There are 67 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Brown's contract laughable

  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 10,162
Originally posted by theduke85:
Seriously? "Throw away" $2 million dollars? It's easy to sit there and scoff at the notion when you're deliberately mischaracterizing the situation with loaded language like that.

We don't live in a black-and-white world; there are shades of grey, and this situation is an example of that. I mean, that's indisputable -- even by the 49ers own admission, because they gave him this $300,000K bonus at the end of the year. I guess that constitutes as "throwing away" money too, then? If the 49ers give Brown 300K, that's okay, because we're an infallible and generous organization, but if we pay up the full $2M we're negligent and catering to an ignoramus who can't be bothered to read a contract. Huh, I guess this is a pretty fine line that we walk.

All I asked if it was within their right/ability to give him the full $2M if they decided it was the right thing to do, if they deemed that Brown was essentially fleeced by an incompetent agent. I fail to see how this is such a cringe-worthy question. As I alluded to earlier, awarding bonuses outside of explicit contract language is probably frowned upon by the league, because it's the type of thing that could potentially be exploited, or could lead to under-the-table payments.

My sense is that the 49er gave him an extra bonus precisely because they believed that the agent screwed Brown.

As far as I can determine, there are legal actions that Brown can take to recoup his money. If Brown is the injured party, and it seems apparent that he is, he has the responsibility to take the actions available to him.

There is a good chance that he can sue his agent both as his agent and under Texas law as a lawyer. In both cases, his agent should have liability insurance that would be used to pay Brown for his loss.

If I remember correctly, with the legal remedies available plus the bonus given to him by the team, Brown has a very good chance of reclaiming close to the total amount he lost.

[ Edited by buck on Mar 23, 2014 at 12:07 PM ]
Originally posted by AB81Rules:
An NFL contract isn't that hard to decifer. The Player must have the brains to read it over before signing something, if he doesn't, he gets most of the blame. Yes a contract contains a lot of mumbo jumbo, but it's not that hard. But he shouldn't blame the agent 100%, if anything it's 50/50.

Plus I think agents only get 3% of the contract(Or signing bonus, I could be wrong), that's what I read from one of the talking heads from ESPN or NFLN that a few players negotiated their deals by themselves, saving 3%.

I just can't envision a player not even bothering to ask "so what do I need to do to get paid?" or something along those lines. I get that probably no player knows their contract verbatim, but you damn well better know what's required of you for the team to cut that check.

Considering there's literally millions of dollars on the line, if you don't know, well, you're an idiot undeserving of the opportunity afforded to you.

I'm sorry, but that's just what it is.
[ Edited by baltien on Mar 23, 2014 at 12:08 AM ]
Originally posted by AB81Rules:
An NFL contract isn't that hard to decifer. The Player must have the brains to read it over before signing something, if he doesn't, he gets most of the blame. Yes a contract contains a lot of mumbo jumbo, but it's not that hard. But he shouldn't blame the agent 100%, if anything it's 50/50.

Plus I think agents only get 3% of the contract(Or signing bonus, I could be wrong), that's what I read from one of the talking heads from ESPN or NFLN that a few players negotiated their deals by themselves, saving 3%.
Orly?? how many have you read in your Lifetime? because im at ZERO just like 99.812647431 of the WEBZONE
There was a player named Dexter Manley for the Skins back in the 80s. Dude could not read but he could play ball. We know that's not Brown's case but there are some guys that just don't have anything going for them except football. Poor guys but we sure do love them on Sunday! Brown was at fault for signing without knowing but his agent should be sued. In my profession patients trust me when I say take this medicine/vaccination it is good for you. They expect me to be accurate and thorough and to have their well being in mind. Their life is in my hands and I feel that I as the paid professional is accountable above all others. I am educated to know what my patients don't and it is my responsibility no matter the outcome. Medicine and law are two different extremes but I feel a professional must do their jobs accurately and be thorough in service
Originally posted by AB81Rules:
An NFL contract isn't that hard to decifer. The Player must have the brains to read it over before signing something, if he doesn't, he gets most of the blame. Yes a contract contains a lot of mumbo jumbo, but it's not that hard. But he shouldn't blame the agent 100%, if anything it's 50/50.

Plus I think agents only get 3% of the contract(Or signing bonus, I could be wrong), that's what I read from one of the talking heads from ESPN or NFLN that a few players negotiated their deals by themselves, saving 3%.
I'm not sure this is true for the vast majority, although I do agree on your point. I sold my company a couple of years back and I was a deer in the headlights reading the agreement. However, I took the responsibility to make sure I clearly understood everything that was in it with my attorney's guidance, made many adjustments along the way and ended up satisfied and thoroughly understanding what I was signing. It was up to Brown to understand what he was signing.
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
There is always conflict between a union doing what is best for an individual and what is in the best interest of the whole. It could be the union turning a blind eye to the intent of the contract (union contract) to allow players more bargaining power to gain income in individual contracts. Wouldn't be the first time. The intent of the voluntary versus involuntary was to allow players off time as they saw fit, while still having the option of working out at the team's facility if desired.

There is no research that I've read saying players who work out at team's facilities produce better results...as a matter of fact guys like Drew Brees and others have gained a lot by working out with other specialists, who introduce varied work out methods...seems like a win win as they can take them back to the team for review.

If it becomes a wink and a nod kind of deal within individual contracts that's OK by me, but I still wonder if it is circumventing the notion of down time, individual choices, etc. But I don't know if this is a common item that's put into contracts or whether it's only in situations where the player has demonatrated neglect during the off season. The SF Giants should definately have this in Panda's contract! Bubba Paris could have used more supervision...just don't know in this case.

These guys don't typically work out on their own, Brees doesn't work out on his own, neither does Kaepernick. Most often the trainers that they work with are receiving their directions from the organization, paid for by the organization who is their client, not the player, in which case, from what I understand, exceptions are made for that. I don't think that Brown's contract stipulated any such language or if it did, then it certainly didn't including him hanging out back at home in Texas.
Originally posted by theduke85:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by theduke85:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by theduke85:
I have a question. I'm sure this has been brought up and answered many times, but maybe I'm glazing over it.

Could the 49ers legally (i.e. within the confines of NFL rules) have given Brown the $2M he missed out on? I assume they couldn't, because allowing teams to do things like that would probably open up a lot of loopholes and under-the-table payments and things like that. But it seems like the whole thing was an honest mistake; it's not like Brown is some lazy slob that just skipped workouts completely. Just a miscommunication or ignorance.

Throughout the process, it seemed like the 49ers were helpful -- like they were trying to get the issue resolved (iirc, they even gave him a nice bonus at the end of the year). But why would they not just give him the $2M? Was something preventing them from doing so?

You give him the $2 million
What's the point of a response like this when I'm asking a legitimate question?

You got a legitimate answer. You just had to think about it.

Why should the team or it's owners throw away $2 million? No reason. Neither people nor companies act that way.
Seriously? "Throw away" $2 million dollars? It's easy to sit there and scoff at the notion when you're deliberately mischaracterizing the situation with loaded language like that.

We don't live in a black-and-white world; there are shades of grey, and this situation is an example of that. I mean, that's indisputable -- even by the 49ers own admission, because they gave him this $300,000K bonus at the end of the year. I guess that constitutes as "throwing away" money too, then? If the 49ers give Brown 300K, that's okay, because we're an infallible and generous organization, but if we pay up the full $2M we're negligent and catering to an ignoramus who can't be bothered to read a contract. Huh, I guess this is a pretty fine line that we walk.

All I asked if it was within their right/ability to give him the full $2M if they decided it was the right thing to do, if they deemed that Brown was essentially fleeced by an incompetent agent. I fail to see how this is such a cringe-worthy question. As I alluded to earlier, awarding bonuses outside of explicit contract language is probably frowned upon by the league, because it's the type of thing that could potentially be exploited, or could lead to under-the-table payments.

Calm down. And it wasn't loaded language. Paying out a capital sum to someone because they have failed to read and follow a contract and their agent has likewise failed is as good a definition of throwing money away as you are likely to come across. We could call it a charitable contribution if you want. It is making a payment for which there is no legal obligation and very little moral obligation.
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
These guys don't typically work out on their own, Brees doesn't work out on his own, neither does Kaepernick. Most often the trainers that they work with are receiving their directions from the organization, paid for by the organization who is their client, not the player, in which case, from what I understand, exceptions are made for that. I don't think that Brown's contract stipulated any such language or if it did, then it certainly didn't including him hanging out back at home in Texas.

Not sure how you back up the statement above. Brees does/has worked on his own but I'm sure his team knows what he's doing. There was a story on ESPN a couple of years ago talking about Brees and his independent streak when it comes to off season work. Not sure how prevalent it is but many players prefer to work near their hometowns in the off-season to be close to family. Brees paid his own way for training because he wanted total say over it...much as players are welcome to get second or third opinions from doctors regarding injury. I believe the new NFL/Players agreement allows the players to do this at team expense, with approval.

Just cruising around NFL stories and found this: http://www.ninersnation.com/2014/3/22/5535098/dashon-goldson-tackling-coach-buccaneers-49ers

Not sure who pays the guy but there is no mention of the team being involved.
[ Edited by dtg_9er on Mar 23, 2014 at 7:44 AM ]
Originally posted by English:
Calm down. And it wasn't loaded language. Paying out a capital sum to someone because they have failed to read and follow a contract and their agent has likewise failed is as good a definition of throwing money away as you are likely to come across. We could call it a charitable contribution if you want. It is making a payment for which there is no legal obligation and very little moral obligation.


Is it really about the money? There's a bigger picture. We lost 2 of 3 experienced starting corners going into 2014. One was expected, the other not. I think the plan was Brock/Brown + out of other roster spots/draft we would fill in the 3rd man somehow. Now instead of finding 700 man-snaps, we have to find 1500-1600 without a known commodity ready to step in. There's a lot of coulda/maybe/hopefullys. But no one who is known and 100% good to go..

So, I'm not sure a few bucks here or there is really the issue.
Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Is it really about the money? There's a bigger picture. We lost 2 of 3 experienced starting corners going into 2014. One was expected, the other not. I think the plan was Brock/Brown + out of other roster spots/draft we would fill in the 3rd man somehow. Now instead of finding 700 man-snaps, we have to find 1500-1600 without a known commodity ready to step in. There's a lot of coulda/maybe/hopefullys. But no one who is known and 100% good to go..

So, I'm not sure a few bucks here or there is really the issue.

Culliver was going to replace one of these guys. It's now Culliver and Brock with a bunch of guys trying to break in at nickle or possibly starter. Brown could have stayed and fought it out with those two but he might blame the niners for his lost money and wanted a more sure chance to start. He's the senior CB by four years! If he is right and he becomes the top CB on the Raiders then his next contract will be a good one.

If the Raiders fold like a cheap suit all the players could suffer and Brown's gamble will have been for nothing. His options may have been limited as well...perhaps no team was willing to give him a long term contract.
3 years 10 million for a 29 year old is a decent offer but it's definitely low. Look what Rogers got 4 years 32 million although he did have 6 ints that year and we were desperate. Brown never was a high int guy but he played solid. I think when he seen our offer he just wanted to go somewhere he could start and turn that a 1 year deal into a big pay day. It's a big gamble and it probably doesn't pay off. He couldn't turn a 1 year deal into a big pay day here being the #3 most likely. So yeah sucks we lost him for that price but he wouldn't have come here for that price. I think he made a bad decision but it's his right to try and get a huge pay day out of a 1 year prove it deal. Similar to Goldson we offered him 5 years 25 mil or whatever and he turned it down to go get more in FA. He got only a few nibbles and ended up coming back for 1 year 2-2.5 mil or so. It worked out for him though he proved himself and went and got 40 million. So it's a big risk for Brown but it might pay off. Brown will be 30 though after this season and Goldson was 28 plus safeties longevity seems to be longer than CB.
[ Edited by Gore_21 on Mar 23, 2014 at 8:42 AM ]
Originally posted by Gore_21:
3 years 10 million for a 29 year old is a decent offer but it's definitely low. Look what Rogers got 4 years 32 million although he did have 6 ints that year and we were desperate. Brown never was a high int guy but he played solid. I think when he seen our offer he just wanted to go somewhere he could start and turn that a 1 year deal into a big pay day. It's a big gamble and it probably doesn't pay off. He couldn't turn a 1 year deal into a big pay day here being the #3 most likely. So yeah sucks we lost him for that price but he wouldn't have come here for that price. I think he made a bad decision but it's his right to try and get a huge pay day out of a 1 year prove it deal. Similar to Goldson we offered him 5 years 25 mil or whatever and he turned it down to go get more in FA. He got only a few nibbles and ended up coming back for 1 year 2-2.5 mil or so. It worked out for him though he proved himself and went and got 40 million. So it's a big risk for Brown but it might pay off. Brown will be 30 though after this season and Goldson was 28 plus safeties longevity seems to be longer than CB.

Agree with this and believe it is a very accurate description of his situation. It is sad that his best shot at money might have been in a contract he either didn't understand or didn't take seriously. Losing that kind of money for a decent but not great player is huge.
Originally posted by AB81Rules:
An NFL contract isn't that hard to decifer.
I disagree. Especially for something like an escalator clause.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 10,162
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
These guys don't typically work out on their own, Brees doesn't work out on his own, neither does Kaepernick. Most often the trainers that they work with are receiving their directions from the organization, paid for by the organization who is their client, not the player, in which case, from what I understand, exceptions are made for that. I don't think that Brown's contract stipulated any such language or if it did, then it certainly didn't including him hanging out back at home in Texas.

Some players work out on with the team trainers and others work out with their own trainers.

I did not think that the team pays when a player works out own their own, i.e. when not at the team facilities.

This is the first time that I have heard that the team pays for essentially personal trainers.

Do you have a source or link?
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 10,162
Originally posted by AB81Rules:
C'mon man. It's not all his agent's fault. Dude is a grown ass man, read the damn contract. Know what you need to do to achieve the money. This is a rare case where a player doesn't show up for workout and doesn't realize he losses money. Manny Lawson, Nate Clements, and someone else did it in 2008 I think. But they knew. Workouts aren't mandatory, but if you want the full money, you go, and participate 90% at least. This isn't a new thing in the NFL. All teams put workout bonuses in deals, all tied to between 80 and 90 % participation, some 95%, which I believe Crabs is, as his holdout did nothing good for him. He got locked in for 6 years, when all those picks signed 6yr deals with voided 6th yr, Crabs didn't get it. Brown needs to take some responsibility. The team and agents shouldn't have to babysit the players. Agents have 100's of clients to deal with, they can't tell everyone what to do.

The team has no responsibility to ensure that Brown understands his contract. That is the work of Brown and his agent.

But, your use of the phrase word babysit in regards to the agent borders on the absurd.

Agents are paid to negotiate the contract and to make sure the player understands well and in detail the contract that to be signed and the responsibilities of the player defined by the contract.

When Brown signed his contract, he was a young kid just out of college--not a thirty year old man. It is reasonable to expect that he would need the advise of a professional to understand the contract.

I have not read the contract, but I do know that contracts of any kind can be difficult to understand, even for old experienced men.

I am not saying that Brown has no responsibility. He does, but his agent has the responsibility to make sure that his client--any client--understands the contract clause by clause.

I have had to read many different contracts, both collective and personal, and it is not necessarily easy to understand them, and some clauses are next to impossible. In every case, I have had the either a union business agent or a lawyer make sure that I did understand the contract.

We do not have all of the information, but it sure seems that Brown was screwed over by his agent. I would say that the willingness of the 49ers to give him a 300,000 stands as evidence that the team believes that the agent did not adequately serve Brown. The team had no legal or moral responsibility to give Brown that bonus.
[ Edited by buck on Mar 23, 2014 at 11:54 AM ]