Tolling Teddy

This is a good question.  If he is tolled, Teddy and the NFLPA will contest it of course.  But how long will it take to get that resolved?  it needs to be expedited so the Vikings and Teddy can move on quickly if necessary. 

its this time line on Teddy that has me thinking that the team just needs to make a decision on him and be prepared to live with it.  If they want Teddy in the long term picture,  go to him with an extension that protects both parties by factoring in the possibility of tolling and the unknowns with his knee,  but also give Teddy some security going forward and some outs if he isnt happy after next season.

I wish I knew. It has to be decided, challenged and resolved by March 14th or it will have a huge impact on both the Minnesota Vikings and Teddy Bridgewater. 

@"MaroonBells" said: I wish I knew. It has to be decided, challenged and resolved by March 14th or it will have a huge impact on both the Minnesota Vikings and Teddy Bridgewater. 

I expect the team to wait at least a couple weeks to see what plays out,  but if he is in their plans for next year I am betting the move to get something done regardless of what the league and union do.  (of course maybe the league wants to fight this out with the union and will pressure the Vikes to let it play out?  who knows for sure,  however if the Vikes are not seeing Teddy as part of the future, let him go and let him know.  He is very well liked in the locker room and to mess with the kids future by playing contract verbiage games IMO would not be well received by his friends that are still on the team.

I don't really see any wiggle room or that a decision needs to be made.  He was on the pup list in week 6.  That's the requirement. 

He can ask the Vikings to be released.  He can take an offer from the Vikings.  When FA starts, no team is going to want to get involved with a QB who hasn't played in 2 years with a contract issue for any significant money.  If he gets an offer in the $3-5M range, that team will likely just throw a 6th or 7th at the Vikes to make it clean, but with the number of QBs in FA and the number of teams actually looking for a QB I just don't see it happening.

If it actually goes to the league to make a decision, they'll say it tolls, and if the NFLPA objects or if Teddy objects, it will go to ...

Well that's interesting.  The Arbitrator specifically does not have authority over the section in the CBA that deals with PUP tolling.  There are procedures for grievances - both injury and non-injury, but they both spell out a procedure including the arbitrator.

Injury grievances look to be long and drawn out - at least a couple of months with needs for filings, responses, hearings, and appeals.  From what I can tell, non-injury grievances look to get dealt with more quickly - less than 2 months, potentially less than 1.  The timelines are messy though - with filings, responses, arbitrator selections, scheduling, etc. so those are guesstimates.  https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/General/2011_Final_CBA_Searchable_Bookmarked.pdf

The PUP thing is in Article 20/2.  Griveances are in Article 43 and 44.  Arbitrator authority is spelled out in Article 15.

I would think, however, because of this:

"The System Arbitrator’s and Appeals Panel’s authority shall be limited to the terms of Articles 1, 4, 6–19, 26–28, 31, or 68–70 of this Agreement"

That the only way to fight the rule is to sue the NFL in civil court and in order to do that I would expect that Teddy has to try to go to another team and fail - at which point there would be something to actually fight about.

And taken into context... I would think that it's really in Teddy's best interest to have the contract toll, earn a roster spot and become an FA next year, or to get released and sign a short term contract with a team that has an injury problem early on.

Unless the NFLPA really wants to put this thing on the commissioners desk.  Which it might or might not. 

Of course, if there's a newer CBA, I could be wrong about everything.  That's what popped up in google.

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I wish I knew. It has to be decided, challenged and resolved by March 14th or it will have a huge impact on both the Minnesota Vikings and Teddy Bridgewater. 

I expect the team to wait at least a couple weeks to see what plays out,  but if he is in their plans for next year I am betting the move to get something done regardless of what the league and union do.  (of course maybe the league wants to fight this out with the union and will pressure the Vikes to let it play out?  who knows for sure,  however if the Vikes are not seeing Teddy as part of the future, let him go and let him know.  He is very well liked in the locker room and to mess with the kids future by playing contract verbiage games IMO would not be well received by his friends that are still on the team.

Thanks Steve, good info.  Hope it works out best for both parties.

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I wish I knew. It has to be decided, challenged and resolved by March 14th or it will have a huge impact on both the Minnesota Vikings and Teddy Bridgewater. 

I expect the team to wait at least a couple weeks to see what plays out,  but if he is in their plans for next year I am betting the move to get something done regardless of what the league and union do.  (of course maybe the league wants to fight this out with the union and will pressure the Vikes to let it play out?  who knows for sure,  however if the Vikes are not seeing Teddy as part of the future, let him go and let him know.  He is very well liked in the locker room and to mess with the kids future by playing contract verbiage games IMO would not be well received by his friends that are still on the team.

It's possible that if/when the league decides that the contract should toll (I mean, it really should), the Vikings may use that as an opportunity to approach him about a win-win deal. 

Basically saying to Teddy...you can take your chances by fighting this with the NFLPA, risk losing, and play next year for $1.3M, or you can take this 1-year $7M-ish contract and compete for a starting job. And if you win it, you're going to get BIG money next year. He might just take that. Because he would have to consider also that even if the NFLPA wins their challenge, it would likely delay his free agency status until after many teams have already grabbed their QBs. 

@JimmyinSD brings up some good points.  Even though the Vikings have the leverage position right now, they've had a history of being a player's team for a while. 

The team could make a reasonable offer on a new contract to take this whole issue off the table. 

@"MaroonBells" said: I wish I knew. It has to be decided, challenged and resolved by March 14th or it will have a huge impact on both the Minnesota Vikings and Teddy Bridgewater. 

That’s why I don’t see it ever getting that far.  There’s no way that the league rules on the matter and it gets settled in court in time.  The only way I see it happening is if we pick a different QB and try to force Teddy to be the backup for cheap with the expectations that he’ll be 100% gone in 2019.

Letting the process play out just opens both parties to the
risk of not getting what they wanted in a pretty big way, because teams need to
commit to QBs and good QBs need to find teams before those positions get
filled.  I can’t imagine the wrath that
Spielman would feel if he was counting on tolling Bridgewater as our starter,
all the FA QBs went elsewhere thinking we’re set with Bridgewater, only to find
out that Bridgewater is indeed a free agent who now is biased against the
Vikings and we rolled into the season left with only Sloter and an uninspiring veteran backup.

@"medaille" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I wish I knew. It has to be decided, challenged and resolved by March 14th or it will have a huge impact on both the Minnesota Vikings and Teddy Bridgewater. 

That’s why I don’t see it ever getting that far.  There’s no way that the league rules on the matter and it gets settled in court in time.  The only way I see it happening is if we pick a different QB and try to force Teddy to be the backup for cheap with the expectations that he’ll be 100% gone in 2019.

Letting the process play out just opens both parties to the
risk of not getting what they wanted in a pretty big way, because teams need to
commit to QBs and good QBs need to find teams before those positions get
filled.  I can’t imagine the wrath that
Spielman would feel if he was counting on tolling Bridgewater as our starter,
all the FA QBs went elsewhere thinking we’re set with Bridgewater, only to find
out that Bridgewater is indeed a free agent who now is biased against the
Vikings and we rolled into the season left with only Sloter and an uninspiring veteran backup.

I am under the impression that whether or not the contract tolls is not up to the Vikings, but that it is automatic from the league according to the language.  Therefore, the Vikings need to know if Bridgewater is being tolled before they can offer any contact. 

If the contract tolls, I would assume it is fully guaranteed like a rookie contract, the Vikings would have to offer an extension.  Therefore, if the Vikings just go for a new contract, it may not be legal under the CBA (ignoring a guaranteed contract). If the contract does not toll, it would have be a new contract.

No matter what, the Vikings need to know if the contract tolls in order to offer a legal contract under the terms of the CBA.  

If they are letting it go towards the toll route, I think some combination of these are in effect:

1. Vikings have not seen enough of his knee/health to feel comfortable he won't just crumple after a few big hits. Speilman might have taken some heat internally for the $6.8M paid to Sharrif Floyd last year and not want to get more if Bridgewater gets reinjured.
2. Bridgewater isn't interested in one of these 1-2 year modest pay contracts with a lot of team-friendly escape clauses regarding his health, which many people here are suggesting.
3. Bridgewater thinks he should be THE starting QB, not here to backup Keenum or Bradford.

If the Vikings can toll his contract they can look at his health for another year, and force him to compete for starter or backup, with very little money.
People say Bridgewater will be pissed at the team. Well, the Vikings will have a year to cheer him up. If he wins the starting QB job and has a great 2018 season, Spielman will be offering a contract extension by December and everyone will be lauding Teddy. If he is still mad this time next year and won't sign, but has proven he is a great starter, then franchise him. Even if we franchised him 2 years running like the Redskins did to Cousins because Teddy carried a hateful multi-year grudge, we get a starting QB for 3 years (2018-20) at less average cost because 2018 was cheap. OTOH, if he reinjures his knee or doesn't perform well and ends up 3rd-string...who cares if he's pissed?

seems to me all this shit should have been settled before now.  Both the Vikings and team Teddy should have had an explanation and been ready to roll if the season played out this way.

@"JimmyinSD" said: seems to me all this shit should have been settled before now.  Both the Vikings and team Teddy should have had an explanation and been ready to roll if the season played out this way.

I can't believe this isn't the case.  It seems like this should have been investigated and settled long ago after Teddy was placed on the PUP.  I can't imagine the NFL would let this issue linger into the offseason and this close to free agency.  Maybe both the team and Teddy already know the answer to the tolling issue but aren't addressing it until they have to.  Or maybe one of them is appealing the decision?  

Could be why Teddy seemed to act a little more distant towards the end of the season?

@"SFVikingFan" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said: seems to me all this shit should have been settled before now.  Both the Vikings and team Teddy should have had an explanation and been ready to roll if the season played out this way.

I can't believe this isn't the case.  It seems like this should have been investigated and settled long ago after Teddy was placed on the PUP.  I can't imagine the NFL would let this issue linger into the offseason and this close to free agency.  Maybe both the team and Teddy already know the answer to the tolling issue but aren't addressing it until they have to.  Or maybe one of them is appealing the decision?  

Could be why Teddy seemed to act a little more distant towards the end of the season?