Twitter: Source: Jeremy Mincey in Oxnard

[dallasdave]

Shhhh
Please don't let common sense get in the way of some hot air

 

[jobberone]

Shhhh
Please don't let common sense get in the way of some hot air

It appears you don't value the guy much. I disagree although your opinion is just as valid. I think he's a versatile player who is a valuable rotation guy who could step up in case of injury or lack of production from unknowns like Gregory and Lawrence and give you decent service at the 3 or 5.

Who else can do that besides Crawford that we actually know can do it now?

Who are the 3s and not 1/3's?

Before you dismiss a player you must be able to replace him with at least someone serviceable.

 

[StarBoyz83]

Good news

 

[TheFinisher]

I don't think he will be our best DE in camp as I'd put Lawrence there although I admit he's done nothing compared to Mincey. I just think he's better. Gregory may be as well as an edge rusher but apples and oranges.

Mincey is a 5 and a 3. We could use that. I think Mincey can rotate at the 3 and 5 with the 3 being just or more important.

I see no reason to address the incentive last year by giving more incentives this year and I'd diminish the snaps and emphasize the production.

Lawrence is all potential at this point, as is Gregory. We're not even sure if Gregory's ceiling year 1 is anything more than a situational pass rusher. It's not a preferable position to be in depending on two unknown guys for the first 4 weeks of the season. They need Mincey with Hardy out.

 

[visionary]

It appears you don't value the guy much. I disagree although your opinion is just as valid. I think he's a versatile player who is a valuable rotation guy who could step up in case of injury or lack of production from unknowns like Gregory and Lawrence and give you decent service at the 3 or 5.

Who else can do that besides Crawford that we actually know can do it now?

Who are the 3s and not 1/3's?

Before you dismiss a player you must be able to replace him with at least someone serviceable.

I do value him, however I'm against mediocre players holding out for more money when they signed the contract with full knowledge of what was in it

I'm even more against random CZ poster coming in and implying that the team has somehow taken advantage of the player by not having a guaranteed contract to distract from the issue knowing full well that is not the case and players do get guaranteed money

Players get an up front signing bonus, that is the guaranteed money. If the player breaks a leg the day after getting his signing bonus and without playing a single down will he give back the money? Of course not. But then you won't see that poster come to the defense of the team.

The contract is for both parties
Don't sign it if you don't like it
Play it out if you do

It would be nice if posters who don't "begrudge" players holding out to get more money would put team before player and understand this simple concept

 

[AzorAhai]

Every player wants to be paid what they are worth until what they are worth is less than they make. Then it's the evil dictator team not honoring the contract. How dare a team scout and develop underrated or underachieving talent and have a good team friendly deal.

 

[windward]

I do value him, however I'm against mediocre players holding out for more money when they signed the contract with full knowledge of what was in it

I'm even more against random CZ poster coming in and implying that the team has somehow taken advantage of the player by not having a guaranteed contract to distract from the issue knowing full well that is not the case and players do get guaranteed money

Players get an up front signing bonus, that is the guaranteed money. If the player breaks a leg the day after getting his signing bonus and without playing a single down will he give back the money? Of course not. But then you won't see that poster come to the defense of the team.

The contract is for both parties
Don't sign it if you don't like it
Play it out if you do

It would be nice if posters who don't "begrudge" players holding out to get more money would put team before player and understand this simple concept

Somebody's reading a bit too much into this, I think. I never implied the team took advantage and it's a fact that contracts aren't fully guaranteed. domtmassume that you know how I would respond if a player broke his leg and needed to repay the signing bonus. I if he did it while playing the game, then yeah he's entitled to keep it. If he hurts it doing something foolish, then that's another matter.

 

[jobberone]

Lawrence is all potential at this point, as is Gregory. We're not even sure if Gregory's ceiling year 1 is anything more than a situational pass rusher. It's not a preferable position to be in depending on two unknown guys for the first 4 weeks of the season. They need Mincey with Hardy out.

I think that's what I said and certainly meant. But we agree!

 

[windward]

But he plays in a world dictated by a collective bargaining agreement and he chooses to play/employee himself in an industry that has these rules.

So I think one can begrudge a player that signed a contract under a collectively bargained agreement and then decides, shoot, I don't want to play under something I agreed to and signed.

Under the CBA, renegotiating contracts are permitted.

 

[jobberone]

I do value him, however I'm against mediocre players holding out for more money when they signed the contract with full knowledge of what was in it

I'm even more against random CZ poster coming in and implying that the team has somehow taken advantage of the player by not having a guaranteed contract to distract from the issue knowing full well that is not the case and players do get guaranteed money

Players get an up front signing bonus, that is the guaranteed money. If the player breaks a leg the day after getting his signing bonus and without playing a single down will he give back the money? Of course not. But then you won't see that poster come to the defense of the team.

The contract is for both parties
Don't sign it if you don't like it
Play it out if you do

It would be nice if posters who don't "begrudge" players holding out to get more money would put team before player and understand this simple concept

If it is for both sides then fans shouldn't begrudge player or team. Again I see no reason not to give the guy some incentives although it will add some to the cap. There is no room for egos on either side.

 

[dfense]

A contract is a contract. If he wanted to prove himself, he should have signed a one year deal instead of two. If he plays well again he'll probably get an extension mid season.

 

[visionary]

If it is for both sides then fans shouldn't begrudge player or team. Again I see no reason not to give the guy some incentives although it will add some to the cap. There is no room for egos on either side.

I "begrudge" the player holding out because it adversely affects the team I'm a fan of

 

[jobberone]

I "begrudge" the player holding out because it adversely affects the team I'm a fan of

He 'held' out a day or three so I don't begrudge him anything.

 

[visionary]

He 'held' out a day or three so I don't begrudge him anything.

What if all players on the last year of their deal hold out 3 days of TC?
No big deal?

Again, let's be a fan of the team

 

[Nightman]

He 'held' out a day or three so I don't begrudge him anything.

And it isn't like teams won't cut players simply because of their contracts and not who 'won' the job. It's all just business.

 

[jobberone]

What if all players on the last year of their deal hold out 3 days of TC?
No big deal?

Again, let's be a fan of the team

Give me a break. Many of the players can't renegotiate their contracts or have no need to. Your scenario is not plausible and therefore irrelevant. As to questioning another member being a good fan; well, I'd avoid doing that.

 

[jobberone]

And it isn't like teams won't cut players simply because of their contracts and not who 'won' the job. It's all just business.

Yeah, that happens which is another reason I don't begrudge players getting theirs while they can. NFL careers are limited. There's nothing wrong with either or both sides getting the most they can while they can.

 

[visionary]

Give me a break. Many of the players can't renegotiate their contracts or have no need to. Your scenario is not plausible and therefore irrelevant. As to questioning another member being a good fan; well, I'd avoid doing that.

It is absolutely plausible
Why wouldn't other players be able do what mincey is doing?
Another poster made an incorrect comment yet you're arguing with me
I wonder why

 

[windward]

It is absolutely plausible
Why wouldn't other players be able do what mincey is doing?
Another poster made an incorrect comment yet you're arguing with me
I wonder why

My comment wasn't incorrect. Contracts aren't fully guaranteed in the NFL, and that was the context in which the statement was made. I suppose I could have added the word fully in there, though it wouldn't have changed the essence of my point. Even so, 200k guaranteed out of 1.5 M isn't much. Also, there is no guarantee he'd have a contract for next year either. In that context, the statement "contracts aren't guaranteed" also makes sense.

Bottom line, players have the right to attempt to renegotiate their contracts. Teams have the right to terminate contracts at will, saving any unguaranteed money from being paid. In that light, I don't have a problem with Mincey missing a few days if it means he can get an added year to his contract. And maybe a little bit more cash.

 

[jobberone]

It is absolutely plausible
Why wouldn't other players be able do what mincey is doing?
Another poster made an incorrect comment yet you're arguing with me
I wonder why

It's a public forum and members post to other members entering and exiting conversations. If you want to talk privately then take it to PMs. There is no underlying current towards you or anyone else.

Many players aren't able to enter free agency and are unlikely to be released. They are stuck such as rookies. They can be released but until then can't play for anyone else. Player's like Romo, Witten, Dez and many others are getting more here than they likely can anywhere else. They are also under contract so can't leave to play elsewhere unless cut.

Only vested veterans can create problems enough to be release so they can play elsewhere. And that's dicey as trouble makers are frowned on.

Players under contract are mostly at the mercy of the club. If they hold out then then they are likely hurting themselves more than anyone.

Right now Mincey either being here or not for a short time is actually beneficial to both parties. His being gone saves his body. Many vets now and remotely have done or do this. Being away briefly or at times longer helps the club evaluate younger players; they get more snaps which they often need.

It's not a simple 'they should' be here. There are pros and cons like most of life.