Charles Rogers (1 Viewer)

[skillz]

Sorry Charlie! Now the $8.5 million dollar question is whether he still has any of the money.

Outside of firing Millen this is probably going to be the best news the Lions get all season.

http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2008/...repay_lion.html

Charles Rogers must repay Lions $8.5 million

by Tom Kowalski

Wednesday October 08, 2008, 10:30 PM

The Detroit Lions finally won. Not a game, but their grievance against former wide receiver Charles Rogers.ALLEN PARK -- It took nearly three years to get settled, but the Detroit Lions ultimately won their grievance against former receiver Charles Rogers.

Lions chief operating officer Tom Lewand confirmed that than arbitrator ruled in the team's favor and Rogers must repay the Lions about $8.5 million.

Rogers was the second overall pick by Detroit in the 2003 draft and signed a six-year contract that included $14.2 million in bonus money.

When he was suspended by the NFL for substance abuse in 2005 -- his third strike under the league's policy -- the Lions argued that he triggered a clause that put him in default of his contract. At the time, the club was seeking $10.2 million -- a pro-rated portion of Rogers' bonus money.

The Lions now must go through a few routine legal procedures before they can demand the repayment obligation and take action to collect. The Lions will get $8.5 million added to their salary cap next season, but only if they physically collect the money.

Whatever amount Detroit is able to recover -- if any -- will be the amount credited to the team's 2009 cap.

Shortly after the Lions filed the grievance in 2005, Rogers was quoted as saying, "It's going to be hard to get $10 million."

The judgment against Rogers was delivered to the Lions on Sept. 24, the day president Matt Millen was fired by owner William Clay Ford.

Rogers, who starred at Saginaw High School and Michigan State University, suffered a broken collarbone in each of his first two seasons with the Lions. He was released in training camp in 2006 and has not played football since. Rogers had tryouts with several NFL teams, including the Miami Dolphins, Kansas City Chiefs, Atlanta Falcons and Tampa Bay Buccaneers but never was offered a contract.

In his three-year career with the Lions, he caught 36 passes for 440 yards and four touchdowns.

 

[T Bell]

The Lions will get $8.5 million added to their salary cap next season, but only if they physically collect the money.

Would someone please explain this? Why does Rogers still count against their cap three years after he last played for them, and why is this contingent upon them actually recovering money from him if this is for the purposes of cap accounting?

 

[Ripleys]

you guys realize it will take YEARS of flipping burgers for Rogers to pay that back?

 

[Wyld Stallyns]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."

I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

That line of thinking makes no sense at all to me.He had talent, but issues. They gave him a shot. He blew it. They pissed away a very high draft pick - rolled the bones and came up empty from the DRAFT perspective.From a MONEY perspective, it's pretty cut and dry. They gave him millions of dollars to do a job. He didn't do it. The penalties for NOT doing the job were written very clearly into his contract. This is why they won their grievance.So you position is: "He is an idiot. They should have known he was idiot, so he should be allowed to break his contract and get away with it." That about gist of it? That's kind of like saying you hired a guy who had spotty references to build you a house. You sign a contract for him to build you a house, give him 50% of the money in the contract up front and he never shows up to build the house. Are you stupid for signing the contract and giving him the money? Sure you are. But that doesn't mean the dude is allowed to walk away with the 50%. You still should be allowed to get that deposit back if you can.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

The Lions will get $8.5 million added to their salary cap next season, but only if they physically collect the money.

Would someone please explain this? Why does Rogers still count against their cap three years after he last played for them, and why is this contingent upon them actually recovering money from him if this is for the purposes of cap accounting?

He doesn't count against their current cap. But my understanding is that they get "free" cap money in future years in cases like this. It's really all you can dn the other hand, I never understood why teams have to actually recover the money for it to do anything for them cap-wise. Seems like cap accounting and actual finances could and should be separate in cases like this.

 

[T Bell]

The Lions will get $8.5 million added to their salary cap next season, but only if they physically collect the money.

Would someone please explain this? Why does Rogers still count against their cap three years after he last played for them, and why is this contingent upon them actually recovering money from him if this is for the purposes of cap accounting?

He doesn't count against their current cap. But my understanding is that they get "free" cap money in future years in cases like this. It's really all you can dn the other hand, I never understood why teams have to actually recover the money for it to do anything for them cap-wise. Seems like cap accounting and actual finances could and should be separate in cases like this.

Ok, so they get some sort of a "cap refund" then? How long does that last? One year? And yeah, I'm with you on the actual recovery issue. It's bizarre to me as the whole salary cap concept seems to relate to teams' competition with other teams for players, while payment or refunding of money is a team-player issue. Maybe it's to prevent an under-the-table payment and good faith in the cap system? Again, I don't get it.

 

[grind]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."

I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

Well he signed for 14.2 and owes back 8.5, so that 5.7 million seems more then fair for his "services". Now had he just sucked instead of sucked and smoked pot, he'd get the full 14.2 million. The Lions organization didn't put the bong in his mouth. He chose to do that and for that choice he owes 8.5 million. Seems fair to me. That'd sure buy a lot of weed.

 

[CMU37484]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."

I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

Well he signed for 14.2 and owes back 8.5, so that 5.7 million seems more then fair for his "services". Now had he just sucked instead of sucked and smoked pot, he'd get the full 14.2 million. The Lions organization didn't put the bong in his mouth. He chose to do that and for that choice he owes 8.5 million. Seems fair to me. That'd sure buy a lot of weed.

"put the bong in his mouth" Just because Matt Millen was the worst GM in the history of pro sports doesn't mean Charles Rogers shouldn't pay back some of the money.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

The Lions will get $8.5 million added to their salary cap next season, but only if they physically collect the money.

Would someone please explain this? Why does Rogers still count against their cap three years after he last played for them, and why is this contingent upon them actually recovering money from him if this is for the purposes of cap accounting?

He doesn't count against their current cap. But my understanding is that they get "free" cap money in future years in cases like this. It's really all you can dn the other hand, I never understood why teams have to actually recover the money for it to do anything for them cap-wise. Seems like cap accounting and actual finances could and should be separate in cases like this.

Ok, so they get some sort of a "cap refund" then? How long does that last? One year? And yeah, I'm with you on the actual recovery issue. It's bizarre to me as the whole salary cap concept seems to relate to teams' competition with other teams for players, while payment or refunding of money is a team-player issue. Maybe it's to prevent an under-the-table payment and good faith in the cap system? Again, I don't get it.

I think just the one year. Seems like they just say, "OK, so you didn't really spend 50M on the cap in 2004/2005. You got 8M of that back. But since we "charged you" 50M against the cap in that time frame we will give you that much space in "credit" on your cap value this year (or next year or whatever makes sense). Strange, but I'm not sure how else they could handle it other than just ignore it.

 

[BaBastage]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

That line of thinking makes no sense at all to me.He had talent, but issues. They gave him a shot. He blew it. They pissed away a very high draft pick - rolled the bones and came up empty from the DRAFT perspective.From a MONEY perspective, it's pretty cut and dry. They gave him millions of dollars to do a job. He didn't do it. The penalties for NOT doing the job were written very clearly into his contract. This is why they won their grievance.So you position is: "He is an idiot. They should have known he was idiot, so he should be allowed to break his contract and get away with it." That about gist of it? That's kind of like saying you hired a guy who had spotty references to build you a house. You sign a contract for him to build you a house, give him 50% of the money in the contract up front and he never shows up to build the house. Are you stupid for signing the contract and giving him the money? Sure you are. But that doesn't mean the dude is allowed to walk away with the 50%. You still should be allowed to get that deposit back if you can.

FTW.

 

[Mikey16x]

They won't get a dime, he's broke.

 

[Wyld Stallyns]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

That line of thinking makes no sense at all to me.He had talent, but issues. They gave him a shot. He blew it. They pissed away a very high draft pick - rolled the bones and came up empty from the DRAFT perspective.From a MONEY perspective, it's pretty cut and dry. They gave him millions of dollars to do a job. He didn't do it. The penalties for NOT doing the job were written very clearly into his contract. This is why they won their grievance.So you position is: "He is an idiot. They should have known he was idiot, so he should be allowed to break his contract and get away with it." That about gist of it? That's kind of like saying you hired a guy who had spotty references to build you a house. You sign a contract for him to build you a house, give him 50% of the money in the contract up front and he never shows up to build the house. Are you stupid for signing the contract and giving him the money? Sure you are. But that doesn't mean the dude is allowed to walk away with the 50%. You still should be allowed to get that deposit back if you can.

I'm just saying - If I go out and give some crackhead on the street a few hundred dollars to come paint my house and the crackhead runs off and never shows up... I'm the ####### who gave a crackhead a few hundred dollars. Lesson learned: Don't give money to crackheads.

 

[W1cked]

An yet Matt Millen keeps all his money and then some...

 

[The_U]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."

I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

Well he signed for 14.2 and owes back 8.5, so that 5.7 million seems more then fair for his "services". Now had he just sucked instead of sucked and smoked pot, he'd get the full 14.2 million. The Lions organization didn't put the bong in his mouth. He chose to do that and for that choice he owes 8.5 million. Seems fair to me. That'd sure buy a lot of weed.

$5.7 mil buys lots of grass too. Rogers doesn't have a pot to piss in, and the Lions once again look like the schmuck organization they are, and will be until the Fords give them up. Even then, I don't know that changes a thing. Morons. Millen should have been gone years ago.

 

[montana_grizzly_bears]

They won't get a dime, he's broke.

Well he might just have a dime left... Just not in the everyday monetary sense of the word.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Guy got shanked with a fork by his gf at his senior prom (just a guess, but might have been something about the two childred he fathered with two other 'ladies'). Failed drug tests every year he was in college.

I hate to paint with a broad brush, but was this one really that hard to see coming? I cannot believe all this crap took place in the same state, anybody who follows MHSAA or MSU knew about it, and the Lions still blew it.

Yes, I'm bitter.

 

[Routilla]

I heard Travis Henry is hiring.

 

[The_U]

Guy got shanked with a fork by his gf at his senior prom (just a guess, but might have been something about the two childred he fathered with two other 'ladies'). Failed drug tests every year he was in college.

I hate to paint with a broad brush, but was this one really that hard to see coming? I cannot believe all this crap took place in the same state, anybody who follows MHSAA or MSU knew about it, and the Lions still blew it.

Yes, I'm bitter.

Air it out Bobby, you've earned it.

 

[W1cked]

Well at least the Lions didn't draft Jeff Smoker, too.

 

[Da Guru]

Rogers was a pothead in HS, Rogers was a pothead at MSU. Rogers smoked his way out of Pro-football.

Matt Millen was a meathead as a GM.

 

[Routilla]

Matt Millen was a meathead as a GM.

 

[Krewe]

Slap me for knowing this---but at average market value, the money he owes the Lions would buy about one TON of everyday grade ganja.

Let's face it....he's already smoked it.

Especially if Ricky stopped by.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

So they drafted him knowing full well that he was quite possibly a pothead with poor work ethic and then gave him millions and millions of dollars, but then when it turns out that he gets in trouble for being a pothead and he sucks as a pro athlete because of his poor work ethic they go and say "whoa, hold up. we needs our moneys back yo."I understand that accountability lands on the kid, but it seems to me that the Lions dug their own hole with poor front office decision making. I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one.

That line of thinking makes no sense at all to me.He had talent, but issues. They gave him a shot. He blew it. They pissed away a very high draft pick - rolled the bones and came up empty from the DRAFT perspective.From a MONEY perspective, it's pretty cut and dry. They gave him millions of dollars to do a job. He didn't do it. The penalties for NOT doing the job were written very clearly into his contract. This is why they won their grievance.So you position is: "He is an idiot. They should have known he was idiot, so he should be allowed to break his contract and get away with it." That about gist of it? That's kind of like saying you hired a guy who had spotty references to build you a house. You sign a contract for him to build you a house, give him 50% of the money in the contract up front and he never shows up to build the house. Are you stupid for signing the contract and giving him the money? Sure you are. But that doesn't mean the dude is allowed to walk away with the 50%. You still should be allowed to get that deposit back if you can.

I'm just saying - If I go out and give some crackhead on the street a few hundred dollars to come paint my house and the crackhead runs off and never shows up... I'm the ####### who gave a crackhead a few hundred dollars. Lesson learned: Don't give money to crackheads.

We don't disagree there at all. The Lions were stupid for drafting him. Almost no one disagrees with that. But that's a separate issue from "I wouldn't have ruled in their favor on this one (the grievance)." So in your scenario (which is basically the same as mine) you are saying the crackhead should be free to fleece anyone he can for a couple of hundred dollars a pop with no consequences to him, because he is a crackhead. If I run into him on the street, I'm not allowed to try to get my couple hundred dollars back, even if he finds a winning lottery ticket in the gutter.Of course this is all likely moot since Rogers probably has blown whatever he had. But they should have the right to TRY to get whatever they can out of him. He broke his contract.Don't see how this ruling relates to Millen's deal at all either. That is unless Millen's contract said something like "If you are an absolute moron and run the team into the ground, we can fire you and not pay you." It probably didn't, so he just sucked, he didn't break his contract like Rogers did.

 

[Yenrub]

They won't get a dime, he's broke.

Well he might just have a dime left... Just not in the everyday monetary sense of the word.

 

[SuperJohn96]

you guys realize it will take YEARS of flipping burgers for Rogers to pay that back?

So next year the Lion's cap will go up by like $2100 or something? LOL

 

[davearm]

It really would be fascinating to know how much of that signing bonus Rogers has left at this point. Probably more sad than fascinating, I suspect.