Written by Mark Maske at WashingtonPost.com
So now the question seemingly has become a financial one, at least in part, for Colin Kaepernick: Is he willing to accept less money to play for the Denver Broncos than he currently is guaranteed from the San Francisco 49ers?
Why would he be so inclined?
There are some reasons in favor of making such a move, of course. But it is not a clear-cut decision.
The quarterback’s salary of $11.9 million for the 2016 season became guaranteed Friday under the terms of his contract with the 49ers. The deal, without further adjustment, already was described as being team-friendly when Kaepernick signed it. Now the Broncos apparently would like Kaepernick to rework the contract and agree to a reduced salary if they’re going to complete a trade with the 49ers for Kaepernick that, according to a report by ESPN, otherwise is basically in place. The network reported that the Broncos are willing to pay $7 million of Kaepernick’s salary and want Kaepernick either to forfeit the rest or the 49ers to pay the difference.
One person familiar with the situation described the remaining differences over Kaepernick’s salary as “considerable” late Saturday, saying plenty of negotiating work remained to be done for the deal to go through and calling it unclear whether a compromise could be struck.
It generally does not seem advisable for a player to agree to a reduced salary when that salary already has been guaranteed. NFL players have relatively brief careers and must make what they can, while they can. Do they really want to hand money back to teams? The leverage to get a player to reduce his salary in most cases is the threat of the player being released and not getting any of that salary; in this case, that threat has been removed.
To continue reading this article, click here.
