http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17383258/san-diego-chargers-pull-offe...
Thought this was an interesting story. I know it has happened before, but I can't recall it ever being the #3 pick in the draft.
This doesn't make the Chargers management look good, but IMO makes Bosa look worse. Not sure what his prospects would be if he sits the year and is in next years draft (although Jerruh and the Cowboys maybe still make an early play for him)
Your thoughts? Is he being a primadonna, especially for someone who has proven exactly nothing on an NFL field. Or are the Chargers just botching this thing up?
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
I think the Chargers are in a bad place. They look a bit petty by airing out the details, but without details to defend themselves, their fan base may wonder why in the world they can't sign their top overall pick.
As for Bosa?
It sounds like he and his agent know he's going to screw up at some point and they want all the money up front so he can get rich quick before he can actually lose anything.
I don't think it's that at all, I think it's that he wants San Diego to make one of two concessions that the number 3 pick has received since the new CBA took place. San Diego is unwilling to make them because they've never had to before, but they also haven't picked number 3 since the new CBA took place.
I don't think what Bosa is doing is the best idea (he has zero leverage and at this point will only lose money), but I wouldn't say he's an idiot or a primadonna.
Dan Graziano's brief column
You can't look at previous years. Look at what players around him drafted got this year.
why can you not look at previous years? is this the one time in the NFL and contract negotiations that we are going to ignore precedence?
and the Chargers are pointing to ezekiel elliot saying he deferred his bonus, well he got drafted after bosa...you wouldn't ask the number 1 pick to accept a contract similiar to the number two pick, why do that in this instance?
San Diego claims they never do this, and I think there were other players drafted early in the first that signed without either of these. I usually think players get short shrift when it comes to contracts in the NFL, but I also think if you're a rookie, sign the deal and get into camp.
San Diego claims they never give these concessions, but up until this year they have literally never even been in the position to have to offer one of these concessions, as they have had no Top 5 picks since the new CBA was signed. So they are technically being honest, but after reading the full story it does reflect very poorly on them what they did yesterday I think.
Per Fireman's comment downthread:
I believe Zeke Elliot and Carson Wentz are those two guys. Even if the Chargers haven't had to do this since the new CBA, there are at least two other teams and players that have done it this year, including a QB who was drafted before Bosa. I don't love that the Chargers are playing this out in public, but it's incredibly stupid for a rookie to try to play hardball.
carson wentz has a legitimate shot at not playing a single game this year (Doug Pederson has stated as much), bosa is the future and the present of san diego's (LA's?) defense.
(also kff17 replied saying it's completely false so at this point it's based on which internet commenter you believe more)
This. As an Eagles diehard, as much as I would like to just see Wentz out there, it is very unlikely this year. as such, he agreed to a contract that delayed some of that signing bonus payout because there is a very very minimal chance of him being put at risk of serious injury this season.
Bosa is expected to be a key component of the San Diego D from week 1. Why try and nickle and dime the guy. its not like we are talking about a 3rd round pick here, but #3 overall.
Both sides maybe overplayed their hand here, but IMO San Diego looks worse because they took it public to make the guy look bad.
I responded to kff17 below, the players drafted both before and after him this year have accepted both as part of their deals.
Quality * talent there. He is getting bad advice from someone because at this rate he is getting 100% of bagging groceries money this year
Bosa screwed up. Although NFL contracts are BS, he has to play in the rookie wage scale as it currently functions and he's only hurting himself.
He isn't the one breaking precedent. The Chargers have a top 3 pick and need to pay as the NFL currently functions
wow
what is going on behind the scenes I wonder...this certainly isn't a good look for Bosa. Might be more to it that we don't know
I have a hard time believing that taking $14.45 million guaranteed in the signing bonus up front isn't enough for anyone
Heard from people close to the anOSU program that he was a problem child there (outside the drugs issue).
Who's acting entitled now! Bosa is being a diva. The NFL is a club and if you want to join you have to abide by the rules. The 2011 CBA obliterated the ridiculous contracts for draft picks in order to provide more cap space for proven free agents. I think it's a better system, more of the money goes to players who have proven their worth.
On the other side the NFL chews up players. Most first rounders get a 4 year guaranteed contract, so Bosa would be covered for 4 years. The down side is the 5th year team option that benefits the team more than they player. By year 5 a guy could be a multiple ProBowler at the top of the league and be getting a rookie deal paycheck. DeAndre Hopkins just got his 5th year picked up for about half of the price of Dez Bryant and Julio Jones. That is a steal for the Texans. I think if they dropped the 5th round option the system would be about right. If Bosa is holding out because of the 5th year option he is getting the cart before the horse and would fall back into idiot category.
I think his demands are quite reasonable
4FSS, quit showing your * homerism, you started with the good guys!
ESPN actually has a pretty good article up regarding this saga. It does a good job explaining both sides. The summary is (1) it's a bad look for the Chargers to divulge what they did today, (2) Bosa's requests weren't ridiculous, but the Charger's have reasonable arguments for saying no, (3) Bosa doesn't have much leverage, and (3) at the end of the day, this isn't a great start to a relationship that I'm sure the Charger's hope(d) would be fruitful for years to come.
Linky
Just come to the cowboys, bosa.
We want you.
Chris Brown (Smart Football) seems to think that the media portrayed the situation unfairly, and that they wanted Bosa to agree to terms that "no top 5 pick since the new CBA has agreed to." I'm always team player when it comes to NFL contracts so I wasn't surprised to see this.
I think Bosa was/is an idiot and got a lot of bad advice. So he was getting 85% instead of 100% of his signing bonus in year one, the other 15% was coming in year 2. He also had a better contract than the #1 pick.
The Chargers might look a little bad for airing details, but they also revealed he turned down the best starting contract for a rookie since the new CBA was signed.
He's a little young for the Raiders, but maybe the Redskins would want someone with his attitude...
I flipped to Chad Dukes vs. The World (DC radio program) yesterday and someone brought up an interesting point. Bosa's agent is also an agent to many other players. The Chargers going public with this could not only hurt the negotiations with Bosa, but future negotiations with that agent's other clients.
Side note, Chad Dukes is the worst part of 106.7.
Caller: *states opinion/facts that Dukes disagrees with*
Dukes: YOU'RE AN IDIOT, I HAVE MY OWN SHOW!!! GOOD BYE LOSER! *hangs up*
Sorry but Dukes is not the worst. He may be arrogant and a prick alot of times but in terms of radio show and entertainment, there is nothing worse than when they allow Chris Russell on the air in any format. Nasally voice, thoughts are always choppy, opinions are rarely based on any really solid information and just does a terrible job all around in managing the flow of callers and guests as well as bringing his own staff into conversations. I regularly have to turn the Fan off when he is on air because its dreadful radio. Chad may piss me off now and again but for the most part he runs an entertaining show. Watching them try to mash Chris Russell onto Chad the last couple weeks has been the pits....
Seems both sides are being stubborn. With the facts they cited the Chargers do have
a point. He should've just signed and gotten on with the season.
This side of the story really needs more attention. He's not being a prima donna, he's asking for what every single other top 5 pick has ever gotten and San Diego is inexplicably being stubborn. Even worse, is that they're going to the press to make him look like the bad guy, which is horribly unprofessional.
And even worse, what they're arguing over is "offset language", which boils down to the Chargers not having to pay him guaranteed money if he's released. Despite it being, you know, "guaranteed".
Except for two other top picks this year who took deals with those conditions in them.
it's also conceivable that neither of the top two picks will play this year (though Goff will likely start at some point, my understanding is he hasn't won the job yet); bosa was drafted to be the cornerstone of the defense starting now.
Completely false!! This contract has BOTH offset and signing bonus deferral and thats whats being fought over. Since the new CBA there has not been a No. 3 overall pick whose contract included both offset language and a split signing bonus. Goff had no offset language btw
How many number 3 picks had a history of being suspended and disciplined in college in the year prior to jumping to the NFL? Bosa has some baggage with him, his attitude and willingness to be told he has to do certain things a certain way( class work). If I'm signing him and paying money I want to make sure he is going to work hard for it not just do what Bosa feels is enough.
Jadaveon clowney? Didn't jamarcus Russell have some issues as well? Cam Newton (not the year prior necessarily but quite a few issues)? These are also #1 picks we are talking about.
Russell didn't work out so well for the team that drafted him in still waiting for Clowney to contribute to the Texans. While I agree that the Chargers owners are cheap and kind of aholes for making this public it's not like Bosa isn't in that "caution zone" for a player.
If you have those concerns don't draft him then. I agree Bosa is a risk, but they did their due diligence and selected him anyways. Can't hold it against him now and try to structure the contract so much in favor of the owners that he is willing to sit out a year. Don't blame him at all for holding out.
Its becoming clear that you just have a personal problem with Bosa. If any character issues are large enough to warrant different contract structuring, they shouldn't have taken him third overall.
Your right the Chargers who never like to pay up shouldn't have picked him 3rd they probably should have traded the pick away.
Not sure this is entirely true, but to give the benefit of the doubt, Carson Wentz is not a #3 pick, nor was Ezekiel Elliot.
According to cover32.com, Wentz's contract contains offset language and, according to the table provided in the link, he receives 25% of his signing bonus in each of the next four years. I'm not sure this is correct, though, and I might just be reading it wrong, because...
Sporting News reported that:
So it looks like both Wentz and Elliot have both parts of this and have already signed and gotten into camp. If this source is true, Wentz's $1 million deferred bonus is about 5.7% of his signing bonus (obviously if the previous reference is correct and this one is wrong, then 75% of his signing bonus is deferred for up to three years, I'd probably trust Sporting News more). If I heard correctly, I think Bosa was asked to defer 15% of his bonus, whatever it is, until January and accept offset language.
I'm not convinced that Bosa is being asked to do much more than anyone else has been asked to do, which some accepted (a player at the most valuable position on the field who was drafted before him as well as a player who is probably in the most injury-prone position who was drafted right after him).
I do think, though, that the Chargers have a really good reason to pull the offer at this point: They're trying to pay him for 16 games, but he hasn't practiced with his team or any NFL team ever before, so it is unlikely that he'll be able to contribute for a full 16 games this year. 100% agree that his first year compensation should be reduced in this case.
Actually that is erroneous. The issue is that #2 and #4 took deals with 1 or the other of the 2 conditions, not both.
San Diego wanted Bosa to sign a deal with BOTH conditions. Which would be unprecedented for a #3 pick.
From what I've read Boss supposedly wants a deal with neither of those conditions in it.Where have you read that?
http://www.sbnation.com/2016/8/8/12402198/joey-bosa-contract-holdout-san...
Your right I read that wrong.
It is my understanding that the offset clause is so they don't have to pay him if he is being paid by another team. IE double dipping. I agree with the Owners on this. He is complaining about wanting more money in one year than 99% of the readers here will likely earn in their lives.
Heck, the chargers are saving him money from his taxes. Who knows what that 20,000,000 a year bracket has to pay as opposed to the 18,000,000 bracket.
This is the problem that always comes up when fans are discussing athletes salaries. They inevitably compare it to themselves and ironically side with the owners who have 1000 times more than those athletes
NAILED IT.
It absolutely amazes me how people are willing to vilify the athlete as greedy when they are putting their bodies, future health on the line every time they step on a field, even in practice, while the billionaire and multi millionaire owners and brass are the the ones making exponentially more.
Both the owners AND the players are greedy.
I'm not villifying them. I'm just pointing it out.
There is no difference in the taxes of the two incomes. Above ~$400k, you're taxed at the top rate.
He does this at the risk of head injury that could and probably will debilitate him for the rest of his life. He's spent the last eight+ years putting his body and his life on the line for absolutely no pay for schools that never gave him a dime of the money he earned them. He's continuing to put his physical and mental well-being at risk for the NFL.
He owes the NFL nothing.
He owes the fans nothing.
He owes the Chargers nothing.
He owes it to himself to protect himself.
He owes it to his family to protect himself.
He's made contractual demands that are well within his rights. He's going to lose because he has no leverage, but I frankly can't fault him for trying.
Love it when people get it, leg.
The ridiculous thing here, as ESPN accurately pointed out, is that for a #3 pick, really the only logical scenario where the team does not have Bosa on the roster for the next 4 years is injury to Bosa that ends his career.
In which case, the team already has insurance to cover that. The irony is they would be the ones double dipping, by not having to pay the guy AND by receiving insurance payments to cover it.
Or they trade him, in which case it is highly likely that a new contract is negotiated anyway to remove offset language.
Would you apply that to your own life? Let's say you're current company agrees to GUARANTEE to pay you your salary next year. Then they fire you and try to get out of paying you just because another company has signed you on. Do you really think they should be off the hook because they fired you? Would you really be ok with losing out on a full year's salary just because they decided they don't want you around anymore?
A better term for "double dipping" would be "team following through on contractual obligations"
He should have signed and accepted the ridiculous amount of money they were offering.
Never ceases to amaze me how often people side with the owners. The Chargers have long had notoriously poor and cheap ownership. Now Bosa is asking for the same structure a top 3 pick would get post CBA and he's to blame? Give me a break. The Chargers are airing dirty laundry in public to try and shame Bosa and people are still on their side? What a joke of a "professional" organization. This is the organization that drove away their star safety because he wanted to watch his daughter during a halftime show. How anyone can side with them is beyond me. Theres a reason Eli refused to be a part of that shit show. LT and Jammer also had major problems with their rookie contracts. Anyone here calling out Bosas character needs to reevaluate how they view billionaire owners vs the athletes we actually pay to watch
Here's a leg and some additional context: The Chargers were petty and terrible even before they tried to stiff Joey Bosa
This is generally true. Also, Kam Chancellor should be paid more. He is getting a third of Richard Sherman's guaranteed salary for no good reason.
The owners of the Chargers being cheap didn't cause Eli's dad tell them he wouldn't play a down for them. He wanted someplace more visible and marketable for his son to play at.
They're ALL making a ridiculous amount of money.
For me, he's not negotiating on principle, but on what his agent is advising him to do. The team doesn't want to set a precedent for all future contracts. Now he's late for camp and won't be of all that much value when the season starts.
For me, there's plenty of blame to go around here, and though I see both sides, he should sign the freaking contract and get on with it. Now he can't, because PRIDE.
That's not pride, it's the owners trying to set a new precedence around the league and his agent is taking a stand (probably at Bosa's expense). This is nothing more than billionaire owners trying to gain yet another advantage over players. The very existence of offset language is absurd enough (a loophole to get out of paying what they owe only possible due to collusion), now they want to get out of the one concession they gave to players? The owners are acting entitled and childish, but they know that any fallout will ultimately fall on the players.
The agent is taking a stand for the agent. The owners are taking a stand for the owners. Bosa is taking a stand for himself.
Childish? Just on the part of the owners?
Seems like to me that this is how the free market works. And nowadays, publishing the details of a negotiation is just another negotiation tactic.
They're all a bit spoiled.
When I said "pride", I meant that's why it's difficult for any of them, and particularly Bosa, to back down at this point. This is more money that he's ever seen. He certainly can trade some of it back for some contract stipulations, but it's costing him in playing time this season.
This isn't a free market, it's textbook collusion between competing businesses and it's illegal. The only catch is that in the last bargaining agreement the owners bullied the players association into agreeing to not sue over collusion so there's no longer any recourse for unfair business practices (unsurprisingly lifelong businessmen are better negotiators and have better lawyers). This is the same reason the Redskins, Cowboys, and Saints were penalized for spending over the cap in a cap-free year. The owners have set up a system where they have the advantage in all negotiations. They're basically held to the honor code to not blatantly take advantage of the situation. They do anyways and then vilify the players for crying foul because public sympathy inexplicably always sides with management.
I just don't agree with the "owner bad, player sheep" argument. Players would get nothing if the league hadn't been set up by owners. Is a true free market in that players get paid by spectators? No. But negotiations are just that. Negotiations.
Your argument makes sense if players getting paid union wages. Star player is a different kind of negotiation.
Players aren't sheep, they're just in a system stacked against them. There are countless reasons for that and most of them aren't sinister, but it remains that they have to fight a lot harder to get what's owed.
And players are getting paid union wages. They're part of a union who set up the bargaining agreement and agreed to pay scales and their negotiations are done within that framework. Certain owners push against that framework to avoid paying what they owe, then cry foul when a player doesn't give in to their demands.
Just because the dollars involved are on a different scale than most unions doesn't mean similar rules don't apply.
They're in a contract negotiation. It's not "what's owed" until they agree on a contract.
It's a mischaracterization to say that the owners are bad, and Bosa and his agent are good. They're just parties on either end of a negotiation.
Greed works.
I think it's pretty obvious we're going to disagree no matter what, but my whole point is that the owners already agreed to contract guidelines through the bargaining agreement. There is a current market value that includes things like how a signing bonus is structured and what offset language is used. When owners strong-arm negotiations like this, they know that the player usually can't afford to hold out to do what's best for themselves and future players. They have intense pressure to be a "team player" from the fans/media and also need to get into camp for their own development. Teams know this, and slowly push down market value through numerous concessions over the years so that contracts go further and further into their favor. It's an abuse of power that happens to be technically legal. You can say all you want that they have every right to do it, and you're not wrong, but we should at least call it what it is. It's greedy and short sighted and done at the expense of the players who have a very small window of time where they can earn money to provide for themselves and their family.
I don't think Bosa and his agent are martyrs, and they're ultimately acting in their own self-interest, but that doesn't make them wrong.
I don't think they're necessarily wrong.
But when Bosa is the last first rounder who hasn't signed, with contract details that are not dissimilar to those agreed to by the guys drafted both immediately before and after him, it makes him stick out like a sore thumb.
It doesn't mean he's in the wrong. But it sure don't mean he's in the right, either.
From http://www.sbnation.com/2016/8/8/12402198/joey-bosa-contract-holdout-san...
Just because the people around you are okay with getting screwed doesn't mean you should be held accountable for their poor choices.
"getting screwed" is a really...not a believable statement to me. But there are a few more details I'd need to really know how bad this is on both sides and to determine how I feel about Bosa and SD.
As far as deferred signing bonus is concerned, why would a player not get the deferred portion of his signing bonus as scheduled?
For example:
If he had a career ending injury, does he get the bonus when it is scheduled?
If he gets suspended for PEDs/off-field incidents/on-field incidents/Manziel-behavior, does he get it?
If he gets cut before the deferred portion is paid, does he get it anyway?
If he decides to retire before the deferred portion is paid, does he get it anyway?
If the signing bonus is fully guaranteed in any and all cases, then I don't see why this is a problem. If he could lose it between now and then, I'm wondering what those circumstances would look like.
As far as offset language, what does the contract say?
For example:
If he signs a contract that guarantees $2 million in year 4, but gets cut at the end of year 3 and picked up by another team for $1 million that year, does the contract state:
- that the Chargers are guaranteeing he will make $2 million in his fourth year? or...
- that they are guaranteeing the Chargers will pay him $2 million in his fourth year?
I really do lack any level of sympathy for someone if they want to try to get paid by two teams at once, so as long as the Chargers make up any difference between the guarantee they make to him and the real money he makes that year, I don't see why that isn't acceptable.
I have an extremely hard time believing anyone would accept this in their own profession. As an example that's closer to what most people would encounter, imagine you leave your current job with 10 vacation days banked. Your company has a policy that they pay you the value of your vacation days upon leaving your job. But there's a catch. Your new job gives you 10 days vacation per year. So, instead of being paid for your vacation, they tell you that your new vacation days offsets your old ones, and they no longer owe you a penny. Would you really accept that? Would you let your old company off the hook for money just because you got a new job? NFL and NCAA coaches wouldn't, and they're often paid by multiple teams due to guarantees in their contracts. Yet somehow when a player is in this situation, they're greedily double-dipping.
The ironic part is that the player is willing to accept this ridiculous idea, and all the Chargers have to do is move around when they give him the signing bonus. They get to include language in the contract that is so far into their favor it would be laughable in any other profession, and all they have to do is pay what they owe a few months earlier. At best it's penny-wise/pound-foolish. At worst it's trying to begin a new precedent to give rookies even worse contracts then what they've been getting.
To be entirely honest, when I leave one employer, I don't expect to get anything from them. Once that relationship is terminated, it's terminated. If there is a severance to negotiate, then it gets negotiated.
In your example, I would think I'd lose my vacation days from my previous employer and I'd get whatever I negotiate with the new employer.
But what I'm saying is that you've already agreed to it. Say you agree to a severance package with a company beforehand. Eventually you are laid off and find a new job. The company with whom you've agreed on this severance package beforehand is now not going to pay you, because they don't think you should get paid by two companies. Does that seem at all fair?
not sure how you are comparing the two situations. if they guarantee to pay him X dollars and cut him before he's received full payment they are still liable. Just because someone else picks him up and pays him another amount doesn't mean they should get off.
I should probably just delete my last couple posts, this is much more succinct.
I noticed I typed almost exactly what you did right after, my bad lol.
Alimony cuts off if a spouse gets remarried right? Catalogue this under "horrible example", I was just trying to think of a way to relate it to real world situations. Maybe a prenuptial agreement would be more comparable?
This is exactly why I had the question in a previous post:
Are they guaranteeing that the Chargers will pay him X dollars in year Y or are they guaranteeing he'll make X dollars in year Y?
The obvious difference is whether the Chargers foot the whole bill or whether additional compensation reduces the Chargers commitment. I don't know the language of these contracts well enough to be able to say.
But, if the Chargers were to cut him in year Y-1, Bosa could always just sit out a year, ensuring the Chargers would have to foot the whole bill.
I'm not saying anyone is in the right or wrong here because I don't know how the contract is written or what could prevent future payments from happening, if anything.
I just don't see this as being clear-cut enough to solely place the blame for the whole scenario on one party or the other. As far as I can tell, both parties are being stubborn.
It's not a true "negotiation " because it's not a free market and Bosa has no options. He can't offer his services to the Dolphins. He is already property of Chargers through no choice of his own.
It was a choice of his to sign into a union that said that was the way it worked.
What? Before being drafted, players are not part of the NFLPA.
So this comment really makes little to no sense. The system is definitely not a free market. No one can even pretend it is. These guys are not really allowed to get what they are "really" worth simply because of the salary cap, let alone the slotted rookie salary scale.
Now that we've identified the owner of an NFL team on our boards, care to use your immense wealth to fully fund Joe's needs for TKP?
The only equitable solution to this issue is for Bosa to sit out this year, and be included in next year's draft. And San Diego should trade up (if necessary) to take him again with the third pick.
I think it's a business. Teams want to minimize spending to maintain margins. Players want to get paid their market value so they can buy nice things and be financially stable in the future. I don't think either side is right or wrong.
That being said, given the physical and mental risks that players take every time they step on the field, I will never fault a player for trying to get more money.
I think in the end, San Diego could stumble into the truth on this one. IMO, Bosa is going to be a bust. He dominated lesser OT's in college, but got dominated by quality OL's.
And yet people don't think there's going to be another player's strike in 2021....
The players expect it, so the fans definitely should
I'm a little shocked it didn't happen after the owners colluded to stay under the cap in an un-capped year. They've over-stepped so many bounds in just a few short years, after getting concessions that any other industry couldn't even dream of. Rookie contract scales are so incredibly team-friendly that all I can think of is that teams got emboldened enough to do literally whatever they want. Compounded with rising injury concerns I wouldn't be too surprised if there's no NFL for an entire year or more
That might be the strike that ruins the NFL. There's a pretty good chance they miss the whole season at this point. The NFL has probably peaked, based on age demographics it's definitely not doing so great. That could be the start of the downfall.
Even more worrisome to the NFL is that the demographics of the NFL are getting older while the demographics of soccer (and especially MLS) are getting very young.
Deny it all you want but soccer is on a very rapid upswing in the US, and its bolstered by the millennial generation.
This doesn't make sense for either side. Bosa will not get that same contract offer now that he's going to miss time, and if he re-enters the draft after missing a full season he's not going to get picked as high, therefore slotting himself at a lower price.
The Chargers are basically willing to concede a 3rd overall pick over a couple million being paid 3 months earlier. They can't trade Bosa until March and there's no way they get fair value at that point for him as a 3rd overall pick.
In conclusion, both sides are going full retard.
It seems to me that regardless of which side you fall on here regarding the fairness of the negotiations, it is still a bad career move by Boss to have let it go this far. He's now screwing himself more than the chargers were trying to screw him.
Does Bosa come from money? I mean how much is he making this very minute? Maybe his agent is guaranteeing him money he is expecting a return on with this negotiation. I find the whole thing comical. Lifestyles of the rich and worthless!
He signed with the Chargers this afternoon
A critical development in closing the cap between the two sides was a switch of the agent who led Bosa's negotiations, sources said.
Good move.
Does anyone know what the final details of the contract were?
Apparently they both compromised. He got more money up front, and the Chargers got to keep the "Ryan Leaf" policy offset language.