Quote
JamesJM
"It is binding---except in circumstances where either the team or the player believe that the contract is too much or too little, respectively." - - -

There is absolutely no chance that is anything other than allowing perception and interpretation to void the contract. It's not different than saying "red is always red unless it's black". - JamesJM

I am just describing what happens.

It's the same when the team asks a player to restructure and take less (like they did with Wells). It works both ways (though usually people only complain when the player is getting more).

What you have to see, I guess, is that red is red and black is black. Red is other contracts. Black is sports contracts. Sports contracts include off-season hagglings over current value. The players have a point since after all they are the product owners are selling and profiting from.

And remember. Donald (or his agents) never really negotiated a contract based on the market. They just followed the CBA slotting for rookies. It was pretty much a pre-determined amount. He clearly outplayed that deal and the Rams openly acknowledge that. Given that, why should Donald risk an injury, when an injury could forever shut him out of the more fair and representative deal.

And as much as any of us might say it, the Rams are NOT saying "you have a contract you must honor it." Instead they are saying yes you are not being paid according to fair value and we will address that. I mean, they understand contracts as much as if not better than we do. So why are they endorsing his claim to merit more and also NOT saying you're under contract you must report?

So a lot of our preconceptions don't apply here, probably because Donald is in an exceptional situation. I mean, Joyner or Higbee can't make the same claims Donald can about his value.


,.,,,



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2017 04:14PM by zn.