What does a team owe a player? (1 Viewer)

[eagles2007]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.

With that in mind, didn't the Chargers owe it to Michael Turner to let him go to a team where he could have been a starter this year? I understand that they owned his rights for one more year and all. But he'll now be a 26-year-old going into his FIFTH NFL season next year. Sure he hasn't taken a lot of hits. But it's probably cost him some money.

Just wondering if anyone else thinks the Chargers screwed Turner?

 

[Max Power]

Teams owe them nothing...players are still employees.

 

[BeachBums]

Was expecting this to be a McNabb thread....

 

[mad sweeney]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.With that in mind, didn't the Chargers owe it to Michael Turner to let him go to a team where he could have been a starter this year? I understand that they owned his rights for one more year and all. But he'll now be a 26-year-old going into his FIFTH NFL season next year. Sure he hasn't taken a lot of hits. But it's probably cost him some money. Just wondering if anyone else thinks the Chargers screwed Turner?

They paid him over a million dollars to audition for a mega contract next year. What else does he want?Chargers needed him this year to back up LT. Next year he'll get paid. What's the problem?

 

[chadjohnsonfan]

Their salary.

HTH.

 

[eom]

they owe him whatever was in the contract he signed and it goes the other way, too.

 

[eagles2007]

they owe him whatever was in the contract he signed and it goes the other way, too.

the problem is, he doesn't have a choice but to sign that contract.

 

[SigEp316]

isn't Turner making over $3 million being a back-up this year?

I'd take that in a heartbeat...a 5 carry a week audition making $3 mill?

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.With that in mind, didn't the Chargers owe it to Michael Turner to let him go to a team where he could have been a starter this year? I understand that they owned his rights for one more year and all. But he'll now be a 26-year-old going into his FIFTH NFL season next year. Sure he hasn't taken a lot of hits. But it's probably cost him some money. Just wondering if anyone else thinks the Chargers screwed Turner?

I disagree with your example, that's not the norm. If a team has a chance to keep their backup QB for the same amount of money, you can gaurantee that they aren't just going to let him go to another team just because. In a day an age where QB's are going down like flies, you need 2 decent QB to make it thru a season.In terms of San Diego, no way would I let Turner go. Think of it as if you were the owner of the San Diego Chargers. You just went 14-2 and just missed out on hosting the AFC Championship and probably winning the SB. You're entire offseason the driving force must be that you want and NEED to get back to that same spot as last year and prove to yourselves and their peers that they indeed deserve a championship.With that frame of mind..........do you actually think you let Michael Turner go. Not only does that harm your team, but it improves another. That would make absolutely no sense. This is a business and San Diego and other teams are in the business of trying to win football games. You don't just let your backup who's talented go. Ask Atlanta (I know they won but....) if they wish they would have kept their backup QB to Vick just because they had Vick.You never know what's going to happen, never. When you have talented people in position, it is horrible business to just let them go because. Owners and teams who do that won't be in those positions for long and if they are, fans/people won't show up consistently to games because they know they have a screwball in charge.

 

[eom]

they owe him whatever was in the contract he signed and it goes the other way, too.

the problem is, he doesn't have a choice but to sign that contract.

wtf???

 

[Challenge Everything]

Another Turner thread =

 

[Brides Maids]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.With that in mind, didn't the Chargers owe it to Michael Turner to let him go to a team where he could have been a starter this year? I understand that they owned his rights for one more year and all. But he'll now be a 26-year-old going into his FIFTH NFL season next year. Sure he hasn't taken a lot of hits. But it's probably cost him some money. Just wondering if anyone else thinks the Chargers screwed Turner?

Just ask Milwaukee (Bucks) what they think they Owe players. You have it wrong the Players are the one's who "Owe", they owe the owners, fans and coaches for giving semi literate ( in a lot of cases) egomaniacs a chance to make more money you and I will more than likely NEVER see in our lifetime. Thank you God for the good jeans.

 

[PranksterJD]

Their salary.HTH.

they owe him whatever was in the contract he signed and it goes the other way, too.

the problem is, he doesn't have a choice but to sign that contract.

Untrue. There's a McDonald's right down the street from me looking for help.Do the Chargers owe Turner something? maybe , but I doubt it. Do they owe their ticket holders something? Definitely.. the best product ( team ) possible. Was it smart for AJ Smith to keep Turner? We'll really never know. LT could have gotten hurt, and keeping Turner would look genius. LT could stay healthy all year, and AJ gave up a $3M and a decent draft pick for whatever compensatory picks "might" come his way. I probably wouldn't have let him go, but as a dynasty Turner owner ( x2 ) I was cursing SD when I heard the tender they placed on him. However, I was fully aware then, and still am now, that the Chargers should have had exactly ZERO concern for Michael Turner's "feelings" or "wishes" when making that decision. The only question involved in that meeting was, and correctly should have been, "will we win more games with or without this guy?".

 

[bigfeet_88]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.

Really? 99 percent of the time professionals teams just let players out of their signed contracts to start on another team? When players demand a trade, teams just give in?SD will let Turner go next year not because they don't want him, but because they can't afford him. Do you really think SD screwed him? SD gave him the opportunity to showcase his skills. Don't feel bad for Turner. He won't be sad sleeping in his king bed of money next year (sleeping in a twin bed of money this year).

 

[TommyGilmore]

Turner is getting $2.35 million to touch the ball 5 times a game. I don't think he's complaining much about that. Not only will he STILL get the huge payday that he wanted, but his legs & body will be fresh and he's much less likely to get injured.

 

[eom]

Thank you God for the good jeans.

I wish god would leave me some jeans.

 

[eagles2007]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.

Really? 99 percent of the time professionals teams just let players out of their signed contracts to start on another team? When players demand a trade, teams just give in?SD will let Turner go next year not because they don't want him, but because they can't afford him. Do you really think SD screwed him? SD gave him the opportunity to showcase his skills. Don't feel bad for Turner. He won't be sad sleeping in his king bed of money next year (sleeping in a twin bed of money this year).

Michael Turner didn't have a signed contract. He was a restricted free agent. The Chargers had him by the short hairs.

 

[Avery]

Their salary.HTH.

Kinda.Since contracts aren't guaranteed and the team can cut them at any point.

 

[candymanvandyfan]

Say what you will, the employment conditions of these NFL football players are substantially different than the conditions of an ordinary person working at an ordinary job.

First, this is essentially a monopsony market where the NFL is the only employer. None of the secondary football leagues offer viable market alternatives to employment in the NFL.

Second, the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) representing the "present and future employee players" and the National Football League Management Council (NFLMC) as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of "present and future employer member Clubs of the National Football League" have entered into a little something called the Collective Bargaining Agreement. This agreement is littered with strictures. "All rookie players once they are selected in the current year’s NFL College Draft" become part of the bargaining unit that the National Football League Players Association represents. Turner, as a draftee in 2004, became part of the bargaining unit. He is both protected by and restricted by the terms of the CBA that was effectuated by the NFLPA and the NFLMC.

Third, in my opinion, one of the most pronounced restrictions can be found in Article 16 of the CBA:

"No player shall be permitted to apply for special eligibility for selection in the Draft, or otherwise be eligible for the Draft, until three NFL regular seasons have begun and ended following either his graduation from high school or graduation of the class with which he entered high school, whichever is earlier."

This notion is antithetical to a free-market system and the theoretical right to work. The CBA, therefore, affected Michael Turner before he was even permitted to become an "employee player" in the NFL.

Fourth, in return for a slew of terms that protect the interests of the league, the NFLPA has secured certain benefits for the members of the bargaining unit, of which Michael Turner is one. Michael doesn't have to practice as long. He gets paid more. He has certain rights when the team or the league tries to do things to him that are proscribed.

The notion, therefore, that teams owe players nothing because they are employees is very incorrect. In fact, the NFLPA has ensured through its representation of the players that a great deal is owed to the members of the bargaining unit, as anyone who has ever read the CBA can attest.

In return for these many benefits, the player employees are also limited in certain areas by the terms of the CBA, a fact identified by the original poster.

I am not arguing for or against unions or the agreement. I would suggest, however, that the upside of the CBA probably benefits Michael Turner more than the downside harms Michael Turner.

 

[tomarken]

Thank you God for the good jeans.

I wish god would leave me some jeans.

Wait, these guys are already blessed with athletic talent that earns them million dollar contracts, and on top of that they get free jeans?!?

 

[-OZ-]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.

Really? 99 percent of the time professionals teams just let players out of their signed contracts to start on another team? When players demand a trade, teams just give in?SD will let Turner go next year not because they don't want him, but because they can't afford him. Do you really think SD screwed him? SD gave him the opportunity to showcase his skills. Don't feel bad for Turner. He won't be sad sleeping in his king bed of money next year (sleeping in a twin bed of money this year).

Michael Turner didn't have a signed contract. He was a restricted free agent. The Chargers had him by the short hairs.

Fight the Power!!!Oh wait, you mean fight the power that's paying me a multi-million dollar salary to play a game? never mind then, I'll just whine to the press (ok, Turner hasn't, others do)Your "had him by the short hairs comment" sounds a lot different when you consider other contexts.

 

[eom]

that's god for you -- always playing favorites.

 

[PMENFAN]

In most team sports, a team won't stand in the chance of a player getting a starting job somewhere else. If you're backing up in Philadelphia and Miami wants you as a starter, Philly will let you go 99 percent of the time. That's just the way it seems to be in professional sports.

Really? 99 percent of the time professionals teams just let players out of their signed contracts to start on another team? When players demand a trade, teams just give in?SD will let Turner go next year not because they don't want him, but because they can't afford him. Do you really think SD screwed him? SD gave him the opportunity to showcase his skills. Don't feel bad for Turner. He won't be sad sleeping in his king bed of money next year (sleeping in a twin bed of money this year).

Michael Turner didn't have a signed contract. He was a restricted free agent. The Chargers had him by the short hairs.

After drafting him. Turner has the option to not be an NFL player and take a 9-5 job. He chooses the money for the NFL. Tehy don't own him forever, and there's worse things than being a RFA in the NFL. Eventually he'll be a FA, or sign w/ the Chargers. I'd like to see him go to Tampa. Win win for both teams. But, will Tampa give up enough, or do they want another back of that caliber?