View Single Post
  #107  
Old 03-28-2019, 02:30 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610 View Post
You should read up on contracts, options, and how the NFL salary cap works, because your comments here are reflecting a poor understanding of these concepts.

Point by point:

1) Roster bonuses are only ever guaranteed if you're on the roster on the day the bonus requires. This money is always referred to as guaranteed when the figure is reported, but it isn't actually guaranteed unless the team decides to keep the player on the roster.

2) Yes, options have buyouts. That's what makes them options, the team has the OPTION to pay the full salary and keep the player, or pay a lesser amount, the buyout, and terminate the contract. It's structured a little differently in the NFL, but the functional effect is the same.

3) No, it doesn't. Justin Houston is a very good player who could still possibly produce at an elite level. Considering the player and the position, the Colts got a very good deal.

4) I still don't understand why you believe this contract is bad, or at the very least not good. You haven't really explained that well. If you think Houston is washed up, you're entitled to that opinion, but you're arguing against his production in that case, and he's actually produced quite well in the past 2 seasons. I see no other logical reason why anyone could consider this contract a not good contract.
Thanks for the advice Thurgood, I can see you’ve got an amazing grasp of “contracts, options, and how the NFL salary cap works”.

Dude, like many you don’t even seem to recognize what you don’t know. The term “roster bonus” indeed implies that it is contingent upon being on a roster, which is precisely why I said (from the outset) it was confusing that Holder called it guaranteed. However, the truth is that you and I have no idea what that contract says or how the guarantees work, but you somehow feel supremely qualified to speak, condescendingly no less, about the terms anyway. I pointed this out in an earlier post to help you out, but you ignored it for some reason. Regardless, I’ll work with the info Holder (who might actually know something) has provided, until I learn otherwise.

As far as your “option” argument – whatever. An option gives the holder the option to buy or sell something at a pre-arranged price/time. A buyout clause allows someone to extinguish an obligation at a preset price/time. One creates an obligation, the other extinguishes it. They are different concepts – look it up.

Lastly, as for Houston himself, I’ve got nothing against the guy and never said it was a bad signing. I’ve merely expressed a bit of concern over spending a lot of money on a guy on the downside of his career, and who has been injured a lot over the last few years and will be changing teams and positions. I think if the Raiders entered into the same contract with him, nobody here would be raving about what a great signing the Raiders had made. Regardless, I’m still excited to have him – it’s just not the type of signing that I’d envisioned the Colts making. That’s all I’ve said. All my other comments were directed to those who sought to justify the signing based not upon Houston’s skills or other football qualifications, but rather on the simple fact that we have a lot of cap space. That is nonsense.
Reply With Quote