The 2025 Free Agency Thread

Both the teams and the players have agreed to a contract between the owners and the NFLPA. All the individual contracts operate under the terms of that agreement, including who can cut who when, penalties for not showing up, etc. Don’t see anybody getting cheated.
 
Chris said:
The Terry McLaurin Fine Tracker

(I can’t determine whether or not missing Tuesday’s report and conditioning test day counts as a fineable offense under the CBA. So for the purpose of this little exercise I’m going to include it since I doubt his absence was a team approved one.)

Day 2 total- 100k (or 7,288 Chick-fil-A chicken sandwich meals)
Click to expand...
Why not Eastern Motors cars? Haha
 
Primus Porcus said:
Can i just say how happy I am that Harris and Co. are not swooping in and forcing the hand to sign Terry because of the fans? It's extremely refreshing to have an owner that's letting football people make football decisions.
Click to expand...
He wants to understand and he wants a hand/voice. Nothing wrong with that. I was one who was concerned with his presence a lot in those early drafts, but only concerned - if he was unduly applying any influence.
Since then it seems to have been the ideal situation: he was present to learn and have a voice, totally his right, but from the sound of things, nothing undue.

So that's truly great. He's a smart guy too, so I doubt his opinions are like, I don't know, Let's sign this dude my kid went to school with. Such a thing would be an absurdity.
 
Chris 44 said:
TM being out has to irritate DQ to no end. Not from an Xs Os standpoint but the fact the first question he had to answer at camp was about TM. DQ prides himself in togetherness and team...so much more going on than having to navigate the TM distraction. Grand scheme TM will sign and all will be well, but I know this has to really irritate him in the short term.
Click to expand...
Probably does, and probably should. This is valuable time. Every team is like a fresh organism that needs time to gel. He had a great year last year, he is a year-in, and year-out PERFORMER, even on some of our struggling RR teams. He's truly a great WR.

This, however, is really poor leadership with a new set of young WRs. The "room" is not going to be as strong as it could be. McLaurin needs to show up sooner rather than later. I don't think AP is going to necessarily hold it against him immediately in the negotiations... but yeah, he could, and few would blame him at this point. This isn't the Snyder years anymore. Not saying AP is perfect or that negotiations will always be airtight, but I think AP will handle the other side with respect. So the McLaurin comments are really unfortunate when you look at it that way. I guess we'll have to get more experience with AP to be totally fair and make sure we aren't wearing B&G glasses again. Mine were super dusty.
 
Conn said:
Teams cut and release players under contract all the time. Why are the players held to a different standard? Pretty sure that’s what he’s getting at
Click to expand...
Yes they absolutely do, and abide by the contract therein.

Guaranteed money is paid at cut-time, etc. It's still a legally binding contract. I guess what you are saying is, he is holding out and not getting paid, sort of like self-cutting? I am not sure that's a valid take, but it's definitely interesting. I guess it depends on how you look at the contract. I think what has come to be understood is:
- the only guarantee is the guaranteed money. That's IT. Nothing else is "guaranteed" from the team's side. So, that is now taken to be "understood."
- I guess now there is a question on what is guaranteed for the team? They guarantee the money. They get one year? They get as much as they guaranteed, as in, if they guaranteed money over 3-years, they get 3-years? I don't think that's what's happening. So, it seems like there is no guarantee from the player's side. I am not on the team's side, but it's unclear to me what the players are guaranteeing now in return for the guaranteed money. They just complain when the market changes.

That's how markets work. We all live with that. Don't sign unless you understand the risks. I have no problem with the idea that when guaranteed money is done, you want to hold out, because at that time, you can be cut (just like you said). Once the contract year is started? Once any money is guaranteed though? I think that becomes a valid part of what you signed, they are now on the hook to pay you, you are on the hook to play.

That is how I see it, at least until someone explains to me how my logic is off - which of course it can be. I feel like I scratch the surface in my full comprehension of all of the ins and outs right now, but I am interested in learning.
 
Conn said:
Teams cut and release players under contract all the time. Why are the players held to a different standard? Pretty sure that’s what he’s getting at
Click to expand...
Sure but that’s not breaking the contract. Those possibilities are agreed to as part of the deal. If the money is guaranteed the player gets paid regardless. If not, then it’s understood that they can be cut or traded as the team sees fit. If cut, they become a free agent which gives them the ability to seek their maximum value elsewhere. There is a labor agreement with the players union that prevents teams from not honoring their end of the contract. If they refused to pay the player guaranteed money that was owed it would be different, but that’s not what’s happening when a player is released.
 
Conn said:
Teams cut and release players under contract all the time. Why are the players held to a different standard? Pretty sure that’s what he’s getting at
Click to expand...


Just a couple general comments here.. not directing specifically at you, just clarity on my own opinion.

1. Players / Teams do in fact sign a contract. When a team cuts the player under contract, they honor the contract with what is guaranteed. It's understood by both sides that at any time the contract can be terminated by the team, and if that happens then $XXX is paid out.

2. Players are not afforded the ability to void a contract in the same sense that a team can. The player can sit out and sacrifice his pay, as well as the length remaining over a very short NFL career. That said, he cannot then go play for, and get paid by, a different team the same way a team can cut a player and immediately sign / pay a replacement.

3. In this instance, the player is still fulfilling his contract. He get 17 game checks per season and to this point has not missed a single game. While I understand the training camp aspect, technically he has done nothing to 'not' honor his contract.

4. His intention is not to effect the current contract. It's beyond the current contract. The 'new' money he's looking for is in aspect of 2026 and beyond. This is a very VERY common practice in the NFL.

Just like the players enter a contract with understand that they can be released, and if they are then 'x' will happen, the team understands entering it that they will likely be looking to re-sign that player prior to their final season. It's also understood that players will look to capitalize on outplaying their contract. Terry has outplayed his contract with the growth of the market.


It's not a perfect situation by any means but at this point I don't think it's fair to look at either side like they're 'in the wrong' here. For years Terry has just shut up and played. We all understand how poorly managed the team was. The absolutely terrible investment in the quarterback position. The drama of multiple name changes, multiple coaching changes. OWNERSHIP change. Poor talent evaluation. He's always kept his head down and been an exemplary employee.

That all said, Adam Peters wasn't here for any of that. He personally owes Terry nothing. The numbers are going to be largely based on his value going forward, not what he did before.

And that is all OK. Terry can absolutely be justified in wanting to maximize what is likely the final large contract opportunity is he going to be afforded, while Peters can absolutely want to maintain what he thinks is the best thing for the team long term. This is all standard practice when you're actually negotiating with premium talent... something we haven't done in a long time.
 
SkinsNumberOne said:
Yes they absolutely do, and abide by the contract therein.

Guaranteed money is paid at cut-time, etc. It's still a legally binding contract. I guess what you are saying is, he is holding out and not getting paid, sort of like self-cutting? I am not sure that's a valid take, but it's definitely interesting. I guess it depends on how you look at the contract. I think what has come to be understood is:
- the only guarantee is the guaranteed money. That's IT. Nothing else is "guaranteed" from the team's side. So, that is now taken to be "understood."
- I guess now there is a question on what is guaranteed for the team? They guarantee the money. They get one year? They get as much as they guaranteed, as in, if they guaranteed money over 3-years, they get 3-years? I don't think that's what's happening. So, it seems like there is no guarantee from the player's side. I am not on the team's side, but it's unclear to me what the players are guaranteeing now in return for the guaranteed money. They just complain when the market changes.

That's how markets work. We all live with that. Don't sign unless you understand the risks. I have no problem with the idea that when guaranteed money is done, you want to hold out, because at that time, you can be cut (just like you said). Once the contract year is started? Once any money is guaranteed though? I think that becomes a valid part of what you signed, they are now on the hook to pay you, you are on the hook to play.

That is how I see it, at least until someone explains to me how my logic is off - which of course it can be. I feel like I scratch the surface in my full comprehension of all of the ins and outs right now, but I am interested in learning.
Click to expand...
In fact, in my zest to see it from the players' perspective, I will say this:
The teams' complexity in contract structuring may have fed this problem. For example, it's not cut and dry like chunks, you go through "guaranteed" period and then enter "non-guaranteed" - it's mixed. So that means figuring out when the team may just cut you is not some obvious equation. You could be cut at almost any time and then you're out on the street with a severance of guaranteed money in your pocket.

That structuring, yes, I can see how players DO feel like they have the right to hold out at any time.

For example, OK, a player gets a contract with a rough 10m AAV non-guaranteed. It varies a bit but let's say for argument's sake it is no more or less than 2m from 10, so we'll consider it as 10.
Then, in terms of guarantees, let's say it's a 5y, and the guarantees are y1=15m, y2=12m, y3=10m, y4=8m, y5=4m.
Now, let's say by the team's internal discussions, the OUT before y4 contract year is 8+4=12. They are fine cutting bait then. The OUT prior to y3 is 22m. If the player is bad, they are fine paying that to get rid of him. Other considerations that are opaque may be in play too.

So yes, the team may cut the player and the player's fortunes are altered considerably. CONSIDERABLY.

So... yes, when you look at it that way, you can kind of see why the players do get worked up to get their values right even in mid-contract. The complexity of these contracts and the limited ability to have clarity on how long the team will actually retain them in spite of the "contract" -- it leads to this kind of relationship.
 
The tweet below is almost for sure true, judging by the leaks thus far.

I am guessing still the team is around 25-27 as a a negotiation initial position, thinking worse case post negotiation it ends up 28-30. And Terry and his agent aren't happy with even 30 because to them its a "status" statement to get paid with the younger class listed in that tweet who are arguably better.

I know some fans are frustrated by Peters. But heck if its going down like this, I'd be frustrated with Terry. Because there is a good chance basically if Terry's agent is saying that he's as good as AJ Brown and Ceede, etc -- AND the fact that these dudes are younger and might not even have hit their prime yet is 100% irrelevant to the point.

Like I was saying the other day. Terry isn't a diva on the field. Not a diva with fans. He's a 10 out of 10 on that front -- he's awesome. But it feels like when it comes to the idea of how he's valued financially and how he stacks with receivers who most think are better than him -- he comes off VERY sensitive and diva like judging by his 2 negotiations, holding out of camp and public statements.

I know Terry said in his press conference a week or so ago its not about the money but what the money symbolizes. But that comes off a bit self serving. On a small scale, It will be like asking a friend to buy me dinner, me picking the most expensive item on the menu, and then I'd tell that friend, its not about the money, but its about the symbolism of them valuing my friendship. Lol, I think my friend would be pissed off if I said-did that.

It's easy for the recepient of the money to say its not about that -- when the outcome of the transaction and the bottom line is totally in the end about the money. If Terry judges the team's love for him 100% by how much they pay him -- then he's 100% transactional. And that's fine. Plenty of players-people do that. But not everyone.

 
Last edited:
skinsinparadise said:
The tweet below is almost for sure true, judging by the leaks thus far.

I am guessing still the team is around 25-27 as a a negotiation initial position, thinking worse case post negotiation it ends up 28-30. And Terry and his agent aren't happy with even 30 because to them its a "status" statement to get paid with the younger class listed in that tweet who are arguably better.

I know some fans are frustrated by Peters. But heck if its going down like this, I'd be frustrated with Terry. Because there is a good chance basically if Terry's agent is saying that he's as good as AJ Brown and Ceede, etc -- AND the fact that these dudes are younger and might not even have hit their prime yet is 100% irrelevant to the point.

Like I was saying the other day. Terry isn't a diva on the field. Not a diva with fans. He's a 10 out of 10 on that front -- he's awesome. But it feels like when it comes to the idea of how he's valued financially and how he stacks with receivers who most think are better than him -- he comes off VERY sensitive and diva like judging by his 2 negotiations, holding out of camp and public statements.

I know Terry said in his press conference a week or so ago its not about the money but what the money symbolizes. But that comes off a bit self serving. On a small scale, It will be like asking a friend to buy me dinner, me picking the most expensive item on the menu, and then I'd tell that friend, its not about the money, but its about the symbolism of them valuing my friendship. Lol, I think my friend would be pissed off if I said-did that.

It's easy for the recepient of the money to say its not about that -- when the outcome of the transaction and the bottom line is totally in the end about the money. If Terry judges the team's love for him 100% by how much they pay him -- then he's 100% transactional. And that's fine. Plenty of players-people do that. But not everyone.

Click to expand...

Great post SIP. Whichever way you look at it or present, at the end of the day it is about the $ and his believed worth
 
DWinzit said:
Great post SIP. Whichever way you look at it or present, at the end of the day it is about the $ and his believed worth
Click to expand...

I seems pretty clear to me that it truly isn't about the $$$ first for Terry... he feels like he has been consistently underrated (likely going all the way back to OSU).

Fair or not, he probably sees being paid near the top of his position as vindication of his true value. He regularly uses language that shows the chip on his shoulder toward league sentiment and his perceived ranking.
 
Riggo44 said:
It's also Lake Lewis. He's only slightly more reliable than Dov Kleinman.
Click to expand...

It is. But the reason why I posted it was it dovetails perfectly with what Rapopport said and Nicki from the WP. It also is consistent with other reporters have said which is Terry wants to be in the same class payment wise of certain WRs.

And clearly those WRs comps for him aren't the over 30 guys like Evans and Adams. Terry's sensitivity of being included with the other 30 year old plus WRs is evident from his own statements -- he wants the age to be ignored.
 
Discobob said:
I seems pretty clear to me that it truly isn't about the $$$ first for Terry... he feels like he has been consistently underrated (likely going all the way back to OSU).

Fair or not, he probably sees being paid near the top of his position as vindication of his true value. He regularly uses language that shows the chip on his shoulder toward league sentiment and his perceived ranking.
Click to expand...

Absolutely comes off that way. Basically, I gather he thinks even if the team thinks its an overpay -- their overpay is a show of love. He at 31 (at the time of the next contract) is just as good as 26 year old Ceedee Lamb or AJ Brown. If they don't pay him like that it means they agree with the rest of the league that Terry isn't as good -- and that hurts him because he sees himself as good.

And why would 31-34 year old Terry be just as good as the younger version of him? It's because he's Terry "F" Mclaurin. He's our Marvel Super Hero and we believe in him. If he says it will be different with him and father time will not touch him, trust him that it will go down like that, simple as that.

I do think its possible that Terry doesn't care that much about the money as far as 27 million versus 34 million or whatever -- but its about the more the team pays -- the higher it indicates how they value him versus the rest of the league.

If so, that's an egostical or insecure perspective of how to tackle a contract -- does he really need that kind of validation? Does he not care that the extra 6 million of whatever could help them win a championship? Again look at some of the Tampa stars -- Evans, Godwin, L. David over the years, not only being amenable in negotiations but also even taking a hometown discount.

Terry not only doesn't have any desire to give a hometown discount but seems to want an overpay that screws the team he plays for to some extent. Some hyperbole on my end to make a point. But hearing that Terry was difficult in the previous negotiation and some in that FO thought it was an overpay back then -- feels like its round 2 of this.
 
Last edited:
Related aside to all of this, can anyone explain what the components of "2025 Cash" are in this?

I can't find it. Is it that they are missing some column called "Howie nonsense/magic" or am I just missing a component. I total the salary, the prorated bonus, and things like that and get to the 17m cap hit. What is the 2025 Cash number then? I saw people mentioning AJ makes 30+, how do we get there?

Just curious if Howie is doing things differently than we/others are or not.
 
Some excerpts from Barry Svrluga in WP:


Terry McLaurin’s holdout is a concern, not a crisis for the Commanders​

General Manager Adam Peters and the standout receiver should be able to come to an agreement, but it might be tricky.
July 23, 2025 at 2:38 p.m. EDTYesterday at 2:38 p.m. EDT

5 min
Summary32

Terry McLaurin wants a contract extension after his best statistical season. (Patrick Smith/Getty Images)
imrs.php

Column by Barry Svrluga
Let’s be clear about the Terry McLaurin situation: It’s uncomfortable, not unprecedented. Yes, practice began at Washington Commanders training camp Wednesday without the team’s top receiver and model citizen. No, this isn’t a nuclear standoff. It’s July, not September.

“It’s part of the business of the NFL,” Coach Dan Quinn said before the team’s initial workout in Ashburn. “I don’t judge or get too worked up about it.”


That’s reasonable. So for now, let’s take this as an interesting stalemate, one in which both sides have reasonable theoretical arguments.
McLaurin: “If I’m not there, who’s your No. 1 receiver? Deebo Samuel? He’s more of a Swiss army knife who has just one 1,000-yard receiving season in a six-year career. Journeyman Chris Moore, who lined up with the first team Wednesday morning? He has never caught more than 48 passes in a season. I haven’t caught fewer than 77 in each of the past five years. Enjoy that.”


General Manager Adam Peters: “Sure. But you’re really going to hold out into the regular season and not play under the final year of your current contract? Have fun forfeiting that money and hitting free agency in your age-31 season.”

So expect a deal. It feels every bit a when-not-if situation.

…..

In thinking about all this — and there is no more pertinent topic for a franchise that is coming off an NFC championship game appearance and has designs on the NFL’s biggest prizes — it’s important to acknowledge what we don’t know and to understand how that makes it almost impossible to side with either the team or the player. What is McLaurin asking for? What is the team offering? Is the gap in money? Or in years? Or in the guarantee? Or some combination of all of those elements?

And believing the sides will find common ground doesn’t mean it won’t be tricky finding it. The absence of McLaurin — a team guy, a standard-setter, always part of the solution and never a problem — shows that. The process is already not linear. There is, as Peters said, nuance.

And believing the sides will find common ground doesn’t mean it won’t be tricky finding it. The absence of McLaurin — a team guy, a standard-setter, always part of the solution and never a problem — shows that. The process is already not linear. There is, as Peters said, nuance.


That could well be in the company McLaurin is trying to keep. DK Metcalf, who was in the 2019 draft class that included McLaurin, signed a four-year, $132 million extension with Pittsburgh after arriving in an offseason trade with Seattle — though only two years and $60 million are guaranteed. That $33 million average annual value puts Metcalf fourth among wide receivers behind only Cincinnati’s Ja’Marr Chase, Minnesota’s Justin Jefferson and Dallas’s CeeDee Lamb — elite company.

McLaurin could easily look at that deal and think: “Well, in the past three seasons, I have more catches than Metcalf [238 to 222] for more yards [3,289 to 3,154] and have caught more touchdown passes [22 to 19]. How am I not worth his contract — at least?”


The team could counter with this: “Look, Terry, we love you. But you turn 30 between our second and third games this season. Metcalf is 27 and doesn’t turn 28 until December. You played four seasons at Ohio State. Metcalf played just three years at Mississippi. You’re from the same draft class with the same service time — but you’re not perfectly comparable because you’re more than two years older.”

….

There’s also a bizarre way to think about this: The fact that Peters and his front-office staff haven’t just handed McLaurin an open checkbook shows the franchise now handles things in a grown-up fashion. This isn’t a group that is going to sling money around in a way that affects roster construction in the future. Entering his second season, Peters still gets the benefit of the doubt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top