The business of the NFL should be quiet next week as the long seven-month period of player contract activity draws to a close. Yes, there will be some contract extensions during the season, along with the natural churn at the bottom of the roster, but in-season mode means the slow time of year for front offices and agents.  

With these final days approaching the in-season deadline, there are a few contract loose ends to tie up. Specifically, there are three wide receiver situations where I have predicted the following outcomes: Deal, no deal and deal (but not sure what team).

Deal

Despite what seemed to be interminable contract negotiations with CeeDee Lamb and Dak Prescott, the Cowboys were very much on brand in these negotiations. 

Every team has a reputation and a résumé that is (or should be) known by every agent entering into negotiations with them. Similarly, every agent and agency has a reputation and résumé that is (or should be) known by every team negotiator. For the Cowboys, that reputation is to wait until the deadline—whatever that may be—and then pay the player a top-of-market contract. This is the ultimate “deadlines spur action” contract with a “deadlines spur action” team.

And that is exactly what happened with Lamb, with reports suggesting an average of $34 million a year, putting the wide receiver at the top of the pay scale for an escalated position. Of course, the devil is in the details. Beyond the splashy average in those extension years, I will look at cash flow over the first year, two years and three years, level of guarantee (a record $38 million signing bonus for the position, according to reports) and the key question of when the Cowboys can exit the deal without further obligation. Lamb is already the beneficiary of a positional market that has escalated dramatically in the last couple of years, and he is the latest to ride that wave.

As for Prescott, I have been on record for months saying he created the most leverage of any player in the NFL, primarily by negotiating a four-year contract three years ago. My sense since their playoff loss to the Packers is that the Cowboys will ride out the last year of Prescott’s contract (and Mike McCarthy’s deal) to an uncertain future with both. Of course, as a deadline team, they could still end up paying Prescott a record contract either in the next week or next season. But as a pending free agent who can’t be franchise tagged, Prescott has set himself up for the largest contract in NFL history by eschewing the longer contracts that so many other quarterbacks have taken. 

No Deal

On the other end of the spectrum from the Cowboys are the Cincinnati Bengals. In recent NFL franchise valuations done by Sportico, the Cowboys were the highest valued team ($10.3 billion) and the Bengals were the lowest valued team ($4.7 billion). That dichotomy reminds me of the constant sparring I witnessed at league meetings between Jerry Jones and Mike Brown. Jones was visibly frustrated by owners such as Brown reaping the benefits of large-market teams such as the Cowboys and effortlessly sharing revenue without applying equal effort in marketing. Those sessions were quite revealing.

Jamar Chase is in the same situation as Lamb contractually, but operating very differently strategically. Rather than holding out, he is holding in, withholding his full participation in protest of his contract to avoid training camp fines. Knowing the reputation and résumé of the Bengals is far different than that of the Cowboys, he and his agent have not trusted the team to eventually waive training camp fines, so he is there—in the words of Marshawn Lynch—so he doesn’t get fined. 

But, again, Chase is dealing with a different situation than Jones. Brown will not be compromised by a hold-in like Jones would be by a holdout. Yes, this deal could happen and the deadline of the season could produce a top-of-market contract extension, but my sense is that it will not. I believe that Chase will have to play out the last year of his contract without a new deal, and may have to deal with the franchise tag scenario that his teammate, Tee Higgins, is now dealing with this year (I also believe the Bengals never intended to sign Higgins, content to “rent” him rather than sign him long term).

Chase is both fortunate to be a wide receiver in an exploding market, but unfortunate to be playing for a team that, while they met the market with their quarterback, is as tough as any in the league in extracting top-level contracts.

Deal (not sure which team)

Brandon Aiyuk’s hold-in strategy appears to have achieved its desired result in San Francisco: creating enough anxiety for the team’s front office for them to act in the player’s best interest, whether an upgraded contract, a trade or both. And speaking from the perspective of a former front office executive, that strategy, from a player point of view, is much more effective than holding out. Teams don’t worry about holdouts—they’re out of sight, out of mind, and will eventually be there—but hold-ins cause some angst among front offices.

Aiyuk has caused angst for the 49ers by demanding a contract they are not prepared to give him, and, reportedly, vetoing potential trades they had negotiated.  

Initially, it seemed Aiyuk’s intransigence had some value for the 49ers, as they were able to leverage multiple teams in an “auction”—much like the Houston Texans did with Deshaun Watson a couple of years ago—as teams had to meet the 49ers’ trade price before talking to Aiyuk’s agent about a new contract. But Aiyuk has reportedly hijacked the 49ers’ leverage, vetoing trades to the New England Patriots and Cleveland Browns.  

Very few players in the NFL have no-trade clauses, and they are usually highly leveraged quarterbacks such as Prescott, Lamar Jackson and Patrick Mahomes.  Of course, the 49ers could still trade him, but an acquiring team does not want to give up assets for a player that does not want to be there.

The latest in this long-running saga is that Aiyuk may be considering the 49ers contract offer or a trade to the Pittsburgh Steelers or perhaps the Washington Commanders. But I would think the Steelers and Commanders are not offering the same level of trade package that the Patriots and Browns did; otherwise, that deal would have been consummated.  

My sense here is Aiyuk does achieve a new contract that falls in line with the upper echelon of young wide receivers, although I am not sure with which team. I would probably think the Steelers, but the 49ers are clearly still in the picture. Either way, Aiyuk has created negotiating strength through his discontent, not something NFL management is happy about.

Player-team relations in the NFL are usually heavily tilted to management in terms of leverage, but Aiyuk and his agent have turned that around in this situation.