The 2026 Free Agency Thread

[heisenberg]

I saw that, but I don't understand that concept of a legal substance being a probationary violation.... seems incongruous (again... not arguing in favor of the player!)

Its quite common actually.

People on probation are frequently required to abstain from alcohol and subject to testing.

 

[Faithful Fan]

More seriously, if LMC can come in and give us 2 splash plays a game, on average, say 30-35 receptions at 15.5 ypc?

Completely realistic, that’s close to what he was doing when he got hurt.

The upside for Aiyuk vs. Diggs is that Aiyuk is 28 and Diggs is 32.

That and the fact he played with Jayden at ASU.

 

[Anselmheifer]

Stefan seems to be suggestive by that the interest in him might not be hypothetical.

 

[SkinsFTW]

Stefan seems to be suggestive by that the interest in him might not be hypothetical.

What?

They can't sign Diggs yet!

What will everyone talk about on the next 50 pages? 😂

 

[Primus Porcus]

I saw that, but I don't understand that concept of a legal substance being a probationary violation.... seems incongruous (again... not arguing in favor of the player!)

Legality has nothing to do with it.

It’s legal to go out of town, but a lot of probations stipulate you can’t leave the county without consent from your probation officer.

Probation terms can dictate pretty much anything they choose, it’s just an out of jail imprisonment. No different than testing positive for weed while in prison… do that and you catch another charge.

 

[Riggo44]

Legality has nothing to do with it

I read this in Clint Eastwoods voice...

 

[Chris]

Hope y’all are sitting down…social media reports that Aiyuk’s agent fired him are not true. Hard to fathom I know.

 

[skinsinparadise]

Hope y’all are sitting down…social media reports that Aiyuk’s agent fired him are not true. Hard to fathom I know.

That's good, but lol speaking for myself what's going on with his agent wasn't my top concern about him, and none of that segment was reassuring to me, it just doubles down on the concerns.

But heck still I'd take Aiyuk over nothing. Will see.

 

[burgold]

The whole narrative was weird. An agent can certainly choose to part ways, but an agent can not fire a client. A client can fire their agent. Unfortunately, I know this, I once had to fire mine. It was a very difficult decision. She was a lovely and good person, but not only did she fail me, but she got me stuck in a terrible situation that I had the forsight to see, she talked me into, and then couldn't get me out of.

 

[HTTR]

Still hoping for a receiver

 

[Chris]

The whole narrative was weird. An agent can certainly choose to part ways, but an agent can not fire a client. A client can fire their agent. Unfortunately, I know this, I once had to fire mine. It was a very difficult decision. She was a lovely and good person, but not only did she fail me, but she got me stuck in a terrible situation that I had the forsight to see, she talked me into, and then couldn't get me out of.

I ‘fired’ more than 1 personal training client. I even sent them back their money without being asked. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[MartinC]

The whole narrative was weird. An agent can certainly choose to part ways, but an agent can not fire a client. A client can fire their agent. Unfortunately, I know this, I once had to fire mine. It was a very difficult decision. She was a lovely and good person, but not only did she fail me, but she got me stuck in a terrible situation that I had the forsight to see, she talked me into, and then couldn't get me out of.

What’s the practical difference between firing someone and “choosing to part ways’?

 

[burgold]

It may feel like a semantic differnce, but it's an important distinction. The agent works for the client. You don't want to cede your power to the agent even if you want it to be a close partnership.

 

[Conn]

The whole narrative was weird. An agent can certainly choose to part ways, but an agent can not fire a client. A client can fire their agent. Unfortunately, I know this, I once had to fire mine. It was a very difficult decision. She was a lovely and good person, but not only did she fail me, but she got me stuck in a terrible situation that I had the forsight to see, she talked me into, and then couldn't get me out of.

This is just nomenclature. Perhaps “fired” isn’t the correct term for when a lawyer/agent/manager type drops a client. But in other industries where vendors or service providers drop clients or service users, “fired” is used frequently in casual conversation. It’s the same thing either way so I don’t think that word usage ever made the story weird. It’s not like this would be a unique situation, for instance Josh Gordon was dropped by his representation at some point along the way, and other players with off-field troubles have had it happen as well.

Aiyuk is exactly the type of player/situation where it wouldn’t be crazy surprising to see him lose his representation (and likely hire someone else) because his erratic and non-standard behavior likely lost some firm lots of dollars, and he likely ignored lots of advice along the way doing his own thing.

So while it’s probably a positive in his narrative if his longtime agent didn’t part ways with him, it’s not like it was ever that far-fetched. There just wasn’t much reporting on it.

But just to repeat, the meaning of the (false?) report/rumor was the same whether the term “fired” was used or not. Everyone knows what it means and it’s absolutely used in some industries with similar relationships.

 

[Ashburn Dave]

I ‘fired’ more than 1 personal training client. I even sent them back their money without being asked. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Can you fire someone that you don't employ?

 

[Chris]

Can you fire someone that you don't employee?

In the common understanding of the term’s strict interpretation of the definition? No. In practical application…you betcha. An agreement, either implied, verbal or written is a defacto contract and can be terminated by either side. Of course there are potential legal aspects that can be triggered in the evidence of breach if either party wishes to pursue that route.

 

[Ashburn Dave]

In the common understanding of the term’s strict interpretation of the definition? No. In practical application…you betcha. An agreement, either implied, verbal or written is a defacto contract and can be terminated by either side. Of course there are potential legal aspects that can be triggered in the evidence of breach if either party wishes to pursue that route.

I get the gist of what you're saying but.

Technically, you cannot directly "fire" someone you do not employ, as you lack the legal hiring and firing authority over them. However, you can effectively remove them from your business or project by severing your relationship with their actual employer or terminating their contract.

 

[Chris]

Potato potahto. Instead of getting tied up in the strict linguistics of the term ‘fired’, I prefer looking at it as one party in a business relationship deciding that they want to end it. That is practically the same action worded differently but the result is the same.

When a lawyer in a court case decides that they no longer wish to represent their client and presents/pleads that to a judge, the lawyer has, for all intents and purposes, effectively ‘fired’ that client.

 

[Ashburn Dave]

I'll take potato.

 

[Discobob]

I'll take potato.