The release of DeAngelo Hall by the Raiders after half a season is astonishing. Having worked for Ron Wolf, I understand the mentality that when a mistake is made, better to admit the mistake and delete it rather than hold onto it and hope it eventually works. Andrew Brandt
The release of DeAngelo Hall by the Raiders after half a season is astonishing. Having worked for Ron Wolf, I understand the mentality that when a mistake is made, better to admit the mistake and delete it rather than hold onto it and hope it eventually works. That obviously makes sense. However, this was not a mistake on a draft pick or a mid-tier free agent without any draft choice compensation. This was a top-of-the-market contract in which 2nd and 5th round picks were given to obtain this player!
Hall used the leverage of a trade to wrangle a deal that rivaled what was paid to top cornerbacks in free agency. Hall’s agents – Joel Segal and Alvin Keels – were able to garner over 20M in guarantees (more on that below) with a 2008 compensation of 7M in a signing bonus and a 1M salary. Thus, even if he was a bust for the team, which it appears he was, he walks away with 8M for his brief visit to the Bay area.
At least the Raiders protected their future with a 2009 option at the team’s discretion and only injury guarantees beyond that. Unlike a skill guarantee, which protects a player from not getting paid if released due to any skill or ability issues, an injury guarantee is typically only payable in the event the player suffers an injury in the prior year that prevents him from continuing to play football in future years. Those injuries are certainly not common. Thus, while headlines about Hall’s contract talked of 24M in guarantees, his true guarantee was 8M, which is the entire amount he will receive from the Raiders.
Hall can file for termination pay at the end of the year for the second half of that salary (unless in the unlikely event that he is claimed on waivers today, taking the Raiders off the hook for at least that amount).
The Raiders will eat Cap acceleration of 5.83M of the 7M bonus, as only the prorated amount for 2008 (1.17M) was accounted for this year. Fortunately for them, as per the present Cap rules, the accelerated Cap amount goes into next year. Were we in 2009 when the Cap rules are changed to give no benefit to releasing a player after June 1, the Raiders could not have released Hall, as his Cap acceleration would exceed the 3.9M of available Cap room the Raiders now have. With 2010 presently an uncapped year, the rules will be tighter in 2009. Fortunately for the Raiders, we are not there yet, and they can awkwardly end a costly relationship halfway through its first year.
"Having worked for Ron Wolf, I understand the mentality that when a mistake is made, better to admit the mistake and delete it rather than hold onto it and hope it eventually works."
Somewhere, Ray Rhodes' ears are burning.
What does Ron Wolf have to say of the moves Al Davis made of late?
Guys--
Interesting comments. Ron is enjoying retirement and, ironically, living in Green Bay.
Peter-
One would like to think that teams will heed the lessons of the perils of free agency, but there will be teams bidding like normal in March. Some can't help themselves.
Andrew
Ron is a tremendous asset to the sport, maybe he can make some guest appearances on NFLN to talk of things.
Overpaid or not, Hall failed to perform. The question is, though, why would anyone want to go to the Raiders now? They are the butt of almost every NFL joke. Players would rather go to 0-8 Detroit (Culpepper) rather than Oakland.
The NFL needs to step in here at some point. The Raiders are hurting the NFL product with the continued black eye that they give the NFL. I understand that the NFL, like all of sports, is a zero-sum sport. For every winner, there's a loser. But what get's me is the complete mockery of management that is the Oakland Raiders.
How much, do you think, the Raiders are going to borrow from the NFL's mega-loan? The Packers have already issued a statement saying they will borrow nothing. The NFL's smallest-market franchise won't need to borrow anything (or will choose not to). But the Raiders, playing in one of the largest markets, will probably borrow money. Why? No one is going to go to their games. I don't know what their attendance figures are right now, but even the loyal Raider fans have to to be thinking - WHAT?
Hall had interest by 15 teams according to his agent. That means half of the NFL was willing to pick this guy up - granted for nearly no risk because the Raiders were so kind to pick up his entire 2008 salary after he files for termination pay, but still, clearly the NFL teams think highly enough of him to put him on their roster.
I heard no rumors of him being on the trading block 3 weeks ago, so what happened in 3 weeks that means the Raiders couldn't at least get something in return?
Andrew,
love the website, great info. i'm curious as to how the agents get compensated for a contract like this. sure they got their client a $70 million contract, but he only realized $8 million of it. do they compensated for the total contract or what is actually paid.
Thanks,
Dan
Dan-
Only on the amount paid, of course.
Glad you are enjoying the site.
Andrew
| powered by TheSeats.com |
NFP's President was featured on...
Vikings and Dolphins probably...
Packers washout now starts for...
DeMaurice Smith lays out the stakes....
As uncapped year approaches, both...
Nov 06, 2008
01:03 PM
Andrew - great insight as always. Mr. Davis has a reputation of overpaying for his players. And this example is just proof that teams have to be careful and very selective who they give money to. Hall basically got 1M per game. Nice pay. I have a follow-up question about the uncapped year 2010. do you think that players have more negotiation leverage and power as a result or is it just the opposite? I am not quite sure whether it will be beneficial for players. Sure, elite franchise type players can command a lot of money, but I think at the same time (and some of the reasons you mention above), teams will be much more careful and rather willing to keep younger, drafted players who a are cheaper than getting free agents? Thanks, Peter