Leonard Fournette officially has challenged the voiding of his guarantees

Getty Images

Jaguars running back Leonard Fournette may be in a “really good place” as it relates to his relationship with the team, but he would be in a better place if his guaranteed money weren’t under attack by the organization.

Per a league source, Fournette has initiated a formal challenge to the team’s voiding of more than $7 million in remaining salary under his rookie contract.

An arbitrator ultimately will decide whether the team will be able to convert more than $2.9 million in 2019 and more than $4.1 million in 2020 from fully guaranteed to not guaranteed at all. As previously explained, the language of the contract supports an argument that a suspension arising from on-field misconduct doesn’t void the guarantees.

The Jaguars officially voided the guarantees based on the one-game suspension imposed on Fournette after he left the sideline and joined a fight during a game at Buffalo. The news came on the same day that executive V.P. of football operations Tom Coughlin publicly chastised Fournette and running back T.J. Yeldon for yucking it up during a season-ending loss to the Texans.

69 responses to “Leonard Fournette officially has challenged the voiding of his guarantees

  1. Not a Fournette fan but the voiding of guarantees should be for drugs & off field behaviour or deliberately trying to injure players like Vontaze Burfict did. It shouldn’t be for a fight. Given that Fournette is on a rookie contract he’s cheap enough that they will still pay him his 4th year unless his YPC stay at 3.3

  2. Dumb plan by management, IMHO. I understand wanting to protect the team by the move, but pissing-off your best offensive skill player seems short-sighted…all for $7Mil over 2 years. I’m sure they’ve wasted more than that on players with less talent over the last few years. Wouldn’t be surprised if Fournette only plays 1/2 of the games because of a “tweaked hammy”… impossible to prove/disprove. Pretty sure there’s a 0% chance of re-signing him if/when he becomes a FA.

  3. Trent Richardson Part II.

    Been an LSU season ticket holder for 12 years and loved to watch Leonard bulldoze people at LSU. But he is showing very little at the NFL level. And while his attitude wasn’t bad at LSU, we saw hints of what he is now.

    Get it together LF7.

  4. Love the message this sends to the team regardless of outcome. Management lost control of the team, this seems to be a way to put everyone on notice.

  5. arclight1972 says:
    January 17, 2019 at 9:49 am
    Not a Fournette fan but the voiding of guarantees should be for drugs & off field behaviour or deliberately trying to injure players like Vontaze Burfict did. It shouldn’t be for a fight. Given that Fournette is on a rookie contract he’s cheap enough that they will still pay him his 4th year unless his YPC stay at 3.3

    ————–

    1000% agree. It should only be for off-field behavior. Most coaches would love it if a player stood up for his teammates. But these morons are gonna use it as a reason to void his contract guarantees because they now realize they used the #4 overall pick on a not great player? That’s a bad look & sets a very bad precedent.

  6. I doubt Fournette has ever had a real job in his life or has ever been held accountable. Here in California it’s an at-will employment state. Meaning you can be fired at any time for no reason at all. I know a lot of guys who were suddenly laid off and they didn’t know why. Of course they were late with their assignments, called in sick often ETC. Kids these days protest any form of punishment.

  7. Good for LF – he didnt do anything worthy of losing his gaurantees. He got in a fight – on a football field. OH NO. Thats what they do the whole game is battle. This team should worry about getting free agents in the future if they pull a guys money for getting in a fight on a football field. The guy is a top end back – no clue why the Jags want to present themselves as they are.

  8. pkrjones says:
    January 17, 2019 at 9:49 am
    Dumb plan by management, IMHO. I understand wanting to protect the team by the move, but pissing-off your best offensive skill player seems short-sighted…all for $7Mil over 2 years. I’m sure they’ve wasted more than that on players with less talent over the last few years. Wouldn’t be surprised if Fournette only plays 1/2 of the games because of a “tweaked hammy”… impossible to prove/disprove. Pretty sure there’s a 0% chance of re-signing him if/when he becomes a FA.

    —————————————————————————–

    Not dumb at all when you look at all of the divas in the NFL with the “me” attitude. The only thing that gets their attention is money and I’m not talking about $20k pocket change either. Maybe he can recoup some of that later in an extension if he shapes up.

  9. chickensalad43 says:

    Eagles should tag Foles and trade him for Fournette straight up.
    ——————————————————-

    I disagree. Fournette and Ramsey!

  10. So you can cut a player anytime you want, not honor the remainder of the contract, and also not even pay “guaranteed money”.

    Well, guess it wasn’t guaranteed after all.

    And people wonder why players at times dont want to honor contracts.

    If management wont honor the contracts, why should the player?

  11. jimmyjohns01 says:

    Maybe he can recoup some of that later in an extension if he shapes up.
    ——————————
    Shapes up? What did he even do wrong? guy has been a stud for that team. I am not even a jags fan and i think this is ridiculous.

  12. So a lot of you prefer that the employer (in this case the Jags) suck up and capitulate to the player. THAT sets a precedent that would be used against every team by every player (supported by the NFLPA and the media of course).
    Is that how YOU would run your business?
    Your employee screws up but you, as the boss, gives him a time out and a juice cup as punishment when the player should receive the harshest punishment possible in order to send a message to other players?

  13. dryzzt23 says:

    Your employee screws up but you . . .
    ———————–
    Can someone please explain to me how LF screwed up? I must be missing something. He got in a fight standing up for a teammate which cost his a game which is why the Jags can void gaurantees. He literally was sticking up for his team. This must be a Coughlin thing – no other team would reduce a guys pay for a one time offense for sticking up for a team mate.

  14. dryzzt23 says:
    January 17, 2019 at 10:34 am
    So a lot of you prefer that the employer (in this case the Jags) suck up and capitulate to the player. THAT sets a precedent that would be used against every team by every player (supported by the NFLPA and the media of course).
    Is that how YOU would run your business?
    Your employee screws up but you, as the boss, gives him a time out and a juice cup as punishment when the player should receive the harshest punishment possible in order to send a message to other players?
    ————————————————-

    What exactly is the message you are sending to other players when you give the ‘harshest punishment possible’ to a guy that they may believe was going to the defense of his teammates? Is that how YOU would run your business? It seems as though the player is getting punished not for his real offense of yukking it up but the only available actionable one and without knowing the pulse of the team that’s too fine a line to walk for a fairly small return.

  15. A $7 million penalty for throwing a punch or two is plainly excessive and unconstitutional, as long ago established by the U.S. Supreme Court for punitive damages.

    If upheld, it sets a precedent that a player is worth $7 million PER GAME! And, it would allow the league to impose draconian fines in the future, which would be certainly overruled as unconstitutional.

    In reality, if more punishment was appropriate for the wrongdoing, then he would have been suspended for the entire season. But he was not, and that means the matter has already been adjudicated, and additional punishment is legally precluded. The team had its chance to insert itself into the original punishment deliberations, and include its $7 million claim. By failing to do so, it waived the releif it now seeks.

  16. The Jaguars do realize that by voiding guarantees on a rookie contract for a suspension that originated on the field they’ve just made future rookie contracts that more contentious right? As with other posters voiding of gaurantees should be for off field activities. So if a player gets suspended for arbitrary interpretation of the illigal hit on a defenseless player rule their gaurantees could are no in jeopardy?

  17. Fournette stuck up for a teammate and now he’s being double punished for that act. He was already suspended, but to void ALL guarantees is like being stabbed in the back by your employers. He’s not in trouble with the law or abusing women or children. This sends a terrible message to players on the Jags and future free agents. Oh sure, they’ll get players to sign, but only the desperate ones. The better players with options will ignore the cheapskate Jags and Tom “Get off my lawn” Coughlin.

  18. He’s missed 21 of 32 games in the two years he’s been there. Since game 6 of his rookie year, he’s averaging 3.3 yards per carry. He admitted in the game at Tennessee several weeks ago that he “didn’t come back in the best of shape”. I’d want to move on from him too. Another running back who flashed for a bit and then flamed out.

  19. As previously explained, the language of the contract supports an argument that a suspension arising from on-field misconduct doesn’t void the guarantees.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Let me see if I have this straight. You think misconduct while on his own time away from the team and the sport is enough to warrant a suspension and the voiding of his guarantees. A positive drug test would also result in the same. However, if he displays conduct actually on the field during a game, while in uniform, on national TV, against another member of the league and his own union and that conduct is bad enough to warrant a suspension from doing his job…your position is that shouldn’t result in the same penalties and just pay the man? Really? Is that your position? I believe that the guarantees were guaranteed provided behavioral requirements were met. How does embarrassing the team and the league to the point of being told “do not come to work at all next week” meet that criteria?

  20. Am I missing something? He left the sideline to go onto the field, run across the field and throw a punch. I can see if he got up walked two feet and got into an altercation. By leaving the sideline and running across the field, he already had his actions planned.

  21. I don’t care WHY LF left the sideline to fight… the issue is that he BROKE the rules and was undisciplined, thus costing his TEAM.
    THAT, to me, reeks of selfishness and immaturity.
    He SHOULD be punished to the harshest extent possible to send a message to all players.
    But no…ya’ll demand that he not be punished so that WHEN he does this again, he can avoid discipline by citing the non-issuance of discipline in this case.
    THEN ya’ll will blame the Jags for not doing something in the 1st incident.
    I am VERY concerned about the kids that ya’ll are raising b/c they must be 100% undisciplined.

  22. jaguars are going to lose this hearing, and they should. they’re are trying to get out from guaranteed money due to poor performance, which is not allowed. the idea that his taking part in an on field fight has anything to do with why is ludicrous. the arbitrator is just going to look at why they didn’t void the guarantees of all the other players who took part in the fight.

    it’s clear they just want to be able to walk away from him if he doesn’t perform better next year. they could do that anyway, he’s only guaranteed like 6 million, but they’re trying to be cheap and petty about it.

  23. The team wants to move on from him. This is clearly a move to try and do that. It will not hold up and they will lose the appeal, barring more information forthcoming previously kept out of the public eye. I’m on his side.

  24. I must ask, what would happen in an employee of the NFLPA broke the rules and violated the terms of their contract?
    Would the LAWYERS that run the NFLPA hold that employee contractually accountable?
    You bet they will.
    But it’s deemed “inappropriate” when the NFL disciplines its own employee?
    Can ya’ll not see the incongruity of this?

  25. solitude44 says:
    January 17, 2019 at 11:29 am
    Am I missing something? He left the sideline to go onto the field, run across the field and throw a punch. I can see if he got up walked two feet and got into an altercation. By leaving the sideline and running across the field, he already had his actions planned.
    ———————————–
    Right – and he was suspended one game and fined the one games pay. Typical punishment. $7M is not typical punishment. No other team has gone this route due to a single suspension during a game. Like the previous poster stated – so now it is legit to yank gaurantees for an ejection for a personal foul unnessary roughness hit as well? Same story – team mate was ejected and they both took place on the field of play.

  26. Whether or not any team has done this before is irrelevant. It’s in most contracts. The fact the Jags invoked this clause means they are sick of him. There’s a broad statement in his contract that says they can do this. Just because it isn’t explicitly mentioned doesn’t mean he’ll get a ruling in his favor. I’ll be surprised if he doesn’t lose this appeal.

  27. —————————–
    Right – and he was suspended one game and fined the one games pay. Typical punishment. $7M is not typical punishment. No other team has gone this route due to a single suspension during a game. Like the previous poster stated – so now it is legit to yank gaurantees for an ejection for a personal foul unnessary roughness hit as well? Same story – team mate was ejected and they both took place on the field of play.
    —————
    If I had 7mm in guaranteed money, I wouldn’t do ANYTHING that would jeopardize it at all. Let me ask you, would you throw a punch if you had that much money on the line? This is football not boxing or mma, maybe all contracts should have a violence clause in there. Or an act your age/ you are a role model clause.

  28. rxrider2000 says:
    January 17, 2019 at 10:37 am

    This stench has Tom Coughlin written all over it.
    ——————

    I still don’t see why people revere that old curmudgeon.

  29. baltimoresnativeson says: “If management wont honor the contracts, why should the player?”
    ———————

    The clause to void the guarantee IS IN THE CONTRACT.

  30. Should the team punish him yes…maybe a game suspension. Going after guarenteed $ in a contract no. The Jags are trying to do a end around because he’s not been on the field. You think he’s gonna sign ANOTHER CONTRACT with the Jags , No. What he will do is, learn from this, move on to another team and become a ALL PRO.

  31. luke says: “jaguars are going to lose this hearing, and they should. they’re are trying to get out from guaranteed money due to poor performance, which is not allowed. the idea that his taking part in an on field fight has anything to do with why is ludicrous. the arbitrator is just going to look at why they didn’t void the guarantees of all the other players who took part in the fight.

    it’s clear they just want to be able to walk away from him if he doesn’t perform better next year. they could do that anyway, he’s only guaranteed like 6 million, but they’re trying to be cheap and petty about it.
    —————

    1. Bills Shaq Lawson wasn’t suspended for the fight.
    2. Jags are not going to cut Fournette regardless of performance. His $3m 2019 and $4.1m 2020 is CHEAP for a second-tier RB (ie McCoy, McKinnon, etc. are in $7m-$8m range.)
    3. It was not an “on field” fight. Fournette was on the sideline.

  32. My sense says its not about him leaving the bench but what happened afterwards. The contract spells out ‘on field events’ dont void the payment. Me thinks the agent, like The Ravens guy and drug testing, is not telling the real story.

    I mean if he came off the field and got into it with the coaches and pushed and shoved and just went berserk, they could suspend him and then fine him later for his continued conduct.

    As the saying goes, dont bite the hand that feeds you.

  33. Classless organization. The Jaguars front office feels they missed on him as a player so now they’re to recoup $7M dollars by voiding contractual GUARANTEES the team agreed to after drafting him? Classless & it’s not going to fly. Top NFL prospects coming out should make it public that they wont play for the Jaguars & tell JAX not to draft them citing this classless move as the reason. The Jaguars pulling an utterly classless move like this is going to make players not want to sign w/ Jacksonville, both rookies & veteran free agents.

  34. akira1971 says:

    The clause to void the guarantee IS IN THE CONTRACT.
    ————————–
    Yes, we all know this fact but what team would be stupid enough to enact it over a personal foul / one game suspension. They are just hurting themselves for future free agents. Who would want to sign a contract in Jacksonville if they dare get a personal foul / suspension penalty – even if not egregious.

  35. akira1971 says:
    January 17, 2019 at 1:27 pm
    baltimoresnativeson says: “If management wont honor the contracts, why should the player?”
    ———————

    The clause to void the guarantee IS IN THE CONTRACT.
    ========================================

    Uhhh, No it is not. If your going make a bold claim like that you might want to know the facts behind what you’re talking about.
    The contract voids guaranteed salary in 2019 and 2020 when the player “does not practice or play” for reasons other than a football-related injury, but it doesn’t specifically list failure to play due to a suspension for on-field misconduct.

    The contract DOES NOT specifically include a suspension for on-field misconduct. Fournette will argue his contract doesnt include language that specifically stays on-field misconduct can or will void his guaranteed money & he will win, because he’s right it’s not in the contract. The Jaguars are pulling the kind of petty crap you only see cheap small market owners pull, not a surprise. Moves like this will ensure no top free agents will want to sign with JAX again in the forseeable future.

  36. Now everyone they draft in the first round will have to think hard about holding out to avoid this kind of contract language.

  37. It’s amazing to me how many management shills post here.

    Feel however you want about Fournette – they drafted him and both sides signed his rookie deal. It’s shady as Hell for the Jags to try to take away his guaranteed money. Was he stupid? Yes. But guys get in fights all the time – how does an on-field fight translate to taking his guaranteed money?

    This move makes the team look awful and does nothing but stir up bad blood. What kind of message does this send to free agents, by the way?

  38. I would say to Tom that the other players are watching. I’m not excusing Fornettes action but if a team is willing to challenge the rules to take money away from players its going to create bad player/front office feelings. If his actions were not bad enough to cut him then suck it up Jags because taking money from players may cause free agents to stay away.

  39. hawkkiller says: “The contract voids guaranteed salary in 2019 and 2020 when the player “does not practice or play” for reasons other than a football-related injury, but it doesn’t specifically list failure to play due to a suspension for on-field misconduct.”
    =================

    The language on the contract only allows Fournette to miss a game due to an injury. That is the condition which Fournette must satisfy. So unless he was injured, he MUST be available to play for the Jaguars every week to ensure his contract is guaranteed.

  40. If the contract states void guaranteed pay resulting from suspension for on-field misconduct and he signed it then that’s on him. It’s called consequence. Responsibility for decisions resulting in actions. Older I get seems fewer humans grasp this concept–rich or poor young or old. In the end, as it relates to the NFL….. Kaepernick attorneys on line-1 and Ms Anna Isaacson on line-2 Mr. Fournette.

  41. hawkkiller says:
    January 17, 2019 at 2:10 pm

    The clause to void the guarantee IS IN THE CONTRACT.
    ========================================

    Uhhh, No it is not. If your going make a bold claim like that you might want to know the facts behind what you’re talking about.
    The contract voids guaranteed salary in 2019 and 2020 when the player “does not practice or play” for reasons other than a football-related injury, but it doesn’t specifically list failure to play due to a suspension for on-field misconduct.

    —————–

    The contract doesn’t have to specifically list anything. The entire point of the way the contract is worded is to cast a wide net – if you’re not playing and you didn’t get hurt, we can rescind the guarantee.

    This is completely within the wording of the contract.

  42. afwhigs says: “It’s amazing to me how many management shills post here.”
    =============================

    Who here says they care about management? NO ONE.

    Fans only want to see their team win. Selfish players that weren’t even in on the play who do stupid things to get themselves suspended hurts the team’s chances of winning.

    If management has to put financial clauses/penalties in contracts to ensure the best players ARE AVAILABLE TO PLAY, then they need to also enforce them.

  43. The truth is the Jaguars aren’t doing this because he threw a bunch versus the Bills. That may be the official version of things, but management was completely fed up with him and his immaturity long before the Buffalo game. They’re just using this as a reason to punish a poorly behaved child.

  44. Would the team be seeking to take away his guarantees if he wasn’t “yukking it up” in the last game (i.e., if the only thing against him was the suspension)? Because I think it could be a much different issue if the team is simply using the suspension as a pretext to punish his conduct in the final game.

  45. Counter-point:
    If there was a clause or trigger in Fournette’s contract where he could void something that would work to HIS advantage, no matter how trivial…would ya’ll be on Fournette’s side or the Jags side?
    Suppose the trigger is if the Jags have 6 RBs under contract during entire course of the season, Fournette can void the 5th year option of his rookie contract.
    In 2018 the Jags had at least 6 RBs on the roster (Rawls, Hyde, Flowers, Williams, Yeldon, Grant, and Fournette).
    Based on that, Fournette voids his 5th year so he can hit FA or force the Jags to franchise him or trade him.
    All of this is a negative for the team but solely benefits Fournette.
    WHAT would YOU say then?
    Would you still support Fournette?
    After all, injuries happen and the Jags HAVE to have RBs for every game plus use them on STs.
    My point is that you ALL seem to view everything through the lens of the player and view the team and/or NFL as “evil” whenever discipline is concerned.
    But when a player screws the team for his own benefit, ya’ll support him no matter what.
    Yes I am calling ya’ll hypocrites.

  46. kevpft says:
    January 17, 2019 at 2:43 pm
    hawkkiller says:
    January 17, 2019 at 2:10 pm

    The clause to void the guarantee IS IN THE CONTRACT.
    ========================================

    Uhhh, No it is not. If your going make a bold claim like that you might want to know the facts behind what you’re talking about.
    The contract voids guaranteed salary in 2019 and 2020 when the player “does not practice or play” for reasons other than a football-related injury, but it doesn’t specifically list failure to play due to a suspension for on-field misconduct.

    —————–

    The contract doesn’t have to specifically list anything. The entire point of the way the contract is worded is to cast a wide net – if you’re not playing and you didn’t get hurt, we can rescind the guarantee.

    This is completely within the wording of the contract.

    ***

    Maybe, maybe not. When a contractual clause regulates certain things, “including but not limited to” specific listed items, it’s a matter of interpretation as to whether something that wasn’t included on that list was intended to be prohibited by the clause. From these articles, I think that is basically the situation here. An arbitrator or judge reviewing the contract might conclude that the parties didn’t mean to prohibit every single unlisted thing, otherwise there would be no reason to list certain things out in the first place. The question then may be whether the unlisted item at issue is similar enough to the listed items to also be governed by the clause.

    An easy example: a town enacts an ordinance stating that anyone operating “vehicles” in the town park, “including but not limited to” cars, trucks, and motorcycles, will be fined $50. Five-year-old Timmy is pushing his little sister in a red wagon. Should he get fined for violating the ordinance?

  47. I care about the management of my team. IMO players are merely employees, the best compensated employees in the entire world (relative to compensation/perks/fame not performance).
    Employees (in this case players like Fournette) will come and go but the business (aka the NFL franchise) will remain.
    So I have no problem whatsoever with how the Jags handle Fournette.
    HE broke the rules.
    HE signed his contract (presumably after reading it) so he KNEW what he could and could not do, contractually.
    HE should be subject to any negative implications of triggering void clauses.

  48. hawkkiller says:

    January 17, 2019 at 1:57 pm

    Classless organization. The Jaguars front office feels they missed on him as a player so now they’re to recoup $7M dollars by voiding contractual GUARANTEES the team agreed to after drafting him? Classless & it’s not going to fly. Top NFL prospects coming out should make it public that they wont play for the Jaguars & tell JAX not to draft them citing this classless move as the reason. The Jaguars pulling an utterly classless move like this is going to make players not want to sign w/ Jacksonville, both rookies & veteran free agents.

    It’s BS posts like this that make me hate most of the people that post on PFT. They aren’t trying to avoid paying him because he hasn’t played well on the field. His rookie year he had over 1000 yards rushing and was a large reason they had success in 2017. He was even decent this year (when he was finally on the field). However, there were reports that Fournette was benched his rookie year a game for violating team rules. Also there are reports that he was late to meetings, issues with his priorities, and the fight that he started (sticking up for a teammate or not, you don’t throw the first punch) while not even being involved in the play (Buffalo game) was the last straw. I’d be shocked if Fournette didn’t win his dispute. Coughlin has a history of not winning anything related to the NFLPA. But to push the uneducated idea that the organization is classless or cheap because you don’t agree with their choice is just slanderous and ignorant.

  49. hawkkiller
    – the Jags wouln’t WANT FA or draftees that feel that the rules don’t apply to them.

    Based on your premise, it would be fair for the Jags to inform other franchises that Fournette breaks team rules routinely, misses play assignments (e.g who he is supposed to block), sleeps during position meetings, etc. Thereby tarnishing his value across the league. That’d be fair right?
    If you postulate that players would refuse to sign with or be drafted by the Jags just because they enforce contractual obligations, with Fournette being the pitiful poor poster child “victim” of the “evil Jags” then it IS fair for the Jags to disclose Fournette’s issues leaguewide.

  50. seahawkcritique says:
    January 17, 2019 at 10:55 am
    A $7 million penalty for throwing a punch or two is plainly excessive and unconstitutional, as long ago established by the U.S. Supreme Court for punitive damages.

    If upheld, it sets a precedent that a player is worth $7 million PER GAME! And, it would allow the league to impose draconian fines in the future, which would be certainly overruled as unconstitutional.

    In reality, if more punishment was appropriate for the wrongdoing, then he would have been suspended for the entire season. But he was not, and that means the matter has already been adjudicated, and additional punishment is legally precluded. The team had its chance to insert itself into the original punishment deliberations, and include its $7 million claim. By failing to do so, it waived the releif it now seeks.

    =========================================

    This is the worst attempt at legal analysis I have ever seen on this site, and that is saying something.

    “Punitive damages” relates to money that a losing defendant pays after a tort law suit. “Damages” refers to the amount the defendants owes to fix what he did wrong. Eg., if someone sues you breaking his fence, you have to pay for the repairs to fence. “Punitive damages” are extra damages awarded to the plaintiff to punish the defendant for the nature of his conduct (eg., to account for the difference between accidentally breaking someone’s fence and maliciously breaking someone’s fence).

    The Jaguars are not seeking punitive damages from Fournette. They are not suing him for money as a result of an alleged tort committed by Fournette. They are trying to void a contract (contract law is totally separate from tort law) and avoid paying him money they already promised. The Constitution has absolutely zero to do with this. There is, on the other hand, plenty of case law in favor of “freedom of contract,” which means the law will not interfere with a legally-entered contract no matter how kooky the contract’s terms are. If Fournette willingly agreed to surrender the right to $7 million (or $100 million, whatever) based on his conduct, the law is not going to interfere. Of course, whether Fournette did something that activates that voiding clause is a separate issue, and *is* the kind of thing on which a court could rule. But the existence of the clause itself is perfectly legal.

    I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

  51. Not a Fournette fan but the voiding of guarantees should be for drugs & off field behaviour or deliberately trying to injure players like Vontaze Burfict did. It shouldn’t be for a fight. Given that Fournette is on a rookie contract he’s cheap enough that they will still pay him his 4th year unless his YPC stay at 3.3

    115 112 Rate This

    It was a fight that didn’t include him . He left the bench for to go on the field. The nhl gives an automatic suspension for leaving the bench . And if his contract says that a suspension can trigger this, I wonder what his will really be worth

  52. y’all don’t get it he’s getting punished because of his sideline activities at the last game of the year when he wasn’t paying attention and laughing.

  53. punkyqb says:

    January 17, 2019 at 5:11 pm

    y’all don’t get it he’s getting punished because of his sideline activities at the last game of the year when he wasn’t paying attention and laughing.

    They already decided they were going to attempt to void his remaining guaranteed money before the last game of the season. People keep trying to bend the truth.

    “Earlier in the day Jaguars VP of Football Operations Tom Coughlin released a scathing statement about Fournette and running back T.J. Yeldon for sitting on the bench while the Jaguars were on offense and looking completely disinterested in the game.

    The AP report also states that the Jaguars made this decision and notified Fournette a few weeks ago, likely shortly after his one-game suspension for fighting against the Buffalo Bills.”

Leave a Reply

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