Jake Plummer...relax...case closed! (1 Viewer)

[Ministry of Pain]

Link

June 10, 2008

Plummer's case is closed

It's a done deal.

The Bucs and retired quarterback Jake Plummer have reached a settlement in a grievance filed by the Bucs that sought to recover $7-million of a signing bonus paid to the player for a contract he failed to fulfill.

Instead of the full sum, we've confirmed the sides have settled the case for roughly half, or $3.5-million. Wednesday's hearing before an arbitrator in New York has been canceled. Plummer faced an uphill climb had the case gone before the arbitrator given the precedent set by other cases.

The Bucs filed the grievance last summer when Plummer failed to report to training camp after his trade from the Broncos earlier in 2007. The Bucs continued to have conversations with Plummer aimed at convincing him to join the team, but Plummer declined and remained retired.

The contract, re-negotiated with the Broncos in 2005, called for Plummer to play through 2009. The trade from Denver to Tampa Bay gave the Bucs all the rights provided under his contract.

Bucs get $3.5 million but they already had a ton of money under the salary cap yes/no?

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Link

June 10, 2008

Plummer's case is closed

It's a done deal.

The Bucs and retired quarterback Jake Plummer have reached a settlement in a grievance filed by the Bucs that sought to recover $7-million of a signing bonus paid to the player for a contract he failed to fulfill.

Instead of the full sum, we've confirmed the sides have settled the case for roughly half, or $3.5-million. Wednesday's hearing before an arbitrator in New York has been canceled. Plummer faced an uphill climb had the case gone before the arbitrator given the precedent set by other cases.

The Bucs filed the grievance last summer when Plummer failed to report to training camp after his trade from the Broncos earlier in 2007. The Bucs continued to have conversations with Plummer aimed at convincing him to join the team, but Plummer declined and remained retired.

The contract, re-negotiated with the Broncos in 2005, called for Plummer to play through 2009. The trade from Denver to Tampa Bay gave the Bucs all the rights provided under his contract.

Bucs get $3.5 million but they already had a ton of money under the salary cap yes/no?

I thought I read that they get the money, but no cap relief. I don't recall where I read it.

 

[cdwood]

I really don't get the whole grievance by Tampa Bay. To my understanding, Denver signs Plummer and pays him some money upfront and it gets pro-rated over the length of the contract. He is traded to Tampa Bay and decides to retire. Tampa Bay files a grievance because he chooses to retire instead and wants money back? Did Tampa Bay actually pay Plummer any money? I don't think so. If any team has a problem about the money issue it should be Denver because they actually paid him some money. I understand Tampa Bay now having the rights under the contract because they traded for him, but to me it seems wrong that Tampa Bay gets any money. If I were Plummer, I wouldn't have settled, I would have gone to arbitration because I don't think Tampa Bay would have won, and if anything, Denver would be getting money back.

Although I guess if both sides settled they both win. Tampa Bay gets some money, and Plummer doesn't have to pay back the full amount he would have owed for the remaining years on the contract.

I just can't help but have this feeling that something here is wrong.

Christopher

 

[a_troll00]

I really don't get the whole grievance by Tampa Bay. To my understanding, Denver signs Plummer and pays him some money upfront and it gets pro-rated over the length of the contract. He is traded to Tampa Bay and decides to retire. Tampa Bay files a grievance because he chooses to retire instead and wants money back? Did Tampa Bay actually pay Plummer any money? I don't think so. If any team has a problem about the money issue it should be Denver because they actually paid him some money. I understand Tampa Bay now having the rights under the contract because they traded for him, but to me it seems wrong that Tampa Bay gets any money. If I were Plummer, I wouldn't have settled, I would have gone to arbitration because I don't think Tampa Bay would have won, and if anything, Denver would be getting money back.Although I guess if both sides settled they both win. Tampa Bay gets some money, and Plummer doesn't have to pay back the full amount he would have owed for the remaining years on the contract.I just can't help but have this feeling that something here is wrong.Christopher

from what I understand, when Denver traded him to Tampa, Tampa assumed all rights to the contract. So, Tampa had the right to reclaim the bonus for not playing.

 

[SSOG]

I really don't get the whole grievance by Tampa Bay. To my understanding, Denver signs Plummer and pays him some money upfront and it gets pro-rated over the length of the contract. He is traded to Tampa Bay and decides to retire. Tampa Bay files a grievance because he chooses to retire instead and wants money back? Did Tampa Bay actually pay Plummer any money? I don't think so. If any team has a problem about the money issue it should be Denver because they actually paid him some money. I understand Tampa Bay now having the rights under the contract because they traded for him, but to me it seems wrong that Tampa Bay gets any money. If I were Plummer, I wouldn't have settled, I would have gone to arbitration because I don't think Tampa Bay would have won, and if anything, Denver would be getting money back.Although I guess if both sides settled they both win. Tampa Bay gets some money, and Plummer doesn't have to pay back the full amount he would have owed for the remaining years on the contract.I just can't help but have this feeling that something here is wrong.Christopher

from what I understand, when Denver traded him to Tampa, Tampa assumed all rights to the contract. So, Tampa had the right to reclaim the bonus for not playing.

Actually, the trade between Denver and Tampa was CONTINGENT on Tampa getting the right to go after that signing bonus. Basically, the trade amounted to "We'll either give you a 4th rounder for Jake Plummer, or a 7th rounder for $7 million (or whatever it was that we could get from Jake Plummer".

 

[msommer]

I really don't get the whole grievance by Tampa Bay. To my understanding, Denver signs Plummer and pays him some money upfront and it gets pro-rated over the length of the contract. He is traded to Tampa Bay and decides to retire. Tampa Bay files a grievance because he chooses to retire instead and wants money back? Did Tampa Bay actually pay Plummer any money? I don't think so. If any team has a problem about the money issue it should be Denver because they actually paid him some money. I understand Tampa Bay now having the rights under the contract because they traded for him, but to me it seems wrong that Tampa Bay gets any money. If I were Plummer, I wouldn't have settled, I would have gone to arbitration because I don't think Tampa Bay would have won, and if anything, Denver would be getting money back.Although I guess if both sides settled they both win. Tampa Bay gets some money, and Plummer doesn't have to pay back the full amount he would have owed for the remaining years on the contract.I just can't help but have this feeling that something here is wrong.Christopher

from what I understand, when Denver traded him to Tampa, Tampa assumed all rights to the contract. So, Tampa had the right to reclaim the bonus for not playing.

Actually, the trade between Denver and Tampa was CONTINGENT on Tampa getting the right to go after that signing bonus. Basically, the trade amounted to "We'll either give you a 4th rounder for Jake Plummer, or a 7th rounder for $7 million (or whatever it was that we could get from Jake Plummer".

If that was the case why did Denver trade Plummer for the 7th - they would have been better off with the 4th - or did Tampa take on the cap (included the prorated stuff which normally would stay in Denver?). In any case, a 7th for 3.5 million cool cash = smart business move by Tampa.

 

[GregR_2]

I really don't get the whole grievance by Tampa Bay. To my understanding, Denver signs Plummer and pays him some money upfront and it gets pro-rated over the length of the contract. He is traded to Tampa Bay and decides to retire. Tampa Bay files a grievance because he chooses to retire instead and wants money back? Did Tampa Bay actually pay Plummer any money? I don't think so. If any team has a problem about the money issue it should be Denver because they actually paid him some money. I understand Tampa Bay now having the rights under the contract because they traded for him, but to me it seems wrong that Tampa Bay gets any money. If I were Plummer, I wouldn't have settled, I would have gone to arbitration because I don't think Tampa Bay would have won, and if anything, Denver would be getting money back.

Although I guess if both sides settled they both win. Tampa Bay gets some money, and Plummer doesn't have to pay back the full amount he would have owed for the remaining years on the contract.

I just can't help but have this feeling that something here is wrong.

Christopher

from what I understand, when Denver traded him to Tampa, Tampa assumed all rights to the contract. So, Tampa had the right to reclaim the bonus for not playing.

Actually, the trade between Denver and Tampa was CONTINGENT on Tampa getting the right to go after that signing bonus. Basically, the trade amounted to "We'll either give you a 4th rounder for Jake Plummer, or a 7th rounder for $7 million (or whatever it was that we could get from Jake Plummer".

If that was the case why did Denver trade Plummer for the 7th - they would have been better off with the 4th - or did Tampa take on the cap (included the prorated stuff which normally would stay in Denver?). In any case, a 7th for 3.5 million cool cash = smart business move by Tampa.

I don't think teams can trade cap room.

 

[sholditch]

Am I reading this correctly? Plummer gets 3.5 mil and never even showed for a practice? My God this is an unfair economy.

 

[srnohav]

Denver paid him the $7 mil. If Plummer showed up and played they would of got a 4th rounder, ir not they just got the 7th rounder. TB never paid Plummer anything, since he did not show up, however part of teh negotiation with Denver was that IF Plummer did not ever play, they had the right to go after the bonus money. This part was only thrown in after Plummer came out and said he would retire before the deal went through. TB got nervous and said they wanted the rights to go after him. the Broncos were hoping Plummer was not serious and that they would get a 4th rounder.

turns out TB traded a 7th round pick for 3.5 mil to their bottom line. not a bad deal. but that is not what everybody thought was going to happen. the old hind sight is 20/20