(03-16-2022, 11:08 AM)Mikey Wrote:

(03-16-2022, 09:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build. 

I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.

Jenkins is effectively on a 2/16 deal, potentially to 18. He made 9 last year between salary and signing bonus, and is guaranteed another 7 this year, with ~1M in bonuses each year. If we move on from him next season, it's a whopping $4M hit. I don't know how we'll cope.

His deal was 4/35. So you're saying you'd rather have paid him ~22M last year between salary and bonus (and taken similar cap hit) so that by year 4 he's playing for about $5M?
How long you think you last as a GM if you're paying (in your words) awful players $20M a year?

Front loading a deal like that is also gonna encourage loafing - they already got paid, what's the incentive to see the deal through to the end?

I want to structure the deal so I can get out of it at any time, without suffering any hit in dead money. Period. Personally, I would've never signed Jenkins to begin with. I certainly wouldn't have signed a below average Safety to a 4 year deal. 

Encourage loafing? I think not. Make the remaining years of the deal incentive based, so they reach bonuses if they perform well. Other teams pay attention to this. These are grown men that should earn their money like everyone else. If they get their money and "dial it in" they will develop a reputation as a lazy player and their value will plummet. They would only be hurting themselves. I think this would only be the case in a handful of incidents from some very immature players and they wouldn't last long in the NFL.

---

(03-16-2022, 11:43 AM)rpr52121 Wrote:

(03-16-2022, 09:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: If I sign a guy to a front loaded deal, he can hold out if he wants, but I'm not giving him a new deal until the old one is finished. I word the contract that I can fine the crap out of him if he does hold out. If they want the big money up front, they will be expected to play out the contract. I'm sick of pushing money into the future. That's how you end up in cap hell and you have to end up cutting all your best players to get under the cap. San Francisco had to do it when Baalke structured all the contracts the same way and the Niners lost most of their good players and had to re-build. 

I believe in spending what you have now and making the hits on the back end light enough, so if you make a mistake and sign a player who doesn't live up to the deal, you can cut him without taking a hit of dead money. We've got stuck with way too many bad players in the past that we couldn't cut, because of the way the contract was structured. Rayshawn Jenkins was awful last season and we're stuck with him this year, because the dead money cap hit is too big. I hate that.

But that is not what happens. Lots of player hold out asking for more money or new contract when they do perform, because they know the teams have all the leverage to cut you if don't perform.

Your plan that "I'm not giving him a new deal no matter what, and I can always cut him later" would piss off a lot a players and agents around the league and probably lead to lots of holdouts.

Players are not assets.

They hold out, they get fined massive amounts of money. I structure the contracts this way. 

Players are assets. Like it or not, football is a business and the players are the product.

---