Lavarleap56 Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Union backing LaVar in claim By Jody Foldesy THE WASHINGTON TIMES The NFL Players Association is backing linebacker LaVar Arrington in a formal grievance against the Washington Redskins, who are accused of shortchanging him $6.5 million in the contract extension he signed at the end of last season. Sources familiar with the dispute said the NFLPA had been weighing the merits of Arrington's case, but NFLPA general counsel Richard Berthelsen said last night any perceived delay in filing was because of efforts to resolve the dispute. Berthelsen said there was never any doubt the union would argue on behalf of the Pro Bowl linebacker. "From Day 1, we've been supporting LaVar's efforts to resolve this," Berthelsen said. Berthelsen provided the most detailed account of Arrington's contention to date. According to Berthelsen, agent Carl Poston and Arrington claim that deadline pressure to get the nine-year extension done before the end of the season (as salary cap considerations dictated) prevented them from reading all the pages in the contract's final draft. Arrington's camp claims the Redskins ignored an earlier agreement and substituted a final draft that did not include a $6.5 million roster bonus due in 2006. Arrington and Poston signed off on the contract, which the league recognized as a $68 million pact. Now Arrington wants the return of the disputed $6.5 million. The Redskins have issued several rebuttals in recent weeks, contending among other things that Poston initialed each page of the final document. Redskins spokesman Karl Swanson could not be reached last night after the union's position became clear. An NFL spokesman confirmed the league received Arrington's formal claim, called a non-injury grievance. The spokesman said an impartial arbitrator would be assigned to the case and that it could be several months before a hearing. Because Poston filed the grievance apart from the NFLPA, there was speculation he hadn't won the union's support. But Berthelsen dismissed that theory and said issues relating to the postponement of the filing deadline led Poston to move forward independently. Despite the NFLPA's backing, there remain questions about Arrington's claim, non-Redskins sources familiar with the case said. An example is the initial haziness with which the dispute arose. Poston apparently did not notice the missing $6.5 million for several weeks, and in initial dealings with the union he declined to say exactly where the $6.5 million had been in the deal. Also, there are several common-sense issues: •There already is a $6.5 million roster bonus in 2006 of Arrington's contract. It is unclear why the sides would have agreed to a separate, simultaneous $6.5 million roster bonus instead of simply lumping the two payments together. •An additional $6.5 million roster bonus would boost Arrington's 2006 cap figure to an enormous $18.6 million. It is unclear why Washington would have agreed to a pact that necessitated massive restructuring or Arrington's release after only two seasons. As the contract stands, Arrington is set to have a $12.1 million cap figure in 2006. But sources said there is a clause that permits Washington to convert the $6.5 million roster bonus to signing bonus for cap purposes, meaning the Redskins are assured of being able to lower his figure to a manageable $6.7 million. Neither Arrington nor Poston could be reached for comment. Notes — Philadelphia Eagles cornerback Bobby Taylor will visit the Redskins on Thursday. New York Giants cornerback Ralph Brown was scheduled to arrive last night, while former Indianapolis Colts corner Walt Harris will visit tomorrow. The Redskins played host to former Chicago Bears linebacker Warrick Holdman, but no signing was imminent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieInferior Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Yes!!! Sign him to a Vincent type contract and I am happy. Have him be the nickel in case Springs gets hurt or regresses! Philadelphia Eagles cornerback Bobby Taylor will visit the Redskins on Thursday. As for Lavar, the more I hear the more I see it as a shot in the dark by Lavar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjinhan Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 hmm lot more secondary are coming to visit... im kind of getting a feeling that FO is trying to fill the need in the secondary so we can pass on Sean Taylor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNatsFan Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Originally posted by lavarleap56 Also, there are several common-sense issues: •There already is a $6.5 million roster bonus in 2006 of Arrington's contract. It is unclear why the sides would have agreed to a separate, simultaneous $6.5 million roster bonus instead of simply lumping the two payments together. •An additional $6.5 million roster bonus would boost Arrington's 2006 cap figure to an enormous $18.6 million. It is unclear why Washington would have agreed to a pact that necessitated massive restructuring or Arrington's release after only two seasons. Interesting. Kinda makes this claim even more ridiculous than it already was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rook Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 For $6.5 million, seems like agent Poston could have paid a few people to read the contract before signing. Seems like Lavar's problem is with his agent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 According to Berthelsen, agent Carl Poston and Arrington claim that deadline pressure to get the nine-year extension done before the end of the season (as salary cap considerations dictated) prevented them from reading all the pages in the contract's final draft. That has to be the lamest excuse I've ever heard....since T.O. last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trung24 Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Regardless of how this turns out IMO it's a lose/lose situation. If it's ruled in LA's favor Danny isn't gonna be so happy. If it's ruled in the Redskins favor then LA will not be happy. Either way I think we're gonna say buh-bye to LA when this is all over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Well...with TO's expected ruling setting a dangerous precedent in the league.... I wouldn't be suprised at all that Lavar's excuse, we were under pressure with the deadline approaching whine..piss..and moan, that the NFL will rule that the Redskins owe him the additional $6.5mil. At that point, the Redskins should petition the league asking for the contract to be null and void and Lavar to be a FA.... then walk away from the overhyped, overated, highly unreliable #56 and his TV aspirations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORICUASKIN Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 What is wrong with these agents? They get paid a lot of money to work for the client best interest, and they are getting very sloppy for TO and now for Lavar. sad sad sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaganaut Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 The Union is set to use the "dog ate homework" legal gambit and will be hiring Johnny Cochran to make up catchy slogans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 How long does it take to read a freakin contract? Take it with you when you go to the head. Read a few chapters before you go to bed. What did they want, a month? I'm REALLY getting sick of these greedy players and their agents. LaVar is getting on my nerves. I wonder if Marty would take him for that #1 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 "The deadline made us hot, so we forgot" "Just because we overlooked, we got hooked" "We were running out of time, hence the crime" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief skin Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Shocking surprise the Union supports the player and his incompetent agent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted March 16, 2004 Share Posted March 16, 2004 Originally posted by Cskin "The deadline made us hot, so we forgot" "Just because we overlooked, we got hooked" "We were running out of time, hence the crime" :laugh: SOMEBODY has been watching too much Johnny C. on CourtTV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.