Consider this before you blame players... (1 Viewer)

[Raider Nation]

Loyalty is a two-way street. Teams aren't noble. If you aren't willing to play for the right cap number, you're gone and they'll find someone to replace you. I applaud Larry Johnson and the others who stand up for what they believe, because the average NFL career is very short. Get what you can get!

Both stories are from PFW:

Sources tell us Simeon Rice wasn't cut by the Buccaneers on the first day of training camp for failing a physical; he was released because he didn't agree to a pay cut. We hear Rice was given five minutes by GM Bruce Allen to decide if he was willing to reduce his $7.25 million salary by more than $2 million. When Rice said "no," Allen released him. We're told Rice would have accepted a pay cut if the team had shown him the respect he felt he deserved, because he realized he wouldn't have gotten a better contract on the free agent market.

and then this...

Word is, the Jets are likely to keep disgruntled OLG Pete Kendall, who's under contract for two more seasons, around until later in the preseason to make it more difficult for him to catch on with another team, particularly given that the team most likely to try to sign Kendall once he's released is the division-rival Dolphins. The Jets' treatment of Kendall, who says he was promised a $1 million raise, and their strong-arm tactics in demanding that first-round pick Darrelle Revis sign a six-year deal, could cause future free-agents to pause before signing with an organization that has acted in a decidedly unfriendly manner toward two of its own players this offseason.



The way Tampa treated Rice is pretty bad, but what the Jets are doing to Kendall is WAY out of line. By all accounts, he's one of the nicest guys in the league, as well as being the ultimate team player and mentor and role model for the younger guys. If indeed the Jets reneged on the promise of a raise and they are holding him hostage so that he can't have a fair chance to catch on with another team, that is unforgivable. As the article indicates, free agents don't forget these things.

 

[waylander]

I see your point, and a part of me agrees. However, it's hard for a blue collar guy like myself to relate when a Jamarcus Russell is turning down 31 million guaranteed because he wants 34 million guaranteed or something to that affect. So he is missing camp, and potentially hurting his team over less than 10% of his guaranteed money, not to mention any salaries or bonuses involved. And we're not talking about a guy who makes 30k a year fighting for 33k a year, this one contract will set him for life regardless of that 3 mil difference.

I could find a way to be set for life just with the amount that he is squabbling over.

 

[Gottabesweet]

I see your point, and a part of me agrees. However, it's hard for a blue collar guy like myself to relate when a Jamarcus Russell is turning down 31 million guaranteed because he wants 34 million guaranteed or something to that affect. So he is missing camp, and potentially hurting his team over less than 10% of his guaranteed money, not to mention any salaries or bonuses involved. And we're not talking about a guy who makes 30k a year fighting for 33k a year, this one contract will set him for life regardless of that 3 mil difference.I could find a way to be set for life just with the amount that he is squabbling over.

 

[Godsbrother]

As a Steelers fan I wish they would have been able to come to terms with Alan Faneca, a 6-time Pro Bowl guard who is in the last year of his contract. I believe that Faneca deserves to be among the highest paid players at his position but unfortunately some teams have paid ridiculous contracts out to guards. So Faneca gets screwed because the Steelers are not going to overpay players -- they just don't operate that way.

That said Faneca was paid a $1 million dollar roster bonus in March and is due to make another $4 million in salary this season. It is hard to feel too bad for him.

I look at it this way: Sometimes players appear to be getting a raw deal but keep in mind they get paid handsomely to play in the NFL -- certainly more than 99% of them would make doing anything else in life.

 

[Bri]

Kendall has kept himself out of some things too. Seen away from the team on the sideline in games and TC. He is supposedly a good guy but that doesn't mean his agent is. When you talk contract that is important.

 

[Raider Nation]

Those of you in the "Well, they make lots of money" camp... I understand your point. But my point is that it is almost always the players who get the blame for being greedy and only looking out for #1. I just wanted to shed some light on the way the organizations think. If you've been a good player and good soldier in the past, so what. If you won't play for x amount, there's the door.

Another rebuttal to the "It's hard to feel sorry for them because they make lots of money" argument:

Yes, they make lots of money. And? Whether you make $25 million per year like A-Rod, or you work hard to barely make a living, we all want to be treated fairly. The fact is that there isn't a 12-year wait for season tickets filled with people who want to watch you sell cars or prepare tax returns. If they get that kind of money, it's because they are worth that kind of money. Deserve? No. Worth? Yes.

 

[RenegadeGM]

Kendall has kept himself out of some things too. Seen away from the team on the sideline in games and TC. He is supposedly a good guy but that doesn't mean his agent is. When you talk contract that is important.

Kendall had a couple of really bad snaps while playing late in the game last night. I'm pretty sure the guy has enough pride that he didn't tank those snaps on purpose, but, given the situation described above, it sure does make you wonder if he is trying to speed up his release.

 

[mad sweeney]

The way Tampa treated Rice is pretty bad, but what the Jets are doing to Kendall is WAY out of line. By all accounts, he's one of the nicest guys in the league, as well as being the ultimate team player and mentor and role model for the younger guys. If indeed the Jets reneged on the promise of a raise and they are holding him hostage so that he can't have a fair chance to catch on with another team, that is unforgivable. As the article indicates, free agents don't forget these things.

I'm not sure where this info comes from. He was booted out of Seattle because he was all about money and was booted out of AZ for similar reasons. Maybe things for him have changed but he was, IIRC, never known as a good locker room guy and just wanted what he though was coming to him regardless of the team's long term plans. Not endorsing the Jets treatment of him but I've never heard of the "good guy" angle of Kendall. For being such a good lineman, getting booted off two teams (especially AZ who was dying for an OL) speaks to his character I believe.

 

[mad sweeney]

Kendall has kept himself out of some things too. Seen away from the team on the sideline in games and TC. He is supposedly a good guy but that doesn't mean his agent is. When you talk contract that is important.

Kendall had a couple of really bad snaps while playing late in the game last night. I'm pretty sure the guy has enough pride that he didn't tank those snaps on purpose, but, given the situation described above, it sure does make you wonder if he is trying to speed up his release.

He's repeatedly gone on record as not liking to play center and not as good at it as other spots. It wouldn't surprise me if he DID tank those snaps, especially considering that they have a probowl caliber lineman out there with the 3rd and 4th stringers in a preseason game while having disgruntled contract issues. And I wouldn't blame him if he did it. There was no reason he should've been out there that late other than management punishing him.

 

[Raider Nation]

The way Tampa treated Rice is pretty bad, but what the Jets are doing to Kendall is WAY out of line. By all accounts, he's one of the nicest guys in the league, as well as being the ultimate team player and mentor and role model for the younger guys. If indeed the Jets reneged on the promise of a raise and they are holding him hostage so that he can't have a fair chance to catch on with another team, that is unforgivable. As the article indicates, free agents don't forget these things.

I'm not sure where this info comes from. He was booted out of Seattle because he was all about money and was booted out of AZ for similar reasons. Maybe things for him have changed but he was, IIRC, never known as a good locker room guy and just wanted what he though was coming to him regardless of the team's long term plans. Not endorsing the Jets treatment of him but I've never heard of the "good guy" angle of Kendall. For being such a good lineman, getting booted off two teams (especially AZ who was dying for an OL) speaks to his character I believe.

In the course of one day, I heard Adam Schein, Solomon Wilcots, Bob Papa and Randy Cross all echo the sentiments above on Sirius radio. They all could not believe the way Kendall was being treated. Those were the "accounts" I referenced. Granted, I never heard quotes like that from current players, but I'm assuming that those guys did hear those things, since their job consists of interviewing players.

 

[proninja]

I totally agree. If I was underpaid in a league without guaranteed contracts, I'd hold out until I was paid market value. If I was being overpaid, you can be certain I'd get cut and re-signed at market value.

Totally different gig in the NBA and MLB, where contracts are guaranteed. If you suck, the team is stuck with you, if you overproduce, you're stuck until your next contract. You know this when you sign a long term deal, so if you want the security, you're giving up your potential for maximizing earnings each year.

 

[Raider Nation]

I totally agree. If I was underpaid in a league without guaranteed contracts, I'd hold out until I was paid market value. If I was being overpaid, you can be certain I'd get cut and re-signed at market value.

Yep. This topic is especially interesting to me because I'm an independent contractor. I am constantly battling with the companies through whom I am contracted over what wages are "fair" for my services, and it's easy to feel unappreciated. Albeit I'm on a much smaller pay scale, granted. But I feel what they're going through.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Apparently some of the veterans would just like all of the contracts in the league to be torn up just because a new CBA pumped a lot more money into the hands of the players. These are the types of guys that I have zero sympathy for. It's not like he was a rookie who significantly outperformed his contract. I have much more sympathy for a guy like LJ than I do Kendall.

There's no denying that the amount of $$ that rookies get is ridiculous and that veterans should be getting a larger piece of the pie, but they only have themselves to blame. Push for slotted salaries out of the draft, or rookie contracts that are based largely on performance and stop whining.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

sometimes players are being greedy....sometimes teams treat players unfairly. impossible to put all the blame on one group or the other without considering all of the circumstances in a given situation.

 

[j3r3m3y]

I see your point, and a part of me agrees. However, it's hard for a blue collar guy like myself to relate when a Jamarcus Russell is turning down 31 million guaranteed because he wants 34 million guaranteed or something to that affect. So he is missing camp, and potentially hurting his team over less than 10% of his guaranteed money, not to mention any salaries or bonuses involved. And we're not talking about a guy who makes 30k a year fighting for 33k a year, this one contract will set him for life regardless of that 3 mil difference.I could find a way to be set for life just with the amount that he is squabbling over.

What keeps me on the side of the players (usually) is the fact that if the player does not get the money, the owner does. Does the owner deserve it?

 

[Raider Nation]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

 

[proninja]

I totally agree. If I was underpaid in a league without guaranteed contracts, I'd hold out until I was paid market value. If I was being overpaid, you can be certain I'd get cut and re-signed at market value.

Yep. This topic is especially interesting to me because I'm an independent contractor. I am constantly battling with the companies through whom I am contracted over what wages are "fair" for my services, and it's easy to feel unappreciated. Albeit I'm on a much smaller pay scale, granted. But I feel what they're going through.

Exactly. And, on top of it all, if a player sits to make sure that he doesn't injure himself further, he's not a "team player" and he takes the PR hit for being soft. Well, guarantee my contract, and I'll leave it all out there for you. If you're going to cut me as soon as I get hurt busting my ### for your team, well, tough dookie.

 

[Weiner Dog]

I agree 100%...players always get a bad rap.

Imagine you went to college for an XYZ Degree, but did not practice that profession immediately out of college. Instead, you played NFL football. Assuming you actually sign a contract, don't get cut during your "contract" and get the opportunity to play for 5-6 years, wouldn't you want to maximize your earning potential for those 5-6 years?? Heck, when you start using your degree (...assuming you finished your Senior year and have a degree) and earn $50-60k/year, wouldn't you want some bank to fall back upon??

Remember: Many NFL players come from poverty. As a result, their "payday" could be the "payday" for 8-10 other people. IMO, it's a lot of stress for a 22-30 year-old kid to shoulder...

...without adding the stress that an NFL team can cut you at any time for any reason.

 

[proninja]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

Of course. It doesn't bother people because they feel that the players have enough money to the point where it doesn't make any difference. They are, of course, totally wrong in feeling this way, but it doesn't stop 'em from spouting off about how horrible a player is when, if they were in the same position at work, would do the exact same thing.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.Apparently some of the veterans would just like all of the contracts in the league to be torn up just because a new CBA pumped a lot more money into the hands of the players. These are the types of guys that I have zero sympathy for. It's not like he was a rookie who significantly outperformed his contract. I have much more sympathy for a guy like LJ than I do Kendall.There's no denying that the amount of $$ that rookies get is ridiculous and that veterans should be getting a larger piece of the pie, but they only have themselves to blame. Push for slotted salaries out of the draft, or rookie contracts that are based largely on performance and stop whining.

 

[proninja]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

What does that have to do with the fact that he was promised a raise, then denied one, then held on until it was too late for him to catch on with another team maximizing his value? Take the money out of the equation for a minute, because we normal humans just can't comprehend that kind of dollar value, and it skews our rational thought.Raider had a good thought. How would you feel if you were promised a raise, then had it taken back from you, and then your employer not only was going to fire you, but they were going to keep you from seeking employment for the next year? My guess is we'd have a thread about that, and nobody would say "oh gosh, he makes $80k a year, I feel no sympathy for him."

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I generally side with football players more often than not b/c of the fact that (a) their contracts are not guaranteed, (b) the normal career doesn't last anywhere near as long as it does in the other major sports, and © the NFL makes such a ridiculous amount of money.

but, what do you guys think about players who treat the franchise tag as such a huge insult? sure, they might not get the huge signing bonus and long-term security that comes with it, but they get paid like a top-5 player at their position. it's in the CBA that the players association agreed to at some point. seems to me that the teams should be able to use option when it suits them without getting so much push back from players.

 

[proninja]

but, what do you guys think about players who treat the franchise tag as such a huge insult? sure, they might not get the huge signing bonus and long-term security that comes with it, but they get paid like a top-5 player at their position. it's in the CBA that the players association agreed to at some point. seems to me that the teams should be able to use option when it suits them without getting so much push back from players.

I agree for the most part, but would like to see a cap on the amount of years in a row a team can franchise the same player. You generally see the franchise tag slapped on guys whom the team doesn't want to give a ton of guaranteed money to. I think the players shouldn't be held from the guaranteed money payday of a long contract in perpetuity. I'm just shooting from the hip here, but how about if you franchise a guy the first year, it stays as it is now. If you franchise him the second year, you're required to give him a two year guaranteed contract?

 

[Raider Nation]

I generally side with football players more often than not b/c of the fact that (a) their contracts are not guaranteed, (b) the normal career doesn't last anywhere near as long as it does in the other major sports, and © the NFL makes such a ridiculous amount of money.but, what do you guys think about players who treat the franchise tag as such a huge insult? sure, they might not get the huge signing bonus and long-term security that comes with it, but they get paid like a top-5 player at their position. it's in the CBA that the players association agreed to at some point. seems to me that the teams should be able to use option when it suits them without getting so much push back from players.

To most of us, yes... we thought "HOW could Lance Briggs turn down $7.2 million for one season?!?!?!" But they simply are thinking what would happen if they got severely injured before securing that phat 8-year contract.

 

[-OZ-]

I see your point, and a part of me agrees. However, it's hard for a blue collar guy like myself to relate when a Jamarcus Russell is turning down 31 million guaranteed because he wants 34 million guaranteed or something to that affect. So he is missing camp, and potentially hurting his team over less than 10% of his guaranteed money, not to mention any salaries or bonuses involved. And we're not talking about a guy who makes 30k a year fighting for 33k a year, this one contract will set him for life regardless of that 3 mil difference.I could find a way to be set for life just with the amount that he is squabbling over.

What keeps me on the side of the players (usually) is the fact that if the player does not get the money, the owner does. Does the owner deserve it?

Nobody truly deserves this kind of money, but usually the owners have taken risks and been successful to get where they are.As have the players, so I don't begrudge them their chance to earn as much $ as possible.This is a business for both sides, how many successful companies enter into contracts without maximizing their potential for profits?I would like to see the cities get more of the money from pro-sports, but that's a different subject.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

Honestly, this is the first I've heard about Kendall being promised a raise. I'm a little doubtful that he was actually promised a raise. Why would a team sign a player and then in the very first year of the deal promise him a raise for the next season? I'm not buying it at all. Where's PFW's source on this one? I don't think I've heard any other source say anything about that subject.If Kendall was not promised a raise, are your feelings the same?

 

[GroveDiesel]

but, what do you guys think about players who treat the franchise tag as such a huge insult? sure, they might not get the huge signing bonus and long-term security that comes with it, but they get paid like a top-5 player at their position. it's in the CBA that the players association agreed to at some point. seems to me that the teams should be able to use option when it suits them without getting so much push back from players.

I agree for the most part, but would like to see a cap on the amount of years in a row a team can franchise the same player. You generally see the franchise tag slapped on guys whom the team doesn't want to give a ton of guaranteed money to. I think the players shouldn't be held from the guaranteed money payday of a long contract in perpetuity. I'm just shooting from the hip here, but how about if you franchise a guy the first year, it stays as it is now. If you franchise him the second year, you're required to give him a two year guaranteed contract?

Well, firstly, the players are the ones that agreed to the current franchise tag agreement, so they really can't complain about the franchise tag. And the way the tag works now, if the player is franchised twice and the 3rd year requires that the player be paid the average of the 5 highest salaries IN THE LEAGUE. So that's not too shabby really.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Also, PFW seems way off base on the Revis thing. First off, the Revis deal is fairly easily voidable to 4 years, although the Jets can buy back the 5th and 6th years but at very lucrative amounts. Right now the talk is that Revis got a very nice deal.

 

[mad sweeney]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

I believe he also restructured last year which was the source of the promise of more money. He took a paycut with the promise that it would be made up for the next year, and now the Jets are balking.

 

[mad sweeney]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

Honestly, this is the first I've heard about Kendall being promised a raise. I'm a little doubtful that he was actually promised a raise. Why would a team sign a player and then in the very first year of the deal promise him a raise for the next season? I'm not buying it at all. Where's PFW's source on this one? I don't think I've heard any other source say anything about that subject.If Kendall was not promised a raise, are your feelings the same?

See above, he restructured to help them manage their offseason .

 

[mhrutkowski]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

I believe he also restructured last year which was the source of the promise of more money. He took a paycut with the promise that it would be made up for the next year, and now the Jets are balking.

He re-structured but he didn't take a paycut. I don't see how Kendall is a "good guy." He only made his way to the Jets because he was divisive with Arizona. He's been trashing the team to the media so I don't feel bad for him. There's a right way and a wrong way to complain about your contract.

 

[mad sweeney]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

I believe he also restructured last year which was the source of the promise of more money. He took a paycut with the promise that it would be made up for the next year, and now the Jets are balking.

He re-structured but he didn't take a paycut. I don't see how Kendall is a "good guy." He only made his way to the Jets because he was divisive with Arizona. He's been trashing the team to the media so I don't feel bad for him. There's a right way and a wrong way to complain about your contract.

If you restructure your contract, somewhere you lost something. If the Jets promised him a million this offseason I have to assume that he definitely gsve something up somewhere, which is tantamount to a paycut.And if you look above I pointed out that he was drummed out of Seattle and AZ so I don't know where these analysts are getting their ideas that he's a good guy.

 

[This_Is_Not_VRR]

I always tend to side with the players in these situations. I'd rather see the players get big pay days instead of their billionaire owners pocketing even more money.

One thing is for sure, the money a franchise saves by being frugal with their payroll never makes its way back to the fans.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

I see your point, and a part of me agrees. However, it's hard for a blue collar guy like myself to relate when a Jamarcus Russell is turning down 31 million guaranteed because he wants 34 million guaranteed or something to that affect. So he is missing camp, and potentially hurting his team over less than 10% of his guaranteed money, not to mention any salaries or bonuses involved. And we're not talking about a guy who makes 30k a year fighting for 33k a year, this one contract will set him for life regardless of that 3 mil difference.I could find a way to be set for life just with the amount that he is squabbling over.

...so what you're saying is that management is potentially hurting the team for a measely 3 million.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

If you restructure your contract, somewhere you lost something.

not really. players convert salary money to signing bonus money all the time. the player gets the cash up front and the team gets to spread out the cap hit over the length of the contract. restructurings don't always equal a pay cut.

 

[Assani Fisher]

I see your point, and a part of me agrees. However, it's hard for a blue collar guy like myself to relate when a Jamarcus Russell is turning down 31 million guaranteed because he wants 34 million guaranteed or something to that affect. So he is missing camp, and potentially hurting his team over less than 10% of his guaranteed money, not to mention any salaries or bonuses involved. And we're not talking about a guy who makes 30k a year fighting for 33k a year, this one contract will set him for life regardless of that 3 mil difference.I could find a way to be set for life just with the amount that he is squabbling over.

And starving children would feel the same way when they see the 30K/year guy squabbling over 3K more. Its all relative to the lifestyle you're used to living. While we may scoff at someone being displeased with 30mil, its much different when you're actually faced with the prospect of losing out on that 3 mil more.

 

[mr. furley]

the problem is it's not JUST the individual player who is forcing the holdout. it has ripples across the league, the Players Association fights for it, agents fight for it.

while Russell may look like a jerk for asking for 3 mil more it's probably 15% Russell, 35% the NFLPA and 50% his agent.

yeah these guys are making ridiculous sums but it's ridiculous to compare it to a guy making 30k too. it's what the market will bear. each contract effects other contracts across the league. if Russell "caves" it makes a negligible difference in his lifestyle but it's all about maintaining "hand" in the relationship for ALL players across the NFL.

 

[BoltBacker]

Loyalty is a two-way street. Teams aren't noble. If you aren't willing to play for the right cap number, you're gone and they'll find someone to replace you. I applaud Larry Johnson and the others who stand up for what they believe, because the average NFL career is very short. Get what you can get!

Both stories are from PFW:

Sources tell us Simeon Rice wasn't cut by the Buccaneers on the first day of training camp for failing a physical; he was released because he didn't agree to a pay cut. We hear Rice was given five minutes by GM Bruce Allen to decide if he was willing to reduce his $7.25 million salary by more than $2 million. When Rice said "no," Allen released him. We're told Rice would have accepted a pay cut if the team had shown him the respect he felt he deserved, because he realized he wouldn't have gotten a better contract on the free agent market.

I'm calling BS on this. Everyone already knows Rice was cut because he wasn't willing to agree to a paycut. Rice was given "Five minutes" to decide if he was willing to reduce his salary???? Let's see, he was due $7.25mil and ended the previous year on the IR list and is 33yo, they go out and acquire some depth in Chukwurah/Carter but more importantly SPEND A TOP 5 PICK IN THE DRAFT ON GAINES ADAMS. If Rice can't see he's going to be asked to accept a paycut who's fault is that????? For that matter it wouldn't surprise me if they asked him to take a paycut last year and refused...."Names Being Floated For Trade, Deadline Looms

Jay Glazer, FOXSports.com - [Full Article]

FOXSports.com has spoken with several teams and come up with a list of players whose names have been floated in recent days. According to seven teams, the Bucs have offered up a "fire sale" with such names as DT Anthony McFarland, CB Brian Kelly and others. Another team executive said he thought DE Simeon Rice and S Jermaine Phillips were also included in the group. The biggest name on the block is the Bills' CB Nate Clements. The thinking is that Buffalo will lose the young corner, so why not try to get something. Other players on the market are Jets' RB Derrick Blaylock, Rams DE Anthony Hargrove and Cardinals OT Leonard Davis. The trade deadline, is less than three days away. " ~ October 16, 2006, 09:20

I'm also not sold on the "Rice would have accepted a pay cut if the team had shown him the respect he felt he deserved, because he realized he wouldn't have gotten a better contract on the free agent market." angle. When was the last time a fading player had a realistic view of his own worth in the open market? For a guy that has a good handle on his value in the open market he certainly seems hesitant to sign with anyone.

That whole blurb reeks of someone close to Rice(his agent?) doing pre-emptive damage control when Rice finally signs a contract worth a whole lot less than he would have made if he would have just accepted the pay-cut and stay in Tampa. So it wasn't Rice and his agent having an inflated sense of his worth around the league.... it was TB showing him no respect by only giving him five minutes to make a decision as to whether to accept a paycut or get released.

 

[BoltBacker]

but, what do you guys think about players who treat the franchise tag as such a huge insult? sure, they might not get the huge signing bonus and long-term security that comes with it, but they get paid like a top-5 player at their position. it's in the CBA that the players association agreed to at some point. seems to me that the teams should be able to use option when it suits them without getting so much push back from players.

I think the franchise tag is a sham and it's too bad that the top 2% of the league has to put up with a rule that is approved by 95% of the union because it's something they can give up in negotiations that will never effect them.In the Rice situaion you saw the free market decide if TB's offer was fair or not. Rice can accept to play elsewhere for less $ that's his choice but he could have made more $ taking the paycut in TB. In the Franchise scenario it takes away the players only leverage in the situation; the ability to shop his services. When you see a guy like Tony Gonzales who was head and shoulders the best player at his positon the average of the top 5 guys(who aren't nearly as talented) and don't even give him a multi-year signing bonus to cover his risk in case of injury I think it's very unfair to the player. What if Anthony Munoz was in his prime today? Would it be fair to force him to play with a one year contract of guys that are far inferior(contracts that were likely signed a few years ago when the salary cap was smaller by the way so it isn't even truly "fair market value" in the first place).??? Ronny Lott in his prime???? The FA tag is a joke and I don't begrudge teams for using it but I do empathize with that top 2% of the league that has to be penalized for it.Bottom line; If you didn't have the right to negotiate the contract you should be under no obligation to play under it. That's why I hate it when the term "holdout" applies to both LJ and Lance Briggs. Briggs never signed a contract.... he's not holding out! He simply wasn't willing to play for a contract that he never had the opportunity to negotiate.

 

[AB in DC]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

I believe he also restructured last year which was the source of the promise of more money. He took a paycut with the promise that it would be made up for the next year, and now the Jets are balking.

the "promise"? Whatever happened to "Get it in writing"?If there was an agreement as part of a restructuring deal, it should be written into the new deal. If it isn't there, it's probably just in his head.

 

[BoltBacker]

Kendall's in what, year 2 of a 4 year deal? Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for him.

Not the issue. Kendall was promised a $1 million bonus this year, which the team now refuses to pay.Would you be pissed if your boss promised you a $30,000 raise and then backed out on that commitment? Be honest.

I believe he also restructured last year which was the source of the promise of more money. He took a paycut with the promise that it would be made up for the next year, and now the Jets are balking.

the "promise"? Whatever happened to "Get it in writing"?If there was an agreement as part of a restructuring deal, it should be written into the new deal. If it isn't there, it's probably just in his head.

Not only that but it could be seen as circumnavigating the salary cap couldn't it? It's happened in the NBA with both Chris Dudley/Blazers and Joe Smith/T-Wolves.

 

[Family Matters]

There are several issues that many have with high player saleries no the least of which is players not honoring their contracts and speaking out against the franchise tag. But the real issue(s) go much deeper.

It all begins with the CBA. The players have very little say over where they work, how much they get paid and for how long their contracts are set for. The guidelines are set by the CBA for many of these deals. Sadly, the CBA also allows for any contract to be voided by the owners with little or no player recourse. The player have no say in this. They can only threaten to hold out but sometimes that's to their dertriment. So the owners hold the key cards.

Another big problem with the CBA are the rookie deals. Paying out millions to a guy that's never played a down doesn't make sense. There is little to nothing tied to performance triggers that support the amount of pay some of these guys are getting.

Further, the players union has created some bad PR for itself by allowing some vets in need go unattended.

Put it all together and I think Upshaw needs to become a change agent or move on. Or should I say moving on or moving out.

A new CBA championed by the players union and Upshaw could go along way towards improving relations and restoring some reason in the pay ranks. Let's pay the vets, allow the rooks to earn their way to a big payday through performance triggers that will rewards those thet are making the plays. In fact, all players should be paid this way along with a reasonable base. Just my

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'm fine with the system as it is. It's essentially one year contracts with some signing bonus money that's guaranteed. These guys have to produce to earn the money they're due. If they don't produce enough, they take a pay cut or they're cut. If they over produce their contract like Larry Johnson, they force a pay raise. Pretty much like lots of "regular" people.

So no, I don't have a problem with a guy overperforming like Larry Johnson holding out for more money. And I don't have a problem with an underperforming player having to take a pay cut. Works pretty well.

J

 

[Weiner Dog]

I'm fine with the system as it is. It's essentially one year contracts with some signing bonus money that's guaranteed. These guys have to produce to earn the money they're due. If they don't produce enough, they take a pay cut or they're cut. If they over produce their contract like Larry Johnson, they force a pay raise. Pretty much like lots of "regular" people.So no, I don't have a problem with a guy overperforming like Larry Johnson holding out for more money. And I don't have a problem with an underperforming player having to take a pay cut. Works pretty well.J

However, if an NFL player is permanently injured and consequently cut, they will not receive disability payments equivalent to 60% of their normal paycheck for the rest of their life (ala long-term disability). Us "common-folk" have protection in place...NFL players do not.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'm fine with the system as it is. It's essentially one year contracts with some signing bonus money that's guaranteed. These guys have to produce to earn the money they're due. If they don't produce enough, they take a pay cut or they're cut. If they over produce their contract like Larry Johnson, they force a pay raise. Pretty much like lots of "regular" people.So no, I don't have a problem with a guy overperforming like Larry Johnson holding out for more money. And I don't have a problem with an underperforming player having to take a pay cut. Works pretty well.J

However, if an NFL player is permanently injured and consequently cut, they will not receive disability payments equivalent to 60% of their normal paycheck for the rest of their life (ala long-term disability). Us "common-folk" have protection in place...NFL players do not.

I'm sure the legal guys can chime in here. But I know they are involved in some of the normal "safety net" type programs like workers comp and such. And the union is working hard on the disability issue. J

 

[ditka311]

I generally side with football players more often than not b/c of the fact that (a) their contracts are not guaranteed, (b) the normal career doesn't last anywhere near as long as it does in the other major sports, and © the NFL makes such a ridiculous amount of money.but, what do you guys think about players who treat the franchise tag as such a huge insult? sure, they might not get the huge signing bonus and long-term security that comes with it, but they get paid like a top-5 player at their position. it's in the CBA that the players association agreed to at some point. seems to me that the teams should be able to use option when it suits them without getting so much push back from players.

To most of us, yes... we thought "HOW could Lance Briggs turn down $7.2 million for one season?!?!?!" But they simply are thinking what would happen if they got severely injured before securing that phat 8-year contract.

Umm, they aren't looking for an 8 year contract. How often do players actually see the entire contract through? They are looking for the large signing bonus that accompanies these "long term" deals that usually aren't seen through.

 

[mad sweeney]

I generally side with football players more often than not b/c of the fact that (a) their contracts are not guaranteed, (b) the normal career doesn't last anywhere near as long as it does in the other major sports, and © the NFL makes such a ridiculous amount of money.but, what do you guys think about players who treat the franchise tag as such a huge insult? sure, they might not get the huge signing bonus and long-term security that comes with it, but they get paid like a top-5 player at their position. it's in the CBA that the players association agreed to at some point. seems to me that the teams should be able to use option when it suits them without getting so much push back from players.

To most of us, yes... we thought "HOW could Lance Briggs turn down $7.2 million for one season?!?!?!" But they simply are thinking what would happen if they got severely injured before securing that phat 8-year contract.

Umm, they aren't looking for an 8 year contract. How often do players actually see the entire contract through? They are looking for the large signing bonus that accompanies these "long term" deals that usually aren't seen through.

Ummm, you're basically saying the same thing. he just didn't use the words signing bonus, he used phat instead. Signing bonuses come along with the phat contract.

 

[delusional]

I agree with most experienced NFL players holding out.

I am on the fence with rookies holding out because I see their side of it ( they could get hurt in camp before their contract and get zlich ) yet their demands are so high for not having taken a snap in camp yet.

So the main problem is there is no set contracts for draft positions. Have each draft # a set amount of bonus / contract per year and hold outs can be avoided. It can be raised each year accordingly

 

[waylander]

I see your point, and a part of me agrees. However, it's hard for a blue collar guy like myself to relate when a Jamarcus Russell is turning down 31 million guaranteed because he wants 34 million guaranteed or something to that affect. So he is missing camp, and potentially hurting his team over less than 10% of his guaranteed money, not to mention any salaries or bonuses involved. And we're not talking about a guy who makes 30k a year fighting for 33k a year, this one contract will set him for life regardless of that 3 mil difference.I could find a way to be set for life just with the amount that he is squabbling over.

What keeps me on the side of the players (usually) is the fact that if the player does not get the money, the owner does. Does the owner deserve it?

I hear you. What keeps me on the fence about it, is the owners really do have all of the cards. After this CBA and the larger guarantee's I think it is getting more balanced however.

 

[BassNBrew]

I totally agree. If I was underpaid in a league without guaranteed contracts, I'd hold out until I was paid market value. If I was being overpaid, you can be certain I'd get cut and re-signed at market value.

Yep. This topic is especially interesting to me because I'm an independent contractor. I am constantly battling with the companies through whom I am contracted over what wages are "fair" for my services, and it's easy to feel unappreciated. Albeit I'm on a much smaller pay scale, granted. But I feel what they're going through.

Exactly. And, on top of it all, if a player sits to make sure that he doesn't injure himself further, he's not a "team player" and he takes the PR hit for being soft. Well, guarantee my contract, and I'll leave it all out there for you. If you're going to cut me as soon as I get hurt busting my ### for your team, well, tough dookie.

So you'll half ### my loan unless I guarantee to use you for all future loans?