Okay, raise your hand if you saw that coming. Go ahead, I’ll wait. (waits…)

Today, special master Stephen B. Burbank set down his ruling in the Michael Vick arbitration case. The ruling? The Falcons are going to be able to attempt to recoup $20 million from Vick, $20 million that Vick had received in different signing and roster bonuses. The Falcons were arguing that Vick had willfully violated his contract (i.e. was involved in an illegal activity) when he signed it in 2004.

Vick on the other hand, seemed to be using the same argument that worked in a previous ruling involving former Broncos receiver Ashley Lelie. In the previous ruling, it was determined that a team could not recover option bonuses or prorated shares of option bonuses. Many experts thought that since Vick had already played 3 years on his contract the Falcons would be unable to recoup the prorated portion of his signing bonus that he received each year. Obviously, today’s ruling shows that the experts were “slightly off” (they were estimating a recovery of only about $3.5 million). I wish there was more to explain about Burbank’s ruling, but none of the major news sites seem to be reporting on the matter in any detail. Apparently, shrugging it off as “highly technical” was enough for the general public. The only insight that they gave was that the Falcons were allowed, under the ruling, to go after about $20 million dollars in roster bonus money that was given to Vick over the last three years. I’m completely guessing here, but, that combined with an ESPN article from August, may shed some light on the subject,

The Falcons might argue that, since the roster bonuses were converted to signing bonuses, they have the right to seek repayment. Vick would likely counter that it was the prerogative of the Falcons to convert the money into signing bonuses, that they were not bound to do so, and that they are characterized as roster bonuses in the original extension document of 2004.

If the Falcons did argue that the roster bonuses that Vick received were in fact signing bonuses and Burbank agreed with them, then any prorated portion of the bonuses that would count against the Falcons in the future would be recoverable (i.e. the Falcons pay Vick a roster bonus in a lump sum during a particular year. The Falcons prorate that amount over X number of years in their salary cap dealings. If the Falcons chose to treat the roster bonus as a signing bonus, then, based on the fact that Vick is suspended indefinitely, he should have to pay the Falcons for the prorated portion of his roster bonus that will count against the Falcons in the preceding years of his contract).

Don’t take my word on it, and definitely wait for a more definitive answer, has anybody out there read this and written an article on it…??? But, I think that this may be a partial explanation of the ruling.

Like I said. Michael Vick is looking for donations.

ESPN: Falcons asking for $20 million; experts say it could be only $3.5 million

Yahoo! Sports: Arbitrator rules Falcons can recoup nearly $20 million in bonus money paid to Vick

UPDATE: Mike Florio of the Sporting News looked to explain the Vick situation as well. I think we sort of agree, although he does a better job of explaining the point, i think

Related –

Sports Business Digest: Atlanta Falcons to Vick: Can I borrow 20 million dollars?

Sports Business Digest: Mike Vick…well, at least he’s fast, right?