Earlier this offseason, we learned an independent arbitrator concluded that NFL owners (and the league office) did not collude in an effort to reduce contract guarantees, especially in regards to quarterback contracts. A recent investigation by Pablo Torre led to the release of a 61-page document that detailed the arbitrator’s findings. While the investigation was inspired by the fallout from Deshaun Watson‘s contract, anecdotes surrounding other notable QBs have started coming out in the laundry.
[RELATED: Russell Wilson Asked Broncos For Fully Guaranteed Deal]
Following a peek behind the curtain surrounding Russell Wilson‘s past negotiations with the Broncos, Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk.com has uncovered some notable correspondence following the Kyler Murray extension. Specifically, two owners may have hinted that Murray’s deal influenced Justin Herbert‘s eventual extension with the Chargers.
Four months after Watson inked his fully guaranteed extension, Murray signed a new deal with the Cardinals that guaranteed $160MM of the $230.5MM total. When word of this extension got leaked to the media, Chargers owner Dean Spanos texted Cardinals owner Michael Bidwill to congratulate him on the specific terms of the deal. Per Florio, Bidwell noted that his front office managed to limit “the fully guaranteed money and have some pretty good language,” with Spanos responding that the Murray contract would “[help] us for our QB next year.”
“I think many teams will be happy with it once they have a chance to review,” Bidwell responded. “Cleveland really screwed things up, but I was resolved to keep the guaranteed [money] relatively ‘low.’”
As Florio notes, this exchange would seem to contradict the findings of arbitrator Christopher Droney. The Cardinals and Chargers are intended to operate as competitors, leading Florio to question why the duo may be coordinating. Florio believes the smoking gun is Spanos admitting that the Murray contract will have an influence on Herbert’s eventual deal. On the flip side, Droney opines that a QB extension would naturally influence future deals, and the correspondence between the two owners doesn’t constitute any circumstantial evidence.
“These communications are more in line with ‘independent response to common stimuli, or mere interdependence unaided by an advance understanding among the parties,’ rather than participation in a collusive agreement,” Droney wrote (per Florio).
Herbert signed his extension almost exactly a year after Murray. The Chargers QB temporarily reset the QB market, and he got $218MM of his $262MM total guaranteed.
For what it’s worth, Droney did note that “the NFL Management Council, with the blessing of the Commissioner, encouraged the 32 NFL Clubs to reduce guarantees in veterans’ contracts” following the signing of Watson’s extension. While players likely have little recourse, there may be some eventual fallout following this recent investigation.
Was he wiretapped for that Watson quote
Are we sure it wasnt sarcastic?
Only my Bolts can make this headline worthy
I had comment typed up. This site is buggy, and if a full screen pops up, you lose it on reload after clicking out of the ad as the article reloads without the comment section.
Short version: Doesn’t like enough to be collusion. Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t, but if they did, the text seems extraneous. Florio’s personal points of view and PFT’s Pablo Torre fetish (just speaking on Florio, here) since Florio developed his odd obsession with Belichick’s odd interview make his article pretty biased; then again, what do you expect from Florio? He’s the ultimate arbiter of justice in his own mind, a crusader for the downtrodden so determined and resolute in his cause (whatever it happens to be that day) that he turned off the comments section on site because he didn’t like the opinions.
The last paragraph here, regarding the NFL directly, is actually the most concerning. The NFL shouldn’t be giving directives or suggestions of action to supposedly independent member organizations that it had no official authority over (at least in that area of business). Two owners texting congratulatory messages are, as the arbitrator rightly noted, not indicative of any kind of scheme on their own. Paired with other evidence, possibly, but only as correlation. On their own, they’re just texts and don’t prove much at all.
I tend to agree with Florio’s politics regarding most financial aspects in the sports industry.
But that also doesn’t stop me from also noticing that he is a self satisfied schmuck. Obnoxious as hell.
Lawyers tend to have that as a character trait. Doesn’t mean he’s wrong.
Agreed
That’s wild he’s prob the only person that congratulated him except arizonas divisional rivals sarcastically. Kyler Murray is an Oompa Loompa
Regardless of how you guys feel about Florio, you’ve gotta quit the bootlicking. Teams like the cardinals and my chargers shouldn’t be talking about how they’ve screwed their franchise QBs out of guaranteed money. Or how the league as a whole, while being the most dangerous with shortest career span lacks guaranteed contracts because the billionaires will make a little less
Nearly every team spends to the cap every year, due to full revenue sharing (no lack of resources like baseball). Only a few teams that are rebuilding dont use all funds, and they roll, so they are just saving them for when good players arrive that deserve to be paid, which segways into my main point.
Fully guaranteed contracts would just gum up payrolls. The system now allows for flexibility for teams to pay the best players now, not the best players from 5 years ago. In baseball you have many players on deals they cant perform to, like Giancarlo Stanton. If watson didnt have that stupid contract, the Browns could get pieces to help Garrrett, but instead they have to give him a rich deal to save face, but he will never win…
As long as teams spend to the cap 90% of years (they do), then the “players” arent getting screwed, maybe a player here or there gets less than they want, but all “players” get paid from the same bucket.
I’m for guaranteed contracts, Chris. My perspective doesn’t magically turn circumstantial evidence into hard proof. That’s why I don’t like Florio-as a lawyer, especially, he should know better.
He’s portraying this as some sort of bombshell that it isn’t, and if you read his litany of other articles about it, you’ll find that actual evidence is spread pretty thinly amongst his mostly speculative soliloquy. The problem is, as NBC’s sponsored “reporter” and as a lawyer, he gets quoted as being fairly authoritative or legitimate by other sites on occasion, and his reports are usually made up of his own opinion with circumstantial evidence sprinkled in here and there. Curiously, you’ll not hear him quoted on most of the big mainstream sites (especially television, which itself can be pretty speculative-that should say something) except in passing; he never breaks news, he just comments on it.
So, yes, the source here is VERY important for considering the article, because the source is opinion presented as fact and that influences how seriously readers take it. The article on this site is quite fair, but the fact that Florio literally presented this as a “smoking gun” when in fact it’s just two inept businessmen texting each other really changes the dynamic as opposed to him clarifying that his article is more speculation than fact.
If you’re a typical NFL fan you probably have to watch games on TV because your job doesn’t provide you with an income large enough to buy game tickets. Are you really going to lose any sleep if a QB only gets $160MM guaranteed instead of 230.5MM?
If youare a billionare and saved $100 million from a tax break are you going to spend that so people with less means can have some extra income.
A smart billionaire business person would certainly do that if the extra income would allow those people of lesser means to buy more of his products. Re-investing profits to make a product better and more affordable than market competitors is a common strategy of most successful corporations.
“Florio believes the smoking gun is Spanos admitting that the Murray contract will have an influence on Herbert’s eventual deal.”
=================
Two things:
1-It doesn’t mean any such thing. Saying that Murray’s contract helps SD Herbert’s contract doesn’t mean they colluded. It’s stating facts. Much like Parsons thanking Garrett for setting a new standard.
2-Why are these people putting anything in an E-mail? That’s what cocktail parties are for.
Couldn’t agree more.
Forget about guaranteed money…fans should be more concerned about owners colluding to keep the cost of a beer and hot dog at the stadium at outrageous prices.
Two people who will never hoist the Lombardi, and this is a prime example why.
I don’t see collusion in those quotes – the arbiter saw the quotes and didn’t see it either. What’s wrong with an NFL QB having to earn the last third of his contract? That’s what it comes down to and other owners shouldn’t have to suffer because of Browns ownership…