Update to Roquan Situation

[PrimeTime]

STFU, you don't know shit.

WARNING...internet tough guy alert. You can do better then that.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

WARNING...internet tough guy alert. You can do better then that.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I was joking, thought it was obvious.

(I'll put the smiley face up next time)

 

[nc0gnet0]

Because only a Bears fan can have commentary about a rookies rights to a fair contract.............Love the Pace fan boys trying to deflect a legit discussion about bullshit contracts forced down rookies throats by billionaires into a Lions/Bears debate.

 

[remydat]

So did all the teams that drafted players represented by CAA give their players a "get paid no matter what you do" clause, or are the Bears the only team getting this treatment.

I can't imagine any NFL team would continue paying a player doing time for murder.

NFL would simply suspend someone if guilty of murder which would void the contract anyway so poor example.

What the Bears want is the right to void guarantees over shit the NFL office can't or won't.

 

[Omeletpants]

I blame that idiot Obama for all of this

 

[playthrough2001]

Nah, the right thing is bend him over the barrel and **ck him up the ass, because, well, that is the way the league has been doing it for years, so it's all good. CBA took away the rookies right to negotiate a market value contract, but that wasn't enough, they then had to install language to try and screw them out of their guaranteed money, even if it was only 1/4 of what they had been making previously. Do you really think Smith wants language in the contract that allows him to kill/rape/abuse someone without repercussions to his paycheck, and that is what is holding this up? My god, are you that clueless?

There is nothing wrong with demanding clarification on what is deemed a suspendable offense under the so called "personal conduct policy". It's already came to light that the Bears begrudgingly removed language (or added) that removed helmet violations under the new rule, are you that naive to think the rest of the language is black and white?

Collective bargaining... Learn about it chump.

 

[remydat]

The NFLPA is elected by veteran NFL players not the rookies like Smith. Hence why they sold out rookies to get or keep benefits for the players they do represent.

 

[botfly10]

DAYDAY!

The nicest guy on the internets!

 

[Madden]

because we needed a new thread on the Roquan contract.......

There really should just be one pinned thread at this point.

To the Mods:

 

[Alterego]

NFL would simply suspend someone if guilty of murder which would void the contract anyway so poor example.

What the Bears want is the right to void guarantees over shit the NFL office can't or won't.

link?

 

[Newblood]

Nah, the right thing is bend him over the barrel and **ck him up the ass, because, well, that is the way the league has been doing it for years, so it's all good. CBA took away the rookies right to negotiate a market value contract, but that wasn't enough, they then had to install language to try and screw them out of their guaranteed money, even if it was only 1/4 of what they had been making previously. Do you really think Smith wants language in the contract that allows him to kill/rape/abuse someone without repercussions to his paycheck, and that is what is holding this up? My god, are you that clueless?

There is nothing wrong with demanding clarification on what is deemed a suspendable offense under the so called "personal conduct policy". It's already came to light that the Bears begrudgingly removed language (or added) that removed helmet violations under the new rule, are you that naive to think the rest of the language is black and white?

BS spin on the rookie salary cap.

The rookie salary got voted in because the vets felt it was BS that so much money was being allocated to rookies that had yet to prove shit in the NFL. It's not like they added the rookie salary cap and then lowered the team salary cap. In fact I'm sure it went up that year also. And since the roster limit didn't go up, they couldn't just use that money to sign more players. That means that big chunk of money that the rookies were eating up could in large part go to the vets that had earned it, which is what the vets (and yes, the teams benefit also) where hoping and trying to accomplish when they signed that CBA agreement.

 

[fenderpfunk]

This is pretty gross to be honest.

 

[number51]

Yeah I would like to see Edmunds vs Smith's contract. Same agent. If they got the Bills to agree and then Smith who was drafted higher shouldn't accept a deal that is worse.

The same specific agent also represents Josh Allen, picked ahead of Roquan Smith. I don’t think they have any outside discipline exemptions in that contract.

CAA also represents Darnold (#3), Ward (#4), Nelson (#6), and Davenport (#14).

So did all the teams that drafted players represented by CAA give their players a "get paid no matter what you do" clause, or are the Bears the only team getting this treatment.

I can't imagine any NFL team would continue paying a player doing time for murder.

NFL would simply suspend someone if guilty of murder which would void the contract anyway so poor example.

What the Bears want is the right to void guarantees over shit the NFL office can't or won't.

Fascinating, murder = hyperbole. But thanks for not answering my question.

I'll try again.

Did all the teams that drafted players represented by CAA give their players a "get paid no matter what you do" clause, or are the Bears the only team getting this treatment.

Suspensions for off the field issues should cost the player, suspensions for poorly defined helmet hits should not.

 

[playthrough2001]

Fascinating, murder = hyperbole. But thanks for not answering my question.

I'll try again.

Did all the teams that drafted players represented by CAA give their players a "get paid no matter what you do" clause, or are the Bears the only team getting this treatment.

Suspensions for off the field issues should cost the player, suspensions for poorly defined helmet hits should not.

Pretty simple concept...

 

[Omeletpants]

STFU, you don't know shit.

He knows his Supreme Court Justices, troll

 

[AussieBear]

He knows his Supreme Court Justices, troll

what be all these court pics u keep spewin.. someone be got papers pending or sumin

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

what all these court pics u keep spewin.. someone be got papers pending or sumin

:dunno:

The ol bat has finally gone :bizarro:.

 

[BringBackDitka54]

How about they just do the right thing?

Riveting stuff there.

 

[dabears70]

Sounds like the Bears are trying to put language in this contract that many or all teams want to do but the Bears are the team that got that player and agency that's gonna fight this with them while they're the team trying to stand pat on this which in turn is gonna make them catch a shit ton of media and fan heat until a side gives in.

 

[Bearly]

Nah, the right thing is bend him over the barrel and **ck him up the ass, because, well, that is the way the league has been doing it for years, so it's all good. CBA took away the rookies right to negotiate a market value contract, but that wasn't enough, they then had to install language to try and screw them out of their guaranteed money, even if it was only 1/4 of what they had been making previously. Do you really think Smith wants language in the contract that allows him to kill/rape/abuse someone without repercussions to his paycheck, and that is what is holding this up? My god, are you that clueless?

There is nothing wrong with demanding clarification on what is deemed a suspendable offense under the so called "personal conduct policy". It's already came to light that the Bears begrudgingly removed language (or added) that removed helmet violations under the new rule, are you that naive to think the rest of the language is black and white?

We have no idea when the Bear decided to agree to remove the helmet rule portion. They may have given that one early and this is about something else. The current leak may have nothing to do with the timing of the negotiation details and simply an attempt to get him in camp this weekend and after tonight's game. A timetable I thought acceptable for both sides when this began.

It's the same offset language given to vets so your rookie wage scale rant has little to do with the situation.