The Backup's Dilemma: Jacoby Brissett and the Value of a Starting Role
Let’s start with a question: What happens when a player signs a contract for one role but ends up in another? That’s the predicament Jacoby Brissett finds himself in, and it’s a scenario that’s far more intriguing than it might seem at first glance. Personally, I think this situation highlights a broader issue in professional sports—the disconnect between a player’s value and their contractual compensation. What makes this particularly fascinating is how Brissett’s case forces us to rethink the dynamics of player contracts, team expectations, and the unspoken rules of the NFL.
Brissett signed a two-year, $12.5 million deal with the Arizona Cardinals last year, clearly slotted as Kyler Murray’s backup. Fast forward to now, and he’s the starter. Here’s where it gets interesting: Brissett isn’t asking for the moon; he’s simply asking to be paid like the starter he’s become. From my perspective, this is a reasonable request. After all, starting quarterbacks in the NFL typically earn at least $20 million annually—a far cry from Brissett’s current $6.25 million average. What many people don’t realize is that the role of a starter comes with exponentially more pressure, responsibility, and risk. Shouldn’t that be reflected in the paycheck?
One thing that immediately stands out is the Cardinals’ position in all this. They’re under no obligation to adjust Brissett’s contract. But here’s the kicker: If they don’t, they risk alienating a player who’s stepped up when the team needed him most. If you take a step back and think about it, this isn’t just about money—it’s about respect and fairness. Brissett didn’t ask to be the starter; circumstances pushed him into that role. Now, the team’s response will say a lot about their values and how they treat their players.
The Role of Circumstance in Contractual Fairness
What this really suggests is that contracts in the NFL are often written with a certain rigidity that doesn’t account for the fluidity of the game. Injuries, trades, and performance fluctuations can completely alter a player’s role mid-season. Brissett’s situation is a prime example of this. He didn’t negotiate a starting quarterback’s contract because he wasn’t expected to be one. Now that he is, the terms feel outdated. This raises a deeper question: Should contracts include clauses that automatically adjust compensation based on a player’s actual role?
A detail that I find especially interesting is the potential for a holdout or a ‘hold-in.’ While Brissett could theoretically refuse to play or participate in training camp, that would be a lose-lose situation. With a new coaching staff and offense in Arizona, every practice rep counts. Plus, holdouts are expensive for players, thanks to daily fines. So, what’s the alternative? Brissett could step aside and let Gardner Minshew or Carson Beck take the reins. But let’s be honest—that’s not what he signed up for, and it’s not what the Cardinals need right now.
The Broader Implications for the NFL
This situation isn’t just about Brissett or the Cardinals; it’s a microcosm of a larger trend in professional sports. Players are increasingly aware of their value and are willing to advocate for themselves. In my opinion, this is a good thing. For too long, teams have benefited from players stepping into larger roles without commensurate compensation. Brissett’s stance is a reminder that fairness should be a two-way street.
What’s also worth noting is the psychological aspect of this. Brissett isn’t just asking for more money; he’s asking to be recognized for the role he’s now playing. That’s a human request, not just a financial one. If the Cardinals want to build a cohesive team, they need to address this issue head-on. Ignoring it could create resentment and disrupt the locker room dynamic.
Looking Ahead: What’s Next for Brissett and the Cardinals?
Here’s where things get really interesting: How will the Cardinals respond? Will they adjust Brissett’s contract, or will they risk losing a player who’s proven his worth? Personally, I think they’d be wise to find a middle ground. Maybe not a full starter’s salary, but something that acknowledges his new role. After all, Brissett isn’t demanding a top-tier deal; he’s asking for fairness.
If you take a step back and think about it, this situation could set a precedent for how teams handle similar scenarios in the future. It’s not just about Brissett—it’s about every player who finds themselves in a role they didn’t sign up for. The NFL is a business, but it’s also a game built on the backs of its players. Treating them fairly isn’t just the right thing to do; it’s good for the sport.
In the end, Brissett’s dilemma is a reminder that contracts are more than just pieces of paper. They’re agreements that should reflect reality, not outdated assumptions. Whether the Cardinals choose to address this or not, one thing is clear: Jacoby Brissett has started a conversation that’s long overdue. And that, in my opinion, is the most valuable takeaway of all.
