Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Awesome news regarding TRich's contract: Colts can walk away from his ~$3M guaranteed because of suspension.


Dustin

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Was this stipulation written into his contract from the Browns that we inherited?

If the suspension was geared toward doing this, it is a pretty underhanded move by the Front Office.

if my memory serves me correctly he was suspended due to missing the walk through for the patriots game
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was this stipulation written into his contract from the Browns that we inherited?

 

If the suspension was geared toward doing this, it is a pretty underhanded move by the Front Office.

 

He was suspended for missing walkthroughs, which he admitted to doing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there are particulars in his contract, then this could be true.

 

Per league rules, if a player is suspended by the league, it can void future guarantees on his contract. But anything that's specific to the player's contract, while it has to be approved by the league, it can go beyond league rules.

 

My initial response was "no, that's not the way it works." But Dominik says this is written into his contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was this stipulation written into his contract from the Browns that we inherited?

 

If the suspension was geared toward doing this, it is a pretty underhanded move by the Front Office.

 

Depends on the situation. He very obviously missed the team walkthrough, and so, he earned the suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there are particulars in his contract, then this could be true.

 

Per league rules, if a player is suspended by the league, it can void future guarantees on his contract. But anything that's specific to the player's contract, while it has to be approved by the league, it can go beyond league rules.

 

My initial response was "no, that's not the way it works." But Dominik says this is written into his contract.

 

Didn't Cleveland do the same thing? Gordon's suspension made it so he didn't accure a full season and I didn't hear anyone (NFLPA) make a big deal about that.

 

Don't really know if that falls under the same category. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if my memory serves me correctly he was suspended due to missing the walk through for the patriots game

 

 

He was suspended for missing walkthroughs, which he admitted to doing. 

 

 

If there are particulars in his contract, then this could be true.

 

Per league rules, if a player is suspended by the league, it can void future guarantees on his contract. But anything that's specific to the player's contract, while it has to be approved by the league, it can go beyond league rules.

 

My initial response was "no, that's not the way it works." But Dominik says this is written into his contract.

 

Yes, but has there not been a lot of fogginess around the particulars of this suspension? Did he have a genuine reason?

 

I have not heard enough to say either way... but if the Colts used a technicality to avoid paying a player money that they are contractually owed, then I wouldn't be a big fan of the tact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Cleveland do the same thing? Gordon's suspension made it so he didn't accure a full season and I didn't hear anyone (NFLPA) make a big deal about that.

 

Don't really know if that falls under the same category. 

 

I don't think it falls under the same category.

 

Gordon was suspended by the league, not the Browns. And it was a drug-related suspension, which I believe it has to be for future guarantees to be automatically voided.

 

Richardson was suspended by the team. Technically, a team could suspend any player at the end of the year and void their future guarantees. The Bears could have suspended Jay Cutler in order to get out of his contract.

 

I'm sort of talking out of my butt here, because I haven't looked up the specific rules and I don't know the particulars of Richardson's contract, but according to what Mark Dominik tweeted (this is the former GM of the Bucs, right?), there is specific language in Richardson's contract that allows for his guarantees to be voided in the event of a suspension. That would be separate from the league rule, as that language wouldn't be needed in a player contract; it's a league rule. So it could apply to non drug-related suspensions. It could also be specific to suspensions stemming from arrests or violent acts or something like that. I'm assuming again, but I don't think Dominik would tweet something like this, something that really doesn't involve him or a player on his former team, unless he has seen the contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it falls under the same category.

 

Gordon was suspended by the league, not the Browns. And it was a drug-related suspension, which I believe it has to be for future guarantees to be automatically voided.

 

Richardson was suspended by the team. Technically, a team could suspend any player at the end of the year and void their future guarantees. The Bears could have suspended Jay Cutler in order to get out of his contract.

 

I'm sort of talking out of my butt here, because I haven't looked up the specific rules and I don't know the particulars of Richardson's contract, but according to what Mark Dominik tweeted (this is the former GM of the Bucs, right?), there is specific language in Richardson's contract that allows for his guarantees to be voided in the event of a suspension. That would be separate from the league rule, as that language wouldn't be needed in a player contract; it's a league rule. So it could apply to non drug-related suspensions. It could also be specific to suspensions stemming from arrests or violent acts or something like that. I'm assuming again, but I don't think Dominik would tweet something like this, something that really doesn't involve him or a player on his former team, unless he has seen the contract.

 

Gordon was suspended by the Browns for missing a walkthrough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but has there not been a lot of fogginess around the particulars of this suspension? Did he have a genuine reason?

 

I have not heard enough to say either way... but if the Colts used a technicality to avoid paying a player money that they are contractually owed, then I wouldn't be a big fan of the tact.

 

He didn't call the team in advance to tell them he'd miss walkthrough. Or so the story goes. So either way, it appears the suspension is earned and valid. We'll probably learn more.

 

And so long as I understand correctly, Richardson's guaranteed money is already in escrow. If the Colts don't have a legitimate reason to withhold his guaranteed money, then it won't be withheld. I guess that doesn't speak directly to your concern, but all things told, I don't have any sympathy for the guy. He missed walkthrough, he (evidently) didn't inform the team, and he earned the suspension. If it triggers a clause in his contract, and the Colts were probably going to axe him anyway, that's just collateral damage (or windfall, in the Colts case).

 

I guess I get your angle. But it doesn't bother me. And that's not just because Richardson is a bad player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if my memory serves me correctly he was suspended due to missing the walk through for the patriots game

 

 

Depends on the situation. He very obviously missed the team walkthrough, and so, he earned the suspension.

 

He obviously missed the walkthrough, which is grounds for suspension.  However, what are folks' thoughts on him being suspended, then cut without pay if he missed the walkthrough because he had a very serious family emergency?

 

*Disregard - I missed AntonMcG's post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah. I forgot about that.

 

If the Browns didn't pay him for that game, then he doesn't accrue a season. That's a similar situation.

 

Right, Gordon wasn't paid for enough games this year to accrue a season. It was him being suspended without pay for the last game that made it the case. He was only paid for 5 games, instead of the 6 need to accrue a season. 

 

His is a completely different situation than TRich, however. I'd be interested to see the language in TRich's contract. This almost sounds to good to be true/too convenient. That said, there's rumblings from local media that there is much more to the story, like him being escorted out of the complex by force prior to missing walk through. IDK...this could get interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In a year when the Colts were in serious need of a QB and in position to draft one, Ballard came up in front of the media 3 days before the draft and straight up said something to the effect of "That guy everybody in media is talking about(Levis), we are not taking him". I don't know why you think the Colts are trying to throw us off the scent this year specifically. They are not trying to give us away the pick(thus the vagueness), but I also don't really think they are trying to mislead anybody. This usually becomes specifically apparent in retrospect after the draft when you look back at a lot of those quotes in the videos they release pre-draft... and they were talking precisely about players we ended up drafting, which they reveal in the post-draft video by extending some of those quotes(they did that with AR last year for example).    And about why people are doing it(guessing who they are talking about) - because it is fun. Nobody has the illusion that we will be right in our guesses 100% of the time... or anywhere close really... but it's still fun. And it's part of why the Colts release those videos with those quotes - to create engagement with the fanbase... part of which, and the entirety of which that 70 pages thread and whole board is about in the offseason. is to guess who the Colts might take and how they might feel about specific prospects.
    • Sir, I was just trying to help you out. No good deed goes unpunished! 
    • Not the least bit surprised to hear from you at this moment.   You see me in an uncomfortable conversation (with a moderator no less) and you seize the moment to take a shot at me.  And you try to act like you’re giving me a sincere explanation of what you’re doing.   Like you have an ounce of credibility with me.      This is not the first time you’ve done this.  While I may not be surprised, I’m certainly disappointed.   
    • Things have now gone from bad to worse.     After I explained myself, I was kind of hoping you’d simply come back with “I’m sorry, I misunderstood you,  may bad.”  And we’d be done with this.  It would be over.      But instead, you double down on the roommate issue and follow up by questioning everything I said by breaking down some of my comments and what you think I really meant by them.     In other words, you’re telling me my motive, my meaning, as if you know my meaning better than I do.    It’s interesting to me…. I was recently told there’s an unofficial moderator policy:  don’t attack the poster, attack the argument.    Well, I don’t see that here.  You attacked me personally the first time and instead of a simple apology, you’ve double downed on a bad hand by attacking me personally AGAIN.      Why you’re comfortable telling me you know my meaning , my intention, better than I do is mystifying to me.  And frankly, I think you’re comfortable doing this because one of us is a moderator, and it certainly is NOT me.     I’ll say it again: you misunderstood my meaning, and intention,  the first time, and you’ve misunderstood me even worse the second time.   As I said before, I’m happy to withdraw and apologize for “go figure”, but the negative inference was not my intention.  Poorly phrased, I give you (in two posts now).   I don’t know what else to say…. I’m hoping this brings this very unfortunate exchange to an end.       
    • I don't think Worthy is a good fit for Richardson's skill set. Think tall with a large catch radius for Richardson to be successful. I don't think u pair a smurf wr with a qb who may have accuracy issues. That's just me
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...