(03-12-2024, 05:20 PM)wassy04 Wrote:

(03-12-2024, 04:58 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: There is a thing in contracts/law deemed disingenuous (or bad faith).  In this case, we entered a contract with the Atlanta Falcons and by announcing it but not signing the contract (which would render giving up a 2nd rounder), it could be deemed as an act of bad faith, thus opening up potential for a breach of contract.  With that in mind, better to just not disclose any agreed upon terms and wait until tomorrow to reduce potential controversy regarding the contract, which could be subject to differences in interpretation ....

https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=21

bad faith

1) n. intentional dishonest act by not fulfilling legal or contractual obligations, misleading another, entering into an agreement without the intention or means to fulfill it, or violating basic standards of honesty in dealing with others. Most states recognize what is called "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing" which is breached by acts of bad faith, for which a lawsuit may be brought (filed) for the breach (just as one might sue for breach of contract). The question of bad faith may be raised as a defense to a suit on a contract. 2) adj. when there is bad faith then a transaction is called a "bad faith" contract or "bad faith" offer.

Surely though when signing the contract all this would've been fairly obvious. I think both teams would be aware this exact scenario could play out. The fact that he's been able to negotiate with other teams at all regardless of whether he really had intention to move justifies the deal.

What if he'd decided that he wanted to stay going into free agency but then a bunch of teams came in with mega offers that blew us out the water, at that point maybe he'd have changed his mind. Whereas without going into free agency he couldn't (legally) know what options were out there.

It feels like the whole legal tampering thing is pretty dodgy anyway. The deals happen way too quickly to suggest they'd previously had no contact so not sure this is that different.

It just boils down to:  Do you want to keep your 2nd rounder or do you want to potentially have to argue with the NFL to keep your 2nd rounder?  I'm going to err on the side of caution every time and just go with the first option.  

To your point about the legal tampering period, yeah, all it did was push the illegal tampering earlier.  The legal tampering period is now effectively the beginning of free agency with the technical beginning of free agency still being the date of the new league year which is what contracts are generally based on including our trade with the falcons for Ridley.

---