Deshaun Watson requests trade

[Drained]

52 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

Was it just the overwhelming dollar amount for why Watson signed the extension in the first place? I'd find it hard to believe this relationship went this bad this fast in last few months. 

We were a team that was simply poised for the playoffs every year before this season. Aside from the insane loss to KC, the win against Buffalo proved to Deshaun he could take us all the way, plus its comfortable here, he likes being in Houston and he enjoys the team, he just opened a restaurant like a month ago. We have a lot more going for us to keep him we just need to hope the dominos fall accordingly. 

[ET80]

5 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

But you are still making 30+ million on the tag, right?

No - not in the case of Dak. He signed his tag, which meant he was going to get paid weekly for 16 weeks, $1.8mm a week ($1,875,000). If he doesn't play, he doesn't get paid.

Dak missed 11 games with his ankle injury, so he lost $20,625,000 due to that injury.

Had he signed the contract, he probably makes that right up front before the ink dries.

[LeotheLion]

4 minutes ago, ET80 said:

No - not in the case of Dak. He signed his tag, which meant he was going to get paid weekly for 16 weeks, $1.8mm a week ($1,875,000). If he doesn't play, he doesn't get paid.

Dak missed 11 games with his ankle injury, so he lost $20,625,000 due to that injury.

Had he signed the contract, he probably makes that right up front before the ink dries.

Well that changes things certainly. I still think the prospects of those injuries and lack of compensation afterwards is overblown (Dak will still make bank) but that's probably too big of a risk. 

[WheatieMan]

7 minutes ago, ET80 said:

No - not in the case of Dak. He signed his tag, which meant he was going to get paid weekly for 16 weeks, $1.8mm a week ($1,875,000). If he doesn't play, he doesn't get paid.

Dak missed 11 games with his ankle injury, so he lost $20,625,000 due to that injury.

Had he signed the contract, he probably makes that right up front before the ink dries.

Wow, didn’t realize FT is week to week. How did the Collective Bargaining not negotiate some insurance for the player?

[Drained]

2 minutes ago, WheatieMan said:

Wow, didn’t realize FT is week to week. How did the Collective Bargaining not negotiate some insurance for the player?

I believe the final draft went to vote and they hoped that it would get shot down but a majority of players voted for it? NFL ownership was playing hardball cause of all the sit outs and not giving up an inch towards the players

Edited January 18, 2021 by Drained

[ET80]

1 minute ago, WheatieMan said:

Wow, didn’t realize FT is week to week. How did the Collective Bargaining not negotiate some insurance for the player?

From what I've read (not an expert here) but anything that isn't defined as "guarenteed" and/or "bonus" is paid weekly during the 17 week season.

So, guys who hold out after all of the guarenteed money is paid out on their contract? That's why they're holding out, they want to get that up front money outside of the season. That's how teams renegotiate/extend guys as well - a guy has a $10mm salary/cap hit, team needs to clear up cap room, so they convert $3mm into a signing bonus and spread that out over (X) years, and now that $10mm turns into $7mm. 

(That's how it's been explained to me at least).

I'd wager that the NFLPA wants to abolish the FT entirely, go to a true FA environment. The league doesn't want to do that, so middle ground will be adjustments, guarenteed money, limitations on when it can be used or who it can be used on...

It's a sticking point for both sides, IMO.

[BayRaider]

With Howard healthy, Gronk is easily the third best TE on the team behind Brate. Brate has actually been very reliable.

[ET80]

13 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

Well that changes things certainly. I still think the prospects of those injuries and lack of compensation afterwards is overblown (Dak will still make bank) but that's probably too big of a risk. 

I agree on Dak, simply because the nature of the injury is one that somebody can come back from - broken ankles look gruesome, but it's all about setting the bone back with plates and pins and letting it calcify. Dak's already running a bit and working out, he's going to be ready for TC.

But there's no way to dictate WHAT sort of injury is coming when you're playing - what if it was a patellar tendon, or an achilles tendon? A ruptured quad or torn hamstring?What if it was a rotator cuff injury to his throwing arm? That's pretty much a death sentence for a QB.

There are career altering injuries to be had, and guys on the tag risk that with no real safety net.

[LeotheLion]

8 minutes ago, ET80 said:

I agree on Dak, simply because the nature of the injury is one that somebody can come back from - broken ankles look gruesome, but it's all about setting the bone back with plates and pins and letting it calcify. Dak's already running a bit and working out, he's going to be ready for TC.

But there's no way to dictate WHAT sort of injury is coming when you're playing - what if it was a patellar tendon, or an achilles tendon? A ruptured quad or torn hamstring?What if it was a rotator cuff injury to his throwing arm? That's pretty much a death sentence for a QB.

There are career altering injuries to be had, and guys on the tag risk that with no real safety net.

You are right, I thought there was a floor of a tag for earnings potential. Though someone of Watson's caliber would have to have probably an Alex Smith type injury to lose out on his true earnings potential. He's shown elite talent that if he suffered a serious injury (achilles tendon) and hit the market there would likely still be a bidding war. But, that slim chance is not worth it. 

[Texansfan713]

Niners fans are overrating Jimmy.  He isnt nowhere near the QB Watson is.  IDC if Bosa is in the deal or not. 

[Ninerholic]

6 minutes ago, Texansfan713 said:

Niners fans are overrating Jimmy.  He isnt nowhere near the QB Watson is.  IDC if Bosa is in the deal or not. 

I don’t think we’re overrating him. Just trying to get rid of him.

[Texansfan713]

Just now, Ninerholic said:

I don’t think we’re overrating him. Just trying to get rid of him.

lol fair enough

[49ersfan]

If the Texans don't make a HC hire in the next 2-3 days, you'd have to think they're waiting for Bienemy. 

I do wonder if hiring him would salvage the Watson relationship. 

[Knowledge]

The 49ers are 100% NOT trading Bosa. They are a QB away from making a SB run for years to come. Giving up their best young player wouldnt make sense. Draft picks only

[ET80]

12 minutes ago, 49ersfan said:

I do wonder if hiring him would salvage the Watson relationship. 

I think he could - but not in the way anyone is expecting. He wouldn't "salvage" the relationship between Watson and Cal/Jack/Caserio, but he would be the buffer between those two groups - he'd relay Watson's concerns to those three and he'd let Watson know what the response was (there might be a few layers in addition, but you get the general idea).

Bienemy isn't one to take crap from anybody, including Easterby (ESPECIALLY someone like Easterby, if I'm being honest). The hierarchy with Watson (and by extension, everyone on the roster) would remain with Bienemy and his staff, while Easterby and Caserio could work with agents and other conduits to work on everything else.

Is this the ideal organizational structure? No, not at all. But - in consideration of other dysfunctional options - it's quite literally the best case scenario for this team.