Fins might get some money but lose Ricky rights | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Fins might get some money but lose Ricky rights

After reading this my question is: the team has going to the special hearing to determine if they have the rights for the 8.5 million (all of it, or in part). That might not be the same thing as exercising those rights. I think at that point Wayne needs to decide if he wants pennys on the dollar and some more real estate in Florida, or if he wants the team to own the rights to Ricky for 3 more years, either preventing him from playing, requiring him to play for Miami, or making him eligible for trade.

None of those options include the drug issue, or the potential feelings other players may have for him, of course.
 
I say let him keep the money and we keep his rights for the next 3 years if those are the options. There is no excusing what he did. Wayne doesn't need the money, so he should keep RW from playing for any other team.
 
Yep. I'd take the rights over the money. My guess is that he will want to play again and then, we can get more draft picks when we trade him.
 
Now we know the real reason why he started selling all his assets as soon as he got back from his walk-about.

We could end up with, not getting the money back AND not getting any compensation for him.

If Wayne doesn't go after the money, and decides to keep his rights, who can say Ricky won't wait three years before he un-quits?

It's about time to send fat Hank and a few of his friends to have a little talk with Ricky.
 
Yes, Keep his rights and make him suffer, there is no way that a player should be allowed out of a contract by this method. They won't get all the money anyways so screw Ricky, if he plays again it will be by the choice of the Miami Dolphins, not by Ricky or his Lawyers.

Just think what will happen if this works out you will have players all over instead of holding out for better contracts fillin bankruptcy and becoming free agents. that is Bull the NFL needs to somehow put a stop to this before it starts or it will be one big mess.
 
inFINSible said:
If Wayne doesn't go after the money, and decides to keep his rights, who can say Ricky won't wait three years before he un-quits?
Click to expand...

Ricky would then be a 31-year old unrepentant pothead who will have almost certainly eaten himself out of game shape on a steady diet of twinkies and fluffernutters.

Seriously though, if Ricky sits for 3 years and causes us to relinquish our rights, it's highly unlikely that he'd be in any demand at all.
 
I have to say get the money, who will want a psycho with a drug problem.
 
31 huh....hmmmm....that is kinda old....yep, I guess I'd keep his rights then.

Lose the battle, win the war, Wayne.
 
I just read the article........and it is total:

BS.

How can these people from the Herald print such crap?

"Bankruptcy Law predating "NFL" contract Law?" Are they kidding? It is not "NFL" contract Law....It is CONTRACT LAW PERIOD....

Nothing to see here.....Even if Williams pays back the 8.6 million...we will still own his rights for 3 years....
 
dolphindog said:
I have to say get the money, who will want a psycho with a drug problem.
Click to expand...

the raiders.


i say keep his rights..... don't let him play. That way he'll never make money again. Retiring early will be the biggest mistake he ever made.
 
Hang on a minute, even if he comes back he has to serve a year's ban, doesn't he?

Make him bankrupt. Take away his homes. Seize his assets. How's he going to make it back in a hurry?

P.S. The homes aren't a problem for him. I think LeBatard has already offered him his spare room.
 
Toneboy said:
Hang on a minute, even if he comes back he has to serve a year's ban, doesn't he?

Make him bankrupt. Take away his homes. Seize his assets. How's he going to make it back in a hurry?

P.S. The homes aren't a problem for him. I think LeBatard has already offered him his spare room.
Click to expand...

no he can't play for a year after he "retires".... so he could be playing at the start of the 2005 season (plus a 4-game drug suspension, so week 5 of the 2005 season he could be playing again)......

unless we keep his rights! ;)
 
Section126 said:
I just read the article........and it is total:

BS.

How can these people from the Herald print such crap?

"Bankruptcy Law predating "NFL" contract Law?" Are they kidding? It is not "NFL" contract Law....It is CONTRACT LAW PERIOD....

Nothing to see here.....Even if Williams pays back the 8.6 million...we will still own his rights for 3 years....
Click to expand...
It does not say NFL contract "law".It says NFL contract rules.
 
phunwin said:
Ricky would then be a 31-year old unrepentant pothead who will have almost certainly eaten himself out of game shape on a steady diet of twinkies and fluffernutters.

Seriously though, if Ricky sits for 3 years and causes us to relinquish our rights, it's highly unlikely that he'd be in any demand at all.
Click to expand...

:yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom