Let’s just hope it never happens. We have gotten lucky for the most part. Sutton, Buggs, all the gamblers, none of them were anything special. Speaking of which for a team that says no turds policy, we have had several turds. Gotta flush that toilet a little more frequently. 
Maybe the lesson was to understand the malleable nature of truth and the influence of money and fame on justice? Maybe it’s not appropriate for 6th grade, but they’re important lessons in the long arc of life. Maybe it was part of foreign studies, exploring strange lands and cultures through the sagas of OJ, Paris Hilton and Milli Vanilli. Maybe the overriding lesson was to avoid everything south of the border. I dunno…
1 Like
Pretty sure the teacher was just hungover. Lol
1 Like
Exactly.
The mob’s lust for immediate, and often asymmetrical retribution overwhelms any interest in whether or not an offense was actually committed, let alone whether or not the accused is the actual perpetrator.
Social media shows how little humanity has changed in the last 1000 years.
2 Likes
We definitely have an idea based on Brad and Dan’s comments. They said their tolerance level will always give consideration to how good the player is. The better you are, the more you can mess up. But if you aren’t getting the job done, the tolerance level is very low.
It is a very pragmatic view of things. And Dan being a former player understands how much of a mess some really good players are. But if you perform on the field, you earn yourself a little more rope to hang yourself with.
2 Likes
It wasn’t a fake rape accusation. The torn piercings and bruising’s prove it wasn’t fake. She may have been mistaken about Araiza’s involvement without it being a “fake rape accusation”.
Due process has to do with the criminal system, that’s it. Employers can do as they see fit. If someone doesn’t want to employ someone because of certain questionable behaviors, it’s within their rights. The Bills may have found disturbing details about Ariaza in their investigation and decided to end his employment and again they’d be within their rights. There is never due process involved with employment.
But again, this probably wouldn’t have been an issue if the SD PD did their job when it was asked of them. There very well could have been a booster that put a squash on the investigation hoping it would just go away. Unfortunately it didn’t and Araiza’s questionable decisions came back to haunt him.
Always good to have Jason around to explain some of the intricacies of the salary cap. I knew it would probably take awhile to get settled (I’ve repeatedly said I didn’t expect the outcome until next years year-end reconciliation). But I do think this is just a formality.
I don’t believe Sutton has a leg to stand on and has filed a grievance in hope of settling for a small amount. I wish I knew exactly how the moral cause was stated.
Chance’s the arbitrator rules:
- 10% the Lions were within their rights to void $10.5M guarantees & recoup $3.6M of the signing bonus
- 60% the Lions were within their rights to void $10.5M guarantees
- 25% the Lions & Sutton settle with the Lions writing a check for around $2M and the case is withdrawn
- 5% the Lions were not within their right to void the $10.5M in guarantees
As I’ve said all along, I doubt the Lions see the results of the Sutton dispute until next year’s year-end reconciliation (February of 2025).
2 Likes
The cash paid and the charges against the cap are going to be the exact same. We paid him $12M last year ($10.9M signing bonus and $1.1M base salary) and we voided his $10.5M 2024 guaranteed base. So it’s either going to be
- $22.5M for one year, if Sutton wins the grievance
- $12M plus whatever we pay Sutton to go away and dismiss the grievance
- $12M if we win the grievance
- $4.7M if we not only win the $10.5M grievance, but the arbitrator rules the Lions can reoup some of the signing bonus.
I think it’s either going to be $12M for one year or maybe up to $14M if we decide to settle. I’m assuming that the Lions have a strong stance.
1 Like
You the man
Thanks
I don’t get the 10.5 (shouldn’t that be 12) or 3.6 (?)…but I get the gist of the 4 scenarios
The $10.5M was the amount of his 2024 guaranteed base salary that the Lions voided when they released him. That’s the amount that has been in all the articles since his release.
$12M was what he earned in 2023 ($10.9M signing bonus and $1.1M base salary). That $10.9M signing bonus could be disputed by the Lions because he violated the terms of his contract. His contract was for three years, so $10.9M divided by 3 is $3.6M per year (not including the voided years used to spread out the cap charges). He didn’t violate the terms of his contract during the first year, so that can’t be recovered, but potentially the final two years can be. But this is a potentially separate issue and it may not even be disputed by the Lions. I had an error in the final number, I’ve fixed it $4.7M (2023 base plus $3.6M signing bonus over one year).
1 Like
Gotcha makes sense now the 4.7
Should the 10.5 be 12+ whatever we decide to pay him to go away…
Making it 14 mil like you said if we give him 2 mil.
So 12 + not 10.5+
Oh man, I just got back into town and am tired. Yes @jman, you are right.
I’m going to fix that number as well. Please let me know if I made any other errors.
1 Like
Haha we are a good team man I am your karate kid student of the salary cap. You are Miagi.
The best teacher
1 Like