Why do players hold out of training camp? (1 Viewer)

[gianmarco]

There may be a simple answer to this that I just don't know, but I was just thinking about this and wonder why is that players hold out of training camp. Here are my thoughts on it:

--Holding out of training camp hurts the player in the end a lot of times. They miss out on key practice time. If I'm not mistaken, this can usually cause players to start slow unless they get into camp early enough. And that's for the stars. For the lesser players, they could lose out in a position battle. They could lose valuable reps. And it seems we hear about more injuries due to players not being prepared during TC

--In the end, most of these players report back at the very end of camp or for games, contract or no contract. So in the end, the team hasn't really lost much and the player has lost more. Which brings me to my next point

--Holding out of a game is much more significant to a team and would seem like a much bigger bargaining chip. Take Roddy White, for example. Out of the blue, he held out of training camp. Now, hopefully he'll get something done and he'll show up. But, this could end up hurting his #'s a little, at least early on. And what happens if he doesn't get the contract he wants? He'll probably show up for Week 1. What if, instead, he shows up to camp but makes it quite clear that if a contract isn't worked out by week 1 that he simply won't be playing. This shows that he's serious about being a part of the team, serious about preparing, but in the end, the team is going to lose where they need him most---the actual games. It also allows negotiations to take place and, if they work out, then no time is lost for player or for team. If he does hold out of Week 1, I bet the contract talks get done even faster and, when finally done, he can get right back in since he did attend TC and is familiar with what's going on.

--There are fines for missing TC. Daily fines. What are those fines for missing a game? What if he shows up to the game but just refuses to take the field? This may be the part I'm missing as I just don't know, but it could potentially be cheaper for the player to do it this way as well.

So, is there something I'm completely missing?

 

[Sabertooth]

Didn't Sterling Sharpe do this? He went all the way through camp and on the eve of the first week started his holdout. Of course, Green Bay took care of that pretty quickly and he never missed a game.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

It raises a good question.

I think there would be a few concerns with this strategy. What happens if you were hurt in training camp and had to miss significant time. I mean football is violent and injuries do happen. Heck even non contact injuries like ACL tears etc could happen.

Also, if the team knows you are doing this, and know you may not be there for week 1, you would probably not be getting those first team reps and the timing etc of playing with the 2nd or 3rd string QB's is not the same as the number one offense. Sure you are catching passes and staying in shape but essentially you are still hurting yourself some as well.

I don't think it is a bad strategy, but I think the injury part may be the biggest concern of an agent or player.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Quitting on a team is a line you don't cross. He'd pretty much destroy any relationship with his teammates.

 

[bcr8f]

Don't they get paid base salaries the games they play and much less for TC?

Yes Sterling did do that but they paid him quickly. At the time he was by far their best player.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

Quitting on a team is a line you don't cross. He'd pretty much destroy any relationship with his teammates.

So how is him not being there and working with the team right now any different? I mean essentially in theory he has quit on his team right now no?

 

[coyote5]

Don't they get paid base salaries the games they play and much less for TC? Yes Sterling did do that but they paid him quickly. At the time he was by far their best player.

^this.Players get their salary in 16 (or 17, not sure how they deal with the bye) game checks I'm pretty sure. Given the penchant for many players to live pay check to pay check, most are in no position to hold out in-season and miss those pay days.

 

[gianmarco]

Quitting on a team is a line you don't cross. He'd pretty much destroy any relationship with his teammates.

Not sure I agree with this. Not being in TC isn't helping the team. You don't think Broncos teammates wish that Moreno was in camp? You don't think Ryan wishes Roddy was there so they can continue to work on their chemistry? In fact, I think players would be more sympathetic with a player who shows up for training camp and practices along with everyone else in all the drills than a guy who skips all that stuff and just shows up for when the games start. If the team takes them seriously, then they can be there for week 1.As to the injury thing, it can happen during the season too. We've seen a good # of holdouts where the guys eventually show up even without a contract. AFAIK, most holdouts don't result in new contracts. I'm not saying this might be the ONLY approach players should take. Different situations call for different things. But I'm just not understanding why we don't see it at all. I don't buy the "quitting on a team" reason for it not happening.

 

[Coboney]

If I remember correctly they get a per diem payment at training camp around 7k. They can also fine 14k or so a day.

If you miss a game you miss one of your 17 paychecks...

Also Carter_Can_Fly - I'd say most players are used to it to some degree now that the first couple weeks of training camp often server as contract finishing times. Its a lot different to not be there when the game is for real.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Quitting on a team is a line you don't cross. He'd pretty much destroy any relationship with his teammates.

So how is him not being there and working with the team right now any different? I mean essentially in theory he has quit on his team right now no?

Because it's just training camp. It's not a big deal. When the games start to count it's another matter entirely.

 

[gianmarco]

Don't they get paid base salaries the games they play and much less for TC? Yes Sterling did do that but they paid him quickly. At the time he was by far their best player.

^this.Players get their salary in 16 (or 17, not sure how they deal with the bye) game checks I'm pretty sure. Given the penchant for many players to live pay check to pay check, most are in no position to hold out in-season and miss those pay days.

Roddy is making an acceptable $2.28 million for 2009. That's $142k/game. He's being fined $17k/day he misses. If he misses 8 days of TC, that's already 1 game. Secondly, what if he shows up to the game but just refuses to go in when the coach asks him too? Does he get fined for that? The full paycheck?ETA--If they are getting paid for each TC day as well ($7k as stated above), that makes it even more costly to hold out during TC. Now he only has to miss 5-6 days for it to cost one game day.

 

[Adebisi]

Because the next team is far less likely to give you a big contract if they have to worry about you holding out of games.

 

[ATC1]

Because the next team is far less likely to give you a big contract if they have to worry about you holding out of games.

My first thought

 

[David Yudkin]

If you are holding our for more money, wouldn't it make more sense to get started sooner and not risk getting hurt? Put another way, if you want a raise and tell your boss that if you don't get a raise, you're walking out . . . in 6 more weeks. Kinda loses some luster, no?

Also, I believe teams are lenient and may throw out fines from training camp. Fines from game days, not so much.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Don't they get paid base salaries the games they play and much less for TC? Yes Sterling did do that but they paid him quickly. At the time he was by far their best player.

^this.Players get their salary in 16 (or 17, not sure how they deal with the bye) game checks I'm pretty sure. Given the penchant for many players to live pay check to pay check, most are in no position to hold out in-season and miss those pay days.

Roddy is making an acceptable $2.28 million for 2009. That's $142k/game. He's being fined $17k/day he misses. If he misses 8 days of TC, that's already 1 game. Secondly, what if he shows up to the game but just refuses to go in when the coach asks him too? Does he get fined for that? The full paycheck?ETA--If they are getting paid for each TC day as well ($7k as stated above), that makes it even more costly to hold out during TC. Now he only has to miss 5-6 days for it to cost one game day.

Those fines are usually waived once the contract is agreed upon.

 

[gianmarco]

If you are holding our for more money, wouldn't it make more sense to get started sooner and not risk getting hurt? Put another way, if you want a raise and tell your boss that if you don't get a raise, you're walking out . . . in 6 more weeks. Kinda loses some luster, no?Also, I believe teams are lenient and may throw out fines from training camp. Fines from game days, not so much.

Doesn't lose luster if, for example, you have a huge presentation to give to a world-class client and you're agreeing to prepare as if you'll be there but not show up when you're needed most unless they compensate you. I think that actually gains luster instead of threatening to not be there to prepare for the presentation but still show up when you're needed knowing you could do it without being there for those 6 weeks of prep.And why do you think fines from game day not so much? Because those are obviously much more important to the team. Thus, if players started actually not playing during the games, then these holdouts would carry a bit more weight, IMO. Right now, missing TC is nothing more than a show of displeasure since oftentimes the players will report at some point, new contract or not. To me, skipping TC to show you don't like your contract but eventually showing up is the "all talk but no walk" way to do it.Showing up to TC and giving the team a definite timetable with definite consequences is the "quiet but deadly" way to approach it. Sure, I'll show up at TC. But if you want me week 1, you better pay me. Want to drag your feet....go ahead. I think if more players started doing this, then some of these contract negotiations will get done faster. Of course, in order to do this, you need to actually mean something to the team. Boldin and Roddy White could get away with this. Others...not so much.

 

[gianmarco]

Because the next team is far less likely to give you a big contract if they have to worry about you holding out of games.

My first thought

This could very well be. But what if this were a more common approach?

 

[Phurfur]

Quitting on a team is a line you don't cross. He'd pretty much destroy any relationship with his teammates.

So how is him not being there and working with the team right now any different? I mean essentially in theory he has quit on his team right now no?

Because it's just training camp. It's not a big deal. When the games start to count it's another matter entirely.

Allen Iverson ?

 

[TheFanatic]

Because the next team is far less likely to give you a big contract if they have to worry about you holding out of games.

My first thought

This could very well be. But what if this were a more common approach?

If it were the norm that would be another story, but it's not. Hard to debate that notion...One thing I can think of is that ironing out a contract can take weeks. A contract can be as thick as a novel. Holding out a game gives them just a few days to get that contract ready.

 

[jackdubl]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

 

[pinequick]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

 

[gianmarco]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

 

[Q-Bert]

#1 Training Camp comes first

#2 If you come to camp while negotiating you run the risk of getting injured and never seeing a pay increase

#3 For most players the money lost from game checks would be more than the money lost from fines for missing camp

 

[jackdubl]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Act of good faith. I could reverse this and ask why do so many players not report. People aren't robots.

 

[pinequick]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Link? Who are you talking about that reports to TRAINING CAMP w/o a contract? (honest question)ETA: Are you talking about guys who want to re-work their contract? Because that's completely different from Crabtree...

ETA2: Sorry--been jumping between this thread and Crabtree thread... this thread has nothing to do w/ Crabtree. If I were trying to rework my contract, I would definitely hold out of camp. Camp sucks. If I'm a vet, I probably don't *really* need the practice. Games is where I make my real money, so I don't want to skip those.

 

[Q-Bert]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Because, sometimes in a negotiation, you lose.For example, a guy holds out because he wants a new contract. The team says no and fines him $17K per day. At somepoint the guy decides he can't afford to lose anymore money and he certainly doesn't want to lose any of his game checks. So, he shows up and takes the money on his current contract and hopes he can try again next year.

 

[gianmarco]

Because the next team is far less likely to give you a big contract if they have to worry about you holding out of games.

My first thought

This could very well be. But what if this were a more common approach?

If it were the norm that would be another story, but it's not. Hard to debate that notion...One thing I can think of is that ironing out a contract can take weeks. A contract can be as thick as a novel. Holding out a game gives them just a few days to get that contract ready.

I'm not saying to spring it on them when Week 1 shows up. I'm saying, instead of springing it on them when training camp arrives, let the team know that you will participate in training camp and continue through to week 1 in good faith that a contract can get done in that timeframe. In other words, if Roddy said that this week, he's giving them 1 month. But, if in 1 month, they can't fix the contract, then Roddy won't be playing week 1. That's giving them more than enough time to get something done while still reporting.

 

[gianmarco]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Link? Who are you talking about that reports to TRAINING CAMP w/o a contract? (honest question)ETA: Are you talking about guys who want to re-work their contract? Because that's completely different from Crabtree...

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about rookies. I'm talking about guys like Boldin and Roddy that want to redo their contracts and hold out of training camp. Boldin did it last year, didn't get his new contract, but eventually showed up and was playing week 1. Would it have been more effective if he stated at the beginning of TC that, come week 1, if no new contract is in place, Boldin won't be playing?

 

[pinequick]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Link? Who are you talking about that reports to TRAINING CAMP w/o a contract? (honest question)ETA: Are you talking about guys who want to re-work their contract? Because that's completely different from Crabtree...

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about rookies. I'm talking about guys like Boldin and Roddy that want to redo their contracts and hold out of training camp. Boldin did it last year, didn't get his new contract, but eventually showed up and was playing week 1. Would it have been more effective if he stated at the beginning of TC that, come week 1, if no new contract is in place, Boldin won't be playing?

My bad--see 2nd edit above...

 

[gianmarco]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Because, sometimes in a negotiation, you lose.For example, a guy holds out because he wants a new contract. The team says no and fines him $17K per day. At somepoint the guy decides he can't afford to lose anymore money and he certainly doesn't want to lose any of his game checks. So, he shows up and takes the money on his current contract and hopes he can try again next year.

Exactly. Because holding out of training camp doesn't hurt the team very much so the player really doesn't have much leverage. If the same threat is not playing an actual game, then the team has a bit more to lose. That's my point is that holding out of training camp doesn't seem to have nearly as much leverage as holding out of an actual game would.

 

[gianmarco]

ETA2: Sorry--been jumping between this thread and Crabtree thread... this thread has nothing to do w/ Crabtree. If I were trying to rework my contract, I would definitely hold out of camp. Camp sucks. If I'm a vet, I probably don't *really* need the practice. Games is where I make my real money, so I don't want to skip those.

But, are you missing camp because camp sucks or because you really want to rework the contract? My guess is that Roddy may very well not end up with a new contract and would report back anyway. I think Atlanta would be in a much bigger pickle if they know that if a new contract isn't in place by week 1, they risk not having their WR1 on the field and would work harder to get it done than just knowing he's likely only going to sit out camp.Now, if these guys are doing it just to miss camp, that's a different story. I don't see that as being the case. I see it as a way to voice displeasure about their contracts without really having much leverage to do anything about it.

 

[Mark Wimer]

There may be a simple answer to this that I just don't know, but I was just thinking about this and wonder why is that players hold out of training camp. Here are my thoughts on it:--Holding out of training camp hurts the player in the end a lot of times. They miss out on key practice time. If I'm not mistaken, this can usually cause players to start slow unless they get into camp early enough. And that's for the stars. For the lesser players, they could lose out in a position battle. They could lose valuable reps. And it seems we hear about more injuries due to players not being prepared during TC--In the end, most of these players report back at the very end of camp or for games, contract or no contract. So in the end, the team hasn't really lost much and the player has lost more. Which brings me to my next point--Holding out of a game is much more significant to a team and would seem like a much bigger bargaining chip. Take Roddy White, for example. Out of the blue, he held out of training camp. Now, hopefully he'll get something done and he'll show up. But, this could end up hurting his #'s a little, at least early on. And what happens if he doesn't get the contract he wants? He'll probably show up for Week 1. What if, instead, he shows up to camp but makes it quite clear that if a contract isn't worked out by week 1 that he simply won't be playing. This shows that he's serious about being a part of the team, serious about preparing, but in the end, the team is going to lose where they need him most---the actual games. It also allows negotiations to take place and, if they work out, then no time is lost for player or for team. If he does hold out of Week 1, I bet the contract talks get done even faster and, when finally done, he can get right back in since he did attend TC and is familiar with what's going on.--There are fines for missing TC. Daily fines. What are those fines for missing a game? What if he shows up to the game but just refuses to take the field? This may be the part I'm missing as I just don't know, but it could potentially be cheaper for the player to do it this way as well.So, is there something I'm completely missing?

In-season players get paid by the game. Their game checks can be quite substantial. I believe the pay for TC is much lower, so they're losing less coin by sitting out.Also, veterans like Roddy White see Harry Douglas go down with a non-contact ACL in 2-a-days and become determined to get their $$$ before risking such a season-ending injury during 2-a-days (which most vets despise anyway).My .02.

 

[jackdubl]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Because, sometimes in a negotiation, you lose.For example, a guy holds out because he wants a new contract. The team says no and fines him $17K per day. At somepoint the guy decides he can't afford to lose anymore money and he certainly doesn't want to lose any of his game checks. So, he shows up and takes the money on his current contract and hopes he can try again next year.

Exactly. Because holding out of training camp doesn't hurt the team very much so the player really doesn't have much leverage. If the same threat is not playing an actual game, then the team has a bit more to lose. That's my point is that holding out of training camp doesn't seem to have nearly as much leverage as holding out of an actual game would.

I think leverage is the whole point. A player in that situation has no leverage. He CAN'T go out on the open market. His rights are owned by the team. So he would be cutting off his nose to spite his face by holding out of games. It's very rare for a player to make up the money he bypasses by holding out of games. I think Emmitt Smith with the Cowboys was the last guy I remember doing it successfully, and that's because that team was trying to win a Super Bowl and started 0-2 without him. It's a gamble. WR's have less leverage than Emmitt had on that team.

 

[pinequick]

Two reasons. 1. You don't want to go out and suffer an injury without getting that up-front money. 2. Although contracts say season on them, they are paid out on a per game basis. You basically lower your value a little for every game you miss plus you didn't get paid for that game.

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Link? Who are you talking about that reports to TRAINING CAMP w/o a contract? (honest question)ETA: Are you talking about guys who want to re-work their contract? Because that's completely different from Crabtree...

That's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about rookies. I'm talking about guys like Boldin and Roddy that want to redo their contracts and hold out of training camp. Boldin did it last year, didn't get his new contract, but eventually showed up and was playing week 1. Would it have been more effective if he stated at the beginning of TC that, come week 1, if no new contract is in place, Boldin won't be playing?

He did, but go back to the first point of your original post--how badly did missing TC affect Boldin last year? He's not going to bail on his teammates, but TC doesn't really count for that. Other players see it as business.Bailing on your teammates in a real game? Probably harder to swallow (for them and you). So between "going to war" with your teammates in real games and the financial hit-difference between pre-season and regular season... skipping regular season games is probably a LOT less attractive to players (hence, the dearth of occurrences).

 

[gianmarco]

There may be a simple answer to this that I just don't know, but I was just thinking about this and wonder why is that players hold out of training camp. Here are my thoughts on it:--Holding out of training camp hurts the player in the end a lot of times. They miss out on key practice time. If I'm not mistaken, this can usually cause players to start slow unless they get into camp early enough. And that's for the stars. For the lesser players, they could lose out in a position battle. They could lose valuable reps. And it seems we hear about more injuries due to players not being prepared during TC--In the end, most of these players report back at the very end of camp or for games, contract or no contract. So in the end, the team hasn't really lost much and the player has lost more. Which brings me to my next point--Holding out of a game is much more significant to a team and would seem like a much bigger bargaining chip. Take Roddy White, for example. Out of the blue, he held out of training camp. Now, hopefully he'll get something done and he'll show up. But, this could end up hurting his #'s a little, at least early on. And what happens if he doesn't get the contract he wants? He'll probably show up for Week 1. What if, instead, he shows up to camp but makes it quite clear that if a contract isn't worked out by week 1 that he simply won't be playing. This shows that he's serious about being a part of the team, serious about preparing, but in the end, the team is going to lose where they need him most---the actual games. It also allows negotiations to take place and, if they work out, then no time is lost for player or for team. If he does hold out of Week 1, I bet the contract talks get done even faster and, when finally done, he can get right back in since he did attend TC and is familiar with what's going on.--There are fines for missing TC. Daily fines. What are those fines for missing a game? What if he shows up to the game but just refuses to take the field? This may be the part I'm missing as I just don't know, but it could potentially be cheaper for the player to do it this way as well.So, is there something I'm completely missing?

In-season players get paid by the game. Their game checks can be quite substantial. I believe the pay for TC is much lower, so they're losing less coin by sitting out.Also, veterans like Roddy White see Harry Douglas go down with a non-contact ACL in 2-a-days and become determined to get their $$$ before risking such a season-ending injury during 2-a-days (which most vets despise anyway).My .02.

Well, I get this, but I still have 2 questions:1. What if Roddy suits up for a game but refuses to go in? Does he lose his entire game check?2. If he's worried about an injury before getting his contract reworked (which I understand is a completely legit reason and why most of these guys do this in the 1st place), then why will he eventually report in a couple weeks and play the season out? He's still putting himself at risk. I guess what I'm getting at with all this is that holding out of training camp doesn't seem like a very successful way to get a contract redone. We see players try it and in the end, because it really doesn't have much leverage, the teams tell them to bite on it and the players eventually report when they're tired of paying the fines. If they REALLY want to get the contract redone, even if it's because they want to get paid before injury, then sit out when it counts and force the team's hand a little bit more. Sure, there's a slightly increased risk of getting hurt during TC, but if the alternative isn't likely to be successful and you have just as much, if not more, chance of getting hurt during the season on the same contract you don't like, then why not go about holding out in a way that would get the team's attention and give you some leverage in the negotiations?

 

[gianmarco]

/thread.

Then why do many players report anyway even if a contract doesn't get done?

Because, sometimes in a negotiation, you lose.For example, a guy holds out because he wants a new contract. The team says no and fines him $17K per day. At somepoint the guy decides he can't afford to lose anymore money and he certainly doesn't want to lose any of his game checks. So, he shows up and takes the money on his current contract and hopes he can try again next year.

Exactly. Because holding out of training camp doesn't hurt the team very much so the player really doesn't have much leverage. If the same threat is not playing an actual game, then the team has a bit more to lose. That's my point is that holding out of training camp doesn't seem to have nearly as much leverage as holding out of an actual game would.

I think leverage is the whole point. A player in that situation has no leverage. He CAN'T go out on the open market. His rights are owned by the team. So he would be cutting off his nose to spite his face by holding out of games. It's very rare for a player to make up the money he bypasses by holding out of games. I think Emmitt Smith with the Cowboys was the last guy I remember doing it successfully, and that's because that team was trying to win a Super Bowl and started 0-2 without him. It's a gamble. WR's have less leverage than Emmitt had on that team.

Maybe that's the answer. I guess I see a team like Atlanta being much more concerned about losing Roddy than maybe they would be. As you said, Dallas needed Emmitt. I see it as Arizona needing Boldin or Atlanta needing Roddy and thus, having leverage as a result of that. If they really view it as it not hurting the team, then yes, it would be silly to go about it that way.That's also why I said above that this isn't obviously for all players that want to hold out. Just the ones that are legitimate stars that mean a LOT to their teams. Maybe I'm overestimating how much these guys mean to their teams in terms of winning.

 

[Mark Wimer]

There may be a simple answer to this that I just don't know, but I was just thinking about this and wonder why is that players hold out of training camp. Here are my thoughts on it:--Holding out of training camp hurts the player in the end a lot of times. They miss out on key practice time. If I'm not mistaken, this can usually cause players to start slow unless they get into camp early enough. And that's for the stars. For the lesser players, they could lose out in a position battle. They could lose valuable reps. And it seems we hear about more injuries due to players not being prepared during TC--In the end, most of these players report back at the very end of camp or for games, contract or no contract. So in the end, the team hasn't really lost much and the player has lost more. Which brings me to my next point--Holding out of a game is much more significant to a team and would seem like a much bigger bargaining chip. Take Roddy White, for example. Out of the blue, he held out of training camp. Now, hopefully he'll get something done and he'll show up. But, this could end up hurting his #'s a little, at least early on. And what happens if he doesn't get the contract he wants? He'll probably show up for Week 1. What if, instead, he shows up to camp but makes it quite clear that if a contract isn't worked out by week 1 that he simply won't be playing. This shows that he's serious about being a part of the team, serious about preparing, but in the end, the team is going to lose where they need him most---the actual games. It also allows negotiations to take place and, if they work out, then no time is lost for player or for team. If he does hold out of Week 1, I bet the contract talks get done even faster and, when finally done, he can get right back in since he did attend TC and is familiar with what's going on.--There are fines for missing TC. Daily fines. What are those fines for missing a game? What if he shows up to the game but just refuses to take the field? This may be the part I'm missing as I just don't know, but it could potentially be cheaper for the player to do it this way as well.So, is there something I'm completely missing?

In-season players get paid by the game. Their game checks can be quite substantial. I believe the pay for TC is much lower, so they're losing less coin by sitting out.Also, veterans like Roddy White see Harry Douglas go down with a non-contact ACL in 2-a-days and become determined to get their $$$ before risking such a season-ending injury during 2-a-days (which most vets despise anyway).My .02.

Well, I get this, but I still have 2 questions:1. What if Roddy suits up for a game but refuses to go in? Does he lose his entire game check?2. If he's worried about an injury before getting his contract reworked (which I understand is a completely legit reason and why most of these guys do this in the 1st place), then why will he eventually report in a couple weeks and play the season out? He's still putting himself at risk. I guess what I'm getting at with all this is that holding out of training camp doesn't seem like a very successful way to get a contract redone. We see players try it and in the end, because it really doesn't have much leverage, the teams tell them to bite on it and the players eventually report when they're tired of paying the fines. If they REALLY want to get the contract redone, even if it's because they want to get paid before injury, then sit out when it counts and force the team's hand a little bit more. Sure, there's a slightly increased risk of getting hurt during TC, but if the alternative isn't likely to be successful and you have just as much, if not more, chance of getting hurt during the season on the same contract you don't like, then why not go about holding out in a way that would get the team's attention and give you some leverage in the negotiations?

I don't know the answer to 1. I'd think if he refused to take the field they'd withhold his pay entirely, but I don't know. on the rest, I think it's the greed factor of the game checks vs. TC checks more than anything else.

 

[GregR_2]

...Well, I get this, but I still have 2 questions:1. What if Roddy suits up for a game but refuses to go in? Does he lose his entire game check?...

The CBA's provision for Conduct Detrimental to the Club would let the club fine him 1 week's salary and also suspend him without pay for an additional 4 weeks. So he could potentially lose 5 weeks of salary by doing it.

 

[gianmarco]

...Well, I get this, but I still have 2 questions:1. What if Roddy suits up for a game but refuses to go in? Does he lose his entire game check?...

The CBA's provision for Conduct Detrimental to the Club would let the club fine him 1 week's salary and also suspend him without pay for an additional 4 weeks. So he could potentially lose 5 weeks of salary by doing it.

See, I knew there was a much better reason for why they don't do it. That makes sense now. Thanks

 

[GregR_2]

Don't they get paid base salaries the games they play and much less for TC?

Yes Sterling did do that but they paid him quickly. At the time he was by far their best player.

^this.Players get their salary in 16 (or 17, not sure how they deal with the bye) game checks I'm pretty sure. Given the penchant for many players to live pay check to pay check, most are in no position to hold out in-season and miss those pay days.

I was wondering this too and looked in the CBA. Didn't find the pertinent section though I did find some other things related to penalties that for some cases had limits like 1/17 of their signing bonus for each regular season week or game missed. So I think it's 17 and they get a check on the bye week too.

 

[coolnerd]

On the idea that players care about the hold out player: I know an ex player and it was described as established veterans are considered just "handling business" and nothing negative is thought about it. Rookie players are much more nagatively viewed since they have not proven anything. Players who are not very good are considered stupid.

 

[Mark Wimer]

...Well, I get this, but I still have 2 questions:1. What if Roddy suits up for a game but refuses to go in? Does he lose his entire game check?...

The CBA's provision for Conduct Detrimental to the Club would let the club fine him 1 week's salary and also suspend him without pay for an additional 4 weeks. So he could potentially lose 5 weeks of salary by doing it.

Now I know for sure. What's the line item there (section, page number, etc?). Just in case it comes up on the boards again in future.

 

[GregR_2]

...Well, I get this, but I still have 2 questions:1. What if Roddy suits up for a game but refuses to go in? Does he lose his entire game check?...

The CBA's provision for Conduct Detrimental to the Club would let the club fine him 1 week's salary and also suspend him without pay for an additional 4 weeks. So he could potentially lose 5 weeks of salary by doing it.

Now I know for sure. What's the line item there (section, page number, etc?). Just in case it comes up on the boards again in future.

Page 19 near the bottom. Article VIII Club Discipline. Section 1(a) Maximum Discipline.And in glancing at the next section, I see that the amounts that have been mentioned of $14,000 for a fine are for 2006 but are higher now. Section 1(b) says that the amounts in 1(a) shall be increased for the 2007 League Year and each League Year thereafter, at the annual Total Revenue growth, up to a maximum annual growth of 10% per year.So in addition to the possible 4 game suspension without pay, the fine has increased.