Micah Parsons’ Contract Grievance Against the NFL and Cowboys
The future contract of Cowboys star pass rusher Micah Parsons isn’t the only one in question. Parsons has a pending grievance against the NFL and the Cowboys regarding his current contract, a person familiar with the situation told The Dallas Morning News. Pro Football Talk was first to report the existence of the grievance.
Related
Parsons is entering the last year of his rookie deal. For first-round picks, teams can pick up a fifth-year option on those players. The compensation is determined by accolades and playing time, but also position. Based on the NFL’s formula, Parsons was designated as a defensive end instead of as a linebacker, the position at which he was drafted.
Contract Details and Position Designation
If Parsons were designated as a linebacker, his base salary for this upcoming season would be just over $24 million. Instead, he’s expected to have a base salary of $21.34 million as a defensive end. That’s a drop of more than $2.5 million. The Cowboys have previously cited the NFL’s formula and the automatic designation for the decision.
NFL’s Response and Previous Precedents
An NFL spokesman told The News on Wednesday that the league “will vigorously defend against this claim.” Parsons, according to Pro Football Focus, played 515 snaps last year on the defensive line, compared to 241 at linebacker. There is one detail that could be up for interpretation, however. Of those 515 snaps at defensive line, 385 were at a position PFF deemed as REO and LEO. That means a player who lined up outside the offensive tackle, but had their hand on the ground when the play was snapped.
There have been differences about position designations before when it comes to contracts. Back in 2014, Jimmy Graham — then with the New Orleans Saints — argued that he was a wide receiver and not a tight end based on where he lined up. That distinction carried a vast difference in terms of franchise tag compensation — over $5 million.
Comparison to Jimmy Graham’s Case
Graham had a case, too. He lined up in the slot or outside on nearly 67% of his passes the year before, according to ESPN. Ultimately, an independent arbitrator ruled that Graham was a tight end instead of a wide receiver. The Saints and Graham agreed to an extension after the ruling.
Implications for Parsons’ Future Contract
Parsons’ position distinction could be irrelevant if he and the Cowboys agree to a long-term extension. While that hangs in the balance, so does this other matter, however.
Twitter: @JoeJHoyt
Find more Cowboys coverage from The Dallas Morning News here.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Micah Parsons’ contract grievance against the NFL and Cowboys is a complex issue that involves the interpretation of his position designation and its impact on his compensation. The outcome of this grievance will have significant implications for Parsons’ future contract and the Cowboys’ salary cap. As the situation unfolds, fans will be keeping a close eye on the developments and hoping for a resolution that benefits both Parsons and the team.
FAQs
Q: What is Micah Parsons’ current contract status?
A: Parsons is entering the last year of his rookie deal, and the Cowboys have picked up his fifth-year option.
Q: What is the dispute about Parsons’ position designation?
A: The dispute is about whether Parsons should be designated as a linebacker or a defensive end, which affects his compensation. The NFL has designated him as a defensive end, but Parsons and his representatives argue that he should be considered a linebacker.
Q: How much does the position designation affect Parsons’ salary?
A: If Parsons were designated as a linebacker, his base salary for the upcoming season would be just over $24 million. As a defensive end, his base salary is expected to be $21.34 million, a difference of over $2.5 million.
Q: What is the NFL’s response to Parsons’ grievance?
A: The NFL has stated that it will “vigorously defend against this claim.”
Q: How does this situation compare to previous cases, such as Jimmy Graham’s?
A: Jimmy Graham’s case in 2014 involved a similar dispute over position designation, with Graham arguing that he was a wide receiver rather than a tight end. An independent arbitrator ultimately ruled in favor of the Saints, designating Graham as a tight end. Parsons’ case has some similarities, but the specifics of his situation are unique.
