Christian Wilkins released!
- Southshield
- Posts: 2,467
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 6:52 am
- Location: Concord, CA
- Has given High Fives: 69 times
- Received High Fives: 119 times
- LayneStaley
- Posts: 4,310
- Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:29 pm
- Has given High Fives: 464 times
- Received High Fives: 1033 times
Grabbing dicks and checking people’s oil on the field is just really f*cking weird. Those aren’t the kind of after the whistle plays I want my team to be known for.
- These users gave a High Five to the author LayneStaley for the post (total 2):
- NoThanksSir, rich72
- raiderboyron
- Posts: 1,097
- Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:44 am
- Location: On the side of Lassen peak in beautiful Shasta Co
- Has given High Fives: 313 times
- Received High Fives: 103 times
So inquiring minds want to know.
When exactly did our #2 tight end
head out of camp again? /s
When exactly did our #2 tight end
head out of camp again? /s
- LayneStaley
- Posts: 4,310
- Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:29 pm
- Has given High Fives: 464 times
- Received High Fives: 1033 times
- srv5490
- Posts: 3,471
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:14 pm
- Location: Returning Videotapes
- Has given High Fives: 87 times
- Received High Fives: 258 times
Here's my best guess as to what is going on here:
- The fundamental issue for the Raiders is that Wilkins won't be ready to play this year, and they wanted to save that money. Probably aggravated by the disagreement in how he handled his treatment. That's probably not enough to get full relief from his contract, however.
- The "weird incident" is probably not a huge thing, and would probably be ignored if he was on the field and balling out, but anything thing that could be construed as unwanted touching of another employee is plenty of grounds for contract termination, and Wilkins is going to have a tough time recouping his money if the Raiders can prove that any of this went on.
So, the "incident" probably isn't the impetus for getting rid of him as much as the injury is, but it gave them the opportunity to make the move, protect themselves against an appeal, and not damage their reputation with other players and agents.
- The fundamental issue for the Raiders is that Wilkins won't be ready to play this year, and they wanted to save that money. Probably aggravated by the disagreement in how he handled his treatment. That's probably not enough to get full relief from his contract, however.
- The "weird incident" is probably not a huge thing, and would probably be ignored if he was on the field and balling out, but anything thing that could be construed as unwanted touching of another employee is plenty of grounds for contract termination, and Wilkins is going to have a tough time recouping his money if the Raiders can prove that any of this went on.
So, the "incident" probably isn't the impetus for getting rid of him as much as the injury is, but it gave them the opportunity to make the move, protect themselves against an appeal, and not damage their reputation with other players and agents.
- DrDUne
- Posts: 4,580
- Joined: Tue May 22, 2018 8:51 pm
- Has given High Fives: 142 times
- Received High Fives: 463 times
The unfortunate part this annual Raiders fiasco is that the team is better when (the player) Christian Wilkins is part of it.
Understand not wanting nonsense in the locker room, an allegedly poor work ethic towards rehabilitation, etc. But this team’s goal is to win games, and they are better when a pro bowl caliber DT is wreaking havoc on the field. Still can’t believe it has spiraled into this mess, particularly if arbitration decides that the Raiders are not able to void the guaranteed money going forward.
Understand not wanting nonsense in the locker room, an allegedly poor work ethic towards rehabilitation, etc. But this team’s goal is to win games, and they are better when a pro bowl caliber DT is wreaking havoc on the field. Still can’t believe it has spiraled into this mess, particularly if arbitration decides that the Raiders are not able to void the guaranteed money going forward.
- LayneStaley
- Posts: 4,310
- Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:29 pm
- Has given High Fives: 464 times
- Received High Fives: 1033 times
- Cruisin with Tooz
- Posts: 1,456
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2024 11:43 am
- Has given High Fives: 191 times
- Received High Fives: 408 times
If the arbitration goes in Wilkin's favor, what happens to the release decision? Does it stand or is that reversed if the Raiders want him since they have to pay him?
- vtraider
- Posts: 7,868
- Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:32 am
- Location: Pigeon forge Tennessee
- Has given High Fives: 34 times
- Received High Fives: 342 times
He's gone no matter how it goesCruisin with Tooz wrote: Mon Jul 28, 2025 6:01 pm If the arbitration goes in Wilkin's favor, what happens to the release decision? Does it stand or is that reversed if the Raiders want him since they have to pay him?
- Cruisin with Tooz
- Posts: 1,456
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2024 11:43 am
- Has given High Fives: 191 times
- Received High Fives: 408 times
Well thats no fair. Why didnt they wait until the appeal deadline passed before releasing him?
- Dr Death
- Posts: 3,729
- Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2024 10:51 am
- Has given High Fives: 3767 times
- Received High Fives: 890 times
Who cares? It's not like he ever did a damn thing for the Raiders. He played 5 f[raiders_icon]cking games. It aint like we're going to miss him. Move on.
- These users gave a High Five to the author Dr Death for the post (total 5):
- LayneStaley, BoKnows81, 352Raider, Toast, Vercingetorix
- DanKD
- Posts: 3,225
- Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:18 pm
- Has given High Fives: 39 times
- Received High Fives: 1090 times
There was always 0% chance he wasnt going to appeal. He was always going to try and keep his 35 million.Cruisin with Tooz wrote: Mon Jul 28, 2025 6:18 pm Well thats no fair. Why didnt they wait until the appeal deadline passed before releasing him?
- raiderboyron
- Posts: 1,097
- Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:44 am
- Location: On the side of Lassen peak in beautiful Shasta Co
- Has given High Fives: 313 times
- Received High Fives: 103 times
So how does the timing match up with Michael Mayer and his disappearance last season?
Hmmmm. (I know I know, I'm just havin' some fun with this.)
Hmmmm. (I know I know, I'm just havin' some fun with this.)
- Cruisin with Tooz
- Posts: 1,456
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2024 11:43 am
- Has given High Fives: 191 times
- Received High Fives: 408 times
I know, but why not wait to cut him until the appeal is decided in your favor? If you lose the appeal and youre forced to take another 35 million cap hit, wouldnt it be better to see if his rehab worked out so you at least get some return for the 35 million?DanKD wrote: Mon Jul 28, 2025 6:28 pm There was always 0% chance he wasnt going to appeal. He was always going to try and keep his 35 million.
- Tatum
- Posts: 1,508
- Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:42 pm
- Has given High Fives: 29 times
- Received High Fives: 17 times
not because of, but for ... card well playedsrv5490 wrote: Mon Jul 28, 2025 2:54 pm Here's my best guess ... the "incident" probably isn't the impetus for getting rid of him as much as the injury is, but it gave them the opportunity to make the move ...
