09-09-2024, 11:11 PM
(09-09-2024, 10:49 PM)fisherscatfan Wrote: It keeps coming up because of the Watson contract fundamentally shifting the guarantee money market. Players signed big contracts for many years and they could be cut and not paid unless the money was guaranteed. Historically Watson’s contract blew up the norm for guaranteed money. The NFL has a stipulation that the NFL “may” (from what I have read) require escrow for guaranteed money but I’m asking if that is required.
Jerry Jones is in a hell of a lot better cash flow situation to fund guaranteed amounts than Mike Brown as MBs wealth appears to be tied directly to the Bengals. So while the salary cap limitations should provide a competitive balance if teams required to fund escrows for guaranteed amounts, owners who have paper worth only because of the franchise value are at a disadvantage to owners that have other cash flow streams.
All of this true and common knowledge, everyone knows this? And yes, we are definitely at a huge disadvantage. But none of it has to do with the accusation that owners do not honor contracts....they do honor the contracts.
As to the guaranteed money that is required to be escrowed, it depends. There are multiple types of "guaranteed" monies in a large contract. There are skill guarantees, cap guarantees, and/or injury guarantees. Signing bonuses are guaranteed and do not require escrow. The first years salary is always guaranteed on big deals and not required to be escrowed. Roster bonuses and other "rolling bonuses" do not require escrow. There is a deductible amount that doesnt have to be escrowed.
And the funding date of the guaranteed money isnt required until the next year.
