beast
  • beast
  • Select Member Topic Starter
6 years ago

The Packers will not recover any of the signing bonus they gave to Martellus Bennett, who the team released less after less than one year for failure to disclose an injury.

While Martellus Bennett’s tenure with the Green Bay Packers lasted less than a season, his impact on the team will last far longer. According to Pro Football Talk, the team will not recover any of Bennett’s original signing bonus after losing its grievance against him.

Due to the dismissal, the Packers must carry $4.2 million in dead money on this year’s books, the remaining amount of the guaranteed money from his contract. That leaves the team with approximately $17 million in cap space, according to Over the Cap’s projections. The decision marks the end of an ugly divorce between Bennett and the Packers.

Jason B. Hirschhorn  wrote:



I read elsewhere the Packers lost the case because there is a rule a team can't recover signing bonus from a contract on a different team... in other words, since another team claimed his contract (Patriots) the rule said the Packers couldn't get the signing bonus money back.
UserPostedImage
Cheesey
6 years ago
I heard if you waive a player, you can't recover the bonus.
A waste of a lot of money.
UserPostedImage
Barfarn
6 years ago

I heard if you waive a player, you can't recover the bonus.
A waste of a lot of money.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 



You can recover bonus if a player didn't disclose an injury.

I read elsewhere the Packers lost the case because there is a rule a team can't recover signing bonus from a contract on a different team... in other words, since another team claimed his contract (Patriots) the rule said the Packers couldn't get the signing bonus money back.

Originally Posted by: beast 



There is no rule or precedent for this ruling and the arbitrator's reported reasoning makes no sense to me. I'd have to read the opinion to educate myself on the actual reason or logic; but I'm not buying what's being reported [Persons educating themselves is something a normal thinking person strives for-only a real dick wouldn’t want to educate himself when he can].

Burbank was the arbitrator and he’s a sharp dude. He filed an amicus in an effort to defeat a 12(B) motion filed against Summer Zervos, who’s suing Trump for defamation [She claimed Trump groped and kissed her w/o consent and Trump called her a liar]. Funny, one of Trump’s arguments is that he’s too busy, haha. The guy rarely works more than 4 hours/day and his average is probably 2hr tops/day. In his first year he made 78 visits to his clubs and played golf at least on 36 of those visits. My lord, he watches TV and tweets until his 10:30 briefing.

I digress, GB held the contract, not NE, at the time the breach occurred. Who is in possession of the contract today doesn’t mean squat. The entire signing bonus was paid by GB, not NE. And when a player is waived, the team that claims the contract is 100% free of any obligation pertaining to the signing bonus. Moreover, the claiming team’s rights cannot be affected in anyway by the arbitrator’s decision on the bonus. GB paid for and is on the hook for the bonus and all its attendant consequences.

This might be an Alex Jones type thought; but I just never understood why NE claimed Bennett with a cuff injury, played him 6 snaps and IR'd him. Thought: NE knew that if evidence was presented on the merits of GB’s grievance; what NE knew about and disclosed to NFL and/or Bennett about the cuff injury would be exposed. Did NE lie to Bennett about the extent of his injury so he’d keep playing? Did NE lie on injury reports about the extent of Bennett’s injury? Etc, etc.

At any rate, NE is a witness in the grievance proceeding and their actions, and it stands today, affected the outcome of the proceeding. I’d say GB needs to appeal; but I’ve asserted they cant win this case on the merits.

If GB was just using the failure to disclose as an excuse to waive Bennett [because you can’t waive an injured player], then GB won’t appeal. If GB believes their grievance has a chance, an appeal is coming.
beast
  • beast
  • Select Member Topic Starter
6 years ago

[Persons educating themselves is something a normal thinking person strives for-only a real dick wouldn’t want to educate himself when he can].

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



Actually a dick is one that acts like a jerk, like you just did by attempting to insult other about education. Please stop acting like you're better than others, because that just makes you look like a real dick. Thank you.


The grievance failed because the Packers waived Bennett — and because the Patriots claimed the contract on waivers. Burbank determined that allowing the Packers to recover any portion of a signing bonus paid under a contract now held by another team would be inconsistent with the league’s waiver system. Put simply, if the Packers had wanted to pursue a recover of Bennett’s signing bonus, the Packers should not have waived Bennett.

Once they did, and once the Patriots claimed the contract on waivers, the Packers lost the ability to recover any of his signing bonus.

profootballtalk  wrote:



UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
6 years ago
Even thought it turned out terrible, at the time, I was happy and I still am happy that the Packers made the signing. We wanted the front office to get players, they did. Sometimes, this is the shark invested waters of free agency. Maybe those who harp on the front office not being more active will tone it down a notch seeing first hand what sharks do. They bite ya! (e.g. Joe Johnson)
UserPostedImage
Cheesey
6 years ago
He couldn't stay in one place, and that should have been a red flag for us.
We SHOULD have tried harder to keep Cook. He PROVED he was a very good TE for a whole season.
But we let him walk, and now have to fight to try to replace his talent.
UserPostedImage
Rockmolder
6 years ago

He couldn't stay in one place, and that should have been a red flag for us.
We SHOULD have tried harder to keep Cook. He PROVED he was a very good TE for a whole season.
But we let him walk, and now have to fight to try to replace his talent.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 



We tried to go with Cook, but the guy does nothing but follow the money. He was bound to get a big contract somewhere after those couple of splash plays he made. At least, that's what he and his agent though.

I liked the signing at first, just like Zero. Bennett was a guy who produced better than Cook throughout his career.

What I don't like is how this screws over our cap. I guess it's our own fault for taking a gamble on a guy with a questionable character.
Barfarn
6 years ago

We SHOULD have tried harder to keep Cook. He PROVED he was a very good TE for a whole season. But we let him walk, and now have to fight to try to replace his talent.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 



Cook will be cut by Oakland because he sucks; so no need to fight to keep him, he sucks.

In '17 Cook was 9th in league in drops, had a fumble and blocked like total crap. Receiving wise the Outsiders had him ranked #20 [DVOA]; or in other words HE REALLY SUCKS.

Generally, he's been a good lockerroom guy with bouts of sulking and other very bad lockeroom behavior [Id say he's bi-polar]. But, with his new big shinney self-entitled contract; he was an integral force in why Oakland tanked last year.

The die is set for Cook, if he has to work for food he'll have some value but he'll never be good.

Actually a dick is one that acts like a jerk, like you just did by attempting to insult other about education. Please stop acting like you're better than others, because that just makes you look like a real dick. Thank you.

Originally Posted by: beast 



When one reads forum responses across Packer nation, it is unequivocal that wayyy too many Packer fans are such delicate, sensitive, little snow flakes 😂 😂.

The statement “educate myself” was directed at its author, not any other persons. It asserted educating one’s self as being a worthwhile endeavor and certainly didn’t disparage anyone’s education. The author recognized the ruling is probably no less than 5 pages and attempting to accurately represent this ruling with a tweet sized sentence is like walking thru a mine field with clown shoes on.

[Getting back to adult mundane discussion ON THE FUCKING TOPIC!!!!!!]

It was simply wrong to assert GB’s case was dismissed “because there is a rule a team can't recover signing bonus from a contract on a different team.” First, this is not a “rule” at all. Second, it’s true that a party cannot recover under a contract to which they are not privy; but this misapprehends the issues between Bennett and GB. Note that the contract between Bennett and NE fails to contain any provision for a signing bonus!

Florio [Who, BTW was an attorney] wrote, Burbank determined that allowing the Packers to recover any portion of a signing bonus paid under a contract now held by another team would be inconsistent with the league’s waiver system. The article took some quotes from the ruling; but this Florio representation was NOT in quote; it’s Florio’s tweet-like take and it is flawed.

[Adding to argument in my other post above] CBA Grievances are grounded in standard contract law. With respect to the Bonus, GB was a privy at the time a thus has standing to sue for a breach, which is what a failure to disclose is. They also put Bennett AND THE REST OF THE LEAGUE on notice with the failure to disclose designation. And this is not at all inconsistent with the NFL’s waiver system. See the Pats/Fanene case.

In April 2012 Pats signed FA John Fanene. He got injured in August, Pats found arthritis and CUT him for failure to disclose the arthritis. In March of 2013 a CBA grievance panel ruled the case could proceed on the merits [Interestingly, discovery revealed that at the scumbag cheating Pats conspired to muddle the injury and Fanene received a settlement under a NDA]. Fanene was cut and the case went forward on the merits; Bennett was cut also, but per Florio the fact GB cut him is the reason the merits will not be heard.

In short, Fanene’s getting cut didn’t affect the Pats rights to recoup the bonus, which is perfectly inconsistent with Florio’s take on Bennett’s case. Moreover, it’s a legal abomination that GB’s rights to recoup the bonus could be affected by something done by a party with absolutely no privity on the issues between GB and Bennett.

There are either other reasons for the case’s dismissal or GB has a solid argument on appeal.
Appealing an arbiter’s ruling under a CBA is difficult; it requires extreme circumstances and GB has those circumstances if Florio’s take is accurate.
beast
  • beast
  • Select Member Topic Starter
6 years ago


When one reads forum responses across Packer nation, it is unequivocal that wayyy too many Packer fans are such delicate, sensitive, little snow flakes 😂 😂.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



Yep, you are as sensitive... which is why you always filibuster every damn post... Stop being so damn sensitive, you dick.

Back to the subject, it's simple because someone claimed him, which is why the Packers aren't getting anything back.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (1h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (2h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (5h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (6h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (16h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (23h) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
beast (25-Mar) : Simply fined in the week to follow
beast (25-Mar) : I agree with one NFL official, it'll probably be like some of the helmets hits, not really called by the refs on the field but simply fined
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Hip drop is not. Super confusing. Referees job is harder
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.