Question about Guaranteed contracts

[Goodell]

One flaw that Nick Collins causes is this. We have to risk an entire year's salary hoping an NFL team picks up the player. If they don't, his grade goes down drastically by like week 4, right? We're basically stuck with that player, and their salary.

I just think we need to establish some rules that makes this more manageable for teams and in-season trading. Just something I was thinking though.

If a player is on the PUP list, and never put on the active roster, is their salary guaranteed in the NFL?

You aren't stuck with the player. You can cut them just like the NFL team cut them in the off-season.

I'll do a little more digging, but I believe if a player is on PUP in the NFL the team is paying their full salary during that time and if the NFL player is a vested 4-year vet or more that being on PUP is still on the team roster and their contract is guaranteed for the team deciding to keep the player instead of cutting him. If a team doesn't want to risk a guaranteed salary on a player, their option is to cut them I believe (as many get cut prior to week 1), not add them to some other list. I wasn't finding a lot of info on that specific situation on a quick search this morning, but that would be my understanding.

Sometimes our sim teams don't like to cut players, but that's the reality in the NFL that good players get cut all the time for such reasons.

[Ben C.]

Think of this as a way to discourage people throwing money around in free agency. Nick Collins is a good example where the team took a major risk in putting a lot of money down to sign him. The contract in question was 7 years, 35 million SB, 4.85 million per year, and was signed in 2010. The team assumed the risk of injury, and now must live with the consequences. Options were to either cut him before the season and absorb a significant signing bonus hit, or hold on to him until the signing bonus is more manageable.

How is this any different from my signing of Atari Bigby the same season for a 5 year deal with 20 million SB, 1 million per year? I assumed the risk that he would not perform to that level, and I am living with the consequences of that decision. I've had to carry him on my roster because of the huge SB.

This sort of rule is likely to make people think twice about big signing bonuses in the future.

[ctnreds]

Think of this as a way to discourage people throwing money around in free agency. Nick Collins is a good example where the team took a major risk in putting a lot of money down to sign him. The contract in question was 7 years, 35 million SB, 4.85 million per year, and was signed in 2010. The team assumed the risk of injury, and now must live with the consequences. Options were to either cut him before the season and absorb a significant signing bonus hit, or hold on to him until the signing bonus is more manageable.

How is this any different from my signing of Atari Bigby the same season for a 5 year deal with 20 million SB, 1 million per year? I assumed the risk that he would not perform to that level, and I am living with the consequences of that decision. I've had to carry him on my roster because of the huge SB.

This sort of rule is likely to make people think twice about big signing bonuses in the future.

I wasn't "throwing around money". I franchise tagged him and signed him to a long-term deal before he suffered his season-ending and now looking like a career ending injury. I do understand what your saying though. That's kinda been my approach to it. Hold on to him until the SB is manageable.