

We would get nothing and he'd be a FA.

If he plays we could get a bunch of sacks then release him next year and recover a 3rd round comp. 

We could deactivate him but then we'd have to pay him and he'd cost us a roster spot. 

I thought so. Not happy about that. In this case, I find myself totally supportive of management.