Beason - what would make him a guinea pig?

If that's really the case I support the team, if it isn't then do a standard contract. We need this guy in camp.

 

True, but I didn't read that. I can't read the SI article though. My impression was that everyone, including us, used these second year bonuses. They are basically roster bonuses, and when the courts decreed this past year that teams could not recoup roster bonuses, whether they are prorated or not, that increased everyone's risk.

I know we have included such bonuses in the past, Morgan and Peppers each got them. Don't know about recent draft picks.

 

I agree as well, and I've always sided with the front offices against holdouts.

 

This doesn't sound like a roster bonus to me. We can avoid payment of roster bonuses by cutting the player. His agent wants this bonus in the guaranteed money.

And I don't think "every" other team is doing these option bonuses. Even the agent is quoted as saying "most" other teams. Just like the voidable years this seems to be against the team's policy.

 

How many times do people have to correct you before it finally sinks in? I'm just curious.

 

Basically, the agent wants the 2nd option that can't be recouped no matter what once it's paid, while the team wants the bonus in the 3rd year as a roster bonus which can be recouped if for some reason the player bolts, is suspended, etc.

While the agent has pointed out that Beason would be the lowest paid 1st rounder in his second year (which isn't that big of a stretch anyway, being that he is a late 1st round pick), he fails to mention he would be one of the highest in the third. The panthers are not trying to take any money away from Beason, they are only moving it to structure that would protect them if he screws them in some way. If Beason is the stand-up guy he is reported to be, then he will get his money regardless.

So, the agent is simply posturing for future players.

 

I understand that but since the dollars are small it reduces the importance of when they are paid out. Why dick around when the contract is small by NFL standards?

There seems to be some conflicting reports on what the standard is for rookies. If most teams are giving out the second year roster bonus then we should do that as well. If that is just BS then we should prepare for Beason to miss all of camp.

 

What if he is a perfect stand up guy and gets hurt in year two?

 

yes

 

I already am, and frankly if he chooses to sit I'm not gonna worry about it. I don't want this team to start getting bullied by ass hole agents. We already overspend for most of our guys, the least we can do is stand up to their shitty contract demands. From the way it looks the only way Beason wouldn't get the bonuses, is if he holds out later while under contract, or breaks some huge team rule causing him to be cut. Basically if he stays outta trouble and plays he'll be paid. I see nothing wrong with this logic.