After sustaining an injury in Week 16, a player has his contract terminated following offseason surgery. What is the recommended action for his contract advisor?

In situations where a player’s contract is terminated due to injury, it is crucial for the contract advisor to understand the nuances of the player’s rights and the terms of the contract. Filing a Non-Injury Grievance is often the recommended action in this context because it allows the player to challenge the conditions surrounding the termination of the contract.

This type of grievance can be utilized when the termination is perceived as unjust or if there are grounds to argue that the player should have additional protections under the terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) or the specific contract in question. Given that the player sustained an injury that necessitated surgery, there may be elements within the contract or CBA that protect players in similar situations.

Negotiating a new contract, while a potential long-term strategy, does not address the immediate concern of wrongful termination. Similarly, seeking arbitration usually arises from disputes that have already escalated, while filing an Injury Protection Claim may not be applicable depending on the specifics of the contract and when the injury occurred. Therefore, initiating a Non-Injury Grievance provides a structured way to address the termination while protecting the player's rights under the current contract.