Zero2Cool;469380Here's the pertinent section of the CBA.
https://overthecap.com/collective-bargaining-agreement/article/13/section/6

If a team wanted to give the guy the money, all they would have to do is give him a new contract after his 3rd and before his 4th year with no real additional years, which I don't believe the CBA bans nor blocks and we just did it with Jordan Love a few years ago.

So CBA only blocks them, when the team wants it to block them, as it's an excuse.

beast;469382If a team wanted to give the guy the money, all they would have to do is give him a new contract after his 3rd and before his 4th year with no real additional years, which I don't believe the CBA bans nor blocks and we just did it with Jordan Love a few years ago.

So CBA only blocks them, when the team wants it to block them, as it's an excuse.

Speculating here -- I wonder if it's different somehow for rookie contracts if you were in the first round due to the option of the 5th year? Although, I am not sure the Packers changed his rookie contract, did they? I thought they gave him basically a one year deal with early money.

There's also the element of when it applies against the salary cap. So, the Packers could negotiate with the players agent about the missed incentive. "Hey, it was two snaps, can we get a $2m kick on bonus?". That's not paying out the incentive on the rookie contract, it's just not being douchebags over two snaps, lol.


Edit: Jordan Love was given a one year deal in place of the 5th year option. So rookie contract was four years and was exhausted and Packers gave him one year deal.
[attach]4703[/attach]

The bottom line for me, is that if the Packers wanted to, they could give him a brand new contract, that looked exactly the same as his current one, but with the extra money that he missed out on... if they wanted to.

They don't want to, and that's smart of them. I'm NOT knocking the decision... just noting that it's the Packers decision, not the the CBA that's actually stopping them from doing so.

beast;469386The bottom line for me, is that if the Packers wanted to, they could give him a brand new contract, that looked exactly the same as his current one, but with the extra money that he missed out on... if they wanted to.

They don't want to, and that's smart of them. I'm NOT knocking the decision... just noting that it's the Packers decision, not the the CBA that's actually stopping them from doing so.

Can they give him the money in new contract? Yes.
Can they alter the rookie contract? No.

Did he get a new contract yet?

Zero2Cool;469387Can they give him the money in new contract? Yes.
Can they alter the rookie contract? No.

Did he get a new contract yet?

You're missing the point... they could give it to him today if they wanted to.

Keeping the rest of the contract the same

Saying they can't do it, is just a BS verbal excuse.

beast;469389You're missing the point... they could give it to him today if they wanted to.

Keeping the rest of the contract the same

Saying they can't do it, is just a BS verbal excuse.

It's easy to miss a point when it is as sharp as a bowling ball.

Yes, they can extend him and add in the $2 million (or whatever the amount) into the new contract. There's no reason to unless they decide they want to keep him. The incentive was put in place for a reason. He narrowly missed it. Rhyan performs well in 2025, you can bet he'll get it in some shape or form. I just don't see it happening until they are convinced they want him/need him beyond 2025.

beast;469389You're missing the point... they could give it to him today if they wanted to.

Keeping the rest of the contract the same

Saying they can't do it, is just a BS verbal excuse.

Can you explain your reasoning Beast. If a player has a contract and failed to meet the bonus requirements how is the team able to give him $2 million dollars?

I would think the CBA would prohibit randomly giving players extra money simply because they like him. Even of they could, I would think it sets a horrible precedent for the other players.
Someone else may miss their bonus by 10 snaps. Or 15 receptions. Or 5 interceptions. Where do you draw the line?
What happens if 5 players are all 1 or two plays away from their escalator clauses but the team is in cap hell?
How about a guy who will get a $15 mil adjustment to his contract instead of $2 mil?

I think it's simple. Sorry you didn't make it. Life is hard. You have to settle for a $1 million dollars instead of $3.

Edit- I see the CBA has been discussed. I guess I should read all the posts before commiting.
I still don't think it is allowed.

wpr;469406Can you explain your reasoning Beast. If a player has a contract and failed to meet the bonus requirements how is the team able to give him $2 million dollars?

I would think the CBA would prohibit randomly giving players extra money simply because they like him. Even of they could, I would think it sets a horrible precedent for the other players.
Someone else may miss their bonus by 10 snaps. Or 15 receptions. Or 5 interceptions. Where do you draw the line?
What happens if 5 players are all 1 or two plays away from their escalator clauses but the team is in cap hell?
How about a guy who will get a $15 mil adjustment to his contract instead of $2 mil?

I think it's simple. Sorry you didn't make it. Life is hard. You have to settle for a $1 million dollars instead of $3.

Edit- I see the CBA has been discussed. I guess I should read all the posts before commiting.
I still don't think it is allowed.

I don't think it should be done, I'm simply saying blaming the CBA is nothing for an excuse, as they can do it if they wanted to do it, not that they should do it.

You can give players money as long as you account for it and stay under the cap limit.