Nobody made him sign it. He hosed himself. There's no secret about this league being about production/potential and the teams holding the cards when it comes to cuts/trades/etc. Must suck to have zero leverage trying to force a massive payday.
That sounds good. What would you have done if there had been no re-negotiation? Would you have stayed or moved on?
Meaningless question. There is nothing wrong with X trying to get a new contract. What happens is up to both the Dolphins and X.
The problem with that is in the NFL the team can break the contract at any time for any reason (eg injury, off field issues, new player who does the same job for cheaper, salary cap crunch, change in philosophy of coaches, change in philosophy of how to build a team, and so forth). Also the league severely limits the freedom of players to sign with the team of their choice for a true fair market price. Teams also have pretty strong leverage to force players to renegotiate their contracts into terms that getter suit the team. If X had signed a fully guaranteed contract then I’d agree with you, but since the team can terminate/change his contract at will X has the same rights.
Meaningless question. [There were two questions!] There is nothing wrong with X trying to get a new contract. [Yes there is!] What happens is up to both the Dolphins and X. [No, entirely up to the Dolphins; that is unless "X" is willing to not play for 2 years and earn $0.00] What a load of "processed oats" - LOL I thought "Smahtaz" was an alias for the "Dol-Fan Dupree" - LOL - my mistake - LOL
Negotiations are not one-time events. They happen on a continuous basis. They're always happening. If at any moment in time the team decides to axe a player, it can do so given the financial repercussions. At the same time, the player can (at any time) choose to play hard ball in an attempt to get more money. There is no good and evil here. Both sides want money. The Dolphins have the advantage of a pre-existing contract. Xavien Howard has the advantage of controlling whether or not he shows up.
If the League wants to fix or improve this they need to allow teams to pay honour their guaranteed money to injured or traded players off the cap. Players could get the security they want in terms of guaranteed money and teams could know that if an injury happened or they wanted to trade the player away, they can do so, paying what they promised but not being limited in terms of cap for the active team.
That's pretty much the situation. If the Dolphins don't want to re-negotiate, "X" can either show up and play and make a lot of money or he can stay at home and pout and not make any money. Let's see how it works out.
Technically this isn't true at all. Teams can not break a contract with a player. If they did they'd be sued and any judge would find in favor of the player. Contracts have provisions in them that allow a team to cut a player so the team isn't breaking the contract they're just exercising their rights under the contract. Also most contract prohibit a team from cutting a player due to injury (provided its football related). That's why Ja'Wuan James is suing the Bronco's. They claim his injury was non-football related so they could cut him and he claims it was football related.
Again, he's not "breaking the contract". There are provisions within his deal that describe what the team can do if he fails to show up. As long as he pays any required fees, he's compliant. He can hold out as well as he can be cut.
X does provide a service to the Dolphins that they want. If he does hold out, then the Dolphins do not get his services. It is not 100% one sided. Yes, the team does hold most of the cards and could play hard ball if they wanted to.
That's an interesting notion but it would need to be worked out further. As you describe it, that sort of system would likely be abused. If the money is essentially guaranteed from the players' perspective, there's no incentive for them to tough it out and play when they're hurt. I bet a lot of players would claim false injuries, too. It could get really weird.
I don't mind the Dolphins offering him more money in 2021 to keep him playing while we're still unsure of precisely how capable Igbinoghene is, but over-committing to an aging player is precisely what the team avoided doing in the initial contract. It was a win for the team, the kind of win they need to achieve consistently. If X demand guaranteed money in 2022 and beyond, I'd be for trading him.
I'd be very surprised if X's contract included a provision that says he is allowed to miss mandatory team activities as long as he pays a fine. What it likely says is that he is required to attend and if he doesn't he has to pay a penalty. It's semantics but technically he would be in breach of the contract and would have to pay the fine to remedy it.
I keep seeing new posts here and hoping for an update- this contract dispute will have major impacts on the season no matter how it plays out. Hopefully it's not an internal distraction as well.
He's in compliance with his contract. Just like the team will be compliant when we cut/trade him eventually. As someone mentioned, if he was breaking his contract, the team would have legal remedies that it could pursue. It's not semantics; it's business. Look, nobody wants this dude back in the fold more than I do. But teams are always working contracts to serve their best business interests. And they're 100% right to do it because they owe it to owners and stakeholders to improve financial return while attempting to put a competitive team on the field. In that order. With that being said, players are 100% right to pursue all remedies in order to take care of their financial futures.
If X's contract either says something along the lines of a) Instead of attending practice you can pay $xxx or b) You must attend practice and if you don't then the club can fine you $xxx Under both scenarios X misses a practice and pays $xx and all is right with the world. But from a legal standpoint in scenario a) X is always in compliance with his contract while under scenario b) X was in breach of the contract and he would have to pay the fine to remedy it (that's the legal remedy the team can pursue). That is why its semantics, the outcome is the same, the only difference is how you are describing it. And this has nothing to do with whether X should or should not hold out, it simply to say its not accurate to say he is in compliance with his contract because he wouldn't be unless his contract reads like scenario a) above which is highly unlikely.
We're not really in disagreement on anything other than the semantic aspects of the discussion. From my standpoint, as long as he pays his fines, he's compliant with the terms of his deal. Just as the team is compliant as long as it pays him his guarantees and his salary. If he's cut, it's because a five-year contract doesn't marry the two parties for five years and the team can do whatever it wants. If he's missing, the only recourses are to cut or fine him. We're just looking at the coin from different sides.
We can also just ignore him if he doesn't show up. He can't contract to another club until his contract here has been completed or he gets traded. He could always retire, but he still can't play with another team until the terms of his current contract are completed.
I think we're looking at moving him. Whether it's his intent or not, he's bound to impact the culture that Flo's been trying hard to instill. If he holds out until week 11 and shows up, keeping him might not be worth it. Especially if we are out of playoff contention by then. Hard to imagine he'd be welcomed back into the locker room.
NFL executives rank Dolphins' Xavien Howard as league's 3rd best CB Steve Mitchell-USA TODAY Sports Kyle Crabbs July 8, 2021 12:07 pm ET If Miami Dolphins cornerback Xavien Howard is looking for a little bit of extra ammunition for his contract dispute with the team this offseason, he’s just got a big boost from other NFL league executives. As a part of ESPN’s series dedicated to identifying the top-10 players at each respective position, Jeremy Fowler is interviewing and polling 50 NFL executives to name their best of the best at each spot. Today’s release comes at cornerback — and Howard checked in at No. 3 overall. Howard is, of course, currently holding out from the team after skipping mandatory mini-camp, opening himself to nearly 6 figures in fines in a statement meant to identify just how serious Howard is about renegotiating his contract with the Dolphins. And with comments like these, it would seem as though plenty of high level decision makers around the league see Howard’s play as among the cream of the crop. “‘He likes to put hands on people. My kind of corner,’ an AFC coordinator said. “Howard has the press-man ability and ball production that every team covets. The All-Pro produced a league-high 20 pass deflections, using his size (6-1, 198 pounds) to fluster top receivers. He is versatile enough to jam a wideout or play Cover-2 when the defense switches things up.” “‘Instincts. Plays a lot closer on you than most, and if people test him and force him, he knows how to get his head around and finish the catch,’ an NFC personnel evaluator said. ‘He breaks so well that he cuts the route.’” — Ryan Fowler, ESPN Of course, the Dolphins love Howard as well. Head coach Brian Flores, even amid the holdout, had praise for the standout cornerback and was emphatic with communicating that the Dolphins want him in South Florida. Howard has four years remaining on his current contract, which should keep the NFL’s third-best corner (according to executives) in Miami in 2021 and beyond — unless Howard is willing to sit out games to prove a point and the Dolphins find a suitor willing to make a trade worth their while. https://dolphinswire.usatoday.com/2...olphins-xavien-howard-as-leagues-3rd-best-cb/
There the rules, then there are The Rules. You can break the rules any time as long as you are prepared to pay the penalty. For example offensive holding is against the rules, but since the penalty is small and rarely enforced it happens on basically every snap of the game. The deliberate fouling of poor free throw shooters in the last 2 minutes of a close basketball game is most commonly seen as smart strategy, not breaking the rules. Breaking The Rules will lead to instant DQs. For example taking your helmet off and using it to attack another player not only gets you ejected from the game but also gets you a lengthy suspension. A coach paying bonuses for causing injuries to opposing players is against The Rules. Not showing up to mini-camp is breaking the rules, but not The Rules.
With your insight into the English language I recommend you have a good lawyer on hand - your going to need one, probably sooner than later, or you can just "tell it to the judge" - LOL
It really doesn't matter if we agree with X for sitting out at this point; what does matter is this being settled quickly. The longer it drags out, the less chance of him ever playing another snap for Miami. The actual problem as I see it is that X is demanding a raise today and we're basically capped (if the site Spotrac is correct, we have $4.8M remaining). So how do you give him a raise when we know Flores loves to poach cut talent at the end of camps? I've said all along that I don't think this ends favorably. If X is really dug in like the media is saying, our options are extremely limited today. We've already cut some players that we would have liked to keep around if possible, and paying X today means someone has to be released or traded. Grant? Wilson? A few of those mid-tier names would have to depart. How do you just cut one of the league's most dominant special teams players though? It's just not a favorable position for us to be in.
I’ve been a lawyer and I’ve taught ESL. I’m pretty confident my meaning was clear and incapable of being misunderstood by someone moderately familiar with the English language.
No reasonable person misunderstood your post. Unreasonable people will misrepresent it though. Simply put, if X "broke his contract", the Dolphins would be in court trying to recoup his signing bonus so we can cut him without cap ramifications. But he's not breaking anything. If anything, he's afoul of the intent of his agreement to abide by certain aspects of his deal for which he'd be paid. But the contract (agreed to by both sides) has remedies and he's willing to suffer any liabilities in accordance with it.
That contracts are not written in blood with a magic seal from the devil. As in Bill Belicheat and Marcia aka Tom Brady and Robert "Happy Ending" Kraft sold their souls... Never mind, I don't get me sometimes either
Isn't there a saying in the legal profession that a lawyer who acts as his own lawyer in court has a fool for a client? - LOL
Truth. And one person shoulders the blame for this position, in the eyes of many. Its not that he "CAN'T" hold out, its not that he "CAN'T" demand more money, its not that he "CAN'T" bad mouth the organization for several years, even after paying him #1 CB money, its no that he "CAN'T" make an ultimatum with zero leverage, its not that he "CAN'T" try to reduce potential earning of his teammates...but he did. In the end, none of our opinions matter, neither does X's...the organization's opinion matters. Our opinions are simply examples of our differences in values, and we'll be Dolphins fans whichever way this goes. Every possible angle surround this BS situation has been hashed out ten fold. Some of us are in X's corner and think the team should bend over...and some of us don't care to see X in a Dolphins uniform ever again, unless he had some epiphany and decided he should just buck up and play out 2021 under his current deal. Neither side will ever convince the other that their side is the "right" way to look at it...and that's OK too.
It's just funny to me that people don't understand that contracts can be renegotiated. Like, how do you think a pay cut and a restructure happen?