What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

RB Melvin Gordon, BAL (5 Viewers)

Just Win Baby said:
These picks have been valuable to the Chargers. There are 13 players drafted in the 4th round or later since 2016 on the Chargers' current roster, and another is on IR. I can assure you that Telesco will value a 3rd or 4th round compensatory pick.
Click to expand...
Therein lies why a trade will likely not happen. The Chargers will value that potential 3rd or 4th compensatory pick and try to justify that as a reason to get a high pick from one of the other 31 teams. But if no other team is willing to part with a high pick, nothing will happen. No one is saying that the compensatory pick isn't valuable. The Eagles, Patriots, and Ravens live off of them.

As you mentioned, it's very late in the game and in season hold out trades are rare. Even if a team somehow were infatuated with Gordon, I would expect low ball offers for him. The Chargers have painted themselves into a corner and are in a quandary with no easily resolution. At this point, the Chargers are trying to facilitate a trade from a position of weakness. Any other team knows they are in a pickle.

 
Anarchy99 said:
As I outlined earlier, the best third round compensatory pick is essentially an early 4th round pick (the best one comes after all the 3rd round picks have been made). Given the exploding salaries of free agents of late at other positions, Gordon might only qualify for a 4th round compensatory pick (which is essentially an early 5th round pick). The other issue is that compensatory picks would be for two drafts away. Most teams look at picks from future drafts beyond the next one at a discount. Since it is further into the future and the team would have to wait, generally speaking, those future picks usually get valued as one round later than they actually are. So what you call a 3rd round compensatory, which is really an early 4th round pick, would be considered essentially an early 5th round pick in terms of trade value. If Gordon were to fall to the 4th round compensatory pick level, that would essentially be worth an early 6th round pick in trade value. And if the Chargers signed a high priced free agent with a similar average annual contract value next off season, they would not get anything for Gordon as far as compensatory picks go.

That's how NFL GM's look at things. So IMO, an offer of a 3rd round pick in the upcoming 2020 draft carries far more trade capital than a chance at a 3rd round compensatory pick in the 2021 draft (if they even earn one for Gordon).
Click to expand...
This.  Rivers isn't a spring chicken.  Waiting for 2 years for what is essentially an early 4th or early 5th is not ideal for a team designed to win now. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
The Chargers have painted themselves into a corner and are in a quandary with no easily resolution. At this point, the Chargers are trying to facilitate a trade from a position of weakness. Any other team knows they are in a pickle.
Click to expand...
:confused:  

Odd take. The Chargers happen to have multiple very good backup RBs, an elite passing game, and an elite defense (though weakened until Derwin James returns). They were 4-0 without Gordon last year against TEN in London, CIN at home, and on the road against PIT and KC. Not an easy schedule of games.

Gordon will have to report in time for the second half of the season, or thereabouts. They should have no trouble getting by without him over the first 8 or 10 games, then they will have him down the stretch with fresh legs.

I'm surprised you don't seem to realize that the Chargers don't want to trade him and are not trying to facilitate a trade. They intentionally set an unreasonably high price, because it would take something unreasonably high to make them change their stance on that.

Gordon is the one who painted himself into a corner.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pipes said:
This.  Rivers isn't a spring chicken.  Waiting for 2 years for what is essentially an early 4th or early 5th is not ideal for a team designed to win now. 
Click to expand...
Yes, they are in a window to win now, which is why they aren't interested in trading Gordon, since that could negatively impact their chance to win in 2019. They will replace him this offseason, so this situation won't negatively impact their chance to win in 2020. The compensatory pick is just added value that comes with not trading him and not signing him to a contract above his value.

 
Just Win Baby said:
:confused:  

Odd take. The Chargers happen to have multiple very good backup RBs, an elite passing game, and an elite defense (though weakened until Derwin James returns). They were 4-0 without Gordon last year against TEN in London, CIN at home, and on the road against PIT and KC. Not an easy schedule of games.

Gordon will have to report in time for the second half of the season, or thereabouts. They should have no trouble getting by without him over the first 8 or 10 games, then they will have him down the stretch with fresh legs.

I'm surprised you don't seem to realize that the Chargers don't want to trade him and are not trying to facilitate a trade. They intentionally set an unreasonably high price, because it would take something unreasonably high to make them change their mind.

Gordon is the one who painted himself into a corner.
Click to expand...
I meant if they were trying to trade him they won't get very far given what they are rumored to want back in a trade. I still think things won't be as hunky dory as you are making them, as I am not sure Gordon will come back and play the role of good soldier and give 110%. But we could be weeks and weeks away from that at this point.

 
Don Hutson said:
Keenan McCardell held out under contract and was traded shortly before the trade deadline.  And then he was forced to return $1.5 million of his signing bonus.  It is extremely rare for a player to hold out into the season when they are under contract.  This situation is a little different than most because Melvin kind of got the shaft when they slapped the 5th year option on him which is the average of the 3rd to 25th highest paid players at the position in the previous year because he was drafted between 11th and 32nd.  Technically he is under contract but this feels similar to a player who is slapped with the franchise tag, except he is being paid way less.  The 5th year option seems extremely unfair especially for a running back whose career is usually short.
Click to expand...
He was advised by his agent and signed that deal. Unfair? He signed it. The team had a 5th year option.....he could have not agreed to a 5th year option knowing full well he could easily get locked into what he perceives as a below market deal.

So he is holding out. But he has zero leverage. Nada.  He will lose salary, pay fines and it is not going to end well. He is getting horrific advise.

 
Todem said:
He was advised by his agent and signed that deal. Unfair? He signed it. The team had a 5th year option.....he could have not agreed to a 5th year option knowing full well he could easily get locked into what he perceives as a below market deal.

So he is holding out. But he has zero leverage. Nada.  He will lose salary, pay fines and it is not going to end well. He is getting horrific advise.
Click to expand...
Curious, how does a first round pick go about receiving/signing a rookie contract that does not include the 5th year option?

I thought this was all stipulated by the CBA and was non-negotiable.

 
davearm said:
Curious, how does a first round pick go about receiving/signing a rookie contract that does not include the 5th year option?

I thought this was all stipulated by the CBA and was non-negotiable.
Click to expand...
Actually you are correct.

So again another example of his players union being weak and not negotiating a fair CBA. He can blame his union reps for his contract dispute not the owners.

I have sympathy for the players.....but in this case....he has zero leverage. Play your final season and freaking become a free agent and get your pay day. If you get hurt.....well dude...this is the game you chose to play. Players get insurance as well these days. 

 
Todem said:
Actually you are correct.

So again another example of his players union being weak and not negotiating a fair CBA. He can blame his union reps for his contract dispute not the owners.

I have sympathy for the players.....but in this case....he has zero leverage. Play your final season and freaking become a free agent and get your pay day. If you get hurt.....well dude...this is the game you chose to play. Players get insurance as well these days. 
Click to expand...
He doesn't have zero leverage, but it's not a lot.  All he can do is withhold his services.  That doesn't get him very far right now but if Ekeler and/or Jackson get hurt or are ineffective, and/or the Chargers see their season slipping away a few weeks in, that could change.

Given his options, I think it's pretty reasonable for him to hold out and minimize his injury exposure.  Play the 6 games (or whatever the magic number is) for $2M or whatever, and get out of there.  That's arguably better than enduring 16 games' worth of being run into the ground by a team that's moving on.

 
davearm said:
He doesn't have zero leverage, but it's not a lot.  All he can do is withhold his services.  That doesn't get him very far right now but if Ekeler and/or Jackson get hurt or are ineffective, and/or the Chargers see their season slipping away a few weeks in, that could change.

Given his options, I think it's pretty reasonable for him to hold out and minimize his injury exposure.  Play the 6 games (or whatever the magic number is) for $2M or whatever, and get out of there.  That's arguably better than enduring 16 games' worth of being run into the ground by a team that's moving on.
Click to expand...
Agree. And that is what he will ultimately end up doing. This is not ending well for the Chargers or his fantasy owners. Too bad. I like watching him play football. 

I think the Chargers will make due with Ekeler and Jackson though. While Gordon is certainly the best back on the team and by good amount...that combination will do fine and help them win games IMO. I saw enough of them last season to think in combination with Rivers and the passing game they can win without Gordon enough to soften the blow of not having Gordon in the lineup for 11 games if he indeed maxes his holdout to amount of games he can miss before coming back to make his contract service years valid to become an UFA in 2020.

 
Todem said:
Agree. And that is what he will ultimately end up doing. This is not ending well for the Chargers or his fantasy owners. Too bad. I like watching him play football. 

I think the Chargers will make due with Ekeler and Jackson though. While Gordon is certainly the best back on the team and by good amount...that combination will do fine and help them win games IMO. I saw enough of them last season to think in combination with Rivers and the passing game they can win without Gordon enough to soften the blow of not having Gordon in the lineup for 11 games if he indeed maxes his holdout to amount of games he can miss before coming back to make his contract service years valid to become an UFA in 2020.
Click to expand...
Why not on the bolded?  A fresh Melvin Gordon for the playoffs (with both of his backups likely being somewhat banged up) seems pretty righteous.  Given that he's going in the 7th-8th round of drafts lately, he's not really a guy you'd have to rely on to get to the fantasy playoffs any longer.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Why not on the bolded?  A fresh Melvin Gordon for the playoffs (with both of his backups likely being somewhat banged up) seems pretty righteous.  Given that he's going in the 7th-8th round of drafts lately, he's not really a guy you'd have to rely on to get to the fantasy playoffs any longer.
Click to expand...
Long prolonged hold outs never bode well for injuries. Soft tissue injuries are very high risk when you are not in football shape. Don't fool yourself.

 
Again, on my DND list, and happy to not have  t to worry about him......I couldn't believe how soon he went in my drafts.  Like 7/8 I believe.....I get last couple round flier, but thats way to early 

 
Anyone traded for him in dynasty?  Seems like great buy low for the long term, but owners may be holding.

 
jm192 said:
Anyone traded for him in dynasty?  Seems like great buy low for the long term, but owners may be holding.
Click to expand...
I tried flipping him for the likes of David Montgomery (with me adding some "incentive" - pick upgrades, cash) but didn't work out.

For now I'm holding but would certainly consider an offer for a RB in the same tier.

 
RBs are harmed by the 5th year option, but that's the current rule. It can't be wished away.

There won't be a trade. It's hard to find a win-win box in the payoff matrix of a negative-sum game.

Stud RBs don't add many team wins. How much did the Vegas line move when Elliott signed? (I think zero.) It's generally better to spend money elsewhere.

I think there's at least a 25% chance that Gordon will report within the next few weeks. $330K justifies a game's worth of injury risk. How many RB starts are there for every injury that affects future earnings? Hundreds? Thousands? Only compound fractures or torn Achilles seem to affect future earnings. Mere ACL tears don't seem to matter anymore. So a 0.5% risk per game seems generous, and would have to reduce future earnings by $60 million to make sitting out a +EV move.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
travdogg said:
On the flip side, you also know you are going to be on a playoff contender. There are a lot of players who would happily sacrifice 2-3 million a year to play for a good team. 
Click to expand...
Oh that is definitely not true. Maybe a few older vets at the end of the road but nobody coming out of the draft. 

 
Just Win Baby said:
Yes, they are in a window to win now, which is why they aren't interested in trading Gordon, since that could negatively impact their chance to win in 2019. They will replace him this offseason, so this situation won't negatively impact their chance to win in 2020. The compensatory pick is just added value that comes with not trading him and not signing him to a contract above his value.
Click to expand...
That makes zero sense. Don’t want to sign him. Don’t want to trade him. How does that help them again? So what’s their strategy?

On the fantasy front I own zero shares of Chargers and I’m OK with that  

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
RBs are harmed by the 5th year option, but that's the current rule. It can't be wished away.

There won't be a trade. It's hard to find a win-win box in the payoff matrix of a negative-sum game.

Stud RBs don't add many team wins. How much did the Vegas line move when Elliott signed? (I think zero.) It's generally better to spend money elsewhere.

I think there's at least a 25% chance that Gordon will report within the next few weeks. $330K justifies a game's worth of injury risk. How many RB starts are there for every injury that affects future earnings? Hundreds? Thousands? Only compound fractures or torn Achilles seem to affect future earnings. Mere ACL tears don't seem to matter anymore. So a 0.5% risk per game seems generous, and would have to reduce future earnings by $60 million to make sitting out a +EV move.
Click to expand...
Keep going with your odds. 25% he signs in a few weeks. X% he comes back week 10. Y% that he’s traded in a month. 

 
Judge Smails said:
Keep going with your odds. 25% he signs in a few weeks. X% he comes back week 10. Y% that he’s traded in a month. 
Click to expand...
Roughly 0% that he comes back Week 10. Roughly 100% that he comes back Week 9 or earlier. Roughly 0% that he’s traded.

My best estimate is that there’s around a 25% chance he returns in Week 2, around a 10% chance that he returns in Week 3, around a 60% chance that he returns in Week 9, and about a 5% chance that he returns sometime between Week 3 and Week 9.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile Tremblay said:
Roughly 0% that he comes back Week 10. Roughly 100% that he comes back Week 9 or earlier. Roughly 0% that he’s traded.

My best estimate is that there’s around a 25% chance he returns in Week 2, around a 10% chance that he returns in Week 3, around a 60% chance that he returns in Week 9, and about a 5% chance that he returns sometime between Week 3 and Week 9.
Click to expand...
Curious why you say that. I would put 70% chance he comes back week 10, 25% chance week 3-9 and 5% week 2 or 3.

 
Tool said:
Curious why you say that. I would put 70% chance he comes back week 10, 25% chance week 3-9 and 5% week 2 or 3.
Click to expand...
The argument that he needs to report prior to week 9 is explained here. There is also an argument that he needs to report before week 13, explained here. Because it seems to be a gray area, it seems that a smart player (with a smart agent) would take the conservative approach and report no later than prior to week 9. But IMO Gordon and his agent have not shown themselves to be very smart so far, so who knows what he might do.

There is no argument that he needs to return prior to week 10, with 7 games remaining, or after week 10, with 6 games remaining, despite the fact that both of those things have been reported in the media much more often than reporting prior to week 9 or prior to week 13.

The reason he might report sooner than week 9 is obviously money. If he sits out until week 9, he will lose $2.6M, not including preseason fines.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Judge Smails said:
That makes zero sense. Don’t want to sign him. Don’t want to trade him. How does that help them again? So what’s their strategy?

On the fantasy front I own zero shares of Chargers and I’m OK with that  
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense. They are a better team with Gordon playing. By not trading him, he will report at some point, likely prior to week 9 as explained above. That will improve their chance of winning this season.

 
Just Win Baby said:
The argument that he needs to report prior to week 9 is explained here. There is also an argument that he needs to report before week 13, explained here. Because it seems to be a gray area, it seems that a smart player (with a smart agent) would take the conservative approach and report no later than prior to week 9. But IMO Gordon and his agent have not shown themselves to be very smart so far, so who knows what he might do.

There is no argument that he needs to return prior to week 10, with 7 games remaining, or after week 10, with 6 games remaining, despite the fact that both of those things have been reported in the media much more often than reporting prior to week 9 or prior to week 13.

The reason he might report sooner than week 9 is obviously money. If he sits out until week 9, he will lose $2.6M, not including preseason fines.
Click to expand...
Would they actually enforce the preseason fines? I think that's around $2M. 

That's really the Chargers trump card isn't it? They could just say show up now or we are enforcing the pre season fines. He would report that day I would imagine.

 
Patrick the Pirate said:
Would they actually enforce the preseason fines? I think that's around $2M. 

That's really the Chargers trump card isn't it? They could just say show up now or we are enforcing the pre season fines. He would report that day I would imagine.
Click to expand...
I expect they would waive the fines for two reasons. First, they want him to play and play well once he reports. If they fine him $2M, he is more likely to be disgruntled and less likely to play hard and up to his capability. Second, their other players are observing how they handle the Gordon situation, and they want to minimize any bad impression that could affect future negotiations with other players.

 
Just Win Baby said:
I expect they would waive the fines for two reasons. First, they want him to play and play well once he reports. If they fine him $2M, he is more likely to be disgruntled and less likely to play hard and up to his capability. Second, their other players are observing how they handle the Gordon situation, and they want to minimize any bad impression that could affect future negotiations with other players.
Click to expand...
He would have to play well regardless once he reports because he is playing for next years contract.

Wouldn't it help the Chargers in future potential holdouts? These guys will know that if they plan to hold out, they are going to eat big fines.

 
Patrick the Pirate said:
He would have to play well regardless once he reports because he is playing for next years contract.

Wouldn't it help the Chargers in future potential holdouts? These guys will know that if they plan to hold out, they are going to eat big fines.
Click to expand...
How much of a deterrent can fines be when guys like Bell are willing to sit out an entire season and forego $14.5M to reach UFA and guys like Elliott are willing to sit out with 2 years remaining on their rookie contract?

 
Just Win Baby said:
How much of a deterrent can fines be when guys like Bell are willing to sit out an entire season and forego $14.5M to reach UFA and guys like Elliott are willing to sit out with 2 years remaining on their rookie contract?
Click to expand...
Bell was unsigned, that's a completely different scenario.  Zeke and Gordon assumed that they had leverage over their franchise due to win-now attitudes.  Zeke was right.  Gordon ####ed with the wrong team, and his agent should have known this going into it.

 
tangfoot said:
Bell was unsigned, that's a completely different scenario.  Zeke and Gordon assumed that they had leverage over their franchise due to win-now attitudes.  Zeke was right.  Gordon ####ed with the wrong team, and his agent should have known this going into it.
Click to expand...
I know it is different. He could sit out the whole year, the others cannot, and he willingly gave up $14.5M to do it. Elliott and Gordon accepted the risk of heavy fines and missed game checks that add up to significant lost money. It paid off for Elliott. Doesn't look like it will pay off for Gordon, yet he is doing it. So it seems obvious that fines are not a deterrent, which was the point of my post that you responded to here.

 
Just Win Baby said:
Tool said:
Curious why you say that. I would put 70% chance he comes back week 10, 25% chance week 3-9 and 5% week 2 or 3.
Click to expand...
The argument that he needs to report prior to week 9 is explained here. There is also an argument that he needs to report before week 13, explained here. Because it seems to be a gray area, it seems that a smart player (with a smart agent) would take the conservative approach and report no later than prior to week 9. But IMO Gordon and his agent have not shown themselves to be very smart so far, so who knows what he might do.

There is no argument that he needs to return prior to week 10, with 7 games remaining, or after week 10, with 6 games remaining, despite the fact that both of those things have been reported in the media much more often than reporting prior to week 9 or prior to week 13.

The reason he might report sooner than week 9 is obviously money. If he sits out until week 9, he will lose $2.6M, not including preseason fines.
Click to expand...
Daniel Popper, the Athletic's Chargers reporter, recently said in an article there that Gordon has to report in time to be eligible to play 6 games. I posted some of this stuff in response, and he responded with this:

Joey Galloway returned for the final eight weeks in 2000 because he was worried the Seahawks would apply to the commissioner for a two-week roster exemption. If the Seahawks did that, returning with eight weeks remaining would guarantee Galloway would be on full pay status for six games, which logic suggests would be the definition of "completing performance" of a contract. Nowhere in the CBA does it explicitly define what "completing performance" is. But people around the league assume that accruing a season is the equivalent of "completing performance." As you suggested, Gordon does not need to accrue another season to become a free agent, but he does need to complete performance of his contract, or else the contract will toll to 2020. Six games is what he needs to do that, according to precedent. The decision would still be in the hands of an arbitrator, though.
Click to expand...
The Chargers bye week this year is in week 12. He says here that Galloway felt compelled to report with 8 games remaining since the team could apply for a two-week roster exemption. Well, the Chargers could also do that, so the same rationale applies to Gordon needing to report with 8 games remaining, i.e., prior to week 9.

 
Just Win Baby said:
First, they want him to play
Click to expand...
Do they want him to play?  He has no choice but to report for half a season.  He will play hard because he will be playing for his next contract.  The Chargers have good replacements who they can audition for next year's potential starting role.  Melvin hasn't usually lasted an entire season so playing half a season is maybe the perfect amount of season for him.  And hopefully he'll be somewhat fresh for the playoffs.  And they will save half of $5.6 million (maybe they will save more including fines?)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just Win Baby said:
Daniel Popper, the Athletic's Chargers reporter, recently said in an article there that Gordon has to report in time to be eligible to play 6 games. I posted some of this stuff in response, and he responded with this:

The Chargers bye week this year is in week 12. He says here that Galloway felt compelled to report with 8 games remaining since the team could apply for a two-week roster exemption. Well, the Chargers could also do that, so the same rationale applies to Gordon needing to report with 8 games remaining, i.e., prior to week 9.
Click to expand...
I don't think "full pay status" matters in this regard. That's for accruing an accrued season. It's not for tolling. I disagree with that guy's analysis. He's right that the CBA doesn't address the issue, but the CBA is the wrong place to look. The standard player contract is where tolling is addressed. It talks about tolling based on rounding to the nearest whole season. That's 8 games -- whether or not on full-pay status.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Devil_Dog said:
Looks like he may report by week 6-8 according to NFL.com

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001051750/article/chargers-melvin-gordon-plans-to-report-in-6-to-8-weeks

As Gordon owner in 2 leagues I'll actually take that instead of a Bell fiasco last year.
Click to expand...
This is the most likely outcome, but remember that during the Bell fiasco, there were countless reports similar to this: Bell will report by week 1, week 2, during their bye, by the trade deadline, by week 10, etc.  These reports are, IMO, more about getting clicks than actually reporting solid facts.

 
Bayhawks said:
This is the most likely outcome, but remember that during the Bell fiasco, there were countless reports similar to this: Bell will report by week 1, week 2, during their bye, by the trade deadline, by week 10, etc.  These reports are, IMO, more about getting clicks than actually reporting solid facts.
Click to expand...
Yep totally get it...but I've already conceded that I won't have Gordon for the bulk of the season so if wk 6-8 happens I'll be happy.

 
I’m betting it’s week 10.

they have a late BYE, and one of two scenarios will happen in the meanwhile:

1. The Chargers are winning without Gordon, the backups performing ably as replacements, they decide to bench him until after the BYE because “F that dude”. Why welcome a guy back with open arms who pulled a stunt like that? 

2. The chargers are losing without him & at 2-4, or 2-6 why bother paying him? 

Either way I’m thinking he may not be relevant until after their BYE. 

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
I’m betting it’s week 10.
Click to expand...
People everywhere, including the media, keep mentioning Week 10. That's for players who are unsigned (e.g., rookies, players who are franchise-tagged) who need an Accrued Season. That's not Melvin Gordon's situation. He's under contract and he needs to avoid having it tolled. Week 10 has nothing to do with that.

He very likely needs to report by Week 9 so that he's holding out for no more than half a season. He needs to hold out for zero seasons rather than one season, as rounded to the nearest whole season. Otherwise, he's still under contract with the Chargers the following year.

And yes, they will happily welcome him back with open arms whether they are 2-6 or 6-2 or anything else.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And yes, they will happily welcome him back with open arms whether they are 2-6 or 6-2 or anything else.
Click to expand...
 I find that highly unlikely. 

 The title of the world‘s shortest book is, “players who have wronged the chargers and been welcomed back with open arms“

 It sits on the shelf right next to the book titled, “Hall of Famers the 49ers have let play out their careers to graceful endings“

 
Wow, rapsheet reporting week 6-8 and using the week 10 deadline. Schefter reporting could last until late November (saying needs to report 30 days before season end). Nothing like having the two top reporters conflict each other

 
Last edited by a moderator:
iamkoza said:
Wow, rapsheet reporting week 6-8 and using the week 10 deadline. Schefter reporting could last until late November (saying needs to report 30 days before season end). Nothing like having the two top reporters conflict each other
Click to expand...
And they're both wrong. The Week 10 deadline is simply inapplicable to players who are already under contract. The 30-days-before-the-season-ends deadline is applicable. It's from Section XVII, Section 17.13 of the NFL Constitution, which states that players on the Did Not Report list cannot be reinstated within the last 30 days of the regular season. So Gordon definitely can't report after that point.

But that doesn't mean that he can report anytime before that point. I mean, technically he can, but unless he avoids having his contract tolled, he'd still be under contract with the Chargers again the following year. So he could report in Week 12, but it probably wouldn't do him any good in his quest to become a free agent.

The relevant language on that point comes from his player contract. The standard contract (see Appendix C) contains a paragraph that says:

Unless this contract specifically provides otherwise, if Player becomes a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or any other country, or retires from professional football as an active player, or otherwise fails or refuses to perform his services under this contract, then this contract will be tolled between the date of Player’s induction into the Armed Forces, or his retirement, or his failure or refusal to perform, and the later date of his return to professional football. During the period this contract is tolled, Player will not be entitled to any compensation or benefits. On Player’s return to professional football, the term of this contract will be extended for a period of time equal to the number of seasons (to the nearest multiple of one) remaining at the time the contract was tolled. The right of renewal, if any, contained in this contract will remain in effect until the end of any such extended term.
Click to expand...
There are a few different ways to read that, but one that's kind of obvious is that he shouldn't miss more than half a season. His contract is tolled while he's away. If he stays away for more than half a season, he'll still have at least a half of season left on his contract when he returns, which means his contract will be extended a full season.

There are other possible ways to read that, but missing more than half a season is a risk not worth taking, IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
His trade value has tanked.  Earlier this week I was offered Gordon for Singletary and Funchess in a dynasty leage.  And I didn't even really consider it even though Singletary isn't a starter.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
And they're both wrong. The Week 10 deadline is simply inapplicable to players who are already under contract. The 30-days-before-the-season-ends deadline is applicable. It's from Section XVII, Section 17.13 of the NFL Constitution, which states that players on the Did Not Report list cannot be reinstated within the last 30 days of the regular season. So Gordon definitely can't report after that point.

But that doesn't mean that he can report anytime before that point. I mean, technically he can, but unless he avoids having his contract tolled, he'd still be under contract with the Chargers again the following year. So he could report in Week 12, but it probably wouldn't do him any good in his quest to become a free agent.

The relevant language comes from his player contract. The standard contract (see Appendix C) contains a paragraph that says:

There are a few different ways to read that, but one that's kind of obvious is that he shouldn't miss more than half a season. His contract is tolled while he's away. If he stays away for more than half a season, he'll still have at least a half of season left on his contract when he returns, which means his contract will be extended a full season.

There are other possible ways to read that, but missing more than half a season is a risk not worth taking, IMO.
Click to expand...
Contracts don't work game to game, they are seasonal.  If he plays at all he'll fulfill the 2019 contract.   Otherwise every holdout would toll into the following season by however many games they held out, and it just doesn't work that way.

However, your link to the Constitution section 17.13 provided the most clear reference I have ever seen, and it's more than just 30 days:

All players in the categories of Reserve/Retired, Reserve/Did Not Report,and Reserve/Veteran Free Agent Asked to Re-Sign will continue to beprohibited from being reinstated in the last 30 days of the regular season.  Additionally, no player in such category will be reinstated between the trading deadline of the applicable season and the normal 30-day deadline unless the club initiates the reinstatement request and the Commissioner approves it.

So, after the trade deadline, he's not guaranteed to be reinstated.  First the Chargers have to request it and if they really want to they can just stick it to him.  So it looks like trade deadline is his safest bet.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
RB Keaton Mitchell, BAL
Replies
29
Views
2K
BobbyLayne
BobbyLayne
Faust
Waiver Wire Targets heading into week 5
2 3
Replies
126
Views
6K
BearsFan4Life
B
S
RB Jaleel McLaughlin, DEN
3 4 5
Replies
216
Views
13K
Stoneworker
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top