Mock 1/23/19

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Don't be stupid. Most NFL contracts are only guaranteed for injury as a result of playing football in an NFL game. Berry is a non-football injury. I highly doubt his contract guarantees. I'd actually be extremely surprised if it did. And, as far as your 3rd day concern goes, you cut that mother****er the 1st second of the new league year.

[Sigh]

You. Can't. Cut. Him. If. He. Can't. Pass. A. Physical.

The guarantee is just a guarantee on day 3. Not for injury or performance or any other qualifier - just a guarantee. But if a player cannot pass a standard player physical as a result of a football related surgery, you can't cut him. He wont pass by day 3 so your 'cut him on day 1' nonsense is prohibited.

There's a ZERO percent chance that his injury will be declared non-football related. Zero. If the chiefs thought that were a possibility they'd have put him on the NFI list and avoided his cap hit for this season.

What would you like to place on this? Hes getting the surgery, it will prohibit the Chiefs from cutting him and we're stuck with his salary in 2019.

You're just flat ****ing wrong here. Any one of your drafts that involves cutting Berry is a waste if your time and anyone who reads it.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

[Sigh]

You. Can't. Cut. Him. If. He. Can't. Pass. A. Physical.

The guarantee is just a guarantee on day 3. Not for injury or performance or any other qualifier - just a guarantee. But if a player cannot pass a standard player physical as a result of a football related surgery, you can't cut him. He wont pass by day 3 so your 'cut him on day 1' nonsense is prohibited.

There's a ZERO percent chance that his injury will be declared non-football related. Zero. If the chiefs thought that were a possibility they'd have put him on the NFI list and avoided his cap hit for this season.

What would you like to place on this? Hes getting the surgery, it will prohibit the Chiefs from cutting him and we're stuck with his salary in 2019.

You're just flat ****ing wrong here. Any one of your drafts that involves cutting Berry is a waste if your time and anyone who reads it.

You're right, EXCEPT that I'm not sure this would count as a football injury. I think if it does NOT count as a football injury, they're off the hook. It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

You're right, EXCEPT that I'm not sure this would count as a football injury. I think if it does NOT count as a football injury, they're off the hook. It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out.

I don't think Berry and his people would have any issue convincing a likely arbitrator (I'm sure that's what would end up happening) that the injury was exacerbated and/or compounded by years of playing football. Afterall, it wasn't an issue when he was at TN or even for the first several years of his career. Then suddenly it pops up.

I know you run into a causation/correlation problem here, but I'd be stunned if an arbitrator ruled that this was unrelated to his football career. There's going to be enough smoke there that they'll see fire.

[BryanBusby]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I don't think Berry and his people would have any issue convincing a likely arbitrator (I'm sure that's what would end up happening) that the injury was exacerbated and/or compounded by years of playing football. Afterall, it wasn't an issue when he was at TN or even for the first several years of his career. Then suddenly it pops up.

I know you run into a causation/correlation problem here, but I'd be stunned if an arbitrator ruled that this was unrelated to his football career. There's going to be enough smoke there that they'll see fire.

Yep. I can't believe people think the Chiefs could wiggle their way out of it

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I don't think Berry and his people would have any issue convincing a likely arbitrator (I'm sure that's what would end up happening) that the injury was exacerbated and/or compounded by years of playing football. Afterall, it wasn't an issue when he was at TN or even for the first several years of his career. Then suddenly it pops up.

I know you run into a causation/correlation problem here, but I'd be stunned if an arbitrator ruled that this was unrelated to his football career. There's going to be enough smoke there that they'll see fire.

I'm not saying Eric can't play the part of the victim and get a favorable ruling, but they'd have to really want it to say "football" did this, it can't just be life.

https://www.foothealthfacts.org/cond...%99s-deformity

Causes
Haglund’s deformity is often called “pump bump” because the rigid backs of pump-style shoes can create pressure that aggravates the enlargement when walking. In fact, any shoes with a rigid back, such as ice skates, men’s dress shoes or women’s pumps, can cause this irritation.

To some extent, heredity plays a role in Haglund’s deformity. Inherited foot structures that can make one prone to developing this condition include:

A high-arched foot
A tight Achilles tendon
A tendency to walk on the outside of the heel.

But I sure wouldn't put any of this beyond what Berry would do to the team...

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

[Sigh]

You. Can't. Cut. Him. If. He. Can't. Pass. A. Physical.

The guarantee is just a guarantee on day 3. Not for injury or performance or any other qualifier - just a guarantee. But if a player cannot pass a standard player physical as a result of a football related surgery, you can't cut him. He wont pass by day 3 so your 'cut him on day 1' nonsense is prohibited.

There's a ZERO percent chance that his injury will be declared non-football related. Zero. If the chiefs thought that were a possibility they'd have put him on the NFI list and avoided his cap hit for this season.

What would you like to place on this? Hes getting the surgery, it will prohibit the Chiefs from cutting him and we're stuck with his salary in 2019.

You're just flat ****ing wrong here. Any one of your drafts that involves cutting Berry is a waste if your time and anyone who reads it.

If it doesn't have an injury qualifier then you're blowing smoke out your own ass. Even if it DOES have an injury qualifier, it HAS to be FOOTBALL RELATED. If you want proof of what I'm talking about, here's an SEC archive of a player contract clause:

12. TERMINATION. The rights of termination set forth in this contract will be in addition to any other rights of termination allowed either party by law. Termination will be effective upon the giving of written notice, except that Player’s death, other than as a result of injury incurred in the performance of his services under this contract, will automatically terminate this contract. If this contract is terminated by Club and either Player or Club so requests, Player will promptly undergo a complete physical examination by the Club physician.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by kccrow

If it doesn't have an injury qualifier then you're blowing smoke out your own ass. Even if it DOES have an injury qualifier, it HAS to be FOOTBALL RELATED. If you want proof of what I'm talking about, here's an SEC archive of a player contract clause:

Its GOING to be football related. **** me, do you really not understand how easy this will be?

"I had to tape my ankles to deal with instability after my injuries..."

That will literally be all it takes. You're welcome to waste as much time as you want jerking yourself off to this idea but I'll bet you $100 the Chiefs either A) dont even try because they know they dont have a chance or B) get SMOKED in an arb hearing.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

All he has to do is tell an arbitrator that it was a result from wearing cleats and the Chiefs are sunk. He's not going anywhere for at least one more year.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Its GOING to be football related. **** me, do you really not understand how easy this will be?

"I had to tape my ankles to deal with instability after my injuries..."

That will literally be all it takes. You're welcome to waste as much time as you want jerking yourself off to this idea but I'll bet you $100 the Chiefs either A) dont even try because they know they dont have a chance or B) get SMOKED in an arb hearing.

Two people that don't understand what "football related" actually means. This deformity was not caused by playing football. It has, literally, nothing to do with playing football. The fact that playing football can make it worse has no bearing whatsoever on what the issue actually is. It's the same thing if a player has a heart condition that wasn't found, then is found after he's been playing ball, and can no longer play. The heart condition wasn't caused by football, it was natural. Playing football could make it worse. **** me if I can't pound that through your ****ing skulls.

Either way, it's whatever, the Chiefs are dumb enough they won't cut him anyway. He'll get the surgery and still be an overpaid, average safety that'll likely find yet another way to not be on the field.

[BryanBusby]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Two people that don't understand what "football related" actually means. This deformity was not caused by playing football. It has, literally, nothing to do with playing football. The fact that playing football can make it worse has no bearing whatsoever on what the issue actually is. It's the same thing if a player has a heart condition that wasn't found, then is found after he's been playing ball, and can no longer play. The heart condition wasn't caused by football, it was natural. Playing football could make it worse. **** me if I can't pound that through your ****ing skulls.

Either way, it's whatever, the Chiefs are dumb enough they won't cut him anyway. He'll get the surgery and still be an overpaid, average safety that'll likely find yet another way to not be on the field.

you're trying to armchair diagnose something where you have no idea what the root cause actually is but think you've got the pulse from webmd

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

you're trying to armchair diagnose something where you have no idea what the root cause actually is but think you've got the pulse from webmd

I'd explain how we know all of this and can diagnose from our armchairs, but it's complicated.

[BryanBusby]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

I'd explain how we know all of this and can diagnose from our armchairs, but it's complicated.

It would be first logical thought you've had.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Two people that don't understand what "football related" actually means. This deformity was not caused by playing football. It has, literally, nothing to do with playing football. The fact that playing football can make it worse has no bearing whatsoever on what the issue actually is. It's the same thing if a player has a heart condition that wasn't found, then is found after he's been playing ball, and can no longer play. The heart condition wasn't caused by football, it was natural. Playing football could make it worse. **** me if I can't pound that through your ****ing skulls.

Either way, it's whatever, the Chiefs are dumb enough they won't cut him anyway. He'll get the surgery and still be an overpaid, average safety that'll likely find yet another way to not be on the field.

I ask again - what would you like to bet on this?

You can say it's not football related all you want but it doesn't have to be 100% BECAUSE of football. It is akin to the eggshell plaintiff rules - sure, Berry may have been genetically predisposed to this condition but if he'd have not had this thing surface had he chosen to be a schoolteacher, it's going to be called football related. It just will. You keep saying 'CAUSED' by football and that ain't how it works. Exacerbated or tangentially related to playing football is going to be enough. Your position that making it worse is irrelevant is just laughably ridiculous.

That's why these CTE cases still get such traction despite no true causal link ever being established. Oh sure, there's a ton of circumstantial linkage and we know that some people are simply going to be more predisposed to cognitive damage than others. An entire field of literature has come to the conclusion that there is SOMETHING already present in these severe cases that might not have surfaced but/for football but the bottom line is that the seed was there and all football did was make it debilitating. And in the end, all of these cases are coming down to "is there enough smoke to say that but/for football, this wouldn't have happened this way or at least not been this severe...."?

If you honestly think that you'll be able to convince an arbitrator that "Eric Berry, Schoolteacher" would've had this condition pop up to a degree that required surgical intervention....well you're being unreasonably myopic. Berry and his people will have an army of experts at ANY hearing saying "Yes, of course wearing football cleats and heavily taping ankles while making hard cuts can and will contribute to exacerbating this physical condition to the point that surgery is now necessary...." The Chiefs may or may not bring in experts of their own to argue to the contrary but if I'm a betting man, I'm betting that they just don't bother trying.

Because they will get their asses kicked badly on this one. You are applying a standard to 'football related' that is ENTIRELY too strict and in the process completely wasting your time.

Eric Berry won't be cut and the reason he won't be is that the Chiefs know that they're not going to get any traction at all on the argument that this injury isn't football related. Spend as much time talking yourself into the opposite view as you'd like, but it's not going to happen. Archive to your hearts content and we'll circle back on the 3rd day of the league year...

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I ask again - what would you like to bet on this?

You can say it's not football related all you want but it doesn't have to be 100% BECAUSE of football. It is akin to the eggshell plaintiff rules - sure, Berry may have been genetically predisposed to this condition but if he'd have not had this thing surface had he chosen to be a schoolteacher, it's going to be called football related. It just will. You keep saying 'CAUSED' by football and that ain't how it works. Exacerbated or tangentially related to playing football is going to be enough. Your position that making it worse is irrelevant is just laughably ridiculous.

That's why these CTE cases still get such traction despite no true causal link ever being established. Oh sure, there's a ton of circumstantial linkage and we know that some people are simply going to be more predisposed to cognitive damage than others. An entire field of literature has come to the conclusion that there is SOMETHING already present in these severe cases that might not have surfaced but/for football but the bottom line is that the seed was there and all football did was make it debilitating. And in the end, all of these cases are coming down to "is there enough smoke to say that but/for football, this wouldn't have happened this way or at least not been this severe...."?

If you honestly think that you'll be able to convince an arbitrator that "Eric Berry, Schoolteacher" would've had this condition pop up to a degree that required surgical intervention....well you're being unreasonably myopic. Berry and his people will have an army of experts at ANY hearing saying "Yes, of course wearing football cleats and heavily taping ankles while making hard cuts can and will contribute to exacerbating this physical condition to the point that surgery is now necessary...." The Chiefs may or may not bring in experts of their own to argue to the contrary but if I'm a betting man, I'm betting that they just don't bother trying.

Because they will get their asses kicked badly on this one. You are applying a standard to 'football related' that is ENTIRELY too strict and in the process completely wasting your time.

Eric Berry won't be cut and the reason he won't be is that the Chiefs know that they're not going to get any traction at all on the argument that this injury isn't football related. Spend as much time talking yourself into the opposite view as you'd like, but it's not going to happen. Archive to your hearts content and we'll circle back on the 3rd day of the league year...

Get off the betting bullshit, for starters.

There's nothing "strict" about anything here, it's the wording of the contract. There's nothing about a naturally occurring bone protrusion that any reasonable person other than a ****ing imbecile would take to mean "caused by football." To think an arbitrator would be so ****ing stupid to not see the disconnect here is ludicrous at best. This deformity is not the same as a cause/effect relationship such as Ryan Shazier becoming paralyzed due to a hit on the field.

And yes, this condition is common enough and is made worse by "school teachers," wearing improper shoes just as much as Berry is. It isn't the Kansas City Chiefs fault that his body grew abnormally. It isn't football's fault. You're grasping at straws and, honestly, insulting any reasonable person's intelligence to think the contrary. The only thing you're 100% correct on is that his continued use of football cleats will exacerbate a naturally occurring condition, which could be remedied to a large extent by the player deciding to have surgery. This is the same as if someone has a naturally occurring heart condition could make his condition much riskier by running 100 yards down the football field. An arbitrator would not side with the player on termination of a contract for the heart condition either. If you want 100% legitmate proof that the NFL will side with the team on this, look no further than a recent case where the Saints were awarded the cap space and right to cut Nick Fairly for a found heart condition.

Done with this discussion.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Get off the betting bullshit, for starters.

There's nothing "strict" about anything here, it's the wording of the contract. There's nothing about a naturally occurring bone protrusion that any reasonable person other than a ****ing imbecile would take to mean "caused by football." To think an arbitrator would be so ****ing stupid to not see the disconnect here is ludicrous at best. This deformity is not the same as a cause/effect relationship such as Ryan Shazier becoming paralyzed due to a hit on the field.

And yes, this condition is common enough and is made worse by "school teachers," wearing improper shoes just as much as Berry is. It isn't the Kansas City Chiefs fault that his body grew abnormally. It isn't football's fault. You're grasping at straws and, honestly, insulting any reasonable person's intelligence to think the contrary. The only thing you're 100% correct on is that his continued use of football cleats will exacerbate a naturally occurring condition, which could be remedied to a large extent by the player deciding to have surgery. This is the same as if someone has a naturally occurring heart condition could make his condition much riskier by running 100 yards down the football field. An arbitrator would not side with the player on termination of a contract for the heart condition either. If you want 100% legitmate proof that the NFL will side with the team on this, look no further than a recent case where the Saints were awarded the cap space and right to cut Nick Fairly for a found heart condition.

Done with this discussion.

The Chiefs would absolutely cut him if they could. They won't because they know better. Ultimately you even know this because you're already backpedaling with your "The chiefs are dumb enough they won't cut him..." nonsense.

They know how dire their cap situation is and they know that Berry is not going to play to the level of his cap hit next season. If they could cull $9 million from their cap as easily as you say they can, they would.

They won't because because 'related' does not mean 'unequivocally caused by'. They know they'll get curb-stomped in an arb hearing.

He's not going anywhere and you can get as huffy as you'd like when someone points that out. It sucks, but it's the reality of the thing. Stomp and pout all you want, but you're wasting your time every single time you put together a mock that includes cutting Eric Berry and freeing up loads of cap space.