How do trades work if player is not cooperative ?

[BnG_Hevn]

Using McNabb as an example, he knows full well he'd be cut if not traded so why doesn't he simply tell (in this case the Vikes) that he won't sign for less than, say, $15 million per year after the "current contract" is up?

Does he have no say at all in it b/c of his contract with the 'Skins?

I know if a player has 1 year remaining and the receiving teams wants a long-term deal that this might work. Just tell them that the "long term" deal would require and a crazy amount of money. Would this not prevent him from being traded an therefore force him to be cut? Which would then allow him to shop on his own terms?

Maybe McNabb has too many years remaining for Vikes to worry about long term contract???

[fansince'76]

Not 100% certain, but I think it largely depends on if the player has a "no trade" clause in his contract, or some other verbiage in his contract stipulating that he can veto a trade. If not, then he faces fines if he's traded to another team and he refuses to report to the new team. In that case, his only real recourse is retirement, and if he decided to sit out a year (or even longer), the rights to his services would still be owned by the team he was traded to and he refused to play for.

[86WARD]

Some players that only have one year left on a deal...ie) Orton or Kolb have some say in where they go in an indirect manner. A lot of teams won't trade for a player unless the player signs a deal for a longer term...so if a player doesn't want to go somewhere, he just won't sign the new deal. Other than that, unless they have a no trade clause, they have no say. A player can be traded and then opt to retire (I think Jake Plummer?) and then there is no deal. If the player opts to come back, then he's the rights of the new team. I think...