Jump to content

Jeremiah sirles released with an injury settlement


WMDman

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Ittakestime said:

 

Yes you can.  There is just a time frame on it.

 

I think it is 6 weeks 

Confirmed 6 weeks 

 

Injury settlements can also give a team a chance at getting a player back during that same season. There is a rule in place that the team (agreeing to a settlement) can’t resign that player until a minimum of six weeks passes following the amount of weeks of the initial settlement. So for our MCL example, the team cannot resign that player for the first eleven weeks. For a player who did a three week/3 game settlement, his team can’t sign him back until after week nine. However, the player is free to sign with another team.

 

https://nationalfootballpost.com/what-is-an-injury-settlement/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

I think it is 6 weeks 

 

It depends on the terms of the injury settlement... https://nationalfootballpost.com/what-is-an-injury-settlement/

 

Quote

WHAT IS AN INJURY SETTLEMENT?

 
 
 

As each NFL team tweaks their 53-man roster this week, there is still a steady stream of negotiations going on between agents and salary cap managers. Some teams are still rounding off their practice squads and building their emergency short list. The other lesser known activity is the negotiation of injury settlements.

Injury settlements are agreements between players and teams spelling out compensation and other terms in which the two parties will immediately part ways. For example, if a player suffered a preseason injury such as a knee MCL partial tear, it usually takes about six weeks to heal and for the player to get back to full strength. If the player sustained the injury in the final week of the preseason (7 days prior to the 53 cut down date) and all parties agreed it would take six weeks for a full recovery, the parties may agree on a five week regular game settlement. A five-week settlement is appropriate because the first week of the six weeks is still during the preseason. Thus, the player would have most likely missed five weeks of the regular season on the inactive or the injured reserved list. Therefore, the team will pay the player for those five weeks in trade for a full release of liability. So the player will be paid 5/17th of his salary (there are 17 weeks in the season.)

Here are some typical terms and/or components of an injury settlement:

-Player and his representatives release team, doctor, trainers and team’s agents from all liability associated with the injury.
-Team will be responsible for the costs of all second medical opinions, rehabilitation, medical and related expenses. A player may choose to rehab his injury at a place of his own choice.
– Player acknowledges that he has hereby been given notice that he may have rights under the applicable Workers’ Compensation laws of the state in which the team resides.
-Offset language preventing a player from double dipping. It usually goes like this:
The parties further agree if Player signs a new contract with another NFL Team during the first five weeks (using our MCL example) of the 2014 NFL Regular Season, Club’s obligation shall be reduced by the amount of any contractual compensation (including, without limitation, salary, signing, reporting, option and/or incentive bonuses) received or earned by Player from such other NFL Team and Player shall reimburse Club for any such amounts previously paid by Club.

Injury settlements are used in lieu of placing a player on the Injured Reserve (IR) until he is healthy enough to be released. If an injury is deemed to take longer than 17 weeks to recover the player will be placed on IR for the season and receive his full salary (unless he has a split contract). Injury settlements are also used to lighten the load of the training room. If a team has six players who have injuries that require rehabilitation it will tie up the time and resources of the training room. Teams want to move on from players they think wouldn’t have made their team, are expendable talents and/or are easily replaceable.

Injury settlements can also give a team a chance at getting a player back during that same season. There is a rule in place that the team (agreeing to a settlement) can’t resign that player until a minimum of six weeks passes following the amount of weeks of the initial settlement. So for our MCL example, the team cannot resign that player for the first eleven weeks. For a player who did a three week/3 game settlement, his team can’t sign him back until after week nine. However, the player is free to sign with another team.

If a player, usually upon the advice of his agent, doesn’t want to do an injury settlement, it’s the team’s obligation to rehab and give him medical treatment. Once the team and the team’s physician deem the player healthy enough to return to the field, the team will release the player from the injured list. If the player feels he is still injured, he has the right to file an injury grievance against the team. An independent arbitrator (as spelled out in the CBA) will hear the grievance.

Negotiating an injury settlement can be very tricky and can get downright nasty. A player has a right to a second opinion from a doctor of his choice. So a team doctor may say the injury should be completely healed in 6 weeks. A second opinion doctor may say that it could take up to ten weeks for the injury to heal. Therefore, the agent will ask the team for ten or even eleven weeks of salary. The team will propose five or six weeks. The two parties will usually reach an agreement in the middle of the two opinions. In most cases, agents will fight tooth and nail for a time beyond the predicted recovery table to make sure they don’t short change their client. Agents will also try to get a settlement equal to at least 3 game checks in order to garner that player a credited season which would lead to certain benefits if the player had at least three credited seasons. As agents, we know that injuries take longer to heal than what is typically projected.

Although this is how the system works, it is deeply flawed. For one, the system asks a salary cap manager/or GM and an agent to play doctor and predict when a player will be healthy. Two, it relieves teams of liability when an injury could possibly linger for months and/or years. Three, it takes the player out of a controlled football environment and sends him out on his own to rehab and workout.

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MR8 said:

 

It depends on the terms of the injury settlement... https://nationalfootballpost.com/what-is-an-injury-settlement/

 

 

 

Yeah I was just about to post that. It is a little more in depth than I First thought because it goes my game weeks not offseason weeks. So if Bills and him agree this is a 10 week recovery, which say runs into season to week 3. They won’t be able to re-sign until week 9. 

 

The 6 Weeks Start AFTER the original date of settlement health date 

 

but it still a 6 week wait no matter what. After original healthy date passes. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MAJBobby said:

 

Yeah I was just about to post that. It is a little more in depth than I First thought because it goes my game weeks not offseason weeks. So if Bills and him agree this is a 10 week recovery, which say runs into season to week 3. They won’t be able to re-sign until week 9. 

 

The 6 Weeks Start AFTER the original date of settlement health date 

 

but it still a 6 week wait no matter what. After original healthy date passes. 

 

 

Yeah that sounds about right.  Honestly I don't really care about Sirles, I don't think he was good enough for us to get up in a twist about... we have a bunch of guys on this roster as good or better, some of whom we are going to need to cut when we go down to the final 53... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MR8 said:

 

 

Yeah that sounds about right.  Honestly I don't really care about Sirles, I don't think he was good enough for us to get up in a twist about... we have a bunch of guys on this roster as good or better, some of whom we are going to need to cut when we go down to the final 53... 

 

Agree kind of cold but that is the business of the NFL. They knew he was too far behind at this point to make the backend of the roster. So wanted to Free Up trainers time to deal with INJ on players that will and said here is your money go rehab on your own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Agree kind of cold but that is the business of the NFL. They knew he was too far behind at this point to make the backend of the roster. So wanted to Free Up trainers time to deal with INJ on players that will and said here is your money go rehab on your own. 

 

Yeah it's definitely cold but they have limited resources across the board with coaches, trainers, and time, they need to put their effort into battles they can win, and when a guy falls way behind with an injury, the sad truth is he's of no use to them and is just sucking up time and resources they need for guys who can play... 

 

So Cut him a check and tell him we'll circle back when he's healthy, hopefully something can be done at that point.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Agree kind of cold but that is the business of the NFL. They knew he was too far behind at this point to make the backend of the roster. So wanted to Free Up trainers time to deal with INJ on players that will and said here is your money go rehab on your own. 

its is a cold business with a capital COLD I have had that beaten into me through numerous cuts of players I really admired ... Now its just rooting for the roster in general..a friend of mine calls it "rooting for the laundry"  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, muppy said:

its is a cold business with a capital COLD I have had that beaten into me through numerous cuts of players I really admired ... Now its just rooting for the roster in general..a friend of mine calls it "rooting for the laundry"  

 

Thats the Nature of the business. And I am ok with it. However that is what also always gets me with the “Honor the Contract” you signed Argument when it comes to players holding out. You Never hear that Honor the Contract Argument back to the Owners when cutting players 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Thats the Nature of the business. And I am ok with it. However that is what also always gets me with the “Honor the Contract” you signed Argument when it comes to players holding out. You Never hear that Honor the Contract Argument back to the Owners when cutting players 

YEP i get super annoyed when I hear that guys sign and then whine they want more money. Being in san diego an example here is they are dealing with Melvin Gordon I have not heard of any resolution there yet I firmly agree that if you signed it you should honor it. Period.

Edited by muppy
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Thats the Nature of the business. And I am ok with it. However that is what also always gets me with the “Honor the Contract” you signed Argument when it comes to players holding out. You Never hear that Honor the Contract Argument back to the Owners when cutting players 

 

That's why there is no loyalty between teams and players anymore.  "The Business of Football" has changed it significantly as the old guard of owners rotated out and new owners rotated in who were 100% about the money and not about "love of the game"... 

 

Ralph floated a no interest loan to the Raiders to help the make payroll back int he 1980s... that kind of stuff doesn't happen anymore.  If a team didn't have the money to make payroll they'd shame that team into leaving that city and finding new ways to "maximize profits"...

 

The league has changed, and the players have had to change as well... they're selfish, and they need to be, because the teams don't give a ***** about them... they need to get theirs while the getting is good, because there are a thousand college football players coming out of college every year looking to replace them, plus how many thousands of others in the NFL or other leagues looking for that shot too...  If you can get paid... GET PAID! otherwise you may miss the boat and never have a shot again.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, muppy said:

YEP i get super annoyed when I hear that guys sign and then whine they want more money. Being in san diego an example here is they are dealing with Melvin Gordon I have not heard of any resolution there yet I firmly agree that if you signed it you should honor it. Period.

 

Then that goes to Teams as well right. They Signed it They should Honor it. Not Cut a player 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, muppy said:

YEP i get super annoyed when I hear that guys sign and then whine they want more money. Being in san diego an example here is they are dealing with Melvin Gordon I have not heard of any resolution there yet I firmly agree that if you signed it you should honor it. Period.

 

I dunno Muppy, I am on the fence on this...

 

Melvin Gordon wants an extension so he isn't risking injury before heading into a FA period... that's actually reasonable.  Where as guys like OBJ and Antonio Brown who are vets with 3 + years LEFT On their MEGA deals, and they want more money just because other guys have signed bigger deals in the 1-2 years since they signed theirs... that's just flat out greedy BS, and they should be ashamed....  

 

There is "get paid when you can" and "money grubbing dick bag"... I feel like most guys are just trying to get paid while they can... but there are definitely the money grubbers who make the rest look bad.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Then that goes to Teams as well right. They Signed it They should Honor it. Not Cut a player 

That is a really interesting take and It is logical that my premise should indeed cut both ways but clearly doesn't. I would then have to say that the contract itself is written what moneys is paid if a guy is cut while signing a deal and he does sign that as part of the deal I guess Im just a "if you sign it dont cry later you're not happy because someone else is earning more wah wah wha I just dont care for that.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MR8 said:

 

I dunno Muppy, I am on the fence on this...

 

Melvin Gordon wants an extension so he isn't risking injury before heading into a FA period... that's actually reasonable.  Where as guys like OBJ and Antonio Brown who are vets with 3 + years LEFT On their MEGA deals, and they want more money just because other guys have signed bigger deals in the 1-2 years since they signed theirs... that's just flat out greedy BS, and they should be ashamed....  

 

There is "get paid when you can" and "money grubbing dick bag"... I feel like most guys are just trying to get paid while they can... but there are definitely the money grubbers who make the rest look bad.

Thanks man that is a great post right there....I shouldn't simply assume he is solely greedy for his holdout...it was the greedy ones I have more of an issue with.

 

Bottom line have a Great agent who will advocate for you STRONGLY uphold YOUR interests Period. Get Paid. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Then that goes to Teams as well right. They Signed it They should Honor it. Not Cut a player 

 

This is something the NFLPA wants out of the new CBA, they want guaranteed contracts like the NHL have... you can cut a guy, but they're still guaranteed the money you have said they'll make...

 

The NFL for years have had a sweetheart deal with their players because they can sign these inflated deals for $100M where they're still only on the hook for say $50M, and if they dump a guy early they don't need to pay them even that, they just need to "account" for "guaranteed money" against the cap, they are not on the hook for the actual cash value to the player... 

 

 

Guaranteed contracts would change the way the NFL does business over night... 

 

Edited by MR8
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MR8 said:

 

This is something the NFLPA wants out of the new CBA, they want guaranteed contracts like the NFL have... you can cut a guy, but they're still guaranteed the money you have said they'll make...

 

The NFL for years have had a sweetheart deal with their players because they can sign these inflated deals for $100M where they're still only on the hook for say $50M, and if they dump a guy early they don't need to pay them even that, they just need to "account" for "guaranteed money" against the cap, they are not on the hook for the actual cash value to the player... 

 

 

Guaranteed contracts would change the way the NFL does business over night... 

 

They should have it.  Then just like with the Rookie Salary table Offsets get put in contract.  So If a team still owes that player 15M on his contract but then he signs a NEW contract with another team for 10M then the cutting team only owes 5M of that Salary.  

 

I look at it as my life.  If I want a Raise and I can show I deserve a raise I can either get the raise, suck it up, or Find employment elsewhere.  Players dont HAVE that leverage they can ask if told NO they have to suck it up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MAJBobby said:

They should have it.  Then just like with the Rookie Salary table Offsets get put in contract.  So If a team still owes that player 15M on his contract but then he signs a NEW contract with another team for 10M then the cutting team only owes 5M of that Salary.  

 

I look at it as my life.  If I want a Raise and I can show I deserve a raise I can either get the raise, suck it up, or Find employment elsewhere.  Players dont HAVE that leverage they can ask if told NO they have to suck it up.  

 

 

True, but you didn't sign a contract... if you signed a 3 year contract at your current salary rate, you would be told you need to honor it, and you wouldn't have the freedom to just leave and get a raise... 

 

On the flip side from labor, the company you work for may not have the ability to pay you more so you leave are are a mercinary for money, and they put the time effort and money into developing you and you are leaving them in a lurch to need to bring in someone else and put that time and effort into developing them instead.  Where's the loyalty to them for the time investment they put in?

 

It's a double edge sword, and neither side is 100% right or wrong.  

 

Industry will do what's best for itself and sometimes what best for the workers, and workers will do what's best for themselves and sometimes do what's best for the industry.... If everyone is out for themselves (industry and worker) then there will always be these conflicts... but no where do you have industry taking care of their workers to the point where the workers don't want to leave ever...  It just doesn't exist... 

 

Long story short, contracts should be guaranteed... but that is also going to mean changes being made to salary cap rules and how things are accounted for moving forward, because all of a sudden over night the penalties for cutting guys would change DRAMATICALLY... so it would need to be a multi-year phase in process with amnesty "buy-outs" sorta speak where you can cut a guy making a lot of money, but it doesn't destroy your cap. 

 

Lots of logistics would need to be worked out, but it would make understanding the salary cap much easier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MR8 said:

 

 

True, but you didn't sign a contract... if you signed a 3 year contract at your current salary rate, you would be told you need to honor it, and you wouldn't have the freedom to just leave and get a raise... 

 

On the flip side from labor, the company you work for may not have the ability to pay you more so you leave are are a mercinary for money, and they put the time effort and money into developing you and you are leaving them in a lurch to need to bring in someone else and put that time and effort into developing them instead.  Where's the loyalty to them for the time investment they put in?

 

It's a double edge sword, and neither side is 100% right or wrong.  

 

Industry will do what's best for itself and sometimes what best for the workers, and workers will do what's best for themselves and sometimes do what's best for the industry.... If everyone is out for themselves (industry and worker) then there will always be these conflicts... but no where do you have industry taking care of their workers to the point where the workers don't want to leave ever...  It just doesn't exist... 

 

Long story short, contracts should be guaranteed... but that is also going to mean changes being made to salary cap rules and how things are accounted for moving forward, because all of a sudden over night the penalties for cutting guys would change DRAMATICALLY... so it would need to be a multi-year phase in process with amnesty "buy-outs" sorta speak where you can cut a guy making a lot of money, but it doesn't destroy your cap. 

 

Lots of logistics would need to be worked out, but it would make understanding the salary cap much easier. 

 

True however ONLY time I ever signed a Contract for employment is when I was in the Military.  Since then I refuse to.  Because my freedom is my leverage.  But then again in my world of Defense Contacting employment contracts are few and far between anyway, because if they want to downsize staff (do to losing a major contract) they have alot of Settlements to pay out.  So it fits well for me, I also have never been denied a raise that I have went in and asked for and shown why I should get it Since I have become a Civilian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...