Saints to Release Latavius Murray (2 Viewers)

Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
14,273
Reaction score
24,254
Online
That works both ways though. What if a player outperforms his contract?
The contract is the contract. If the player overachieves or underachieves they are tied to the guaranteed money in the contract, just like the organization. Right now the Saints are paying CGM to sit on his butt because they made the error in giving a guy with personality issues a ton of guaranteed money. This is no different to contracts involving other professionals. If someone wants to hold out for a better contract then that’s up to them...but the organization is under no obligation to comply. Just like a player is not forced to take a paycut.
 

saint_drago

I Must Break You
VIP Contributor
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
9,968
Reaction score
22,881
Location
West Monroe
Offline
I don't see this as some nasty move by the Saints. It was clear that Murray had hit a wall. The NFL is a meritocracy. Murray was outplayed by TJJ and was regulated to third on the depth chart. So the Saints have this expensive #3 RB who has apparently hit a wall physically and doesn't offer anything in special teams. What do you do with such a player? They could've cut him without even asking him to take a pay cut.
 

Nolan

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
9,494
Online
There has to be a move coming, hopefully an extension to either Lattimore or Williams.
 
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
14,273
Reaction score
24,254
Online
I don't see this as some nasty move by the Saints. It was clear that Murray had hit a wall. The NFL is a meritocracy. Murray was outplayed by TJJ and was regulated to third on the depth chart. So the Saints have this expensive #3 RB who has apparently hit a wall physically and doesn't offer anything in special teams. What do you do with such a player? They could've cut him without even asking him to take a pay cut.
The question is the timing. Why not cut him sooner? Well...I think that there are good reasons they didn't do so. First...I think that the Saints had every intention of giving Murray every opportunity to make the team under his current contract. He was beat like a drum by TJJ in both preseason games. So the final preseason game was key...and it got cancelled. I suppose that the Saints could have cut him immediately after learning that the game cancelled, but then Shannon Sharpe would be complaining that the Saints were inhumane for cutting Murray on the verge of having to relocate himself and his family during Hurricane Ida. Waiting until immediately after the hurricane is actually the humane thing to do...as it gives Murray one less thing to worry about during the very stressful hurricane situation. It would not have changed anything in regards to his ability to catch on with a team. He will still have plenty of options, and he would have struggled to play for that team in week 1 of the regular season any way you spin it.

We also have no clue on the timing of the situation. Perhaps the Saints told him about the need for him to take a paycut before yesterday and he was considering his options.

This...like the Urban Meyer "story"...isn't a story.
 

Merl

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
12,574
Reaction score
7,990
Location
Monroe
Offline
There has to be a move coming, hopefully an extension to either Lattimore or Williams.
Williams is locked into playing this year under his franchise tag value as salary. Nothing can be done with that until the off season. With Lattimore they gave him most of his 5th year option salary as a signing bonus earlier this year in order to push most of it into next year. I am not sure if the rules changed but at one time a player can only get a new deal once per league year.
 

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
61,678
Reaction score
97,520
Location
Charleston, SC
Online
He should of done it on cut down day. Would of look better with the team.

I think they tried to keep him on cut down day, but then needed cap. They saw some room with him as an expendable veteran but he wouldn't take the cut so they released him.
 

sfidc3

Pro-Bowler
Joined
Mar 14, 2015
Messages
4,837
Reaction score
6,128
Online
Man, it's hard to believe he regressed that quickly, I wish him well. He was a quality RB here....
 

football

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
6,888
Reaction score
13,088
Online
I think they tried to keep him on cut down day, but then needed cap. They saw some room with him as an expendable veteran but he wouldn't take the cut so they released him.
Guess I don't understand the business side but it just look bad on our part. If I go by your post, then they should of talk to him before cut down.
 

Clintonrebel

Pro-Bowler
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
2,422
Reaction score
3,448
Location
Clinton
Offline
Its a business. We found a really good rookie free agent RB for a lot cheaper. This makes room to make the CB trade. We needed CB help more than we needed an extra running back. That's what happened to Murray.
 

Nolan

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
9,494
Online
Williams is locked into playing this year under his franchise tag value as salary. Nothing can be done with that until the off season. With Lattimore they gave him most of his 5th year option salary as a signing bonus earlier this year in order to push most of it into next year. I am not sure if the rules changed but at one time a player can only get a new deal once per league year.

Gotcha, I didn't realize that about tagged players.
 

HouseCall

Resist, Ronald, resist!
Joined
Dec 7, 1998
Messages
6,745
Reaction score
10,753
Age
44
Offline
I think the Saints did him dirty. How come when a player asks for a trade or wants more money he’s a cancer but when a team cuts a player under contract or asks them to take a paycut “it’s just business”. Interesting.

Contracts in the NFL only loosely fit the definition of what a "contract" is intended to be. Basically an NFL contract is a salary/payment structure and anything beyond the current year is essentially meaningless.

A really exceptional player has the ability to essentially void their contract every 2-3 years, regardless of the terms of the contract - the team also has the ability to release a player they feel isn't meeting their standards while only being on the hook for a portion of what was agreed upon by both parties.

It's a two-way street, in a sense. Because teams can release a player with little regard to what was agreed upon in the contract, players are more inclined to fight for more money when they have played to a level that exceeds the "going rate" for that position. As unsavory as a holding-out player can seem, it acts as a form of "checks and balances" for the player/team dynamic.

Where it gets a little muddled in the public perception is that for a team to use their leverage by releasing an "underperforming" player it can easily be explained away as "we are doing what it best for the team" - which makes fans happy because, that money will go to someone potentially better than the released player and equal more wins.

In order for a player to use their leverage, they have to withhold their services and force the team to give them more resources than were originally allotted for that player - which of course means that there is less of the pie to go towards resigning other players or brining in new players.

In the eyes of fans - that's a bad thing. So the player seeking more money is usually vilified.


The biggest issue is that it's all extremely unbalanced. Only the upper-tier players hold the negotiating leverage. Guys like Murray are in the "good, but very replaceable" area, so they have little leverage in negotiating for more money.

Often, as we saw with Murray, teams will balance the books on the backs of those players. They will essentially come with the ultimatum - "you are overpaid for your production level. Take a pay cut or we will release you."

The player can agree to that, if they agree with the assessment - then they play out the new terms and walk when the contract is done. Or they can say, "I don't agree with the assessment - or I do but would rather play somewhere else for less money than stay where I'm undervalued." Which is what Murray chose - and he will likely go to the Ravens where he will be on a good team.
 

bobad

Son of Adam
VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
25,204
Reaction score
18,005
Location
Saints Country
Offline
I kept wondering why Murray didn't get the ball more, now I know. I knew it wasn't his performance.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom