- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why don't the Bengals cut ties with Shemir Stewart and just sign Hendrickson to a deal?
Posted on 7/24/25 at 11:05 pm to JohnnyKilroy
Posted on 7/24/25 at 11:05 pm to JohnnyKilroy
I know. It’s exhausting.
And yet absolutely nobody has been able to find JUST ONE example of some super hard instance that proved this clause would be hard to adhere to lol
“Uhhhh some player said he likes Donald trump”
“Uhhhhh what if a player gets in a fight with a woman and calls her a dumb bitch. Uhhhhhh what’s wrong with that??”
And yet absolutely nobody has been able to find JUST ONE example of some super hard instance that proved this clause would be hard to adhere to lol
“Uhhhh some player said he likes Donald trump”
“Uhhhhh what if a player gets in a fight with a woman and calls her a dumb bitch. Uhhhhhh what’s wrong with that??”
This post was edited on 7/24/25 at 11:07 pm
0
Posted on 7/24/25 at 11:19 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
You do realize all first round picks get guaranteed money at their slot value right?
You do realize that nearly 100% of contracts have verbiage that states that the guarantees are voided if the player performs a negative act?
Posted on 7/24/25 at 11:44 pm to cubsfan5150
quote:
You do realize that nearly 100% of contracts have verbiage that states that the guarantees are voided if the player performs a negative act?
No. There's a reason CAA Agency turned down the same contract verbiage the last 2 years from the Bengals.
Their client list includes Josh Allen, Matthew Stafford, TJ Watt, Dak Prescott, Ceedee Lamb, AJ Brown, and lots more. But I guess they don't know what they are doing and shouldve just told their players "just don't say anything stupid"
CAA
This post was edited on 7/24/25 at 11:46 pm
Posted on 7/24/25 at 11:50 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
But I guess they don't know what they are doing and shouldve just told their players "just don't say anything stupid"
There’s no doubt they wish they could and make things that easy. Sucks to not have enough faith in your clients, which makes things harder.
This post was edited on 7/24/25 at 11:51 pm
Posted on 7/25/25 at 12:00 am to Corinthians420
The dispute isn’t about how much guaranteed money is in the deal. Its about whether the Bengals should be able to void the remainder of the guaranteed money should he get into trouble related to behavior.
Seems like the obvious solution for both parties is for the contract to specify exactly what type of conduct would be able to void the contract as opposed to the broad term of “conduct detrimental to the team”. Outline it specifically with things like felony convictions, repeated team suspensions for violating team rules, violation of league’s personal conduct policy that led to a suspension greater than 5 games, etc.
Seems like the obvious solution for both parties is for the contract to specify exactly what type of conduct would be able to void the contract as opposed to the broad term of “conduct detrimental to the team”. Outline it specifically with things like felony convictions, repeated team suspensions for violating team rules, violation of league’s personal conduct policy that led to a suspension greater than 5 games, etc.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 12:03 am to Tiger Prawn
I remember when the Colts voided Trent Richardson's because his wife had to be rushed to the hospital due to going into labor at 28 weeks and he missed a flight.
Seems like the player's union got him at least some of his millions back though after he filed a grievance. It did get his money off the salary cap though.
Seems like the player's union got him at least some of his millions back though after he filed a grievance. It did get his money off the salary cap though.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:20 am to Tiger Prawn
quote:
Seems like the obvious solution for both parties is for the contract to specify exactly what type of conduct would be able to void the contract as opposed to the broad term of “conduct detrimental to the team”. Outline it specifically with things like felony convictions, repeated team suspensions for violating team rules, violation of league’s personal conduct policy that led to a suspension greater than 5 games, etc.
Stewart’s camp has publicly said they don’t want to negotiate anything.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:24 am to TackySweater
quote:
That’s a really asinine thing to expect as one party to a business contract lol
If it’s so asinine to expect that language not to be in the contract, why does every other player in the NFL get to enjoy this asinine expectation?
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:29 am to cubsfan5150
quote:
You do realize that nearly 100% of contracts have verbiage that states that the guarantees are voided if the player performs a negative act?
Please define negative act
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:36 am to Corinthians420
quote:
remember when the Colts voided Trent Richardson's because his wife had to be rushed to the hospital due to going into labor at 28 weeks and he missed a flight.
It’s no surprise you misled on this example, likely intentionally lol
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:36 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
Please define negative act
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:37 am to Corinthians420
Yep, those guys can go beat their wives and their money can’t be voided. Bulletproof.
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 7:49 am
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:40 am to cubsfan5150
quote:
Yep, those guys can ask go beat their wines and their money can’t be voided. Bulletproof.
You want to try English?
Posted on 7/25/25 at 7:49 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
You want to try English?
Don’t text and drive, kids
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 7:52 am
Posted on 7/25/25 at 10:29 am to TackySweater
quote:
It’s no surprise you misled on this example, likely intentionally lol
it wasn't misleading. That's what happened. The Colts don't even dispute that's what happened. They effectively waived his guarantees because he didn't call the team during a family emergency. That's the type of personal conduct that apparently can void millions of dollars.
quote:
Trent Richardson was waived by the Indianapolis Colts on Thursday, but the fight over his $3.184 million 2015 salary continues.
Richardson, according to an NFL source, has filed a grievance over the team's refusal to pay the balance of his rookie contract. The news was first reported by Profootballtalk.com
The team holds the position that the two-game suspension for conduct detrimental to the team levied against Richardson in January voided the guarantees in his contract, as spelled out in the forfeiture language included in the deal.
But Richardson is challenging the decision, perhaps based on the notion that his actions did not rise to the level of conduct detrimental. Richardson missed a team practice and flight to New England the day prior to January's AFC Championship Game, he says, because he rushed his girlfriend to the hospital with pregnancy complications.
The team has not disputed this but told Richardson the suspension was levied because he did not contact team officials in a timely manner to inform them of his whereabouts.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 10:37 am to TackySweater
quote:
Stewart’s camp has publicly said they don’t want to negotiate anything.
no they haven't. Here's what his agent said
quote:
“It’s essentially that when a player signs his contract and it’s guaranteed, it should be completely, fully guaranteed. Obviously if there’s certain circumstances that happen, the team should be able to void. However, again, if you want to make changes to your precedent, it should be a negotiation. It should be give and take. It shouldn’t just be, Hey, we’re changing this and sign it or go scratch.”
Posted on 7/25/25 at 10:50 am to lsufball19
quote:
wasn't misleading. That's what happened. T
No that’s not. You quoted what actually happened yourself lol.
If you lack the mental capacity to understand the difference, then all your previous posts make way more sense now lol
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 10:52 am
Posted on 7/25/25 at 10:51 am to lsufball19
Ok. Now quote the part where they said they don’t want anything new added and just want exactly what was done in the past.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 10:58 am to TackySweater
You have to be the most confident moron I have ever encountered on this forum
Posted on 7/25/25 at 11:12 am to lsufball19
I mean. You clearly posted two things that you are wrong about lol
One you actually posted the actual thing that makes you wrong.
You can’t make level of wrongness up lol
One you actually posted the actual thing that makes you wrong.
You can’t make level of wrongness up lol
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 11:13 am
Page 15 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News