Jauan Jennings Wants New Contract

#80
#80
Wow! I can't believe it's been ten years since his game winning catch against the DOGS!


bull dog GIF by GeorgetownUniversity
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, orangebloodgmc and HeadVol77
#87
#87
EastTNVol6240 said:
So then tell us the use of a contract? Should we even use them?
Click to expand...
Contracts are made to renegotiate as circumstance changes for either party.

Every person who asks for a raise is literally renegotiating, and the best reason for it is because you’ve become more valuable, not simply because you managed to breathe another year and perform at the same level for a COL increase.

This is not an arcane concept. The 49ers agreed with him, for crying out loud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KHVol
#89
#89
NCFisher said:
Contracts are made to renegotiate as circumstance changes for either party.

Every person who asks for a raise is literally renegotiating, and the best reason for it is because you’ve become more valuable, not simply because you managed to breathe another year and perform at the same level for a COL increase.

This is not an arcane concept. The 49ers agreed with him, for crying out loud.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying he doesn’t deserve it. But your really downplaying the point of a “contract”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unconditional Surrender
#90
#90
NCFisher said:
Contracts are made to renegotiate as circumstance changes for either party.

Every person who asks for a raise is literally renegotiating, and the best reason for it is because you’ve become more valuable, not simply because you managed to breathe another year and perform at the same level for a COL increase.

This is not an arcane concept. The 49ers agreed with him, for crying out loud.
Click to expand...
So by said argument, if JJ would’ve underperformed, or been injured, would it have then been fair for the team to “renegotiate” as things had changed for the parties?

I think not. You don’t get to play both sides. Contracts are written for a purpose, and have timelines for a purpose.
 
#91
#91
EastTNVol6240 said:
So by said argument, if JJ would’ve underperformed, or been injured, would it have then been fair for the team to “renegotiate” as things had changed for the parties?

I think not. You don’t get to play both sides. Contracts are written for a purpose, and have timelines for a purpose.
Click to expand...
There is no playing both sides; while collective bargaining provides some support, the contract T/Cs determine performance metrics and define benefits/status in an injury scenario. He can be benched. If his stock falls so low he no longer has a place on the team, he can join Josh Dobbs on the journeyman circuit.

If they can’t come to terms, they can litigate or reach settlement.

Again, SF AGREED WITH HIM that he was worth more $ and these adult people reached agreement.
I fail to see the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volsrock09
#94
#94
BernardKingGOAT said:
Now that Deebo has moved on, he wants WR2 money. That's why he is asking for more. 7 sticks is WR3 money. It's market driven
Click to expand...
I think the total value of his 2025 contract was 10million, they reworked his contract in September. It’s going to be hard to get real WR2 money because he was around 650 yards receiving. That’s WR3 production. His argument will be he had 9 TD’s. Either way he is a free agent next year so if he goes and gets 9TD’s again and gets to 8-900 yards he’ll see big money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, MemphisVol77 and BernardKingGOAT
#95
#95
901 Orange said:
I think the total value of his 2025 contract was 10million, they reworked his contract in September. It’s going to be hard to get real WR2 money because he was around 650 yards receiving. That’s WR3 production. His argument will be he had 9 TD’s. Either way he is a free agent next year so if he goes and gets 9TD’s again and gets to 8-900 yards he’ll see big money.
Click to expand...
I wonder if anyone keeps stats on number of catches that pick up first downs? Or 3rd down (or 4th) catches that pick up the first?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#97
#97
NCFisher said:
There is no playing both sides; while collective bargaining provides some support, the contract T/Cs determine performance metrics and define benefits/status in an injury scenario. He can be benched. If his stock falls so low he no longer has a place on the team, he can join Josh Dobbs on the journeyman circuit.

If they can’t come to terms, they can litigate or reach settlement.

Again, SF AGREED WITH HIM that he was worth more $ and these adult people reached agreement.
I fail to see the problem.
Click to expand...
I think the point has been missed. I also agree Jennings was due. Obviously SF did as well. The discussion/debate was on contract holdouts(Nico) looking for more money.

A contract is a contract. If you’re not abiding by it, why even draw it up or sign it?
 
#98
#98
EastTNVol6240 said:
I think the point has been missed. I also agree Jennings was due. Obviously SF did as well. The discussion/debate was on contract holdouts(Nico) looking for more money.

A contract is a contract. If you’re not abiding by it, why even draw it up or sign it?
Click to expand...
I see one person tried to analogize Nico’s NIL with NFL contracts but they’re entirely different. NIL can’t even require the player to be on a team, while NFL contracts are performance based. One is an employee while the other is not. It’s an analogy fail.

JJ asking for more $ and a longer commitment while nearing end of a current contract - when his value has clearly increased - is perfectly ordinary. Making a bad analogy out of it doesn’t change that.
 
#100
#100
NCFisher said:
I see one person tried to analogize Nico’s NIL with NFL contracts but they’re entirely different. NIL can’t even require the player to be on a team, while NFL contracts are performance based. One is an employee while the other is not. It’s an analogy fail.

JJ asking for more $ and a longer commitment while nearing end of a current contract - when his value has clearly increased - is perfectly ordinary. Making a bad analogy out of it doesn’t change that.
Click to expand...
Once again missing the point of a “contract”. The analogy someone brought up has no bearing on the fact that it’s still a “contract” regardless of different situations. You’re blinded by your orange glasses because it’s JJ. Did JJ deserve it? I think so. Do nfl players routinely “holdout” of said contracts? Yes, and it’s sorry. I don’t feel like I should have to define “contract” so I’ll just leave this dead horse lying here.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top