6 hours ago
(11 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Has been brought up many times already. The teams that have these clauses, have a more front-loaded payout of the signing bonuses. If it's front-loaded, you get it sooner and it can't be as much voided at the whim of your boss.
The problem with the Bengals is that they are trying to adopt the clause, but ALSO want to keep their original signing bonus payout plan that is more spread out and disadvantageous to the player.
How do you know all the other NFL teams pay their players the full amount of money upfront? That claim sounds highly unlikely to me that the Bengals would be the only team in the NFL to spread the payments out while every other team pays the money upfront.
(11 hours ago)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Ray Rice was under his second contract. It wasn't his rookie deal.
So that makes it ok? My point wasnt what year contract he was on. My point is was if you knock out your girlfriend, teams shouldnt be forced to keep those players signed to guaranteed contracts regardless. In Stewart's case we are talking about someone who would be on his rookie contract which is common to have these type conduct clauses.
