Darius Slay claimed on waivers by Buffalo

[boyst]

33 minutes ago, boyst said:

the contract he signed is carried by waivers to the team who signs him

@Rochesterfanwhy did you disagree? we take on his contract because we signed him.

[The Jokeman]

49 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

If they don't have to, so much the better.

We wouldn't and according to https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/darius-slay-wont-commit-as-to-whether-he-would-have-reported-to-the-eagles we'd get money.

 

The other wrinkle relates to the ability of the Bills to play hardball with Slay. If Slay fails to report, a portion of his $8.745 million signing bonus could be recovered by the Bills, even though the Bills paid none of it. It’s a simple proposition. The signing bonus represents advance compensation for future services. Failing to provide those services exposes the player to losing some of that compensation.

[Rochesterfan]

Just now, boyst said:

@Rochesterfanwhy did you disagree? we take on his contract because we signed him.

We only pay him if he reports.  If he decides to “retire” or sit out we can put him on the did not report and he does not get paid.

 

We have to hold the money, but his contract is contingent on him being here and playing.

[Matt_In_NH]

55 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

But he signed in Pittsburgh and did not “move his family”. They were still living in Philly.

And he got $9.7 million for doing that, I did not intend to say it was just where is family is or is not, sorry it you took it that way.  I laid out the financial benefits for him to go finish the season somewhere else.  It is not just one thing (money or family) it is several.  At least I bet those are the things going through his head and discussing with his agent.  

43 minutes ago, boyst said:

the contract he signed is carried by waivers to the team who signs him

And that contract has parameters for both parties, he does not get to not show up and get paid his base.

[boyst]

25 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

We only pay him if he reports.  If he decides to “retire” or sit out we can put him on the did not report and he does not get paid.

 

We have to hold the money, but his contract is contingent on him being here and playing.

Ah yes that nuance. I was only concerned with the consumption of money against the cap (that is if his balance is in the top 51)

[RoyBatty is alive]

23 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

We wouldn't and according to https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/darius-slay-wont-commit-as-to-whether-he-would-have-reported-to-the-eagles we'd get money.

 

The other wrinkle relates to the ability of the Bills to play hardball with Slay. If Slay fails to report, a portion of his $8.745 million signing bonus could be recovered by the Bills, even though the Bills paid none of it. It’s a simple proposition. The signing bonus represents advance compensation for future services. Failing to provide those services exposes the player to losing some of that compensation.

Interesting, so in theory this could all be a potential money grab or do I not comprehend all the nuances?

[BRH]

After hearing what he said, I wish him a merry Christmas and a happy new year at home with his family while he remains on our reserve/did not report list and explains to his wife that he just gave up $2.5M in prorated signing bonus in order to do that.

[quincy]

2 minutes ago, BRH said:

After hearing what he said, I wish him a merry Christmas and a happy new year at home with his family while he remains on our reserve/did not report list and explains to his wife that he just gave up $2.5M in prorated signing bonus in order to do that.

 

We probably will not do that in order not to scare away any future free agents or waiver claim players (according to what is commonly believed). 

 

 

[Beck Water]

18 minutes ago, boyst said:

Ah yes that nuance. I was only concerned with the consumption of money against the cap (that is if his balance is in the top 51)

 
Top 51  is just for the off-season

[paulmm3]

36 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

We only pay him if he reports.  If he decides to “retire” or sit out we can put him on the did not report and he does not get paid.

 

We have to hold the money, but his contract is contingent on him being here and playing.

 

You are correct and I was unfortunately relying on hallucinating AI. Even more reason we shouldn't help Slay become a Philadelphia Eagle.

[BRH]

52 minutes ago, quincy said:

 

We probably will not do that in order not to scare away any future free agents or waiver claim players (according to what is commonly believed). 

 

 

 

Not really sure how those are impacted.  If we release someone, we can't control what 31 other teams do in waivers (see, e.g., Houston).  And if we claim someone on waivers, that player isn't going to not report just because Darius Slay was a b1tch.

 

It's more about maintaining a good relationship with the other teams by keeping the "gentleman's agreement" about not claiming other teams' cuts.  

 

But Beane could already have been pissed at either Pittsburgh or Philly, or both, if he didn't feel they were acting in good faith before the trade deadline, which would have sent the "gentleman's agreement" out the window.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by BRH

[TheBrownBear]

34 minutes ago, quincy said:

 

We probably will not do that in order not to scare away any future free agents or waiver claim players (according to what is commonly believed). 

 

 

I doubt any player or agent holds that against us. He knew what he was opening himself up to when he forced the Steelers hand. Keep his rights and make him pay back the signing bonus.

[DapperCam]

2 hours ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

At this point, we're paying him $350k to not play against us in the SB, possibly.

 

$350k is to Terry Pegula what $10 is most of us.

 

***** Slay.

If he doesn’t report I don’t think we pay him anything.

[quincy]

23 minutes ago, BRH said:

It's more about maintaining a good relationship with the other teams by keeping the "gentleman's agreement" about not claiming other teams' cuts.  

 

Also, Beane could already have been pissed at either Pittsburgh or Philly, or both, if he didn't feel they were acting in good faith before the trade deadline.

 

 

You have convinced me, I am all in on team "recoup the signing bonus" now. 

[PromoTheRobot]

41 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Interesting, so in theory this could all be a potential money grab or do I not comprehend all the nuances?

The money thing just worked out that way. They'd rather Slay reports. But if being home with family is more important, then it's $2.5MM well spent...I guess.

1 minute ago, DapperCam said:

If he doesn’t report I don’t think we pay him anything.

 

Correct.

[quincy]

4 minutes ago, TheBrownBear said:

I doubt any player or agent holds that against us. He knew what he was opening himself up to when he forced the Steelers hand. Keep his rights and make him pay back the signing bonus.

 

I agree with you however it is the perception that players don't want to play here that irks me. 

 

i guess the Slay situation is somewhat unusual, there can't be many guys who have earned $100M plus be subject to waivers.

 

Let's say if he was claimed by Miami or either of the two LA teams, do you reckon the answer would be the same? Remember he's from the South! 

 

If he just wanted to retire all he has to do is just tell the Steelers without involving any other teams/processes. 

[Ralonzo]

1 hour ago, The Jokeman said:

We wouldn't and according to https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/darius-slay-wont-commit-as-to-whether-he-would-have-reported-to-the-eagles we'd get money.

 

The other wrinkle relates to the ability of the Bills to play hardball with Slay. If Slay fails to report, a portion of his $8.745 million signing bonus could be recovered by the Bills, even though the Bills paid none of it. It’s a simple proposition. The signing bonus represents advance compensation for future services. Failing to provide those services exposes the player to losing some of that compensation.

 

That sounds like staking out your neighbor's trash for a Christmas present they didn't want and threw out, grabbing it at night and returning it to the place they bought it.

 

Oh don't look at me like that, we've all done it! Right?

[TheBrownBear]

3 minutes ago, quincy said:

 

I agree with you however it is the perception that players don't want to play here that irks me. 

 

i guess the Slay situation is somewhat unusual, there can't be many guys who have earned $100M plus be subject to waivers.

 

Let's say if he was claimed by Miami or either of the two LA teams, do you reckon the answer would be the same? Remember he's from the South! 

 

If he just wanted to retire all he has to do is just tell the Steelers without involving any other teams/processes. 

I agree.  It's clear that he wasn't intending to retire.  He wanted to go to Philly.  Flat out.

 

And I'm not sure it's just about Buffalo and that he reports to another more "desirable" city.  He's 34, made plenty of cash and has 5 kids and his hottie wife sitting there in Philly. I think it really was Philly or bust, and unfortunately for him, he went bust.

[finn]

1 hour ago, Slippery Rubber Mats said:

 

I'll miss Whositnamenow, he was pretty good/bad idk I can;t even remember his name

Oh, come on. Whatshisname has been here for ages! At least since that other guy (forgot his name) drafted ahead of him out of that college somewhere in the Midwest. (Or was it the Southwest?) Now that he's gone, we'll miss him every day, good old... whathisname. 

[T.E.]

Sorry if it was already mentioned, but I watched a clip of McDermott discussing the whole thing, and he is his clearly doing everything in his power to conceal his boiling rage over the whole ordeal lol