Watson signed a 5 Year, $230 Million fully guaranteed contract in 2022. He was given a $46 Million signing bonus, which I was prorated over five years, counting $9.2 Million each year against the cap (2022-2026).
In 2023, Watson was due a salary of $46,000,000. The Browns restructured Watson’s deal by converting $44,920,000 into a signing bonus, added a void year to 2027 so they could spread out the cap hit. Watson’s cap this year was reduced to $19,057,000. His 2023 base salary is $1,080,000. His original signing bonus of $9.2 Million from the ‘22 bonus and $8,984,000 of the ‘23 signing bonus.
Where things get fun are next year. Watson’s Base Salary is currently $46 Million. His prorated bonuses total up to $17,977,000 for a 2024 cap number of $63,977,000. The Browns can restructure Watson’s contract at any point but he has to agree to an extension. But imagine if he plays awful? The cap could rise to $256 million next year, Watson’s cap number accounts for 25% of the Browns cap.
As some people clamor for guaranteed contracts, remeber this example.
He’s trying to push the market, he may not be as dumb as everyone thinks and in the end it’s all negotiating. If someone gets desperate they will cave. If not he’ll take a lesser deal or the tag (or sit if he wants). He’s not losing anything by waiting.
If the Browns don't win it all soon, they will be rebuilding again.
Guaranteed contracts will ruin the sport. Hold strong owners!
If the Browns don't win it all soon, they will be rebuilding again.
Guaranteed contracts will ruin the sport. Hold strong owners!
I'm very much the other way - pro player. Of all the professional team sports, football players should get guaranteed contracts based on the violence and risk of the sports. Think about it: go out there and entertain tens of millions of people in a brutal sport - our most popular sport by far - by putting your longterm health at risk. But without 100% guaranteed money.
It's absurd to me that that would even be in dispute.
I think a system of realistic 2, 3, and 4 year deals makes for an exciting market. And if teams want to lock up a franchise guy for 5 years, they better make it worth his while.
If I were a QB I would never sign a 5 year deal. Too much discount to the team in the out years.
I'm sure there is some type of a morals clause in the contract
Quote:
The Giants, BTW, have 116 million in cap space in 2024.
If the Browns don't win it all soon, they will be rebuilding again.
Guaranteed contracts will ruin the sport. Hold strong owners!
I'm very much the other way - pro player. Of all the professional team sports, football players should get guaranteed contracts based on the violence and risk of the sports. Think about it: go out there and entertain tens of millions of people in a brutal sport - our most popular sport by far - by putting your longterm health at risk. But without 100% guaranteed money.
It's absurd to me that that would even be in dispute.
As long as you are willing to pay $250-$300 a ticket minimum
I fully understand that a party to a CBA can waive it legal rights, and that apparently is what’s going on here.
Still, anyone with any sense of fairness has to engage in significant mental gymnastics in order to defend this paradigm.
Quote:
In comment 16078936 ZogZerg said:
Quote:
The Giants, BTW, have 116 million in cap space in 2024.
If the Browns don't win it all soon, they will be rebuilding again.
Guaranteed contracts will ruin the sport. Hold strong owners!
I'm very much the other way - pro player. Of all the professional team sports, football players should get guaranteed contracts based on the violence and risk of the sports. Think about it: go out there and entertain tens of millions of people in a brutal sport - our most popular sport by far - by putting your longterm health at risk. But without 100% guaranteed money.
It's absurd to me that that would even be in dispute.
As long as you are willing to pay $250-$300 a ticket minimum
I think just because you have a guaranteed contract doesn't mean they HAVE to be absurd wages. Players won't agree to it, though, because ultimately they'd end up earning less money and contracts would generally be shorter.
I suspect players will generally feel better about a 5 year, 75 million dollar deal with 30 million guaranteed; over a 3 year, 40 million dollar deal with 100% guaranteed.
As far as ticket prices, this is an issue regardless the cap is related to league income. If that drops, so will the cap.
Guaranteed contracts will ruin the sport. Hold strong owners!//////
I'm very much the other way - pro player. Of all the professional team sports, football players should get guaranteed contracts based on the violence and risk of the sports. Think about it: go out there and entertain tens of millions of people in a brutal sport - our most popular sport by far - by putting your longterm health at risk. But without 100% guaranteed money.
It's absurd to me that that would even be in dispute.
As much as from a 'selfish fan' perspective zz's position is recognizable to us--let's stock up on talent and have plenty of cap space to stock up on more!!, that is harsh, as bw points out. Given that in the sports of hoops and baseball injuries tend to be fewer and less serious--pitchers probably the exception--guaranteed $$ are a relatively acceptable risk to run from owners' business perspectives.
Football (followed by hockey): the risks of injury to your indentured servants are significantly greater, so the risks to owners' business perspectives are, accordingly, much greater. For the NFL to have the least guaranteed money is a very one-sided calculus.
Quote:
Lamar Jackson wants more guaranteed money than Watson (probably more years then, too). That will destroy the QB market way more than it already is. No team is doing that. Lamar is being obtuse.
He’s trying to push the market, he may not be as dumb as everyone thinks and in the end it’s all negotiating. If someone gets desperate they will cave. If not he’ll take a lesser deal or the tag (or sit if he wants). He’s not losing anything by waiting.
He turned down a 3-year, $133M fully guaranteed.
He wants more than what Watson got. That's considerably more than what Allen and Mahomes got.
If this was Joe Burrow? I could possibly see the argument. Not for an oft-injured, not overly impressive passing QB like Jackson.
I fully understand that a party to a CBA can waive it legal rights, and that apparently is what’s going on here.
Still, anyone with any sense of fairness has to engage in significant mental gymnastics in order to defend this paradigm.
What are you talking about? The only “enforceable” part of the contract is the guaranteed part. EITHER side can get out of the non guaranteed portion. Sure a team can cut a player but the player also has options
This. Yes, it’s a bad contract to give anyone, but Watson was the worst candidate to blow up the QB market.
I don’t think it’s fair to lump Lamar in with Watson. Lamar has said he never demanded a fully guaranteed contract, and as far as wanting more money, why shouldn’t he? When it was reported that Jones’s team wanted $45M per, May here defended that by saying (correctly) that he should ask for as much as he can. Why shouldn’t Lamar, who has had a much better career to dat?
Quote:
A contract that is fully enforceable on one party but can be unilaterally terminated by the other side is not unconscionable.
I fully understand that a party to a CBA can waive it legal rights, and that apparently is what’s going on here.
Still, anyone with any sense of fairness has to engage in significant mental gymnastics in order to defend this paradigm.
What are you talking about? The only “enforceable” part of the contract is the guaranteed part. EITHER side can get out of the non guaranteed portion. Sure a team can cut a player but the player also has options
That’s not true. Let’s use Daniel Jones contract as an example. Technically, the contract is 4 years, but the Giants can get out after 2 with little penalty. However, if the Giants want to roll the contract through all 4 years, Jones doesn’t get to unilaterally void the last 2 years like the Giants can.
Quote:
In comment 16078936 ZogZerg said:
Quote:
The Giants, BTW, have 116 million in cap space in 2024.
If the Browns don't win it all soon, they will be rebuilding again.
Guaranteed contracts will ruin the sport. Hold strong owners!
I'm very much the other way - pro player. Of all the professional team sports, football players should get guaranteed contracts based on the violence and risk of the sports. Think about it: go out there and entertain tens of millions of people in a brutal sport - our most popular sport by far - by putting your longterm health at risk. But without 100% guaranteed money.
It's absurd to me that that would even be in dispute.
As long as you are willing to pay $250-$300 a ticket minimum
That's probably not what would happen.
First of all, fans assume that there's a massive passalong rate that only occurs in the ticket price. Generally, there's simply not enough inventory to accommodate much upside on the ticketing revenue, and teams aren't going to price their tickets any higher than that which will result in a full sellout. And if their market could sustain a $250+ minimum entry price, they'd already have that pricing scale in place right now. They're not artificially suppressing ticket prices to appease you right now, so it's not like there's some limiter that would be removed out of necessity if guaranteed contracts forced franchises to ramp up revenue.
Once you start to realize that the NFL isn't intentionally leaving any ticketing revenue on the table right now, it necessarily follows that they aren't going to jack up ticket prices in response to OPEX changes because they're presumably already aiming to optimize ticket revenue (and full capacity).
Quote:
In comment 16078930 Toth029 said:
Quote:
Lamar Jackson wants more guaranteed money than Watson (probably more years then, too). That will destroy the QB market way more than it already is. No team is doing that. Lamar is being obtuse.
He’s trying to push the market, he may not be as dumb as everyone thinks and in the end it’s all negotiating. If someone gets desperate they will cave. If not he’ll take a lesser deal or the tag (or sit if he wants). He’s not losing anything by waiting.
He turned down a 3-year, $133M fully guaranteed.
He wants more than what Watson got. That's considerably more than what Allen and Mahomes got.
If this was Joe Burrow? I could possibly see the argument. Not for an oft-injured, not overly impressive passing QB like Jackson.
What you’d do doesn’t matter though. Calling him obtuse for trying to set a new market norm, which he’d likely get as a UFA is strange. The hate this guy is taking doesn’t make sense to me.
I wouldn’t give up picks and pay him a fully guaranteed contract either, but he’s not stupid or delusional for wanting and asking for that.
And the man demands $230M+ guaranteed? This isn't setting a high bar, it's being unrealistic.
Just look at there OP - it wasn’t too long ago that people thought Watson would never play again and not only did he sign a mega deal but it was fully guaranteed. Thinking Jackson isn’t being realistic doesn’t make any sense.
If Watson gets injured the Browns will likely wind up with an equal or better QB.