Eagles Declined Nick Foles Trade for Browns 35th pick This Last Draft

[Schmoopy1000]

Fact is teams have contract rights on 1st round picks for 5 years.

well its good to know you are from the old school math!

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Fact is teams have contract rights on 1st round picks for 5 years.

Absolutely. But as the email said from my super agent friend m, rights doesn’t mean it’s a 5 year contract.

 

[Manster7588]

Absolutely. But as the email said from my super agent friend m, rights doesn’t mean it’s a 5 year contract.

Answer this. When the contract is signed does it include the 5th year?

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Answer this. When the contract is signed does it include the 5th year?

No. But it has a clause saying the team has the rights to extend it to 5 years or just keep it at the original 4 years

 

[handicappers]

Absolutely. But as the email said from my super agent friend m, rights doesn’t mean it’s a 5 year contract.

Wrong bitch ass hood rat. It’s 5 years and that email was fake as fuck

 

[handicappers]

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Wrong bitch ass hood rat. It’s 5 years and that email was fake as fuck

Sorry. I found something more entertaining to do. Got boring fighting with you so I watch zit popping videos on YouTube. Kind of reminds me of you anyway.

You also recently said Foles > Dak. So if Dallas gives Dak more then 80 million they must be getting ripped off according to you.

 

[Manster7588]

No. But it has a clause saying the team has the rights to extend it to 5 years or just keep it at the original 4 years

No but?

Get the fuck out of here with that BS.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

well technically PE1 is right. the "rookie" Contract is 4 years.
1st 4 years is the only thing that can be negotiated by the agent.
Also the 4 years is part of the rookie pool in the salary cap.
The 5th year is part of the normal cap (whatever the fuck all that means to the salary cap)
However because 4+1=5 the contract a 1st round rookie signs is for 5 years. the rookie part is the 1st 4.

1st round rookies sign contracts giving up their rights to other teams for 5 years.

This is all I’ve been saying since the very beginning. And props to you for being open minded even though you disagree with me on a lot of issues and that I’m an Eagles fan. The teams have the players rights for 5 years like you said. But the rookie signs a 4 year deal. On the contract it says that the team can later change the contract from 4 to 5 years. I’m sure the contract also has wording on being “tagged”. So since that’s in the contract too 4+1+1+1 equals 7. So the team actually can have the players rights for 7 years. Should we call it a 7 year deal?

 

[Manster7588]

This is all I’ve been saying since the very beginning. And props to you for being open minded even though you disagree with me on a lot of issues and that I’m an Eagles fan. The teams have the players rights for 5 years like you said. But the rookie signs a 4 year deal. On the contract it says that the team can later change the contract from 4 to 5 years. I’m sure the contract also has wording on being “tagged”. So since that’s in the contract too 4+1+1+1 equals 7. So the team actually can have the players rights for 7 years. Should we call it a 7 year deal?

Question for you.
If a rookie is cut after two years what was his original contract?

Here's the beauty of NFL 1st round contracts. The teams have full control for 5 years while the player has no leverage to change that 5th year.

Here's another question for you. In what season will Wentz be paid on his second contract?

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Question for you.
If a rookie is cut after two years what was his original contract?

Here's the beauty of NFL 1st round contracts. The teams have full control for 5 years while the player has no leverage to change that 5th year.

Here's another question for you. In what season will Wentz be paid on his second contract?

Me answering your simple minded questions won’t prove your point at all.

If a rookie was cut after two years he originally signed a 4 year deal. Why can’t you just read what Schmoopy just said and move on. Why can’t you accept that even though the team has rights for 5 years the rookie still signs a 4 year deal and the team can choose to just honor the original 4 year or decide to extend it to 5.

The team also has contractual rights to tag the player after his deal is up so since the team actually has the players rights for 7 years why don’t you call it a 7 year deal. Here’s the beauty of a 1st round pick. The team has his rights for 7 years.

I know you can’t let it go but the email I got specifically said the right to a fifth year DOES NOT make it a 5 year deal.

I’ve seen some Cowboy fans saying we can simply tag Zeek for two more years and not have to give him a huge deal ever. The Cowboys have his rights for 7 years if they so choose so why aren’t you calling it a 7 year contract because they have his rights, contractually, for 7 years.

Lastly, Wentz’s new extension starts year 6 because they choose the 5th year extension on his 4 year deal.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

This is all I’ve been saying since the very beginning. And props to you for being open minded even though you disagree with me on a lot of issues and that I’m an Eagles fan. The teams have the players rights for 5 years like you said. But the rookie signs a 4 year deal. On the contract it says that the team can later change the contract from 4 to 5 years. I’m sure the contract also has wording on being “tagged”. So since that’s in the contract too 4+1+1+1 equals 7. So the team actually can have the players rights for 7 years. Should we call it a 7 year deal?

just to be clear a 1st round rookie signs a contract for 5 years.

putting part of it in a rookie pool & part of it not is irrelevant.

to be tagged would be he would have to sign another contract.
In his original 5 year commitment he does not.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

just to be clear a 1st round rookie signs a contract for 5 years.

putting part of it in a rookie pool & part of it not is irrelevant.

to be tagged would be he would have to sign another contract.
In his original 5 year commitment he does not.

Yep.
He does have to sign it but they still have his rights. He can’t say, “I’m not going to sign this”, and then sign a new deal with a different team. The team contractually still has his rights. Just like they have the rights to a 5th year on the rookies 4 year deal.

What Manster doesn’t understand is that it’s, as you said, “technically a 4 year deal” even though they have the rights to later extend it to 5. When we draft someone in the 1st we can all freely say, “We know have him for 5 years if we want”. We can all say, “he’s ours for 5 years”. But the original deal as you said Schmoopy is technically a 4 year deal.

I tried to explain it to him like this a while ago. Let’s say you get a new job and they say, “Here’s your 4 year deal at a 100 grand a year. We have the right to give you a Ferrari after four years or we can decide to not give it to you”. Does that mean you just got 4 years and a Ferrari? Nope!

 

[Schmoopy1000]

He does have to sign it but they still have his rights. He can’t say, “I’m not going to sign this”

he can say I am not going to sign this.
Also he isnt contracted with that team at that point.

After a rookie signs his 5 yr. deal. He "is" apart of that team contractually in his 5th year.

A player not signing his fran tag is not part of the team & cant be fined or anything from the team, because well. he is not part of the team.

A rookie playing in his 5th year cant say this & can be fined & everything else.

As you can see.
One is under contract.
the other is not.

Considering we are talking actual contracts. Not sure how you can dispute this. (but dont worry I have faith in you) LOL

 

[Manster7588]

Me answering your simple minded questions won’t prove your point at all.

If a rookie was cut after two years he originally signed a 4 year deal. Why can’t you just read what Schmoopy just said and move on. Why can’t you accept that even though the team has rights for 5 years the rookie still signs a 4 year deal and the team can choose to just honor the original 4 year or decide to extend it to 5.

The team also has contractual rights to tag the player after his deal is up so since the team actually has the players rights for 7 years why don’t you call it a 7 year deal. Here’s the beauty of a 1st round pick. The team has his rights for 7 years.

I know you can’t let it go but the email I got specifically said the right to a fifth year DOES NOT make it a 5 year deal.

I’ve seen some Cowboy fans saying we can simply tag Zeek for two more years and not have to give him a huge deal ever. The Cowboys have his rights for 7 years if they so choose so why aren’t you calling it a 7 year contract because they have his rights, contractually, for 7 years.

Lastly, Wentz’s new extension starts year 6 because they choose the 5th year extension on his 4 year deal.

OK answer this simple question. How many years is Baker Mayfield under Cleveland control?

 

[Manster7588]

Me answering your simple minded questions won’t prove your point at all.

If a rookie was cut after two years he originally signed a 4 year deal. Why can’t you just read what Schmoopy just said and move on. Why can’t you accept that even though the team has rights for 5 years the rookie still signs a 4 year deal and the team can choose to just honor the original 4 year or decide to extend it to 5.

The team also has contractual rights to tag the player after his deal is up so since the team actually has the players rights for 7 years why don’t you call it a 7 year deal. Here’s the beauty of a 1st round pick. The team has his rights for 7 years.

I know you can’t let it go but the email I got specifically said the right to a fifth year DOES NOT make it a 5 year deal.

I’ve seen some Cowboy fans saying we can simply tag Zeek for two more years and not have to give him a huge deal ever. The Cowboys have his rights for 7 years if they so choose so why aren’t you calling it a 7 year contract because they have his rights, contractually, for 7 years.

Lastly, Wentz’s new extension starts year 6 because they choose the 5th year extension on his 4 year deal.

Difference in the Franchise tag is the Player has to sign it as a stand alone agreement.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

OK answer this simple question. How many years is Baker Mayfield under Cleveland control?

Manster you are just gonna in circles with him with that question.

Ask him how many year Mayfield is contractually under clev. control.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

he can say I am not going to sign this.
Also he isnt contracted with that team at that point.

After a rookie signs his 5 yr. deal. He "is" apart of that team contractually in his 5th year.

A player not signing his fran tag is not part of the team & cant be fined or anything from the team, because well. he is not part of the team.

A rookie playing in his 5th year cant say this & can be fined & everything else.

As you can see.
One is under contract.
the other is not.

Considering we are talking actual contracts. Not sure how you can dispute this. (but dont worry I have faith in you) LOL

The point I’m making is that even though they have his rights when they tag him it doesn’t mean he signed a 7 year deal. He can choose not to sign it but they still have his rights. I’m agreeing with you... don’t know if you get that.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

OK answer this simple question. How many years is Baker Mayfield under Cleveland control?

5 just like every 1st round pick. Well actually 7 if you include tagging.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Difference in the Franchise tag is the Player has to sign it as a stand alone agreement.

Yes. You’re right. But the team still has his rights. Just like in the 4 year contract they still have his rights the 5th year.