This could end up a problem.
There were reasons Ryan Tannehill caved on the offset issue a year ago, even though most of the draft prospects drafted around him did not. Tannehill hoped to be the quarterback of the Dolphins even as a rookie. He knows that at his position it is absolutely imperative he not miss any time. You can't walk in even a week late and still win the job. Plus he had familiarity with some of the coaches on the team including and especially the offensive coordinator. He felt safe in their commitment to him, he felt urgent about getting to practice, and so he caved on the issue. But only after the Dolphins compromised and threw Ryan a little extra bone in the deal. Why did the Dolphins do that? Because they felt just as urgent about it. This is the team's quarterback and I think they had a feeling he might start immediately. They couldn't have him missing much time.
This situation with Dion Jordan is different. He's a pass rusher, not a quarterback. It's not the same, as far as him feeling urgency to get into camp on time. He's more likely to "let the agents handle it" rather than end up forcing the issue and overruling them which is what Ryan did. Meanwhile, the Dolphins are not as incentivized to throw the agents an extra bone in compromise, because again this is not a quarterback. It's a defensive end/linebacker. Further, this is a top 3 pick. Ezekiel Ansah is the #5 pick and he already signed a deal without offset language. I don't think any other pick in the top five will get offset language put into their contract. Maybe no prospect in the top ten will. I believe last year Tannehill may have been the only one, or one of the only ones. I know Kuechly at #9 overall didn't get offset language.
So this battle is definitely setting up to be WORSE than the Tannehill battle.
The whole thing is stupid.
Last year Trent Richardson got a $20.4 million deal fully guaranteed. His fourth year salary is $3.2 million which is guaranteed. If he had offset language and the Browns cut him prior to 2015 then the Browns would be off the hook for whatever his new team pays him. If he makes $2.5 million from the Redskins then the Browns pay $700k of the $3.2 million guaranteed salary.
The problem with this is if you're the Redskins why do you offer Trent Richardson $2.5 million in 2015 when you know you can offer him $0.5 million (vet's minimum) and have the Browns pick up the rest of the tab? Richardson is going to get $3.2 million either way. He don't care whether it comes from his new team or old team. In fact as a means of revenge, and a showing of good faith, he may prefer his old team foot more of the bill than his new team.
For the team, the offset language only becomes useful if Trent Richardson is worth MORE on the free agent market in 2015 than $3.2 million. And if that's the case, why the hell did you cut him? If he's worth $4 or $5 million on the market and you're only paying him $3.2 million salary, why the hell are you cutting him?
On the other hand you think about it from the player's perspective. Say you succeed in negotiations and there's no offset language. Your fourth year salary becomes fully guaranteed. Under what circumstances would you find yourself being cut when your fourth year salary is guaranteed no matter what? A team would have to decide you're just not even worth a 53 man roster spot. You're that bad (and/or that injured). If that's the case then how much can you really hope to "double dip"? Maybe half a million, or a million?
On the other hand, to you as a player, half a million or a million means a WHOLE LOT MORE to you than it does to the team. The team is awash in money. You're not. A dollar means more to you than it does them...which is why the players are for the most part winning this negotiations battle over offset language.