Frank Clark arrested

[oldtimer 8,686]

What Do Frank Clark's Arrests Mean for His Contract with the Chiefs?

Frank Clark may have lost millions of dollars because of his pair of arrests this offseason, and it could ultimately add flexibility for the Kansas City Chiefs.

 

CONNER CHRISTOPHERSON

56 MINUTES AGO

Kansas City Chiefs defensive end Frank Clark was arrested twice this offseason, and even if he doesn't see significant legal punishment, he could lose out on some money — and perhaps give the Chiefs some future flexibility.

Ignoring the legal specifics of Clark's story, there are potential consequences to Clark's arrests when it comes to his contract, and these ramifications could impact the Chiefs in a substantial way.

First things first, as reported by a few salary cap-focused organizations like Over the Cap and Spotrac, it is very likely that Clark's "guarantees" will void if he is suspended for any amount of time. The reason "guarantees" are in quotes will be explained later, but Clark’s $18.5 million base salary in 2021 is fully guaranteed, and that would be the money in danger.

The reason Clark's base salary this year is in question is because most contracts in the NFL have default clauses. One such default clause on most NFL contracts is that guaranteed money will void if a player violates the personal conduct policy of the NFL.

Has Clark violated that policy? It seems likely. This is the fifth bullet point of a list of prohibited conduct in the aforementioned personal conduct policy:

"Illegal possession of a gun or other weapon (such as explosives, toxic substances, and the like), or possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting."

It seems reasonable to assume that Clark's arrests for illegal firearm possession would be in violation of this clause.

If the NFL suspends Clark due to the guidelines in the personal conduct policy, the remaining guarantees on his contract are void.

So, could the Chiefs cut Clark after a suspension? Kind of. Yes. But it's complicated.

The Chiefs could then easily get out of Clark's $18.5 million guaranteed 2021 base salary. With no more guarantees on his contract through guaranteed base salary, Clark is quite a bit more cuttable. There is, however, still dead money.

 

Clark’s signing bonus of $19 million, salary prorating of $7 million and restructuring of $5 million are all dead cap hits on the salary cap to the tune of $6.8 million each year for the next three years. This money has already been paid to Clark in full, which is the reason it is harder to take back. Salary cap experts like Joel Corry doubt the Chiefs would be able to get much other than bonus money Clark would have made this year during any suspension he serves. This means that even with the base salary guarantees voided, the Chiefs would still have to deal with dead money if (or when) they cut Clark.

Despite the presence of dead money on Clark's contract, the possibility for the Chiefs to move on from Clark still remains.

The mechanics of cutting Clark are murky as of now. Corry, who does fantastic work with the salary cap, mentioned that the Chiefs would be on the hook for $6.8 million in dead money in 2021 and $13.6 million in dead money in 2022 (due to Clark being cut after June 1) if they cut Frank Clark between now and the start of the season. Other reporting has indicated that the dead money hits would be spread out differently, but the reality stays mostly the same in both cases: Clark is cuttable if his base salary guarantees are voided.

If the dead money is spread out as Corry suggests, the Chiefs would save $18.5 million against the salary cap in 2021 and $5.9 million against the 2022 salary cap by cutting Clark. This is a drastic change from only saving $500k this year by cutting Clark, all by his base salary being voided.

The real boon from cutting Clark is that the $18.5 million saved in 2021 can be carried over to 2022, creating a ton of salary cap room next year that is also usable this year.

If Clark's guarantees were not voided, the Chiefs would be forced to wait until the next offseason to cut Clark. The Chiefs would have to also designate him as a post-June 1 cut to get the maximum savings for the 2022 season, which pushes some dead money from 2022 into the 2023 offseason.

The voiding of the base salary this year accelerates this path by one year, and that one year could be vital. The extra year can be used to fit left tackle Orlando Brown Jr. and star safety Tyrann Mathieu under the salary cap. It could be used to retain a player like defensive tackle Derrick Nnadi who is playing on the last year of his contract this season. That extra year could even be used aggressively to get a free agent next offseason. The Chiefs would have more options and have them sooner if Clark were to be suspended and lose his guarantees.

Will the Chiefs take this path? That is the question as of now. Clark's guarantees will likely be voided, but general manager Brett Veach might not bite at the opportunity still. While Clark has underperformed so far in his Chiefs career, it is hard to reason that there are better defensive ends out on the market right now. Melvin Ingram has been a popular name thrown out for the Chiefs to sign, but the 32-year-old defender is on the wrong side of 30 and is coming off an injury. A reunion with Justin Houston is nice in theory, but that bridge could be burnt.

So, for a defensive end room lacking elite talent, is it worth losing the one starter who you can trust to at least be adequate at defensive end? The Chiefs might take that gamble and cut Clark regardless, considering that Chris Jones is on track to play more snaps at defensive end this year, but as it stands now, there are no public indications of what the Chiefs will do.

What is clear, however, is that the Chiefs will likely have options they didn't have earlier this offseason.

[Holmes4six! 968]

What does it mean for the chiefs and the exempt list now that his arraignment is scheduled for oct. ? 
 

[Handswarmer 645]

On 7/13/2021 at 8:13 PM, mex said:

magazine, rook.

I have slammed more of either in my M-16 and M-4 than most people ever will my 24 years in the military.

I can call it whatever I want, hunter guy.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

The Chiefs front office is very clever.  They must have planted those guns (It was probably the equipment manager).

 

 

[kkuenn 3,599]

23 minutes ago, Holmes4six! said:

What does it mean for the chiefs and the exempt list now that his arraignment is scheduled for oct. ? 
 

If the NFL puts him in the suspended list, they can cut him.  That is all that is needed to save the cap space.

[kkuenn 3,599]

17 minutes ago, Handswarmer said:

I have slammed more of either in my M-16 and M-4 than most people ever will my 24 years in the military.

I can call it whatever I want, hunter guy.

Well to be honest you use the clip to load the magazine. I was infantry too among other MOSs for almost 25 years. 

[oldtimer 8,686]

12 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

Well to be honest you use the clip to load the magazine. I was infantry too among other MOSs for almost 25 years. 

[reesebobby 5,663]

19 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

If the NFL puts him in the suspended list, they can cut him.  That is all that is needed to save the cap space.

I think the question is that since his arraignment is after the season starts, would he be suspended prior to the arraignment or is just being charged sufficient. 

[kkuenn 3,599]

1 minute ago, reesebobby said:

I think the question is that since his arraignment is after the season starts, would he be suspended prior to the arraignment or is just being charged sufficient. 

Well I posted on this before. I thought his money became guaranteed if the season started as one article stated. Then all I have been reading is that the money can be recouped easily and not guaranteed if he is in fact suspended.

So I am going with him losing money if he gets suspended at any time. Read below that also was cited in the article above.

 

 

 

One such default clause on most NFL contracts is that guaranteed money will void if a player violates the personal conduct policy of the NFL. ... If the NFL suspends Clark due to the guidelines in the personal conduct policy, the remaining guarantees on his contract are void.

[Balto 723]

Again I think it points to Veach getting on the phone with Roger and asking to put Clark on the Comish list until his court date in OCT.  I would think that at least covers everything until the NFL decides to suspend or not suspend.

 

[Balto 723]

3 hours ago, oldtimer said:

What Do Frank Clark's Arrests Mean for His Contract with the Chiefs?

Frank Clark may have lost millions of dollars because of his pair of arrests this offseason, and it could ultimately add flexibility for the Kansas City Chiefs.

 

CONNER CHRISTOPHERSON

56 MINUTES AGO

Kansas City Chiefs defensive end Frank Clark was arrested twice this offseason, and even if he doesn't see significant legal punishment, he could lose out on some money — and perhaps give the Chiefs some future flexibility.

 

Thanks for posting this OT!

I wonder how a trade would work?  Typically when a team cuts a player they still pay all the guaranteed money and cap hits but of course with situations like this we might be able to get out of those guarantees and just be on the hook for the $5.2/A signing bonus + $1.6 restructure.  In a trade we would still eat the Signing Bonus and Restructure but the new team would be on the hook for his Base salary($18.5M this year, $19M next and $20.5 his last contract year).  I wonder if KC can only pull that guaranteed base salary by cutting him OR can they also do so with a trade?  Meaning the team that trades for him has him locked up for 3 years @ about $58M 100% not guaranteed? 

Now I know he has under performed by a lot BUT with how contracts have ballooned and the importance of a DE could we get something for him if he had no guarantees?   

[AFCWEST 1,238]

50 minutes ago, Balto said:

Thanks for posting this OT!

I wonder how a trade would work?  Typically when a team cuts a player they still pay all the guaranteed money and cap hits but of course with situations like this we might be able to get out of those guarantees and just be on the hook for the $5.2/A signing bonus + $1.6 restructure.  In a trade we would still eat the Signing Bonus and Restructure but the new team would be on the hook for his Base salary($18.5M this year, $19M next and $20.5 his last contract year).  I wonder if KC can only pull that guaranteed base salary by cutting him OR can they also do so with a trade?  Meaning the team that trades for him has him locked up for 3 years @ about $58M 100% not guaranteed? 

Now I know he has under performed by a lot BUT with how contracts have ballooned and the importance of a DE could we get something for him if he had no guarantees?   

I doubt any team would want that contract let alone his bs.

[Holmes4six! 968]

5 hours ago, Balto said:

Again I think it points to Veach getting on the phone with Roger and asking to put Clark on the Comish list until his court date in OCT.  I would think that at least covers everything until the NFL decides to suspend or not suspend.

 

Thanks everyone. I think if the NFL waits for the arraignment which is in October to put him on the exempt list this then creates a issue for the chiefs to get out of the contract with no losses. 
not sure how this will play out. 

[jetlord 10,209]

Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves?  There's a good chance that Clark doesn't even face a trial.  He'll plea bargain down to some light punishment and then the NFL will suspend him for a number of games, maybe 4-6 which will be appealed down to 2-3 next season.  Chiefs will pay him this year and release him before next season unless he has a monster year this season.  Might be worse, but that's my current guess. 

[sith13 1,746]

8 hours ago, jetlord said:

Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves?  There's a good chance that Clark doesn't even face a trial.  He'll plea bargain down to some light punishment and then the NFL will suspend him for a number of games, maybe 4-6 which will be appealed down to 2-3 next season.  Chiefs will pay him this year and release him before next season unless he has a monster year this season.  Might be worse, but that's my current guess. 

That's the likely scenario. Since it's not his first time I'm guessing 6 games going down to 4. Should lead to something around 5 million cap savings for the rollover to 2022 as well but we'll have some major DE need in the short term. I'm wondering if we can actually utilize that money as early as this offseason once he gets the suspension. 

[oldtimer 8,686]

8 hours ago, jetlord said:

Aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves?  There's a good chance that Clark doesn't even face a trial.  He'll plea bargain down to some light punishment and then the NFL will suspend him for a number of games, maybe 4-6 which will be appealed down to 2-3 next season.  Chiefs will pay him this year and release him before next season unless he has a monster year this season.  Might be worse, but that's my current guess. 

not so sure as it was in California  and with all the anti gun hoopla going on right now I think he picked the wrong place and the wrong time.

[xen 1,010,220]

4 hours ago, oldtimer said:

not so sure as it was in California  and with all the anti gun hoopla going on right now I think he picked the wrong place and the wrong time.

From what I read most first offenses are pled down.  Not to mention the cops had better hope they did everything exactly right and had probable cause to search or the prosecution won't be able to submit the gun as evidence, in which case it will be dismissed with no evidence.  Even in California, if the barrel was sticking out of a bag, they have to show they knew it was an illegal gun vs a legal one to have probable cause for a search since it was a routine traffic stop.

[oldtimer 8,686]

14 minutes ago, xen said:

From what I read most first offenses are pled down.  Not to mention the cops had better hope they did everything exactly right and had probable cause to search or the prosecution won't be able to submit the gun as evidence, in which case it will be dismissed with no evidence.  Even in California, if the barrel was sticking out of a bag, they have to show they knew it was an illegal gun vs a legal one to have probable cause for a search since it was a routine traffic stop.

but from my understanding he has now had 2 incidents the first maybe pled down but the 2nd? I'm not up on Cali laws so cant comment on the rest but I am sure Clark will have the best lawyers $$$$$$$$$ can buy. I'm sure there is a great deal we the public just don't know. 

[jetlord 10,209]

5 hours ago, oldtimer said:

not so sure as it was in California  and with all the anti gun hoopla going on right now I think he picked the wrong place and the wrong time.

Agree, it's a bad place for a gun possession offense, but it's a good time to be charged.  The DA there is letting people out with much worse crimes. 

[jetlord 10,209]

1 minute ago, oldtimer said:

but from my understanding he has now had 2 incidents the first maybe pled down but the 2nd? I'm not up on Cali laws so cant comment on the rest but I am sure Clark will have the best lawyers $$$$$$$$$ can buy.

The second offense will probably be lumped in with the first in any plea deal.  There's just so much we don't know and even other lawyers are all over the place as to the probable outcome.  

[oldtimer 8,686]

1 minute ago, jetlord said:

Agree, it's a bad place for a gun possession offense, but it's a good time to be charged.  The DA there is letting people out with much worse crimes. 

but he doesn't have to go to jail to be cut/ suspended by the league..does he? I dont know askn.

[jetlord 10,209]

Just now, oldtimer said:

but he doesn't have to go to jail to be cut/ suspended by the league..does he? I dont know askn.

Nope, the commish has a lot of power in these cases.  For example, Kareem Hunt among others.  But the suspension for a victimless crime shouldn't be more than six games, I would guess, and the NFLPA will plead that down, normally. 

[xen 1,010,220]

3 hours ago, oldtimer said:

but from my understanding he has now had 2 incidents the first maybe pled down but the 2nd? I'm not up on Cali laws so cant comment on the rest but I am sure Clark will have the best lawyers $$$$$$$$$ can buy. I'm sure there is a great deal we the public just don't know. 

Depends.  If the first gets dismissed they can't use it in the 2nd.  

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

5 hours ago, xen said:

Depends.  If the first gets dismissed they can't use it in the 2nd.  

True. If it was dismissed, it can't be used in any future prosecution.  That doesn't mean the NFL can't use it in some way, though. They are all about image and selling a product. Whether it can be used in a civil case regarding an employment contract depends on the clauses in the contract, is my guess.  But I am no attorney.

[xen 1,010,220]

4 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

True. If it was dismissed, it can't be used in any future prosecution.  That doesn't mean the NFL can't use it in some way, though. They are all about image and selling a product. Whether it can be used in a civil case regarding an employment contract depends on the clauses in the contract, is my guess.  But I am no attorney.

The NFL can do whatever they want within the bounds of the CBA.  Which is a lot.