Bill from NYC Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 As per the NFL players agreement, RW SHOULD count toward the phish 05 salary cap. Correct so far? Also, a judge ruled that RW owes the dolphins some of his signing bonus money. My question is.....Will the dolphins (or have they already) appeal this to the NFL? Should they be penalized when a judge did rule that RW violated his contract? My guess is that the NFL will negate the cap hit. If this was the Bills by the way, I would doubt that they would do so. Anyway, I think they will get at least some of the cap hit taken away, sign Drew Brees, and cut Fiedler. Any info/opinions would be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clumping platelets Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Ricky Williams is not even listed on NFLPA.org anymore. The answer is no....he does not count on their cap Miami had no cap hit for RW in 2004 and likely not have one in 2005. When he was traded, signing bonus amortization was assumed by the Saints, RW only counted salary and LTBE/NLTBE on Miami cap. Thus, he could have hypothetically been released with NO dead cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Ricky Williams is not even listed on NFLPA.org anymore. The answer is no....he does not count on their cap Miami had no cap hit for RW in 2004 and likely not have one in 2005. When he was traded, signing bonus amortization was assumed by the Saints, RW only counted salary and LTBE/NLTBE on Miami cap. Thus, he could have hypothetically been released with NO dead cap. 217745[/snapback] and this is why i still find it remarkable that the dolphins won their claim against him......... they didn't pay him any bonus money, the saints did....... they did pay him incentives, which he earned on the field....... i don't think he should have to pay back one cent to the phins........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightRider Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 I thought he got an extension while with the fish... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clumping platelets Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 and this is why i still find it remarkable that the dolphins won their claim against him......... they didn't pay him any bonus money, the saints did....... they did pay him incentives, which he earned on the field....... i don't think he should have to pay back one cent to the phins........ 217835[/snapback] When Miami acquired him, they re-worked his deal (no signing bonus) to make the incentives more reachable. They also put in a clause that if RW did not honor the deal (i.e. retire), then Miami could get the incentive money back. Now, I do not agree with Miami getting the signing bonus money, unless, of course, they are going to send it to the Saints. Saints paid it and took all cap hits from it. I agree with Miami getting the incentive money back but not the signing bonus money. I've not read anything that sez Miami will get any cap credit(s) if/when they receive the money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 When Miami acquired him, they re-worked his deal (no signing bonus) to make the incentives more reachable. They also put in a clause that if RW did not honor the deal (i.e. retire), then Miami could get the incentive money back. Now, I do not agree with Miami getting the signing bonus money, unless, of course, they are going to send it to the Saints. Saints paid it and took all cap hits from it. I agree with Miami getting the incentive money back but not the signing bonus money. I've not read anything that sez Miami will get any cap credit(s) if/when they receive the money 217849[/snapback] but didn't ricky earn that incentive money by putting up numbers on the field? it wasn't a signing bonus (i.e. paid with the expectation of future performance).......it was paid based on PAST performance because ricky busted his a** and put up big time numbers...... i've heard about the clause, but hasn't the NFLPA argued that clause is illegal and in conflict with state laws on performance based contracts?.......the bottom line is his agents should have done a better job and taken that clause out, but i still don't see how logically he should have to repay what he earned on the field.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clumping platelets Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 but didn't ricky earn that incentive money by putting up numbers on the field? it wasn't a signing bonus (i.e. paid with the expectation of future performance).......it was paid based on PAST performance because ricky busted his a** and put up big time numbers...... i've heard about the clause, but hasn't the NFLPA argued that clause is illegal and in conflict with state laws on performance based contracts?.......the bottom line is his agents should have done a better job and taken that clause out, but i still don't see how logically he should have to repay what he earned on the field.. 217851[/snapback] Agents approved it, RW signed it, and the NFLPA sez nada until he's sued? Nope, NFLPA should have said something long before the situation arose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col_forbin Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 As per the NFL players agreement, RW SHOULD count toward the phish 05 salary cap. Correct so far? Also, a judge ruled that RW owes the dolphins some of his signing bonus money. My question is.....Will the dolphins (or have they already) appeal this to the NFL? Should they be penalized when a judge did rule that RW violated his contract? My guess is that the NFL will negate the cap hit. If this was the Bills by the way, I would doubt that they would do so. Anyway, I think they will get at least some of the cap hit taken away, sign Drew Brees, and cut Fiedler. Any info/opinions would be appreciated. 217226[/snapback] It's good to see the word PHISH on these boards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Agents approved it, RW signed it, and the NFLPA sez nada until he's sued? Nope, NFLPA should have said something long before the situation arose. 217874[/snapback] i'm not debating that the NFLPA dropped the ball here.......they screwed up and should have protected the player.........but the fact remains the law is the law, and if this clause is in conflict to the law, it should be over-turned....... but beyond all the legal elements around it, i still don't see how it makes any logical sense.......he earned the money based on past performance and should, logically, get to keep his money....... there is no right or wrong answer here -- it's a very gray issue........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clumping platelets Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 The clause was added as a condition of altering RW's original rookie deal. Both the NFL and NFLPA approved the deal, thus I have to believe that it is legal. But, oh well, it's fun to see the Fins like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts