10/25/2014 Update: Late last evening, Ray Rice’s grievance hit the Ravens’ Salary Cap. When a player files a grievance against the team, the CBA dictates that 40% of the amount claimed in the grievance shall be applied to the team’s Salary Cap, pending the outcome of the grievance. The Ravens’ Cap reduced from $5,545,087 to $4,133,322. The $1,411,765 deduction represents exactly 40% of the $3, 529,412 that Rice has claimed in his grievance. Once the grievance is decided, the total amount of the grievance will count against the Cap. If the amount is less than the 40% already counting, the team’s Cap will be credited the appropriate amount so that the accurate amount of the grievance award will be counting against the Cap. There was some discussion on the local airwaves that, no matter what the outcome, Rice’s grievance would not affect the team’s Salary Cap. It is now clear that that will not be the case, and as explained below, this grievance could have a major impact on the team’s Cap.
Late Tuesday evening, news broke that former Ravens RB Ray Rice filed a grievance against the team claiming he had been wrongfully terminated.
This grievance against the Ravens was filed in addition to Rice’s grievance against the NFL for imposing two punishments on him for a single offense.
In that grievance, Rice’s will argue that the indefinite suspension imposed on him after the second elevator video became public, violates the CBA’s express prohibition against two punishments for a single offense. This “double jeopardy” argument would appear to have a strong possibility for succeeding against the league, unless the NFL can prove that Rice lied to the Commissioner about the severity of the altercation and that the second penalty is being imposed for that, different offense.
The grievance against the Ravens would appear to have far less of a chance of success because teams can release players for any reason – or, really, no reason at all. This right is CBA protected and releasing a player is not considered to be “punishment” under the terms of the CBA, so the “double jeopardy” argument that may work very well against the NFL, would not seem to carry much weight against the Ravens.
The news of Rice’s grievance against the Ravens has left more than a few NFL pundits scratching their heads:
Ray Rice may defeat the NFL but odds stacked against him in new legal challenge against Ravens. NFL teams have wide latitude to cut players.
— Michael McCann (@McCannSportsLaw) October 22, 2014
@YesImMatt @AMAAS Rice likely wants more money from Ravens, but hard to see a viable legal argument. Cutting a player isn’t suspending him.
— Michael McCann (@McCannSportsLaw) October 22, 2014
Rice grievance v. Ravens curious. Teams cut players for many reasons, even off suspended lists. Have always had discretion to set roster.
— Andrew Brandt (@adbrandt) October 22, 2014
There have been plenty of instances of players being suspended and then released or even released before the suspension was actually imposed. In none of those cases was the player ever entitled to any further money from the team (unless there was still future guaranteed salaries involved).
As such, it would appear that Rice – even claiming “double jeopardy” in his Ravens grievance – would have little chance of success against the Ravens.
However, if he did, the Ravens would owe Rice $3,529,412, which represents the balance of his 2014 salary.
This is quite critical because, if the Ravens owe him the balance of his salary, that amount would seemingly have to be counted against the Ravens’ Salary Cap. A player’s salary, if earned, counts against the Cap. Guaranteed salary paid after a player is released counts against the Cap. An injury settlement, agreed to by the team and the player, counts against the Cap. An award in an injury grievance, filed against a team for releasing an injured player without an injury settlement or being placed on IR, counts against the Cap.
An injury grievance would seem to be very akin to Rice’s situation as it is filed because the team allegedly violated the terms of the CBA by releasing the player. If Rice is successful with his grievance, he will similarly have to prove that the Ravens violated the terms of the CBA by wrongfully releasing him.
Obviously, Rice’s situation is rather unique – and a case of first impression – but it would certainly appear that, much like with an injury grievance, if the Ravens are forced to pay Rice’s salary, it will have to be counted against the team’s Cap.
Whether it counts against this year’s Cap or next year’s Cap will depend on when the grievance is actually decided, but either way, that’s $3.529M in Cap space that they won’t have next year (assuming they would have otherwise been able to carry that unused amount over from 2014 to 2015).
There are two other wrinkles involved if Rice did, in fact, win his grievance. First, he would also have to win his grievance against the NFL for the Ravens to have to pay him, because a player who is suspended is not entitled to be paid during the suspension. It would, of course, be rather unlikely that Rice would win his grievance against the Ravens, but lose his grievance against the league.
More likely, though – again, if Rice wins – is that the Ravens could seek “salary forfeiture” against Rice due to his original 2-game suspension (which is not subject to Rice’s grievance against the NFL).
The CBA allows for teams to seek “salary forfeiture” for past bonus money paid to a player if the player becomes “unavailable” due to suspension, holdout or retirement. Article IV, Section 9(a)(iii) states as follows:
(iii) Regular Season. If the player is not subject to Subsection (ii) above, and commits a Forfeitable Breach for the first time that League Year during the regular season, the player may be required to forfeit up to twenty-five percent (25%) of his Forfeitable Salary Allocations upon missing his first regular season game. If player’s Forfeitable Breach continues beyond four (4) consecutive weeks, then player may be required to forfeit up to his remaining Forfeitable Salary Allocations on a proportionate weekly basis (i.e., one-seventeenth for each missed regular season week after the fourth week).
This would allow the Ravens to recover 25% of Rice’s $3M bonus proration (the “Forfeitable Salary Allocation”) based on his original 2-game suspension. So, the Ravens could at least minimize the Cap hit a bit and offset the $3.529M to be paid to Rice by withholding $750K in salary forfeiture.
The Ravens have already had this right, but since Rice was released, there was no further salary to forfeit and, therefore, no way for the Ravens to recoup that $750K.
So, if Rice is now successful with his grievance, it would most certainly be expected that the Ravens would move to trigger the salary forfeiture.
13 Responses
Yes,A team may release a player at anytime but…the Ravens timing is tied to that 2nd tape in the elevator video that went national. The Ravens had decided he would be paid and on the team. He was never convicted of any crime. He WAS the starting running back. Biscotti had seen the first tape and Rice told the team the truth and this owner did not see fit to talk to him himself. No doubt the offering him a job in a wriiten text will also come into play. It will be interesting no doubt!
JWS, I don’t think it will matter. Teams have released players in the past due to poor conduct and they’ve never had to worry about player grievances. The grievance against the league on the other hand is an altogether different story IMO.
This case is very different than others. The Ravens agreed to let Rice play after reviewing his case and then dumped him after the 2nd video surfaced. The video is the only reason why he was cut. The Ravens and the NFL knew he punched his then-girlfriend in the elevator, the only thing that changed was that the video was graphic and shocking. We don’t know what kind of deal was struck between Rice and the team prior to release of the second video, so it’s not wise to come to conclusions. I doubt if this deal was merely done with a handshake. There might be some signed papers.
Why would the Ravens make a deal before the second video? That makes no sense.
Agree TL…NFL teams have and can cut/release players pretty much anytime they deem necessary.
Do you know RR told him exactly what happened? I doubt that he described to Biscotti that he hit her so hard she flew into the wall of elevator and was out cold before she fell into a twisted pile on the floor unconscious. What makes more sense is that RR’s story fell short of describing the event and when it was finally viewed, it was more horrific than imagined.
everything every one has written is true, but in Ray Rice’S case the Ravens have said he was only released because of video, so there is more to it, they let him slid then changed their minds because they sw the tape. that was wrong
I don’t necessarily think it’s a matter of right or wrong because it stills follows “at will” employment. The team doesn’t have to establish a just cause or reason for the termination even if they were acting in reaction to public outcries over the 2nd video. I don’t disagree with you but at will employment/contracts don’t have to be justified unfortunately.
The lawyers are now heavily involved…and lawyers always get their money…so the Ravens vs RayRay looks to be quite a payday…for the lawyers on both sides!
I suspect Ray Rice is probably destroying any goodwill he may still have had with the team’s owner and the fans. I am going to replay Biscotti’s Rice interview, but I think Biscotti essentially said that the 2nd tape was different than what had been conveyed by Rice to the GM and Head Coach. Also, if Rice did not come clean with the NFL before his original suspension, his double jeopardy claim will hold no water. I wonder if Biscotti still wants to hire Rice for $100,000 per year in the future??? It’s sad to watch the Ray Rice trainwreck/implosion. Thank God that Biscotti moved quickly to release Rice or the Ravens would now be in the middle of the public drama surrounding Rice’s appeal.
I’ll bet Rice’s lawyer is not handling these grievances on a contingency basis!!!
They should have dropped Rice ages ago regardless. Even in the Super Bowl year, in Cam Cameron’s “run run pass” offense, Rice was captain “3rd and long” for Flacco. This is the first season of Joe’s career that I remember where most of his throws weren’t on 3rd and long.
The Ravens Panicked and cut him after the video went public. I’m disappointed in management for not being honest in the first place. two things, when does knocking out your wife look pretty? If you push her down the stairs and she gets knocked out from “hitting the railing” is that better? They operated like every team in the NFL does and frankly continues to do. Secondly if they are now SO appalled by domestic violence release T sizzle tomorrow for his known incidents with his wife from years ago. Then go out and kick out all the other guys who have been indicted for it. Not saying Ray was right but this is a total PR move by the Ravens and the NFL and they let Ray hang for centuries of turning the blind eye. If there’s a hint that the NFL had the video and saw it Ray needs to be paid ever cent he was supposed to make this year and goddell should get fired immediately. Not sure what to do the Ravens as they were just following quid pro quo in a league full of crazy dudes.