Every Dolphins contract since Brandon Marshall has included offset language

[Nublar7]

So: Jeff Ireland and his employee's create a policy and stand behind it refusing to give in. Unless, you know, they do give in such as with Dansby. But then the policy is back up in full force! Until they decide to take it down again. But they wont this time! And its simply not their fault if players cant figure that out!

Policy appears to have started after the Dansby signing and the first one was Marshall.

Where is this cap friendly deal that everyone keeps talking about? This only becomes better for the Dolphins if Tannehill is no longer on the roster. Why in gods name should we applaud Tannehill busting? Will anyone be praising Ireland for saving a few bucks if the former 8th overall pick sucks?

Who said anything about applauding Tannehill busting? Applaud that your front office stays true to who they are and their policies.

 

[Spesh]

Policy appears to have started after the Dansby signing and the first one was Marshall.

Who said anything about applauding Tannehill busting? Applaud that your front office stays true to who they are and their policies.

So they randomly just threw in the policy between two of our biggest free agent signings? Hmm, fair enough. Not sure i understand the "standing behind principle" argument when the principle was decided mid-free agency period, but whatever works.

Many people have taken delight in pointing out this deal is team cap friendly. Its only friendly to the team if Tannehill is no longer on the roster. How is that to the betterment of our franchise? And will it even be mentioned as a good thing if Tannehill does in fact bust?
They stayed true to a absurd policy that was apparently rushed into the front office in the middle of an offseason. You seem to be celebrating the fact that they "stayed true to the policy", but you are overlooking the policy that they stayed true to. It reminds me of earlier in this offseason when everyone was so relieved that Ireland had a plan that they never thought to ask if the plan was any good. In this case, for this divine policy, if the player is questionable enough to even make the team, why is he good enough to draft/sign in the first place?

 

[phintim]

Geezh get it they have been doing this 2010 and some of you guys now want to split and compare what happen when in 2010 with whom to what they have been doing consistently since then thats at least 2 and a half years. These arguments about Ireland having to much cap space or too little has just not happened under his watch. He spends the money available but does not overspend. Langford would probably still be on this team if Ireland had more money to spend. The guys is willing to resign proven players to cap friendly contracts what the heck is wrong with that. You act like Ireland should pay out the butt for Paul S and a guy like Wake and some teams do but the guy is doing his job. You know what those guys have NOT been crying about it in the media and if they were getting the raw deal you keep bashing Ireland for why would they sign it and why would not be complaining about it. This stuff you are bringing up is just crazy the players appear satisfied with it but you as a fan would perfer to see your GM spend more money even if your players are happy. Where is the logic. If you are just going to bash Ireland stick with the draft at least that is subjective to an opinion but when your players on your team who are playing well are willing to stick around for less and resign with your team you don't bash the GM over that.

 

[Zounds]

So they randomly just threw in the policy between two of our biggest free agent signings? Hmm, fair enough. Not sure i understand the "standing behind principle" argument when the principle was decided mid-free agency period, but whatever works.

Many people have taken delight in pointing out this deal is team cap friendly. Its only friendly to the team if Tannehill is no longer on the roster. How is that to the betterment of our franchise? And will it even be mentioned as a good thing if Tannehill does in fact bust?
They stayed true to a absurd policy that was apparently rushed into the front office in the middle of an offseason. You seem to be celebrating the fact that they "stayed true to the policy", but you are overlooking the policy that they stayed true to. It reminds me of earlier in this offseason when everyone was so relieved that Ireland had a plan that they never thought to ask if the plan was any good. In this case, for this divine policy, if the player is questionable enough to even make the team, why is he good enough to draft/sign in the first place?

Its not cap friendly from a cash standpoint, its cap friendly in a risk mitigation standpoint. Its absolutely crazy that some people insist Ireland is a fool here when we clearly ended up with a better deal than most other 1st rounders. Would you seriously consider giving Tannehill more guaranteed money for the sake of being nice? really? I think some people are so adamant on calling Ireland a fool that even the truth wont change their mind.

 

[Spesh]

Its not cap friendly from a cash standpoint, its cap friendly in a risk mitigation standpoint. Its absolutely crazy that some people insist Ireland is a fool here when we clearly ended up with a better deal than most other 1st rounders. Would you seriously consider giving Tannehill more guaranteed money for the sake of being nice? really? I think some people are so adamant on calling Ireland a fool that even the truth wont change their mind.

When you spend the 8th overall pick on a franchise quarterback, you dont worry about risk mitigation. The risk was in the draft pick. Either it works out or the franchise is set back. Saving a few bucks wont change that.

Better then most other 1st rounders at the expense of a holdout? Sure, that holdout part sounds outstanding for us, loads of fun. If your asking me if i would treat Tannehill different because hes a franchise quarterback? Then: yes. Absolutely yes. Overwhelmingly yes. Why would i give a quarterback more money(or a pro-bowl quality linebacker in Dansby's case)? Because the player is worth it. Period.

 

[Zounds]

When you spend the 8th overall pick on a franchise quarterback, you dont worry about risk mitigation.

Yes you do. You always worry about cost.

Better then most other 1st rounders at the expense of a holdout? Sure, that holdout part sounds outstanding for us, loads of fun.

A two day holdout for a 3rd string QB who already knew the offenses is nothing

If your asking me if i would treat Tannehill different because hes a franchise quarterback? Then: yes. Absolutely yes. Overwhelmingly yes. Why would i give a quarterback more money(or a pro-bowl quality linebacker in Dansby's case)? Because the player is worth it. Period.

His position has nothing to do with his contract, and unfortunatley, you dont have the option of giving Tannehill more money because of the rookie wage slotting system. He's a rookie, not a free agent - both of wich are treated entirely different.

And Dansby never went to a pro-bowl.

 

[MP-Omnis]

As the article stated...not EVERY Dolphins contract included off-set language. (Dansby) :D

Here is what Tannehill’s contract should have looked like:
Signing bonus: $7.653 million
2012 base salary: $390,000
2013 base salary: $965,841
2014 base salary: $1.541 million
2015 base salary: $2.117 million


Instead, here’s what the Dolphins and Tannehill agreed to:
Signing bonus: $7.653 million
2012 salary: $390,000 base
2013 salary: $480,000 base + $485,841 bonus if he is on the roster the 6th day of training camp
2014 salary: $570,000 base + $971,682 bonus if he is on the roster the 6th day of training camp
2015 salary: $660,000 base + $1.457 million bonus if he is on the roster the 6th day of training camp

So he gets a lump sum on the 7th day of training camp? ****, I'd take that in a heartbeat.

 

[Wildbill3]

lol Ironic that the same people who want to bust Ireland for his cap management, are the same ones who wanted ireland to toss out the offset langauge to get tannehill in here.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

lol Ironic that the same people who want to bust Ireland for his cap management, are the same ones who wanted ireland to toss out the offset langauge to get tannehill in here.

I was in favor of the team throwing out the offset language, but I did not realize that the Dolphins were doing this for all contracts. With that being the case, I applaud them for sticking to their guns and trying to do a better job of managing the cap.

 

[Spesh]

Yes you do. You always worry about cost.

A two day holdout for a 3rd string QB who already knew the offenses is nothing

His position has nothing to do with his contract, and unfortunatley, you dont have the option of giving Tannehill more money because of the rookie wage slotting system. He's a rookie, not a free agent - both of wich are treated entirely different.

And Dansby never went to a pro-bowl.

So money was the real concern.....while we are in a draft system which forces you to only pay a player so much. Right. Sure. I suppose we have to squeeze out every dime and nickle from our quarterbacks contract so we can afford the next offensive lineman with a injury history that we will gladly accept a huge contract from us.

Tell me how long a holdout has to go on before its a unacceptable. But then again, it doesnt surprise me that you view Tannehill as nothing more then some 3rd stringer who couldnt benefit from training camp.

I can give Tannehill the money that he is allowed to earn. You know, like every other quarterback drafted in the top 10(even Weeden, in the 20's, got more guaranteed then Tannehill), and every other player drafted in the top 9. Instead i assume the "correct" course of action is to draw a line in the sand over a few hundred thousand bucks(over a million his last season...which we will hopefully have resigned him by that point, but i put nothing past us if Ireland is still GM) because we have to show that rookie "whats what" around here! You know, because that line in the sand was so very important to us that we drew it for everyone.....err, well, drew it after we signed the player we really wanted.
And never said Dansby went to the pro-bowl. Read again.

 

[Zounds]

So money was the real concern.....while we are in a draft system which forces you to only pay a player so much. Right. Sure. I suppose we have to squeeze out every dime and nickle from our quarterbacks contract so we can afford the next offensive lineman with a injury history that we will gladly accept a huge contract from us.

Tell me how long a holdout has to go on before its a unacceptable. But then again, it doesnt surprise me that you view Tannehill as nothing more then some 3rd stringer who couldnt benefit from training camp.

I can give Tannehill the money that he is allowed to earn. You know, like every other quarterback drafted in the top 10(even Weeden, in the 20's, got more guaranteed then Tannehill), and every other player drafted in the top 9. Instead i assume the "correct" course of action is to draw a line in the sand over a few hundred thousand bucks(over a million his last season...which we will hopefully have resigned him by that point, but i put nothing past us if Ireland is still GM) because we have to show that rookie "whats what" around here! You know, because that line in the sand was so very important to us that we drew it for everyone.....err, well, drew it after we signed the player we really wanted.
And never said Dansby went to the pro-bowl. Read again.

So what exactly are you saying? There were 3 options we had: give in to Tannehill's agents' demends, hold firm on our demands, or meet somewhere in between. We took the 3rd option. Are you seriously saying that the compromise we made, to which Tannehill and Miami both agreed, was not the best solution for both parties? You are grasping at straws here trying to defend the idea that we shold just pay a rookie whatever he wants....I dont even understand what your point is, other than bashing Ireland for getting Miami a better deal.

 

[Spesh]

So what exactly are you saying? There were 3 options we had: give in to Tannehill's agents' demends, hold firm on our demands, or meet somewhere in between. We took the 3rd option. Are you seriously saying that the compromise we made, to which Tannehill and Miami both agreed, was not the best solution for both parties? You are grasping at straws here trying to defend the idea that we shold just pay a rookie whatever he wants....I dont even understand what your point is, other than bashing Ireland for getting Miami a better deal.

My suggestion this entire time has been pay him what the CBA allows. Virtually every other pick around Tannehill got their player to camp on time. We drew our line in the sand over something petty and trivial. Its typical of the Dolphins the last 5 years: become so focused on something meaningless that we shoot ourselves in the foot. Win the battle and lose the war. We successfully held the line(!!!) that we drew(after making sure we signed the players we wanted first) and stood up on principle(laughable).....and our future franchise quarterback missed camp time. But hey, we followed protocol! High fives all around!

And Tannehill signed a 4 year, 12.688 million dollar contract according to NFL.com. http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/0900...ct-status-for-2012-nfl-draft-firstround-picks

Well, lets break down his contract:

Although the Dolphins wouldn’t budge on offset, they did allow for cash flow “gives” to -- pardon the pun -- “offset” the offset language. The contract allows Tannehill to collect:

• His entire signing bonus -- $7.65 million -- within 60 days: $5 million now and the balance on Sept. 30.
• The balance of his salary -- beyond minimum salary -- in training camp roster bonuses, giving him a total of $2.9 million of “early money” in Years 2-4 of the deal.

Thus, although the Dolphins drew a line in the sand over offset language, there were considerations made to allow Tannehill to walk away from the deal feeling like he won something.

http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/45418/breaking-down-ryan-tannehills-deal

So, of a $12.668 mil deal we will be paying him $10.55 mil "early". Thank god we got that "team cap friendly" deal everyone is raving about!!!!! Good lord, can you imagine how much we would have had to pay if we fully guaranteed our franchise quarterbacks rookie contract! Whew! Close call people! Risk mitigation complete! Go team friendly deals that follow protocol!

 

[Zounds]

My suggestion this entire time has been pay him what the CBA allows.

We did pay him what the CBA allows....so I'll ask again - what exactly do you suggest Ireland should have done instead of making the compromise he made? You think he should have given him more money? you dont think we got a good deal? I think your argument has more to do with your general dislike for Ireland rather than the details of Tannehills contract.

 

[Spesh]

We did pay him what the CBA allows....so I'll ask again - what exactly do you suggest Ireland should have done instead of making the compromise he made? You think he should have given him more money? you dont think we got a good deal? I think your argument has more to do with your general dislike for Ireland rather than the details of Tannehills contract.

In a way your right, we did end up paying him most of what he was due.......after making him miss camp. Way to be Miami! What do i think we should have done? Sign him before training camp. Even if that meant giving him the same deal literally everyone else did. Im not sure how you are still not understanding that. Ill put it bluntly: we should not have gotten hung up on petty details and just signed him. Ive underlined and bolded it this time so hopefully it will stick.

And no, i dont think we got a good deal. It became a bad deal the minute Tannehills holdout began and he missed the start of camp. The only time this deal helps us is if Tannehill gets cut. Him busting and/or him missing camp are NOT good things for Miami. Again, not sure how your not understanding that cutting our franchise quarterback would be bad for the team. If he busts, thats bad for Miami. I would think that would be a common sense statement. The entire "team friendly" deal part of this discussion is hilariously absurd. I keep pointing out that its only helpful if Tannehill is a bust and you keep suggesting: its really good though just cause its good! Its like your stuck in a paradox about the situation.

Has it been three posts now that youve made accusations at me without a shred of evidence? Fair enough, ill respond in kind: i think your argument has more to do with your general love of anyone who sits in the general manager position of our football team than of any conviction about how good a deal this was. Reality is unable to penetrate the glasses of bias. You keep insisting this is a good deal because it will save money while ignoring the fact that we only save money if it all blows up. But hey, the saving money part is what everyone needs to focus on, right? Not the missing camp or busting draft pick part, ignore those. Go team friendly deals!

 

[Zounds]

Well its sounds like you are about to cry so I'm not going to embarass you, but I asked you 3 times (not "accused you 3 times without a shred of evidence" like you say) what your point was, and it took you hours of whining to simply say it you thought it was a bad deal because Tannehill missed 2 days of camp. Because if he didnt hold out, he would be starting? Right. Those 2 days are such a non-factor. And when managing a cap, details are everything.