Report: Union eyeballing recent rookie trades

On Monday, the Eagles and the Cardinals swapped a pair of rookie draft picks.  Later that same day, the Redskins and Rams did the same thing.

On Tuesday, the Redskins cut the fifth-rounder they’d acquired from the Rams, linebacker Hall Davis.

Chris Mortensen of ESPN reports that the NFLPA is monitoring whether the teams made the trades to circumvent a specific rule of the uncapped year that guarantees any rookie draft pick 85 percent of the first-year minimum salary of $310,000.

Apparently, trading the rookie doesn’t trade the obligation.  So when the Redskins cut Davis, the Redskins — and the Rams — avoided the requirement to pay Hall $272,000.

On the surface, the NFLPA has a point.  On the other hand, the NFLPA agreed to these terms, just as they agreed to an increase in the minimum years for unrestricted free agency from four to six.  Plenty of players have been screwed by the uncapped year.  As to Davis and other 2010 rookies, they’re not losing something they would have had in a capped year.

The real issue here, in our view, isn’t whether the spirit of the 85-percent rule was violated.  Instead, the transactions — specifically the Rams-Redskin trade — could be interpreted as evidence of collusion.  Surely, the Rams and Redskins knew what they were doing when swapping two unwanted rookies; they were essentially agreeing to a quid pro quo that gave each team a chance to dump a player while saving $272,000.

There’s no specific provision of the CBA’s Anti-Collusion clause that addresses this precise issue.  But Section 1(e) of Article XXVIII arguably is broad enough to cover this situation, by encompassing any agreement “concerning the terms or conditions of employment offered to any player for inclusion, or included, in a Player Contract.”

Either way, the Redskins and Rams may have outsmarted themselves on this one, and in an effort to save $272,000 they may have fueled a broader attack on the league’s overall perceived (or actual) lack of player spending in the uncapped year.

UPDATE:  A league source tells us that the money wouldn’t have gone to Davis, but that it would have gone to the other rookies who made the team, distributed based on the number of downs played by the rookies.  So, basically, the Rams may have screwed their rookies other than Hall Davis out of their cut of $272,000.

23 responses to “Report: Union eyeballing recent rookie trades

  1. Mike why dont you go find something to do. Nobody cares about what teams do with players that no one has ever heard of.

  2. Another Florio invented pro-union post that makes absolutely no sense at all. If an agreement has a loophole which has been found by more than one team, the use of that loophole is not “collusion,” but the use of a loophole! Why is it when players use the benefit of the agreement they may have signed that is ok, but when the teams do so, it’s a conspiracy? Antonio Bryant got $8M when he knew he had a bad knee; Favre got $7 extra to play when he had a contract still in force; and Revis has three years left on an agreement which he has now breached — but don’t let the teams use loopholes!!

  3. This has g0t to be the funniest “look into the operations of the Redskins” that I’ve ever read…
    In April they gave Haynesworth $21MILLION bonus so that he’d continue to play for the Skins, and have received nothing but headaches, acrimony, and angst from that lazy, fat POS.
    In August the Skins are looking for loopholes to save $272K by jettisoning rookie draft picks.
    Hahahahahahahahahahah… keep up the great management, Snyder. You’re an example to ALL how to screw-up EVERYTHING that you touch.

  4. # Crazy Nick says: September 1, 2010 11:04 AM
    Remember when the Patriots gaggws away their season in SB XLII?
    Wasn’t that great?
    v;ddov. Esu yp hp, yjpdr yu[omh v;sddrd str trs;;u [suomh pgg…..
    Translation for those that dont get it:
    Classic. Way to go, those typing classes are sure paying off

  5. Report: MBAs/lawyers with professional sports teams find loopholes in agreements, find way to make unions look bad in the process.

  6. Union is pissing about the terms they agreed to? Guess that goes a long in explaining why the players do the same thing with their contracts.

  7. UPDATE: A league source tells us that the money wouldn’t have gone to Davis, but that it would have gone to the other rookies who made the team, distributed based on the number of downs played by the rookies. So, basically, the Rams may have screwed their rookies other than Hall Davis out of their cut of $272,000.
    Poor Bradford. He isn’t going to get a portion of that $272k. Now, $50.04 million is a payday. But $50 million… the hell is a man supposed to feed his family on a measly $50 million?

  8. Good God, Florio. I enjoy reading a lot of your stuff, but could you POSSIBLY pull your lips off of the union spode long enough to write articles that don’t jump at every chance to suggest collusion? That friggin union that you love so much is FAR more engaged in activities that are essentially legalized collusion than ANYTHING the league does.

  9. Another day, another blind shot by Florio at trying to say the Redskins cheated again.
    It’s too bad that Florio’s vag is still hurting after the Redskins fired him years ago from a peon job that he couldn’t perform.
    Seriously Florio…get a life. Get over your anger at Snyder and the Redskins. Learn to be a professional.
    Like I always say…this site is no more than a blog.
    And Florio is the Perez Hilton of Football.

  10. Anti-union rhetoric is so ridiculous. You blame the players/workers for signing contracts that aren’t beneficial to them, but when a company signs a contract you say the union forced them.

  11. the union sucks, which is WHY football is the strongest sport in the world. give the union more power and watch the product suffer.

  12. Umm, The Union is complaining that the Redskins are not paying money to players? Really?
    Didn’t they just give $21 million to a guy to sit on his butt for 4 months?
    You might want to pick a different fight on this one NFLPA.

  13. The other day when the trade was announced a poster wrote “I’ll trade you my empties for your empties.”
    He was right, and ahead of everyone at PFT.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!