1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Dolphins releasing Van Noy;

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by pumpdogs, Mar 2, 2021.

  1. Deus ex dolphin

    Deus ex dolphin Well-Known Member

    3,101
    1,588
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    If the front office wants to clear cap space in anticipation of surprise cuts next week? It's.... not the worst idea. Miami can make an offer immediately if a prime player is cut loose.

    This is also the year to get a bunch of one-year rentals. The cap went down and a lot of guys will NOT get the big contract they want this year, but could play for less in 2021 and try the free agent market in 2022.

    Tua would need to make a big leap in production, to make it worth signing several one year deals, but it would also tell us how good he can be with better weapons around him.
     
    DOLFANMIKE likes this.
  2. DOLFANMIKE

    DOLFANMIKE FOOTBALL COACH 32 YEARS Luxury Box

    5,398
    4,476
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    California
    Given Van Noy's injuries and stats his cost put things over the top given Van Ginkel's performance with limited play. Compare their stats and Van Ginkel made more plays with less playing time. That is always a formula to lose your starting position or to get cut.

    Van Noy: - 61.6 overall grade
    - 811 snaps
    - 31 total pressures
    - 60.4 run d grade
    - 27 stops


    Van Ginkel: - 79.3 overall grade
    - 479 snaps
    - 19 total pressures
    - 77.6 run d grade
    - 22 stops
     
  3. OwesOwn614

    OwesOwn614 Active Member

    157
    185
    43
    Jul 8, 2020
    I might be alone here but this is why I always side with the players in matters of contracts. Teams cut and trade players as often as they want, for whatever reasons they can determine so it's not a matter of loyalty. You're only young once and if you have leverage, use it to make yourself happy. Even if you shoot yourself in the foot (hello, LeVeon Bell), at least approach your career clear eyed and look out for yourself first.

    With that being said, flame away.
     
    Disgustipate and mlb1399 like this.
  4. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,732
    9,982
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Personally, I think it's unfair that teams can end contracts at any time while players are forced to honor them. Look at Watson and how badly he wants out...yet he's stuck due to a contract. Miami wants Van Noy out and <poof>, the contract doesn't matter.

    In an ideal world, players would have the same ability to opt out as their employers. It should be a two-way street where players could also walk at any time OR all contracts should be 100% guaranteed money.

    Why? The average pro gets only a handful of years in any league. They should have a say in where they play and be able to maximize their chances for success. It's nonsense that they sign 4+ year contracts when the organization has zero intention of ever keeping them that long.
     
    OwesOwn614 likes this.
  5. Finatik

    Finatik Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    2,210
    2,092
    113
    May 2, 2014
    SO Cal
    The Dolphins told linebacker Kyle Van Noy that they were releasing him earlier this week, but they haven’t made the move official and they may not go that route when it comes to excising Van Noy from the roster. Field Yates of ESPN reports that the team has not followed through on releasing Van Noy because they are trying to trade him.

    Van Noy has a $12.5 million salary that becomes fully guaranteed on the third day of the league year. That may make it difficult to find a trading partner with the salary cap dropping for the 2021 season. The Dolphins would clear $9.775 in cap space by parting ways with Van Noy. He had 69 tackles, six sacks, two forced fumbles, and two fumble recoveries in his only season with Miami.
     
  6. Finatik

    Finatik Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    2,210
    2,092
    113
    May 2, 2014
    SO Cal
    Watson is working on his rookie deal.
    1. So do you think a rookie who never played a down in the NFL should be able to walk away from their contract after the 1st year?
    2. Or that all rookie deals would need to be guaranteed before they even played one single down?

    I can see some changes on their 2nd contract but if you blow up the rookie deals then the whole draft system should be scrapped. Also the salary cap would totally be blown to hell.

    3. Would you also be open to a contract that says it's guaranteed but if you don't play like you were expected to play then you get a cut in salary? So many free agents have a great contract year and then never live up to the deal and if it was all guaranteed then what's the recourse?
    4. Do you think it should just be only a one way street?
     
  7. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,732
    9,982
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    1) Good point, I'd say no. You have to play out your rookie contract. More on that in a minute though.

    2) That's tough, but I'd say 1st round rookie contracts should be guaranteed if they remain at 5 years. Maybe not 100% guaranteed though. For 2nd rounders, maybe guarantee them partially for 3 years and 3rd rounders get a 2 year guarantee. For 4th rounders and beyond, make them shorter contracts w/ no guarantee or longer contracts guaranteed.

    3) I'd say that after your rookie contract, either side can cancel a contract at the end of each season. Trades cannot be forced either- players should have a say. And they should be 100% guaranteed if the player holds up to his end of the agreement (no off-field issues, sticks to training/nutrition goals, makes meetings on time, etc.). Bonuses for performance wouldn't be guaranteed...but then again, they shouldn't be there anyway since that's partially outside the player's control.

    4) No, it should be a two-way street. But if players can walk, contracts are shorter and partially/fully guaranteed, it's a real commitment representing real numbers. I think that would bring the average contract price down and change the whole strategy behind contracts. For instance, look at Watson's current contract....$15M this season and $40M next season. But once they got there, they'd try to restructure it because that's a ton of money they know they can't realistically afford. Or look at our prior Suh contract- why sign a piece of paper you know will have to be voided? It makes no sense and I feel like it's in bad faith.

    Players should have a realistic expectation of job stability and what they'll be paid, just like any other job. And if your boss is a jerk, you should be able to find new employment...just like any other job. That's my opinion anyway.
     
    Ophinerated and Finatik like this.
  8. Finatik

    Finatik Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    2,210
    2,092
    113
    May 2, 2014
    SO Cal
    I agree with most of this to a point. The part you're kinda missing is that people have paid Billions of $$$$ for these franchises. And that needs to be taken into account. They are also taking all the risks on the business side. Let's take Covid for example. If they would have cancelled the season this year and not played would the players help pay for the cost of the expenses of the franchise? That's a big NO. It's why I have issues with employees at companies that are privately held complaining that the owners get the largest share. Where are they when the risks start hitting the fan? Gone.

    Now sports doesn't operate the same as "normal" business. I get that. But the concept that the players are "owed" everything and should be able to choose discounts the fact that they pay a bunch of contracts/$ to players that never live up to them. It's an inherent risk in sports as there is no team in any sport that I know of that can pick personnel perfectly. So how they shift some of that risk is by not guaranteeing some or all of the contract. If you sign a contract that is not guaranteed, you know what that means. If you don't like it then don't sign it and find someone else with a better deal. When there is not a better deal, then I guess that's what your employment is worth. We mostly don't ever get what we all think were worth.
     
    Ophinerated likes this.
  9. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,732
    9,982
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Personally, I think contracts have spiraled out of control as well and ultimately, the fans pay for it with ridiculous ticket prices and TV deals (Sunday Ticket, etc.). There's honestly not that much risk involved since the league handles the networks, the merchandising, etc. and that's where the vast majority of the money comes from. The billions they paid was essentially an exclusive membership that has very little to do with profit...it's a status symbol. I agree with you in general about business though- which is why I've been self-employed almost my entire adult life. People have that option and it's nobody's fault but their own if they don't take it.

    For the players, the problem is that they're rarely in a position to where they can turn down a contract. Rookies certainly can't and UFDA's probably have the better path in the league since they get to choose their team and prove their worth.
     
    Ophinerated and Finatik like this.
  10. Finatik

    Finatik Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    2,210
    2,092
    113
    May 2, 2014
    SO Cal
    @KeyFin
    Nice discussion. Not many in the offseason. Cheers.
     
    Ophinerated and KeyFin like this.
  11. OwesOwn614

    OwesOwn614 Active Member

    157
    185
    43
    Jul 8, 2020
     
  12. OwesOwn614

    OwesOwn614 Active Member

    157
    185
    43
    Jul 8, 2020
    It all comes down to leverage. Owners have a variety of reasons for owning teams but much of it comes down to money. They don't lose a lot of it and teams typically appreciate in value, so any time that they want to drop out, they can do so with a healthy profit. Players own as much of how they are treated as management because they sign the CBA and they trade some guarantees for a bigger share of revenues. That's the macro of it.

    On the micro side, if I was a player, I would seek whatever terms made me happy. Whether that means resigning with my first team or holding out for a better deal, I'm going to treat the business as selfishly as management does. Even if that means a holdout. The example that I frequently use is when LeBron James made the Decision. Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert penned an op-ed where he called him disloyal and trashed him personally for taking his talents to South Beach. But in order to keep LeBron, Gilbert had already fired coach Mike Brown and GM Danny Ferry, who helmed the team through its first consecutive 60-win seasons. How loyal was he?

    I don't blame either side in contract matters because they're working within the system. But I don't think it's any worse for a player to hold out than for a team to cut or trade him.
     
  13. Puka-head

    Puka-head My2nd Fav team:___vs Jets Club Member

    7,110
    3,418
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Slightly left of center
    Spot on.
    Van Noy got Van Ginkled!
     
  14. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,732
    9,982
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I've been watching Pat for a few months now and I absolutely love the guy....he's a complete idiot and funny as can be. Hard to believe he was one of the best punters/kickers ever in the league!

    I highly recommend his interview with Dan Campbell, for example!
     
  15. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity Staff Member

    14,096
    8,588
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    On the contract issue I'll say that the one essential point that is rarely ever brought out is that it is the GM's whole job to move players. That's literally his job. Trade, cut, sign, etc.

    The player's job is to play - fulfill whatever responsibility they've been signed to do.

    This is crucial to remember.

    A player can do their job anywhere, and the CBA and nature of the league as concerns top talent provide lots of protections to ensure they will still have a job.

    Meanwhile, a GM's cannot do their job properly if players they've counted on and signed for x number of years, decides they want out. The GM and co. have to manage cap, draft, positional depth etc. And most people know how important the right team construction and cap management are. A star player just walking out if they feel like it isn't just about them and their career it's about the entire franchise, and it can massively damage the work done by the FO.

    The right comparison here isn't player to GM, because they've got completely different jobs and responsibilities. The right comparison could be player to player. For example, tell a CB that he's going to be running this play and that play, and his teammates will be doing x, y and z. And then mid game, have a teammate just walk off, or do something different.

    Sure, a good CB will try to adapt, but he really won't be able to do his job properly.

    That's the position the GM is in when star players walk.

    I get that they have lives and that being moved affects that. But in some ways it's like being in the military. You're part of an organisation and for as long as you're in you could be moved. Players should maybe see themselves part of the league and not just one team. The nature of the cap, and draft, and other aspects means that team builds will have to change, especially when a player takes up a big portion of the cap.

    So all in all I don't think players should have the same ability to play with contracts etc. as GMs do. They're doing different jobs.

    What I will say is that trust matters and where genuine lies happen, that can break a relationship. GMs should be honorable and truthful. No lies. And players should understand no one is beyond trading and moving around is part of the job.
     
    Finatik likes this.
  16. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,732
    9,982
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Well, on the flip side of that, a player's job is simply to work hard, stay in shape and execute the plays that are called. I think the part that most fans forget is that a coach or executive can work in this business for 30-40 years, while the average player only sees 2-3 seasons total. For instance, look how many players we picked up in 2019 as UFDA's that are no longer in the league- they were one and done.

    I get that football is a business. I've owned/managed several businesses in my day and my #1 rule has always been taking care of my employees and helping them build a career path. I've always rewarded loyalty, took a genuine interest in my employees and tried to create an atmosphere where they were enjoying their shifts everyday. So a lot's the same as football except that my employees could quit at any time and go to work for the competition. That one facet kept me honest in a two-way relationship.

    If I had a bad employee, then that generally meant I didn't do my homework before hiring them...that's on me. The same is true for football, but GM's have a lot less influence on their labor pool due to the draft, contracts, etc. Their job is clearly harder than mine was because they can't naturally attract the best talent for any given job, so I get why they need some protections via contracts. If you take someone young and help them develop, it makes sense that you don't want the competition to poach them from your roster.

    But at the same time, I keep going back to that 2-3 year average in the league. If you're drafted in the late rounds, you probably won't get much playing time those first few years and your career is over before you know it...I just don't like that aspect.
     
    mlb1399 likes this.
  17. OwesOwn614

    OwesOwn614 Active Member

    157
    185
    43
    Jul 8, 2020
    It's a matter of semantics. There are contracted agreements and implied agreements. The contract provides teams with an if/then playbook for how to conduct business. If a player is on the team, then he gets paid. That's the heart of it. The implied agreement is that a player will maintain or improve the performance that he had prior to signing the deal. For the player, the implied agreement is that teams will put him in the best position to succeed. If either of these implied agreements fail to manifest, you have problems.

    "Success" means something different for individuals vs groups. For example: If a running back is drafted in the sixth round and proves to be a stud, the team got a bargain. Some teams assume RBs are easily replaceable so if they get a gem, they'll run him 25 times a game. If he averages 4+ YPC, he's nominally successful and can look forward to a big second deal, right?

    Not always. Some teams might see their cap is overloaded and while they have that stud on a rookie deal, they'll keep that workload consistent and 350-400 carries (possibly 450 touches) per season takes a ton of tread off the tires. If a player notices (like Ezekiel Elliott did a couple seasons ago), he might try to leverage the team's dependence on him into a new deal before the current one expires. In that situation, did either party violate the implied agreement?

    One last thing: Players can't violate contracts. Anything that a player does that falls out of line with expectations can be addressed by the CBA and his contract. Avoid OTAs? If your contract incentivizes it, you'll lose that pay. Hold out of training camp? You can be fined for every practice that you miss. Fight with the coach? Suspension or cut. Every situation is detailed and has a repercussion. There is literally no way for a player to break his contract. And the only way that a team can break a contract is by paying the player less than he's contracted to receive for his play, which is a violation of the NLRA. You almost never see that. A team doesn't contractually owe a player a chance to play or succeed. But it's implied that they will, just as it's implied that a player will play balls out to win.

    It's all semantics. It's all business. And since it's not personal for either side, it's not personal for me when a player holds out or a team cuts/trades him.

    Sorry for the book. Don't mind if you TL;DR.
     
  18. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    7,732
    9,982
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    No worries, this is probably about the most interesting of topics we'll get in March concerning football.

    Looking at what you just said, let's talk about Josh Rosen. He's a top-10 pick, went to Arizona, and absolutely got his *** kicked all season behind that offensive line. cBrad will tell you he's the only QB in the history of the universe that didn't post at least an average QBR in his first 16 starts...but why? Is Rosen really that lousy, or did Arizona not uphold their end of the contract in good faith? Of course, it could be Rosen and the Cardinals....this isn't an either/or situation.

    Miami grabs Rosen and again, it looks like things might be different. He rides the bench, learns from Fitz and make a lackluster debut. I give cBrad a hard time because Jakeem and Williams dropped an easy TD pass in his 1st game....that would have been his "average or above" QB rating....but it didn't pan out. Flores said that he had the kid's back, that he was developing nicely and figuring things out...and then we cut him. Huh. Was that in the player's best interest as well?

    I have no dog in the "Josh Rosen" saga other than saying he could potentially be the best QB of that entire draft class...or maybe the worst. We have no idea because two teams placed him in bad situations two years in a row. The thing that gets me is that there's probably hundreds of "Rosen stories" every season....fringe guys that get drafted late and never get a solid look.

    Heck, I went to high school with a player who ended up with the Ravens backing up Ray Lewis. They both got drafted in the mid-90's. Yet my teammate started only two games and was out of the league after his 2nd year...he never got another look. He's nothing more than a footnote in the league because he was never going to surpass Lewis on the depth chart, and I'm guessing that happens quite a bit in the NFL. I doubt anyone here can even figure out his name- that's how obscure a lot of draft picks are in the league.
     
    OwesOwn614 likes this.
  19. OwesOwn614

    OwesOwn614 Active Member

    157
    185
    43
    Jul 8, 2020
    I hold firm to the belief that every year players wind up on the wrong teams by unfortunate circumstance. Whether it's culture, scheme or just a bad location for someone to settle into, there are players who wind up falling out of the game because teams give up on them. Put them in another uniform and they might survive and contribute for years.

    And then, there are some like Ahmed and Gaskin who make the most of the chances they get - even when they are second (or third) chances. There's a great chance one of those players will be off the team in 2021 and a pretty good chance that he'll be out of the league.

    Did the Phins violate the implied agreement with either? Nope. Both got a chance and if they're better than whomever we pick up in FA or the draft, they'll be back. It's a dog-eat-dog business and players should treat it as such. Fans should recognize it as such. And when I wrote that some teams put players in bad situations, I should have put it into context by saying that coaches aren't stupid. They're doing everything they can to win, so if it seems like they're screwing a player of his opportunity, it's because they judge it to be in their best interest. Flo is no idiot. If Rosen was the Guy, he'd be on the field. And I'm somebody who wanted to see him play and develop in Miami.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  20. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity Staff Member

    14,096
    8,588
    113
    Apr 22, 2014

     
  21. The G Man

    The G Man Git 'r doooonnne!!!

    7,317
    5,503
    113
    Mar 18, 2009
    Patriots signed OLB Kyle Van Noy, formerly of the Dolphins, to a two-year contract.

    It's worth "up to" $13.2 million, but we're awaiting for the "down to" numbers that don't make the signing headlines. Van Noy reunites with coach Bill Belichick after a one-year stint with the Dolphins. Miami surprisingly released the veteran edge rusher one season into a four-year deal despite being a locker room leader, and Van Noy used the hashtag "#Personal" as a part of his signing announcement on Wednesday. The Patriots struggled rushing the passer last season, but they've retooled this free agency and are getting some pieces back from COVID-19 opt out. New England will certainly be better in 2021, partially because of Van Noy's return. He'll be 30 years old.

    Source: Kyle Van Noy on Twitter
    Mar 17, 2021, 9:17 PM ET
     

Share This Page