Is CLEARED FOR PRACTICE being taken as filing paperwork to play? Or like a subdivision of the PUP?
There seems to be confusion over "cleared for practice" vs. "cleared for play." There was some speculation that there are two different "designations" for being "cleared."
I thought "cleared" was just a doctors OK. That things blurred with the raised hope he can literally practice with the team on the PUP through a special "practice" designation but not count towards the 53; like without that "cleared for games" designation he's still on the 53 but... PUPed.
It feels a bit like a made up legal position intended to address gray area in the CBA. I dont doubt that Teddy could use some "practice rehab," but I think the idea with the PUP and tolling was to protect guys that have no gray area with their injury. With Teddy walking around and running drills away from the team, where is that line? There is some gray area now.
The Vikes walk away gigantic winners if Teddy can practice AND toll. But I dont think the PUP cares if you can practice but not play.
I think where it will matter will be legally. If Teddy can prove he is "cleared for practice," ... is there a fine CBA definition for the difference between the two? If The Vikes say, "duh, he cant get hit" and then Teddy comes back and says, "i can practice," i guess I kinda figured the team was SOL because the player can demonstrate that he is able to play. Does the level of performance matter?
(Lol, some people collect their thoughts and nicely present them; i write until it makes sense or until im even more confused)
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
Is CLEARED FOR PRACTICE being taken as filing paperwork to play? Or like a subdivision of the PUP?
There seems to be confusion over "cleared for practice" vs. "cleared for play." There was some speculation that there are two different "designations" for being "cleared."
I thought "cleared" was just a doctors OK. That things blurred with the raised hope he can literally practice with the team on the PUP through a special "practice" designation but not count towards the 53; like without that "cleared for games" designation he's still on the 53 but... PUPed.
It feels a bit like a made up legal position intended to address gray area in the CBA. I dont doubt that Teddy could use some "practice rehab," but I think the idea with the PUP and tolling was to protect guys that have no gray area with their injury. With Teddy walking around and running drills away from the team, where is that line? There is some gray area now.
The Vikes walk away gigantic winners if Teddy can practice AND toll. But I dont think the PUP cares if you can practice but not play.
I think where it will matter will be legally. If Teddy can prove he is "cleared for practice," ... is there a fine CBA definition for the difference between the two? If The Vikes say, "duh, he cant get hit" and then Teddy comes back and says, "i can practice," i guess I kinda figured the team was SOL because the player can demonstrate that he is able to play. Does the level of performance matter?
(Lol, some people collect their thoughts and nicely present them; i write until it makes sense or until im even more confused)
better keep writing bro! 
EDIT: dont get mad BM7, it was meant in fun.
Lol, i totally like that but couldnt pass up an oppertunity to click that.
Writing with a touchscreen keyboard is a lot looser and a little harder to reread/write - seems like thoughts are as scattered as the process of writting them. And right here in the post is the point where I can subtly feel my brain recoiling off my skull with each glass smashing letter selection... lol
Is there a legal difference, defined by the CBA, for "cleared to practice" vs "cleared to play?"
I get the technical differences between the two, but does the CBA care?
I noticed some hope for him being "allowed" to practice with the 53 while still being on the PUP because he isnt "cleared for games." I was under the impressions of what Wet was saying; and think that "being cleared for practice" was kind of lip service for the team to get him practicing while keeping the PUP option open.
I kinda wonder, if there really isnt a difference, does being "cleared for practice" become viewed by Teddy and his agent as a green light to fight.
Thats all; from a legal/CBA definition of the PUP under the CBA, can a player even be greenlighted for practice but not games under the PUP?
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
Lol, i totally like that but couldnt pass up an oppertunity to click that.
Writing with a touchscreen keyboard is a lot looser and a little harder to reread/write - seems like thoughts are as scattered as the process of writting them. And right here in the post is the point where I can subtly feel my brain recoiling off my skull with each glass smashing letter selection... lol
Is there a legal difference, defined by the CBA, for "cleared to practice" vs "cleared to play?"
I get the technical differences between the two, but does the CBA care?
I noticed some hope for him being "allowed" to practice with the 53 while still being on the PUP because he isnt "cleared for games." I was under the impressions of what Wet was saying; and think that "being cleared for practice" was kind of lip service for the team to get him practicing while keeping the PUP option open.
I kinda wonder, if there really isnt a difference, does being "cleared for practice" become viewed by Teddy and his agent as a green light to fight.
Thats all; from a legal/CBA definition of the PUP under the CBA, can a player even be greenlighted for practice but not games under the PUP?
if you like the down thumb you will love the WTF TA!
I dont know about all the legality and stuff pertaining to Teddy and his rehab and practice stuff, but I can say from what I saw at camp of him... hes not ready for contact yet and IMO putting him out there to simply avoid a tolled year could and likely would have a very bad affect on his career, much more so than simply losing 1 year of monster money as a starting QB on his second contract.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Purplewhizz said:
@e"Canthony" said:
I believe there was a discrepancy and the fine line between being game ready and cleared to practice. If you aren't game ready and can protect yourself.. then you are unable to physically perform.
I feel Teddys camp probably pushed to be taken off PUP because he was going to be cleared to practice. I am going to guess they lost that fight.
Just my opinion that is.
But he hasn't been cleared to practice as far as I know, has he?
Doesn't appear so as he was videod working out with Floyd away from the rest. However he may be taking part in non contact parts of practice and doing his rehab drills during the more physical parts.
It seems like there is some confusion about what Teddy CAN and CAN'T do while he is on the PUP list...
Because he is on the PUP list, he is NOT allowed to practice with the team. He can do rehab work on the side, but he cannot participate in any part of practice. If he is cleared to practice with the team (contact or non-contact), he would then need to be removed from the PUP list.
If he is removed from the PUP list during training camp/preseason ... He is no longer eligible to be placed on the regular season PUP list and would count towards the 53 man roster whether he is physically ready to play or not.
At this point, I would be surprised if he is activated from the PUP list. The last preseason game is today and if he was healthy enough to practice/play, he would have been activated by now. It seems pretty clear the team will leave him on the PUP list and move him to the regular season PUP list this weekend when final rosters need to be set. Once that happens, he won't be able to play for the first 6 weeks and would then have a 3 (or 5?) week window to be activated to the 53 man roster assuming he is completely healthy.
are you sure about all that? I had heard to the contrary.
Did you read my two posts above (after the one you quoted)? Both are quotes from articles within the last year. Unless something has changed THIS off-season, those are the facts.
I can't find ANYTHING that states a player on the Active/PUP can practice with the team and remain on the PUP. Believe me, I've looked.
Further... it would defy logic if a player could do that. PUP stands for Physically Unable to Perform. If a player can practice, he is no longer physically unable to perform, right? :-P
Your last liner there Wet was what I was thinking. Seems contradictory.
It seems like defining the difference legally (more coloring in existing CBA language) would be a good avenue for the Vikings to take should Teddy "be cleared for practice."
Who wins in a "we dont think you can play" vs "my camp is clearing me" fight? The guy who's willing to show up for practice or the team that wants to protect their investment?
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ BlackMagic7 said:
It's all fun and games until that guy ends up filling in for Christian Ponder in a playoff game; then we immediately pull the plug and pretend it never happened.
I think Heineke has already shown that he is an actual QB, Webb was an athlete that was asked to play the position.
Heineke has journeyman written all over him, I'm ready to move on and start developing another.
Heinecke's lack of arm strength is problematic. Webb has carved out a nice career as a backup QB, not only is Heinecke not going to be the #2 QB, who knows if he has any kind of future in this league. He should be cut outright, but he might not because of Teddy not being able to practice. Some fans just love any kind of garbage in a purple uniform.
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
Your last liner there Wet was what I was thinking. Seems contradictory.
It seems like defining the difference legally (more coloring in existing CBA language) would be a good avenue for the Vikings to take should Teddy "be cleared for practice."
Who wins in a "we dont think you can play" vs "my camp is clearing me" fight? The guy who's willing to show up for practice or the team that wants to protect their investment?
All of us schoolyard lawyers can generate a few pages of debate about this case with almost no effort - just imagine what the highly-paid sharks can do. I think this will be challenged, definitely: Teddy wants to be playing soon (for Miami if not Minnesota...) and he's young and cocky and thinks he can beat the medical advice, and as the first attempt by any team to exercise tolling, the NFLPA will challenge to discourage future use. It will get uglier and I stand by my prediction: Teddy leaves in March as a free agent.
|
