What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Favre Upset With Walker (1 Viewer)

what happened to mckenzie when he went public about a new contract? what happened when al harris kept in in the clubhouse?

there are proper way to go about it.
Also add that Ahman Green has not "asked" about a new contract and he has done a lot more then Walker. Of the two Ahman deserves to be "paid" but then again Ahman has off field issues and probably knows to keep quiet for the most part. Having said that, after this year it will be Ahman's time for a new contract and the Packers are probably more willing to work with him then they are with Javon... unless Drew is gone or Javon gets his butt in camp.
 
Pennington taking a $2 millon "pay cut" for Coles = team player

Favre not doing anything for Walker = selfish
Once again, this is a ridiculous statement. Walker NEVER went to the Packers privately and asked to renegotiate! He immediately went from hiring Rosenhous to the press threatening hold out.All you Favre haters just cling to anything you can huh? :rolleyes:

 
Pennington taking a $2 millon "pay cut" for Coles = team player

Favre not doing anything for Walker = selfish
And you don't think he's going to get that money back eventually??You're a funny guy for a Favre hater.

:hophead:

 
Pennington taking a $2 millon "pay cut" for Coles = team playerFavre not doing anything for Walker = selfish

Also the Pennington "pay cut" is a little different because he and Coles are very good friends. Pennington named his kid Cole. Let's see if Penny takes a paycut to get Abraham signed long term.
 
A few things.1) Brett Favre missed minicamps because Mike Sherman told him he didn't need to show up. Period. End of story.2) The packers have long had a policy of negotiating an extension at the beginning of the final year of the contract. Albeit this was a policy that Sherman had and Thompson is a new GM, but still.. I see no reason to believe the policy has changed. This is why Mike McKenzie didn't get a new contract. It's why other guys, like Grady Jackson and Al Harris and Robert Ferguson.. did. Even Favre played out his rookie contract to RFA status. And as was stated before... he was a pro-bowler playing for a small contract.It is also a policy held by the Philadelphia Eagles. Looks like it's the policy of the Cardinals as well. (anquan boldin)3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.Does he deserve an extension? Yes. Will he get an extension? Yes. Next year. When the standard policy of the Packers plays out.You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.4) Feel free to glow about the demise of the Packers. It's been predicted for 5 years now. Somehow it never shows up. They re-tool, have a winning season and make the playoffs. The Vikings were the consensus to win the division for 3 straight years. And for three straight years, it's been the Packers.Sharper is gone. And they brought in 5 guys to compete to take his place. The LOSER of which will likely replace Mark Roman, who was atrocious last season.Wahle and Rivera are gone. At worst, the packers will gain a pro-bowl lineman that was gone last year (Flanagan) and fill in with another guy that played all year last year (Ruegamer). One spot WILL need to be replaced. But again. There's plenty of solid competition behind, arguably, the best O-Line coach in the NFL, Larry Beightol. Remember. Rivera was an NFL-E guy who Beightol made into something special. Wahle was a LT reject nearly sent packing who Beightol fashioned into a spectacular Guard.The key to the Packer's season will be two-fold. Can the Packers' defense improve with new scheme? And can the Packers lower their turnover numbers.Keep counting the Packers out. It makes it more funny when they prove the naysayers wrong... again... and again.. and again.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A few things.

1) Brett Favre missed minicamps because Mike Sherman told him he didn't need to show up. Period. End of story.

2) The packers have long had a policy of negotiating an extension at the beginning of the final year of the contract. Albeit this was a policy that Sherman had and Thompson is a new GM, but still.. I see no reason to believe the policy has changed. This is why Mike McKenzie didn't get a new contract. It's why other guys, like Grady Jackson and Al Harris and Robert Ferguson.. did. Even Favre played out his rookie contract to RFA status. And as was stated before... he was a pro-bowler playing for a small contract.

It is also a policy held by the Philadelphia Eagles. Looks like it's the policy of the Cardinals as well. (anquan boldin)

3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

Does he deserve an extension? Yes. Will he get an extension? Yes. Next year. When the standard policy of the Packers plays out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.

4) Feel free to glow about the demise of the Packers. It's been predicted for 5 years now. Somehow it never shows up. They re-tool, have a winning season and make the playoffs. The Vikings were the consensus to win the division for 3 straight years. And for three straight years, it's been the Packers.

Sharper is gone. And they brought in 5 guys to compete to take his place. The LOSER of which will likely replace Mark Roman, who was atrocious last season.

Wahle and Rivera are gone. At worst, the packers will gain a pro-bowl lineman that was gone last year (Flanagan) and fill in with another guy that played all year last year (Ruegamer). One spot WILL need to be replaced. But again. There's plenty of solid competition behind, arguably, the best O-Line coach in the NFL, Larry Beightol. Remember. Rivera was an NFL-E guy who Beightol made into something special. Wahle was a LT reject nearly sent packing who Beightol fashioned into a spectacular Guard.

The key to the Packer's season will be two-fold. Can the Packers' defense improve with new scheme? And can the Packers lower their turnover numbers.

Keep counting the Packers out. It makes it more funny when they prove the naysayers wrong... again... and again.. and again.
:bow: :bow:
 
A few things.

1) Brett Favre missed minicamps because Mike Sherman told him he didn't need to show up.  Period.  End of story.

2) The packers have long had a policy of  negotiating an extension at the beginning of the final year of the contract.  Albeit this was a policy that Sherman had and Thompson is a new GM, but still.. I see no reason to believe the policy has changed.  This is why Mike McKenzie didn't get a new contract.  It's why other guys, like Grady Jackson and Al Harris and Robert Ferguson.. did.  Even Favre played out his rookie contract to RFA status.  And as was stated before... he was a pro-bowler playing for a small contract.

It is also a policy held by the Philadelphia Eagles.  Looks like it's the policy of the Cardinals as well. (anquan boldin)

3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal.  He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move.  There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW.  Still.  He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract.  It was his choice.  Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

Does he deserve an extension? Yes.  Will he get an extension? Yes.  Next year.  When the standard policy of the Packers plays out.

You can't have it both ways.  Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it.  Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.

4) Feel free to glow about the demise of the Packers.  It's been predicted for 5 years now.  Somehow it never shows up.  They re-tool, have a winning season and make the playoffs.  The Vikings were the consensus to win the division for 3 straight years.  And for three straight years, it's been the Packers.

Sharper is gone.  And they brought in 5 guys to compete to take his place.  The LOSER of which will likely replace Mark Roman, who was atrocious last season.

Wahle and Rivera are gone.  At worst, the packers will gain a pro-bowl lineman that was gone last year (Flanagan) and fill in with another guy that played all year last year (Ruegamer).  One spot WILL need to be replaced.  But again.  There's plenty of solid competition behind, arguably, the best O-Line coach in the NFL, Larry Beightol.  Remember.  Rivera was an NFL-E guy who Beightol made into something special.  Wahle was a LT reject nearly sent packing who Beightol fashioned into a spectacular Guard.

The key to the Packer's season will be two-fold.  Can the Packers' defense improve with new scheme?  And can the Packers lower their turnover numbers.

Keep counting the Packers out.  It makes it more funny when they prove the naysayers wrong... again... and again.. and again.
:bow: :bow:
:cheese:
 
A few things.

1) Brett Favre missed minicamps because Mike Sherman told him he didn't need to show up. Period. End of story.

2) The packers have long had a policy of negotiating an extension at the beginning of the final year of the contract. Albeit this was a policy that Sherman had and Thompson is a new GM, but still.. I see no reason to believe the policy has changed. This is why Mike McKenzie didn't get a new contract. It's why other guys, like Grady Jackson and Al Harris and Robert Ferguson.. did. Even Favre played out his rookie contract to RFA status. And as was stated before... he was a pro-bowler playing for a small contract.

It is also a policy held by the Philadelphia Eagles. Looks like it's the policy of the Cardinals as well. (anquan boldin)

3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

Does he deserve an extension? Yes. Will he get an extension? Yes. Next year. When the standard policy of the Packers plays out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.

4) Feel free to glow about the demise of the Packers. It's been predicted for 5 years now. Somehow it never shows up. They re-tool, have a winning season and make the playoffs. The Vikings were the consensus to win the division for 3 straight years. And for three straight years, it's been the Packers.

Sharper is gone. And they brought in 5 guys to compete to take his place. The LOSER of which will likely replace Mark Roman, who was atrocious last season.

Wahle and Rivera are gone. At worst, the packers will gain a pro-bowl lineman that was gone last year (Flanagan) and fill in with another guy that played all year last year (Ruegamer). One spot WILL need to be replaced. But again. There's plenty of solid competition behind, arguably, the best O-Line coach in the NFL, Larry Beightol. Remember. Rivera was an NFL-E guy who Beightol made into something special. Wahle was a LT reject nearly sent packing who Beightol fashioned into a spectacular Guard.

The key to the Packer's season will be two-fold. Can the Packers' defense improve with new scheme? And can the Packers lower their turnover numbers.

Keep counting the Packers out. It makes it more funny when they prove the naysayers wrong... again... and again.. and again.
:eek: :goodposting:

:thumbup:

Nicely done.

 
what happened to mckenzie when he went public about a new contract? what happened when al harris kept in in the clubhouse?

there are proper way to go about it.
I agree with that, though I'm not sure what the case is with Walker. The first articles speculating a no-show at mini camp said that Rosenhaus had already spoken with the Packers by that time.If he's threatening a hold out publicly rather than sitting down and talking, then Favre's statements would be in a different light than I assumed they were, and I'd agree whole-heartedly that you need to go through the process and work with the team first.

If they've already heard a firm "no" from the Packers, then I don't fault Walker for threatening to hold out. At this point, I haven't seen anything to make clear which the situation is though.

 
Mozzy backed up his claim with the reasons he thinks it'll be true.  Packersfan backed his up with the fact that he has enough confidence in his claim that he's willing to bet on it.

Isn't the board a lot more useful backing up with reasoning (and even facts) so they can be debated and contribute to the board, rather than by backing them up with a willingness to bet?

At this point, Mozzy has asked packersfan to provide what games he thinks the Pack can win, which hasn't been done.  So I'd say packersfan is the one who needs to back up his claim, not the other way around.
Fair enough. The Packers' defense was putrid last season and yet Green Bay still won 10 games and won another division title. Despite having a horrible defense they still were the best team in the division. I do not believe their defense can be any worse. In fact, I think it will be better (perhaps only slightly so) because I believe Bates is a MASSIVE upgrade as a coordinator over Slowik. So I believe the team will be better prepared and better coached and you will not see many of the problems that we saw last season (missed tackles in particular) because the defense will be more fundamentally sound.

Offensively, the Packers were a Top 5 offense last season and I do not believe they will slip this season. As I've said numerous times, guards are the easiest position on the O Line to replace so I'm not concerned about the line having a massive drop-off without Wahle and Rivera. The Packers don't need to find two Pro Bowl guards for the offense to function at a high level. That's the point so many people seem to be missing.

So I think the Packers this season will be a lot like last season. A questionable (and that's putting it kindly) defense and a high-powered offense.

One possible area of upgrade is the return game. If Murphy is as good as advertised he could fill a glaring need the team has had since Rossum left. And if the return game improves that will enable the offense to be even better (and it's already pretty damn good).

With regard to the rest of the division, the Lions are clearly improving on offense but their defense also has questions. The major question, though, is at QB where I think Harrington is awful and will prevent Detroit from really making a strong run at the division. The Vikings, meanwhile, have done a nice job on paper of addressing team needs, but if they think Darren Sharper is still a Pro Bowler they're going to be in for a big surprise. So I'm not yet convinced their defense will be significantly better. More importantly, we have to see how the offense will function without Moss. I believe they will still be potent, but the idea that this offense won't be affected by Moss' departure is foolish. In fact, I would say the Moss issue and the Harrington issue rank far above the guard issue in Green Bay as far as significant questions that need to be answered.

So when it's all said and done I would not be surprised to see the North fall the way it did last season -- with the Packers in first, the Vikings in second and the Lions continuing to inch forward. At worst, I would predict the Packers to finish second behind Minnesota. I just don't think Detroit is quite ready to be a division winner.
OK. Let me get this straight. Losing Wahle and Rivera won't hurt the team.
Losing Wahle and Rivera will sting, but once again guards are the easiest place on the offensive line to replace. That's a widely held belief throughout the league. And again, the Packers don't need to find two Pro Bowl guards in order to function at a high level offensively. That's my point.
Losing Sharper won't hurt the team.
If you watched the Packers at all the past two seasons you'd realize Sharper isn't anywhere close to the Pro Bowler of a few seasons past. He's been a liability on defense.
Now, I guess, losing Javon Walker won't hurt the team.
I don't think Walker is going to miss any time this season. I think his situation will be resolved and he'll report before the start of the season.
My question is this: whose departure would hurt the team??!?
That's easy. Favre. As long as he's there, the Packers are a playoff contender. That's been proven throughout his career. If they lose him, they're sunk.
The other question I have is: wouldn't it be possible for the Pack to only win 5 or 6 games AND finish 2nd in the NFC North?
I don't see that happening. I think the Packers, Vikings and Lions will all be no worse than .500.
What is your over/under for the Pack's win total this year?
8-8 is the worst I see them finishing. The best would be 10-6. But when I looked at their schedule I figured 9-7. For what it's worth I have the Vikings at 9-7 as well and Detroit at 8-8.
 
Sherman tells Favre to take a pass

http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/apr05/321955.asp

and

Coach Mike Sherman said part of the reason he wanted Favre to stay in Mississippi involved what he'd heard about Hall of Famer Joe Montana.

"I remember someone telling me that one reason Joe Montana got out of the game was the meetings and the practices," Sherman said. "I never want (Favre) to get bored with it. I always want him to feel challenged. I don't want it to get old. He plays like every game is his first, and I don't want him to lose that, and I don't want to take it away from him in minicamps."

http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/apr05/322580.asp

 
The best would be 10-6.
I don't disagree with the majority of what you have said. I just had been getting the feeling from your posts that you thought the Pack could top last year's performance. This seemed somewhat bewildering to me given what they have done in the offseason relative to the rest of the NFC. But now you have made it clear that you expect the Pack to "come back to the Pack" and the Vikings and Detroit to improve moderately which seems to be more in line these teams' offseasons.
 
You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.------------------Yes, you can - unless the Packers are really going to go without their best WR this year. A deal gets done that makes both sides happy, regardless of the Packers' negotiation policy.

 
ill be the first to admit that a contract isnt a contract in the nfl, but 2-3 years into your career, i think you are messing with the spirit of the league by holding out after 1 good year. can you really hold out for more when you arent even eligible to become a free agent yet?

 
ill be the first to admit that a contract isnt a contract in the nfl, but 2-3 years into your career, i think you are messing with the spirit of the league by holding out after 1 good year.

can you really hold out for more when you arent even eligible to become a free agent yet?
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly. Is there any limit to how cheap a guy should play on his rookie contract? Tom Brady got a new contract the year after the first Superbowl since his 6th round rookie contract would have been ridiculous for a player who produced as he has.

 
ill be the first to admit that a contract isnt a contract in the nfl, but 2-3 years into your career, i think you are messing with the spirit of the league by holding out after 1 good year.

can you really hold out for more when you arent even eligible to become a free agent yet?
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly. Is there any limit to how cheap a guy should play on his rookie contract? Tom Brady got a new contract the year after the first Superbowl since his 6th round rookie contract would have been ridiculous for a player who produced as he has.
Brady was drafted in 2000. As a late round pick he signed the standard 3 year deal.He was extended in 2002. 1 year in advance of the end of his rookie deal.

The packers would like to do the exact same thing. Extend Walker 1 year in advacne of the end of his rookie deal. And Walker hasn't won any super bowls yet.

 
ill be the first to admit that a contract isnt a contract in the nfl, but 2-3 years into your career, i think you are messing with the spirit of the league by holding out after 1 good year.

can you really hold out for more when you arent even eligible to become a free agent yet?
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly. Is there any limit to how cheap a guy should play on his rookie contract? Tom Brady got a new contract the year after the first Superbowl since his 6th round rookie contract would have been ridiculous for a player who produced as he has.
Brady was drafted in 2000. As a late round pick he signed the standard 3 year deal.He was extended in 2002. 1 year in advance of the end of his rookie deal.

The packers would like to do the exact same thing. Extend Walker 1 year in advacne of the end of his rookie deal. And Walker hasn't won any super bowls yet.
exactlyplus, the qb position is slightly different than the wr position.

 
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly.
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
 
It's been said before but it bares repeating, Favre's not upset because Walker would like a better deal and is underpaid based on his performance. Favre's mad because Walker is holding out because of it.Walker needs to learn that he can still show up for practice AND work on renegotiating his deal at the same time. I think Favre would be just fine if that were the case.

 
#4 clearly knows that he has a better receiver on the roster to take Walker's place if he isn't there.Viva la revolution! :ph34r: HERD

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think a lot of you are missing the point.  Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler.  Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly. 
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal.  He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move.  There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW.  Still.  He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract.  It was his choice.  Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways.  Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it.  Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
 
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly.
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This goes both ways. If Walker gets a raise are you then saying he should withdraw money from said renogiated contract if he does not produce this year? Ha Ha, he wont give money back... they never do. The team is one player away from another winning season and can achieve that with or without Walker. New contract or not there are much better ways to go about this and holding out only hurts his demeanor among fans and associates. The only person it helps is his agent. If he thought he was going to achieve ProBowl status he should have signed a shorter contract. Live and learn but he is learning a lesson here. If he does not play he does not get paid... when the pocket book is lighter he will wonder why he is doing what he is doing.Also, every player every year who makes the ProBowl should get a new contract for more money? What is that? You sign a contract to play and get money, up front, to do so while your yearly pay compensates you during the year. Get in there and play.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think a lot of you are missing the point.  Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler.  Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly. 
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal.  He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move.  There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW.  Still.  He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract.  It was his choice.  Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways.  Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it.  Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
But he made a decision when he came into the league. More money in my pocket now in exchange for obligating myself to the Packers an extra year. Maybe he never expected to make the Pro Bowl, maybe he just needed the money, I dunno, but he signed the contract and took the money. On the injury thing...anyone know if a guy in Walkers shoes can get insurance against injury based on what his future contract might look like or is it all based on current contracts?

TIA

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly.
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This goes both ways. If Walker gets a raise are you then saying he should withdraw money from said renogiated contract if he does not produce this year? Ha Ha, he wont give money back... they never do. The team is one player away from another winning season and can achieve that with or without Walker. New contract or not there are much better ways to go about this and holding out only hurts his demeanor among fans and associates. The only person it helps is his agent. If he thought he was going to achieve ProBowl status he should have signed a shorter contract. Live and learn but he is learning a lesson here. If he does not play he does not get paid... when the pocket book is lighter he will wonder why he is doing what he is doing.Also, every player every year who makes the ProBowl should get a new contract for more money? What is that? You sign a contract to play and get money, up front, to do so while your yearly pay compensates you during the year. Get in there and play.
But there's nothing wrong with holding out. He's not going to go play for the Vikings. He's well within his rights to holding out. He thinks playing for the Packers at that salary is a bad decision, and I'm not so sure he's wrong. Maybe he thinks he can add an extra year to his career later on where he'll make much more than 515K. He's simply choosing not to play football.
 
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly.
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This goes both ways. If Walker gets a raise are you then saying he should withdraw money from said renogiated contract if he does not produce this year? Ha Ha, he wont give money back... they never do. The team is one player away from another winning season and can achieve that with or without Walker. New contract or not there are much better ways to go about this and holding out only hurts his demeanor among fans and associates. The only person it helps is his agent. If he thought he was going to achieve ProBowl status he should have signed a shorter contract. Live and learn but he is learning a lesson here. If he does not play he does not get paid... when the pocket book is lighter he will wonder why he is doing what he is doing.Also, every player every year who makes the ProBowl should get a new contract for more money? What is that? You sign a contract to play and get money, up front, to do so while your yearly pay compensates you during the year. Get in there and play.
But there's nothing wrong with holding out. He's not going to go play for the Vikings. He's well within his rights to holding out. He thinks playing for the Packers at that salary is a bad decision, and I'm not so sure he's wrong. Maybe he thinks he can add an extra year to his career later on where he'll make much more than 515K. He's simply choosing not to play football.
Then that is his choice. The Packers will move on and he simply wont get paid. Either he realizes that or he is ending his football career well before it should have ended. Oh well... right?
 
I think a lot of you are missing the point.  Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler.  Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly. 
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal.  He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move.  There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW.  Still.  He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract.  It was his choice.  Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways.  Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it.  Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This goes both ways. If Walker gets a raise are you then saying he should withdraw money from said renogiated contract if he does not produce this year? Ha Ha, he wont give money back... they never do. The team is one player away from another winning season and can achieve that with or without Walker. New contract or not there are much better ways to go about this and holding out only hurts his demeanor among fans and associates. The only person it helps is his agent. If he thought he was going to achieve ProBowl status he should have signed a shorter contract. Live and learn but he is learning a lesson here. If he does not play he does not get paid... when the pocket book is lighter he will wonder why he is doing what he is doing.Also, every player every year who makes the ProBowl should get a new contract for more money? What is that? You sign a contract to play and get money, up front, to do so while your yearly pay compensates you during the year. Get in there and play.
But there's nothing wrong with holding out. He's not going to go play for the Vikings. He's well within his rights to holding out. He thinks playing for the Packers at that salary is a bad decision, and I'm not so sure he's wrong. Maybe he thinks he can add an extra year to his career later on where he'll make much more than 515K. He's simply choosing not to play football.
Then that is his choice. The Packers will move on and he simply wont get paid. Either he realizes that or he is ending his football career well before it should have ended. Oh well... right?
Sitting out a season would not end his career and the Packers need him more than he needs the $515k this year. If he sits out the year (won't happen of course) then the Packers would probably trade him and Walker would get a big contract wherever he goes. That's a much better option than playing this year for way below what he's worth and risking injury.
 
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler. Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly.
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal. He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move. There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW. Still. He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract. It was his choice. Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it. Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This goes both ways. If Walker gets a raise are you then saying he should withdraw money from said renogiated contract if he does not produce this year? Ha Ha, he wont give money back... they never do. The team is one player away from another winning season and can achieve that with or without Walker. New contract or not there are much better ways to go about this and holding out only hurts his demeanor among fans and associates. The only person it helps is his agent. If he thought he was going to achieve ProBowl status he should have signed a shorter contract. Live and learn but he is learning a lesson here. If he does not play he does not get paid... when the pocket book is lighter he will wonder why he is doing what he is doing.Also, every player every year who makes the ProBowl should get a new contract for more money? What is that? You sign a contract to play and get money, up front, to do so while your yearly pay compensates you during the year. Get in there and play.
But there's nothing wrong with holding out. He's not going to go play for the Vikings. He's well within his rights to holding out. He thinks playing for the Packers at that salary is a bad decision, and I'm not so sure he's wrong. Maybe he thinks he can add an extra year to his career later on where he'll make much more than 515K. He's simply choosing not to play football.
Then that is his choice. The Packers will move on and he simply wont get paid. Either he realizes that or he is ending his football career well before it should have ended. Oh well... right?
Sitting out a season would not end his career and the Packers need him more than he needs the $515k this year. If he sits out the year (won't happen of course) then the Packers would probably trade him and Walker would get a big contract wherever he goes. That's a much better option than playing this year for way below what he's worth and risking injury.
He'd have to sit out two years... his best interest would be to play this year and hope the packers redo his contract next year...
 
I think a lot of you are missing the point.  Walker signed the contract he did because as a late 1st round pick he wasn't expected to become a Pro Bowler.  Well, he did and after proving that he's one of the top young WR in the league now he wants to get paid accordingly. 
Obviously, the guy wants to get paid, who doesn't, but faede nailed the point right here:
3) Walker actually agreed to a longer contract then the standard 4 year rookie deal.  He got a signing bonus that was comensurate with the move.  There is no doubt that he is outplaying his contract... NOW.  Still.  He was given the extra signing bonus to allow for the extra years on the contract.  It was his choice.  Now, he needs to wait for the choice to play itself out.

You can't have it both ways.  Either you take the standard Rookie contract and the lower signing bonus that comes with it.  Or you take the bigger bonus and wait a year for your second contract.
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This goes both ways. If Walker gets a raise are you then saying he should withdraw money from said renogiated contract if he does not produce this year? Ha Ha, he wont give money back... they never do. The team is one player away from another winning season and can achieve that with or without Walker. New contract or not there are much better ways to go about this and holding out only hurts his demeanor among fans and associates. The only person it helps is his agent. If he thought he was going to achieve ProBowl status he should have signed a shorter contract. Live and learn but he is learning a lesson here. If he does not play he does not get paid... when the pocket book is lighter he will wonder why he is doing what he is doing.Also, every player every year who makes the ProBowl should get a new contract for more money? What is that? You sign a contract to play and get money, up front, to do so while your yearly pay compensates you during the year. Get in there and play.
But there's nothing wrong with holding out. He's not going to go play for the Vikings. He's well within his rights to holding out. He thinks playing for the Packers at that salary is a bad decision, and I'm not so sure he's wrong. Maybe he thinks he can add an extra year to his career later on where he'll make much more than 515K. He's simply choosing not to play football.
Then that is his choice. The Packers will move on and he simply wont get paid. Either he realizes that or he is ending his football career well before it should have ended. Oh well... right?
Sitting out a season would not end his career and the Packers need him more than he needs the $515k this year. If he sits out the year (won't happen of course) then the Packers would probably trade him and Walker would get a big contract wherever he goes. That's a much better option than playing this year for way below what he's worth and risking injury.
Not likely. If Walker actually sat out the whole year, the Packers aren't going to give him just what he wants and trade him somewhere to a team that will overpay for him. If he actually sat out the whole year, $515k salary or know, he'd be viewed as a malcontent, and no team would give up the farm for him. Nor would any team, other than one totally starved for WR talent give a fat juicy contract to a receiver who had just missed an entire year of football over a contract dispute.The injury risk has already been addressed. More than likely he already has an insurance policy.

 
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This is why the signing bonus is so key in the NFL. A signing bonus guarantees your money. Now. You don't have to give it back unless you go ricky williams on a team.And this is why the signing bonus was larger for Javon Walker in his rookie contract then most other rookie contracts. He got an extra year on his contract.. but got some extra up front money because of it.If.. and only if... a portion of that signing bonus could be taken back in the event of something like this... I would agree. But it can't. It's money in the bank for Walker. Thus, his calculated risk backfired on him. He has to pay the dues for that. He took a risk that he would outplay his contract.. but he accepted that risk and took a bit more money up front. Now he wants more. Again. You can't have it both ways.
But there's nothing wrong with holding out. He's not going to go play for the Vikings. He's well within his rights to holding out. He thinks playing for the Packers at that salary is a bad decision, and I'm not so sure he's wrong. Maybe he thinks he can add an extra year to his career later on where he'll make much more than 515K. He's simply choosing not to play football.
I agree that there's nothing "wrong" with it.The problem is... it doesn't work. Can you remember the last holdout that actually got a big contract for a guy? It doesn't happen.
Sitting out a season would not end his career and the Packers need him more than he needs the $515k this year. If he sits out the year (won't happen of course) then the Packers would probably trade him and Walker would get a big contract wherever he goes. That's a much better option than playing this year for way below what he's worth and risking injury.
See. That's just it. Again. It just doesn't work.MAYBE, just MAYBE if he wants a trade it would work. But he doesn't. And, considering Walker's learning curve (he has a learning disability) it wouldn't be a benefit for him. It took him more then a year to learn the Packer version of the WCO. Even if he got traded to another team, he's going to go through that learning curve a second time.And in response to the "take off a year" thing. Again. TO qualify for a year of service, he would have to sit out all of training camp, then come back at week 10. If he sits out the entire year, he doesn't get a year taken from his contract and he's back to square one. And because he has two years left on his contract.. he'd have to do this little 10 week hold out... twice before his is free and clear as a UFA.You really think the Packers would blink for that? As you said, he's cheap. And because he'd only be charged the packer cap for 6 weeks of service.. minus a ton of fines... he's even MORE cheap.If I were the Packers, I would gladly pay that much (approximately 250k cap hit both years.) to put a gigantic statement out there that the team will not be held hostage by a player. That's worth far far more then a measly 250k cap hit, especially when you have a pro-bowl receiver behind him (driver) and 2 new draft picks as well, one from the second round.And even if Javon Walker spent all that time and effort to really "stick it" to the Packers organization in a hold out. He wouldn't be worth spit. What would you pay for a guy that just spent two years holding out and has only been in 12 games in two seasons? His value would go down the crapper fast. Add in losing a few hundred thousand dollars in fines and forfeited salary.. it's NOT in his best interest to pull something like that. Consider. If he just plays out this season, does well, lives up to his potential.. he 1) still collects his money from this year and 2) keeps his value when he signs his next contract.. which at that point.. the Packers would be more then willing to pursue, as per their policy, one year previous to the end of the contract.The simple fact is.. the Packers organization holds all the power here. And it's power that Javon Walker gave them, via a longer rookie contract then normal.
 
Not likely. If Walker actually sat out the whole year, the Packers aren't going to give him just what he wants and trade him somewhere to a team that will overpay for him. If he actually sat out the whole year, $515k salary or know, he'd be viewed as a malcontent, and no team would give up the farm for him. Nor would any team, other than one totally starved for WR talent give a fat juicy contract to a receiver who had just missed an entire year of football over a contract dispute.

The injury risk has already been addressed. More than likely he already has an insurance policy.
I guarantee his "insurance policy" won't pay him anywhere near what a new deal from the Packers will pay. So relying on the insurance policy while playing for a mere 1/2 a mill is a TERRIBLE financial decision for Walker.The average NFL career is what, 4-5 years? That's a small window for an NFL player to get as much $$$ as he can. Walker absolutely has the right (and apparently the common sense) to understand that he has the leverage in this situation, and has to take advantage of his opportunity to get paid while he can.

How does anyone know that Walker and his agent haven't been asking for an extension/renegotiation for months? I seriously doubt that Walker went public with his demands w/o speaking to the Packers first.

Those of you praising Favre and bashing Walker are either Cheeseheads or financially irresponsible. Walker playing '05 on his current contract would be a disservice to himself and his family.

I guarantee Walker makes more than the $500,000 he's scheduled to make this year - the Packers HAVE to cave.

 
Not likely.  If Walker actually sat out the whole year, the Packers aren't going to give him just what he wants and trade him somewhere to a team that will overpay for him.  If he actually sat out the whole year, $515k salary or know, he'd be viewed as a malcontent, and no team would give up the farm for him.  Nor would any team, other than one totally starved for WR talent give a fat juicy contract to a receiver who had just missed an entire year of football over a contract dispute.

The injury risk has already been addressed.  More than likely he already has an insurance policy.
I guarantee his "insurance policy" won't pay him anywhere near what a new deal from the Packers will pay. So relying on the insurance policy while playing for a mere 1/2 a mill is a TERRIBLE financial decision for Walker.The average NFL career is what, 4-5 years? That's a small window for an NFL player to get as much $$$ as he can. Walker absolutely has the right (and apparently the common sense) to understand that he has the leverage in this situation, and has to take advantage of his opportunity to get paid while he can.

How does anyone know that Walker and his agent haven't been asking for an extension/renegotiation for months? I seriously doubt that Walker went public with his demands w/o speaking to the Packers first.

Those of you praising Favre and bashing Walker are either Cheeseheads or financially irresponsible. Walker playing '05 on his current contract would be a disservice to himself and his family.

I guarantee Walker makes more than the $500,000 he's scheduled to make this year - the Packers HAVE to cave.
You are WAY off here.In what world does holding out = more money for a player? It doesn't happen. You assume that Walker is in a position of negotiating strength and that cannot be farther from the truth.

Think of the scenarios for him that could come of this. The LEAST likely of those scenarios is that the packers cave and give him a bunch of money.

 
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This is why the signing bonus is so key in the NFL. A signing bonus guarantees your money. Now. You don't have to give it back unless you go ricky williams on a team.And this is why the signing bonus was larger for Javon Walker in his rookie contract then most other rookie contracts. He got an extra year on his contract.. but got some extra up front money because of it.

If.. and only if... a portion of that signing bonus could be taken back in the event of something like this... I would agree. But it can't. It's money in the bank for Walker. Thus, his calculated risk backfired on him. He has to pay the dues for that. He took a risk that he would outplay his contract.. but he accepted that risk and took a bit more money up front. Now he wants more. Again. You can't have it both ways.
Didn't a court rule that RWilliams owed a significant part of his signing bonus back to the Phins? The Packers were well aware that Walker retained the right to hold out when they agreed to his contract and signing bonus. Therefore, they negotiated and assumed the risk, and likely affected the amount of $$$ they offered him. In other words, Walker's right to hold out was bargained for in his initial deal.

 
Not likely.  If Walker actually sat out the whole year, the Packers aren't going to give him just what he wants and trade him somewhere to a team that will overpay for him.  If he actually sat out the whole year, $515k salary or know, he'd be viewed as a malcontent, and no team would give up the farm for him.  Nor would any team, other than one totally starved for WR talent give a fat juicy contract to a receiver who had just missed an entire year of football over a contract dispute.

The injury risk has already been addressed.  More than likely he already has an insurance policy.
I guarantee his "insurance policy" won't pay him anywhere near what a new deal from the Packers will pay. So relying on the insurance policy while playing for a mere 1/2 a mill is a TERRIBLE financial decision for Walker.The average NFL career is what, 4-5 years? That's a small window for an NFL player to get as much $$$ as he can. Walker absolutely has the right (and apparently the common sense) to understand that he has the leverage in this situation, and has to take advantage of his opportunity to get paid while he can.

How does anyone know that Walker and his agent haven't been asking for an extension/renegotiation for months? I seriously doubt that Walker went public with his demands w/o speaking to the Packers first.

Those of you praising Favre and bashing Walker are either Cheeseheads or financially irresponsible. Walker playing '05 on his current contract would be a disservice to himself and his family.

I guarantee Walker makes more than the $500,000 he's scheduled to make this year - the Packers HAVE to cave.
You are WAY off here.In what world does holding out = more money for a player? It doesn't happen. You assume that Walker is in a position of negotiating strength and that cannot be farther from the truth.

Think of the scenarios for him that could come of this. The LEAST likely of those scenarios is that the packers cave and give him a bunch of money.
Are you joking? Holding out works all the time. Why do you think players do it?If holding out NEVER worked, no one would do it, and Packer management and fans wouldn't care.

 
I guess I don't agree that a player should have to play under a contract that he has clearly outplayed. In the NFL where you are an injury away from your career being over, you need to protect yourself. I don't think Walker is that out of line to want a raise when he's clearly underpaid.
This is why the signing bonus is so key in the NFL. A signing bonus guarantees your money. Now. You don't have to give it back unless you go ricky williams on a team.And this is why the signing bonus was larger for Javon Walker in his rookie contract then most other rookie contracts. He got an extra year on his contract.. but got some extra up front money because of it.

If.. and only if... a portion of that signing bonus could be taken back in the event of something like this... I would agree. But it can't. It's money in the bank for Walker. Thus, his calculated risk backfired on him. He has to pay the dues for that. He took a risk that he would outplay his contract.. but he accepted that risk and took a bit more money up front. Now he wants more. Again. You can't have it both ways.
Didn't a court rule that RWilliams owed a significant part of his signing bonus back to the Phins? The Packers were well aware that Walker retained the right to hold out when they agreed to his contract and signing bonus. Therefore, they negotiated and assumed the risk, and likely affected the amount of $$$ they offered him. In other words, Walker's right to hold out was bargained for in his initial deal.
Yes. But Ricky Williams quit on his contract. There's a big difference.Walker is well within his rights to hold out. I never disputed that. What I dispute is the thought process that this is a "good" tactic.

It's not.

It doesn't work.

In this type of a holdout, where a player has years left on a contract, the team has the upper hand, by far.

Again, give examples of a holdout of this type that has come out with a positive result for the player. I would imagine they are pretty tough to come by. The only ones I can think of, involve trading the disgruntled employee.. and even then, it's no guarantee that the player will get his money.

 
The only ones I can think of, involve trading the disgruntled employee.. and even then, it's no guarantee that the player will get his money.
Ask Mike McKenzie how his new contract is working out.Oh wait a minute, he hasn't gotten one.

 
Not likely.  If Walker actually sat out the whole year, the Packers aren't going to give him just what he wants and trade him somewhere to a team that will overpay for him.  If he actually sat out the whole year, $515k salary or know, he'd be viewed as a malcontent, and no team would give up the farm for him.  Nor would any team, other than one totally starved for WR talent give a fat juicy contract to a receiver who had just missed an entire year of football over a contract dispute.

The injury risk has already been addressed.  More than likely he already has an insurance policy.
I guarantee his "insurance policy" won't pay him anywhere near what a new deal from the Packers will pay. So relying on the insurance policy while playing for a mere 1/2 a mill is a TERRIBLE financial decision for Walker.The average NFL career is what, 4-5 years? That's a small window for an NFL player to get as much $$$ as he can. Walker absolutely has the right (and apparently the common sense) to understand that he has the leverage in this situation, and has to take advantage of his opportunity to get paid while he can.

How does anyone know that Walker and his agent haven't been asking for an extension/renegotiation for months? I seriously doubt that Walker went public with his demands w/o speaking to the Packers first.

Those of you praising Favre and bashing Walker are either Cheeseheads or financially irresponsible. Walker playing '05 on his current contract would be a disservice to himself and his family.

I guarantee Walker makes more than the $500,000 he's scheduled to make this year - the Packers HAVE to cave.
You are WAY off here.In what world does holding out = more money for a player? It doesn't happen. You assume that Walker is in a position of negotiating strength and that cannot be farther from the truth.

Think of the scenarios for him that could come of this. The LEAST likely of those scenarios is that the packers cave and give him a bunch of money.
Are you joking? Holding out works all the time. Why do you think players do it?If holding out NEVER worked, no one would do it, and Packer management and fans wouldn't care.
Feel free to cite examples.We'll have a debate. You come up with examples of holdouts by players under contract where the team has caved to the demands of the player. I'll come up with examples of holdouts where the player got screwed. We'll see who wins.

1) Ty Law - 2004.

Your turn.

 
Keenan McCardell got traded. He didn't get a new contract from the Bucs because of his holdout.He also didn't get a contract extension when he got traded. The bolts, instead, extended him after the 2004 season.But, fine.Mike McKenzie. Held out. Got traded. Still didn't get a new contract and is a likely hold-out candidate for his new team.Go ahead.

 
And BTW, your boy Favre has resorted to hold outs before:

Maybe the only time the Packers ever had to operate without Favre was at their April 1994 minicamp in Mesa, Ariz., during construction of the Don Hutson Center. Favre, a restricted free agent at the time, didn't practice for contractual reasons.

Favre visited the New Orleans Saints earlier that winter and then reportedly received a five-year, $20 million offer from the Los Angeles Rams.

Returning from a scouting trip, Wolf remembered standing on the practice field in Mesa for two days and getting that anxious, sweaty feeling.

"I'll never forget when Brunell and (Ty) Detmer were quarterbacking and Favre was out running around doing his tour, like panic set in," Wolf said. "We realized we weren't going to go anywhere if we had to (play) either one of those guys. I took the first flight back to Green Bay and told people we had to get that done."

Favre was re-signed and Brunell spent a second season backing him up before the trade was consummated.
LinkFavre was a restricted FA, so the circumstances were a bit different, but still....

 
Keenan McKardell
Emmitt Smith
this is a good answer.Emmitt Smith's holdout boned the Cowboys good. Probably the best example of a holdout that actually worked.

...

But, Joey Galloway. Terry Glenn. Orlando Pace. Julian Peterson. Chales Woodson. Sterling Sharpe. Jason Ball. Duce Staley.

And those are just off the top of my head.

When a player has multiple years left on a contract, he just doesn't have the power. Even during a franchise or RFA tender situation, the team still has the power.

Javon Walker is bargaining from a position of relative weakness.

 
And BTW, your boy Favre has resorted to hold outs before:

Maybe the only time the Packers ever had to operate without Favre was at their April 1994 minicamp in Mesa, Ariz., during construction of the Don Hutson Center. Favre, a restricted free agent at the time, didn't practice for contractual reasons.

Favre visited the New Orleans Saints earlier that winter and then reportedly received a five-year, $20 million offer from the Los Angeles Rams.

Returning from a scouting trip, Wolf remembered standing on the practice field in Mesa for two days and getting that anxious, sweaty feeling.

"I'll never forget when Brunell and (Ty) Detmer were quarterbacking and Favre was out running around doing his tour, like panic set in," Wolf said. "We realized we weren't going to go anywhere if we had to (play) either one of those guys. I took the first flight back to Green Bay and told people we had to get that done."

Favre was re-signed and Brunell spent a second season backing him up before the trade was consummated.
LinkFavre was a restricted FA, so the circumstances were a bit different, but still....
That's not a holdout. He didn't have a contract, which makes him a serious liability on a practice field. He could've signed a $100,000 "practice" contract (guys do this a lot) but is not obligated to, nor is there any indication he was offered one to sign. They just waited until they got a deal done. If you don't have a contract in a FA situation, it's not holding out.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top