John Welbourn Retires

[PhillyPhreak54]

WELBOURN RETIRES FROM CHIEFS

Though it would be very easy for us to claim that the possible surprise retirement to which we were referring earlier on Thursday was Chiefs tackle John Welbourn, who only hours after our story was posted walked away from the sport at the age of 30, we weren't referring to Welbourn.

Regardless, the veteran offensive lineman is packing it in, effective immediately.  "I decided to retire on my own terms rather than somebody else's," Welbourn told the AP.

Given that Welbourn was suspended for four games in 2005 for violating the league's steroid policy, the "somebody else's" terms to which he refers could be a looming suspension for another violation.

The league's steroid policy requires a suspension of at least four games for a first offense, a suspension of at least six games for a second offense, and a suspension of at least one year for a third offense.

Of course, we're not reporting that Welbourn has committed a second or a third violation of the policy (primarily because we've allowed our liability insurance to lapse).  But any time a player with a history of violating either the substance abuse policy or the steroid policy abruptly walks away from the game, there will be speculation that the guy walked before he got run.

Hmmm...interesting. How'd that new contract work out for you in KC, John? Oh...you didn't get it? HA! HA!

[PhillyPhreak54]

John Welbourn retires from Chiefs    
NFL.com wire reports

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (June 15, 2006) -- Kansas City Chiefs offensive lineman John Welbourn announced his retirement.

Welbourn, 30, was acquired from Philadelphia in 2004 after coming into the league as a fourth-round draft choice in 1999.

He was hampered by a knee injury during his first year in Kansas City, and was suspended the first four games of 2005 for violating the NFL's policy on performance-enhancing drugs. This season, he would have competed with newly signed Kyle Turley and veterans Jordan Black and Kevin Sampson at right tackle.

"I decided to retire on my own terms rather than somebody else's," Welbourn told The Associated Press. "It was awesome playing in the NFL. I got to play with a lot of great athletes, Will Shields, Willie Roaf, to name a few. I've been playing football for 16 years and it's a little scary to think I won't be playing any more. But at the same time, it's exciting to think I'll be starting a whole new chapter in my life."

Welbourn, who has nearly completed work on a graduate degree in education, said he planned to enroll in law school. He said he would be filing the paperwork on his retirement with the NFL office.

"I discussed this with the Chiefs a couple of weeks ago," said Welbourn, who participated in last month's minicamp but has been unhappy that the Chiefs would not renegotiate terms of his contract.

A Chiefs spokesman said the team had received a fax from Welbourn's representative indicating "his desire to pursue his studies." Kansas City plans to keep him on the active roster for now, in case he changes his mind.

He was primarily a left guard in five years at Philadelphia, where he played in three NFC championship games.

"It's weird thinking I won't be playing football anymore," he said. "Most guys play until they can't play anymore. But I feel good physically and I've been playing well. I'm leaving on a high note

[bobbyinlondon]

So, do you think he retired because of contract issues, or maybe because he tested positive again for performance-enhancing drugs and the NFL was getting ready to either suspend him for the season or part of the season? After all, the quote that he "would rather go out on my terms than someone else's" is a bit of a question. I mean, if he doesn't think he could beat out Black, Sampson, or even Kyle Turley, he must not have had enough confidence in his abilities.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

The Eagles ended up getting Tapeh and Moats for Welbourn.  If Tapeh contributes at all this year, it's a slam dunk, and it probably is one anyway.

[Diomedes]

I have nothing to say about Welbourn or the Kansas City Chiefs.  Go Tapeh, go Moats!

[Zanshin]

It would be close to a slam dunk even if the Eagles gave him away, considering the unreasonable pain in the ass he's been coupled with the substance issues and diminished play.

[MURP]

Welbourn turned out to be quick the douche. 

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

Welbourn turned out to be quick the douche. 

I'm sure he's both quick to douche and quite the douche, whichever one you meant.

[MURP]

yep yep

[mussa]

he did sure as hell go quick to douche 

[BigEd76]

[Feva]

[LBIggle]

im willing to bet it was  because of testing positive again.  if he "feels fine"  then why would u walk away from 100X the money you'll see in the real world for playing a game?   he's obviously not too bright, whats he got to "study" exactly..

[PhillyPhreak54]

WELBOURN WALKED OVER MONEY

Although our first reaction upon learning that Chiefs tackle John Welbourn had retired "on my own terms rather than somebody else's" was that he'd possibly tested positive (again) for banned substances, a league source tells us that Welbourn retired simply because he wanted more money, and that the Chiefs wouldn't give it to him.

Welbourn was traded to Kansas City in April 2004 after asking for more money from the Eagles, not getting it, requesting to be moved out of town, and then blasting the team on the radio -- which included questioning the quality of the team's recent drafts.

Philly selected Welbourn in the fourth round of the 1999 draft.  In 2001, he committed to the team through 2008, and received a $2.5 million signing bonus in the process.

The raise he didn't get in Philly he also didn't receive in Kansas City, where the Chiefs paid him at a base rate of $1 million in 2004 and $1.2 million in 2005.

With three years remaining on his contract (at salaries of $1.4 million, $1.7 million, and $2.0 million), the Chiefs had no reason to give in, especially since he'd done little in two years with the team to merit more coin.  Injuries limited Welbourn to only 10 games in 2004, and a four-game suspension for violation of the steroids policy kept him to 12 appearances in 2005.

WELBOURN COULD OWE MONEY TO CHIEFS

In retiring three years prematurely from the Kansas City Chiefs, tackle John Welbourn might not have only walked away from $5.1 million in future salary.  He also might have put himself in the position of owing a nice chunk of money back to the Chiefs.

Even though the Chiefs didn't pay Welbourn's signing bonus, the Chiefs have the ability to enforce any language in his deal requiring him to pay back bonus money if he quits the game.  Two years ago, for example, the Dolphins successfully enforced signing bonus forfeiture language in the contract Ricky Williams had signed with the Saints.

In this regard, two factors will control:  (1) the language of the contract Welbourn signed with the Eagles; and (2) whether the new CBA restrictions on bonus forfeiture apply retroactively.

Under the new CBA, a player who retires prematurely must only repay the remainder of the signing bonus allocation.  In Welbourn's case, that amount is $416,666.  But if the Eagles beefed up his contract to require a greater repayment obligation -- and if the changes to the CBA ultimately aren't determined to be retroactive, the final bill could be much bigger.

Assuming that, at a mimum, the contract signed by Welbourn with the Eagles contains a requirement that any remaining bonus allocation be paid in the event of a retirement, he's looking at a final price tag of more than $5.5 million for his early exit -- more than $400,000 of which he'd have to come up with out of his own pocket.

And although there's a feeling in light of the Ricky Williams situation that clauses like this are essentially meaningless because team's aren't inclined to throw good money after bad, the Fins know that they'll never get a dime out of a guy whose only other life ambitions appear to be practicing yoga and impregnating women.  In Welbourn's case, the amount owed would be much lower, he plans to become a lawyer, and (as far as we know) he's not required by law to finance the rearing of multiple children.

Finally, there could be a way for Welbourn to avoid paying back anything to the Chiefs.  If the contract generally requires repayment for a "default" and includes within the definition of the term both retirement and league-imposed suspensions, and if the Chiefs didn't file a grievance against Welbourn after he was suspended for four games in 2005, he might be able to argue that the team has waived its ability to pursue him for repayment now.  Whether he'd be successful is another story -- but with more than 400 large riding on the outcome it makes sense to throw out any plausible argument he can muster.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

Long live Tapeh & Moats.