Foles Opting Out

[Manster7588]

I wasn’t wrong. ESPN was wrong, every Philly paper was wrong, ProFootballTalk was wrong but Manster was right. “I’ll cede the number can be amended” aka I know am wrong but I’ll still say ESPN and every Philly media outlet is wrong and I’m right”

Breath, step back and take a deep breath, then calmly restate what point your trying to get across here.

 

[Manster7588]

And what you can’t understand is it’s a 4 year contract with a 5th year option

Is that 5th year option part of the contract?

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Breath, step back and take a deep breath, then calmly restate what point your trying to get across here.

I stated clearly...
ESPN is wrong about Foles 2 million rollover, the entire Philly media reporting the same thing is wrong also, profootballtalk is wrong as well but Manster is right. We got you. You know more then all of them

 

[steelerssb]

Just what this board needed, another Foles/Wentz thread

 

[Manster7588]

I stated clearly...
ESPN is wrong about Foles 2 million rollover, the entire Philly media reporting the same thing is wrong also, profootballtalk is wrong as well but Manster is right. We got you. You know more then all of them

Again, how can a team carry forward money it doesn't have?

Come on you went to school, explain this. Of course if you can't just say so.

 

[Manster7588]

I stated clearly...
ESPN is wrong about Foles 2 million rollover, the entire Philly media reporting the same thing is wrong also, profootballtalk is wrong as well but Manster is right. We got you. You know more then all of them

As for the 2M being carried over I've seen only one story even suggesting it. Feel free to post others.

 

[Manster7588]

To add to the Foles 2M Carry over issue, and there can be a great debate here.
Option buyouts are treated the same as bonuses where they are spread over the remaining length of the contract. Technically Foles contract went through 2021 (2020 and 2012 being voidable) so its possible that if the team does amend the carry over they may only be allowed to carry over .667M.

 

[PickleRick]

He hasn’t been released he’s hasn’t been extended.
Just answer this one question and I’ll drop it...
We are talking contracts and the specific language says “Rookie 1st round picks are mandated to sign a 4 year contract”.
My question is WHY DO YOU GET TO CHANGE THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE OF THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT?

It’s not a contract. It’s a 4 year contract with an additional year of rights if they so choose. “Rights” is not a contract.

But again... why do you get to change the exact wording of the NFL contractual agreement?

You are dead wrong. Its a 5 year contract with only the last year as a teams option.

 

[dbldwn711]

You are dead wrong. Its a 5 year contract with only the last year as a teams option.

That’s too simple. He has a much more convoluted way to explain how it works.

 

[SteelersPride]

I just can’t anymore

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Bb

You are dead wrong. Its a 5 year contract with only the last year as a teams option.

Then why does the contractual rules say VERBATIM: All rookie first round picks are mandated to sign a 4 year contract? It’s 100% a four year contract but the team has their rights for UP TO 5 years. Rights aren’t a contract. So you are the one who is dead wrong. You don’t understand that “rights” aren’t a contract

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

That’s too simple. He has a much more convoluted way to explain how it works.

Ooooh.
Now I am wrong again. First I was wrong. Then I post proof and I’m right. Now that several people are confused that rights aren’t a 1 year contract but you can’t be a man just someone who goes with the crowd.
Having someone’s rights is not a contract.

Want me to prove you are all wrong. Bo Jackson chose baseball but the Raiders drafted him and had his rights but there was no contract. It’s over dude. I understand cause it’s confusing but they sign for year contracts and the team has their rights for 5 years. Raiders had Bo Jackson’s rights... that right wasn’t a contract it was a league rule.

 

[PickleRick]

Bb


Then why does the contractual rules say VERBATIM: All rookie first round picks are mandated to sign a 4 year contract? It’s 100% a four year contract but the team has their rights for UP TO 5 years. Rights aren’t a contract. So you are the one who is dead wrong. You don’t understand that “rights” aren’t a contract

It has been explained to you several times. The rookine contract has in it, not added to it, that the 5th year is a team option. That 5th year is in the original contract. It is not added to it.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

It has been explained to you several times. The rookine contract has in it, not added to it, that the 5th year is a team option. That 5th year is in the original contract. It is not added to it.

No it’s not. Verbatim. Do you know what that means. This superstar kid who is a QB and got drafted in baseball already is going to be a first round pick in the NFL too. If he plays baseball the NFL team that drafts him has their rights. Is that a contract? No. It’s rights not a contract.

 

[PickleRick]

No it’s not. Verbatim. Do you know what that means. This superstar kid who is a QB and got drafted in baseball already is going to be a first round pick in the NFL too. If he plays baseball the NFL team that drafts him has their rights. Is that a contract? No. It’s rights not a contract.

Are you using drafting rights to some how extrapolate how a contract with a 5th year option isnt a 5 year contract? Please tell me you know they are not even remotely correlated.

 

[GNG]

Foles would look great in a Cowboys uniform.

 

[jarntt]

still heads...

 

[Schmoopy1000]

No it’s not. Verbatim. Do you know what that means. This superstar kid who is a QB and got drafted in baseball already is going to be a first round pick in the NFL too. If he plays baseball the NFL team that drafts him has their rights. Is that a contract? No. It’s rights not a contract.

because the guy never signed a contract.
Rookie contracts the player "signs" a contract.
the team option means he has him for 5 years. Yes all 5 years. The only reason it is even looked at as an option is for Salary cap reasons. 1st 4 years is guaranteed against the cap. 5th year is team optional against the cap.
but the player signs up for all 5 years. In one single contract. This conversation would be so much easier if you understood how contracts work.

Just like in the beginning. When I told you rookie contracts didnt fit your analogy when talking fran tags & such for foles.

You just proved it with your baseball analogy.
Franchise tags (& your baseball theory) no one has signed a contract. So they arent committed to it.
Rookie contracts they have signed a contract. making it apart of the contract. Which means..... yep! you guessed it. They are committed to that team for 5 years. A contractual commitment for 5 years. Agreed to terms for 5 years.


This is here is apart of the NFL rules
"Every player selected in the first round of the NFL Draft will automatically have a Fifth-Year Option added in his contract. This option cannot be separately attached to the player contract."

"The Fifth-Year Option is non-negotiable, and the non-compensation terms from a player’s rookie contract will be transferred to the fifth year."

So as you can see per verbatim. They are indeed 5 year contracts. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
All apart of one single contract.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Are you using drafting rights to some how extrapolate how a contract with a 5th year option isnt a 5 year contract? Please tell me you know they are not even remotely correlated.

They are correlated in showing rights are not a contract. Why do you get to change the wording of NFL contractual mandates to fit your argument. Having rights to a player is not a contract. Why do you get to over ride what the agreed upon contractual mandates say? Why? Why do you get to say every reporter is wrong when they say Saquon Barkley signed a 4 year deal? Why? Why do the contractual terms say, “Per cap rules every 1st round pick is MANDATED in signing a 4 year contract”. Why do you get to erase and over ride that fact? Why?

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

because the guy never signed a contract.
Rookie contracts the player "signs" a contract.
the team option means he has him for 5 years. Yes all 5 years. The only reason it is even looked at as an option is for Salary cap reasons. 1st 4 years is guaranteed against the cap. 5th year is team optional against the cap.
but the player signs up for all 5 years. In one single contract. This conversation would be so much easier if you understood how contracts work.

Just like in the beginning. When I told you rookie contracts didnt fit your analogy when talking fran tags & such for foles.

You just proved it with your baseball analogy.
Franchise tags (& your baseball theory) no one has signed a contract. So they arent committed to it.
Rookie contracts they have signed a contract. making it apart of the contract. Which means..... yep! you guessed it. They are committed to that team for 5 years. A contractual commitment for 5 years. Agreed to terms for 5 years.


This is here is apart of the NFL rules
"Every player selected in the first round of the NFL Draft will automatically have a Fifth-Year Option added in his contract. This option cannot be separately attached to the player contract."

"The Fifth-Year Option is non-negotiable, and the non-compensation terms from a player’s rookie contract will be transferred to the fifth year."

So as you can see per verbatim. They are indeed 5 year contracts. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
All apart of one single contract.

If I understood contracts. Fucking hilarious. You can’t understand that having the rights to a player is not a contract.