Why are there so many delays in NFL contract negotiation agreements?

After a summer of uncertainty, the Cincinnati Bengals and Washington Commanders have finally secured their star players with new contracts. Defensive end Trey Hendrickson, following a tense hold-in during training camp, agreed to a revised deal that increases his 2025 salary to £22.5 million, up from £15.8 million, with both sides open to further talks beyond this season, while wideout Terry McLaurin resolved his contract standoff with the Commanders by signing a three-year extension worth up to £72 million, cementing his future in Washington.

These agreements, finalised just days before the 2025 NFL season begins, come as a relief for fans of both teams, each with lofty aspirations for the year ahead. But they raise a critical question: Why do NFL teams persistently delay extending contracts for proven stars like these? And do these lengthy disputes actually impact their preparation for the season? The ongoing dispute with Dallas Cowboys linebacker Micah Parsons serves as a stark reminder of the consequences when these issues remain unresolved.

Let’s be honest, the approach of NFL teams when it comes to contract extensions often resembles a high-stakes game of brinkmanship. For financial reasons, teams wait until the last possible moment, sometimes deep into training camp or even pre-season, before committing to new deals.

For Hendrickson, a consistent Pro Bowler who’s amassed 39.5 sacks over the past four seasons, the Bengals had already extended his contract in 2023, but this latest adjustment came only after he skipped voluntary workouts and held in at camp to push for greater security. Similarly, McLaurin, a dependable 1,000-yard receiver who’s been the Commanders’ offensive cornerstone through a revolving door of quarterbacks, endured prolonged negotiations that turned into a distracting saga, complete with missed OTAs and public speculation about his future.

Parsons’ situation mirrors this pattern but heightens the stakes: As of late August 2025, he’s still locked in a heated dispute with Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, with no progress reported on a new deal. Parsons has been listed as inactive during camp, citing a back problems, but it feels obvious that the contract dispute is the real reason, even despite concerns his injury issues.

So, why the delay? From a front-office perspective, it’s all about leverage and economics. Teams prefer to let the market settle, waiting for comparable players to sign deals that establish the benchmark. In a league where the salary cap is a constant puzzle, executives meticulously analyse future cap space, inflation in position values, and injury risks. Why commit early when you might secure a better deal later or push the player to prove their worth once more?

Jones, for example, has publicly downplayed the urgency, noting Parsons is under team control for the next three seasons, including options. But this strategy overlooks the human element. Players aren’t merely assets; they’re individuals with families, careers, and pride at stake. Hendrickson’s hold-in signalled clear frustration after outperforming his contract, yet the Bengals held firm until the pressure mounted. McLaurin’s situation followed a similar path, turning what should have been a straightforward reward for loyalty into a prolonged distraction. For Parsons, the standoff has escalated, with the star pass-rusher taking aim at the team on social media and even facing criticism from former Cowboys for his behaviour during the dispute.

In my view, the real cost surfaces in summer preparations and Parsons’ case could be detremental to the player short term. Training camp is meant for building team chemistry, refining strategies, and getting players in top physical condition, not for contract disputes. When stars like Hendrickson or McLaurin hold in or out, it disrupts the rhythm.

Teammates notice the absences, coaches must adjust drills, and the players themselves may miss crucial reps that could prevent injuries or hone their skills. Hendrickson’s revised deal came after he ended his hold-in, but those missed sessions can’t be fully recovered. The Buffalo Bills faced a similar issue with running back James Cook, who held in for nine days during camp before signing a new deal, forcing backups to take key reps and potentially disrupting the offence’s cohesion for a team with Super Bowl ambitions.

Contrast this with Myles Garrett and the Cleveland Browns, who resolved a high-profile dispute early in March. Garrett, the 2023 Defensive Player of the Year, requested a trade in February but signed a market-resetting four-year, £120 million extension with £92.6 million guaranteed just 34 days later, well before training camp. This early resolution allowed Garrett to fully participate in the Browns’ off-season programme. Unlike Parsons, whose hold-in has disrupted Dallas’ defensive preparations, Garrett’s early deal likely positions him better for the 2025 season, with uninterrupted training and no lingering distractions, plus the fact, when Parsons does get a new deal, it’ll probably now end up being larger than Garrett’s.

Could timing have a big impact? A historical parallel can be found in 2018 with running backs Todd Gurley at the Rams, and Le’Veon Bell at the Steelers. Gurley signed a four-year, £43 million extension in July that year before camp, and went on to lead the league with 17 total touchdowns and 1,831 yards combined from scrimmage, earning first-team All-Pro honours. Bell, however, held out into the regular season, missing the entire 2018 campaign upon returning in 2019 with the Jets, managed only 789 rushing yards and 3 touchdowns — a career low. Gurley’s early resolution enabled full preparation, directly contributing to his stellar season, while Bell’s prolonged dispute disrupted his rhythm and performance. And let’s not mention Deshaun Watson; he may have got his money, but his career and legacy were in flames after forcing a move away from the Texans over his own dispute.

For McLaurin, integrating with a new quarterback becomes trickier when contract talks overshadow playbook study. The Buffalo Bills faced a similar issue with running back James Cook, who held in for nine days during camp before signing a new deal, forcing backups to take key reps and potentially disrupting the offence’s cohesion for a team with Super Bowl ambitions. Now, amplify that for the Cowboys: Parsons, arguably their defensive cornerstone, hasn’t fully participated in team activities, forcing coaches like Brian Schottenheimer to plan contingencies for their 2025 season opener against the Eagles. The drama has spilled into public view, with Jones stoking tensions through media comments (even involving Parsons’ family) creating an awkward atmosphere that seems to be getting ugly. This isn’t just a distraction; it’s draining team morale and preparation time, with the Cowboys risking a sluggish start if Parsons isn’t mentally or physically ready.

Could earlier timing make a difference? Absolutely. Imagine if these extensions had been signed in March or April, during the off-season lull. Players could approach OTAs and minicamp with clear minds, focusing solely on football. Teams would avoid the public relations headache of holdouts, which can fracture locker rooms or alienate fans. From a performance perspective, data from sports analytics firms indicates that players who secure deals before camp tend to have smoother transitions into the season, with lower injury rates in the early weeks due to uninterrupted training. Yes, some negotiations take time—agents push for maximum value, teams for flexibility — but proactive general managers (like the Chiefs with Patrick Mahomes’ restructures) show it’s possible to get ahead of the curve. For the Cowboys, resolving Parsons’ deal earlier might have prevented this sideshow, allowing the team to gel without the cloud of uncertainty.

Ultimately, the late deals for Hendrickson and McLaurin are triumphs, ensuring the Bengals’ pass rush remains formidable and the Commanders’ receiving corps stays potent. But Parsons’ ongoing holdout highlights the dangers of delaying too long — impacting not just the player, but the entire franchise’s readiness. As the 2025 season approaches, let’s hope more teams learn from this summer’s brinkmanship and pay their stars early, letting the focus return to the pitch where it belongs.