(Yahoo/AP) NFLPA advises players about potential 2011 lockout

[AbeBeta]

Other sports != Football. So you point is moot! :laugh2:

anyhow, if they have it good, why are there rumors of a lockout?

Because business people always want something better. That's their only leverage and they are going to use it.

 

[Doomsday101]

Correct. But, if the contract was guaranteed and the signing bonus was removed his deal would look more like 6 years 60 million. I'm not sure even Danny would guarantee him that 60 million considering he's decided to "show up" and be dominant for a grand total one year of his career. Which brings us back to my point. The players that are WORTH that kind of money will get it. The "contract players" will earn what an owner deems he's worth. Many owners would NEVER give a huge amount of guaranteed money to a guy that finally "showed up" once it was time for him to sign a new contract if they knew they had to guarantee it. Currently, they can lock these guys up because they know that they can dump them and their salary with a lot less impact on their cap if they know they don't have to guarantee any of the money (sans the signing bonus).

Bottom line is the players are taken care of they are being well paid the 41 million in hand to Hayensworth no matter how you cut it is a damn find day. I agree owners are not going to give out 6 year and 60 million guaranteed why should they not protect the franchise in a game where injuries and a players performance tends to slide faster than other sports. Sorry I'm not going to cry for the players and the contracts they enjoy.

 

[skinsscalper]

Bottom line is the players are taken care of they are being well paid the 41 million in hand to Hayensworth no matter how you cut it is a damn find day. I agree owners are not going to give out 6 year and 60 million guaranteed why should they not protect the franchise in a game where injuries and a players performance tends to slide faster than other sports. Sorry I'm not going to cry for the players and the contracts they enjoy.

Me either. My debate is, in fact, in support of the contrary. I think a lot more of them should be paid a lot less. Which is why I think guaranteeing their contract will bring them back down to earth.

 

[AbeBeta]

Me either. My debate is, in fact, in support of the contrary. I think a lot more of them should be paid a lot less. Which is why I think guaranteeing their contract will bring them back down to earth.

Like it does in baseball?

Yeah. Real down to Earth deals there.

 

[Doomsday101]

Me either. My debate is, in fact, in support of the contrary. I think a lot more of them should be paid a lot less. Which is why I think guaranteeing their contract will bring them back down to earth.

I don't begrudge players money however I don't care to listen to them moan and groan as if they are getting paid minimum wage in the real world. I would like to see rookie caps put into place I think that would help free up more cash for vet players who have actually gone out and earned it. I would like to see from the owners more money contributed to retired player’s funds to help those who helped build this game.

 

[skinsscalper]

Like it does in baseball?

Yeah. Real down to Earth deals there.

I agree that some are astronomical in baseball. However, only the elite of the elite get those deals in baseball. The gap between what the elite get in baseball as opposed to JAG is greater in the MLB. In the NFL you've got guys like Albert Haynesworth as the highest paid D-lineman when he's not even the best D-lineman in his division. Why? Because his contract isn't guaranteed.

 

[skinsscalper]

I don't begrudge players money however I don't care to listen to them moan and groan as if they are getting paid minimum wage in the real world. I would like to see rookie caps put into place I think that would help free up more cash for vet players who have actually gone out and earned it. I would like to see from the owners more money contributed to retired player’s funds to help those who helped build this game.

I wouldn't argue against any of those points. I totally agree.

 

[SkinsFan28]

If it's a strike shortened season, the Commanders will win another Superbowl. :laugh2:

I would take it

 

[SkinsFan28]

I hope these two sides work out their differences. Football has had it good for a while now, and it would be a shame to see that go away.
I believe in a rookie cap, and contracts that encourage performance. But players, like every union, is more worried about getting their piece of the pie, rather than what they do to earn it. If AH gets hurt tomorrow, he still gets 41 Million dollars, worse if Stafford gets hurt tomorrow, HE gets 40+ million dollars. There will always be owners, like Snyder, willing to pay top dollar within whatever structure is created, just like there will be owners who try to pocket all their money and re-invest the bare minimums. The pot is split pretty reasonably now, and I for one simply want to watch the games, and don't care how these very rich men (even #53 on the roster, if he stays on for a couple years) sort it out.

Just git 'er done!!!

 

[AbeBeta]

I agree that some are astronomical in baseball. However, only the elite of the elite get those deals in baseball. The gap between what the elite get in baseball as opposed to JAG is greater in the MLB. In the NFL you've got guys like Albert Haynesworth as the highest paid D-lineman when he's not even the best D-lineman in his division. Why? Because his contract isn't guaranteed.

That's not good logic. Haynesworth is the top paid D-lineman because he was a UFA this off season and he's one of the league's best defenders - of the guys who got deals this off season, he is the best D-lineman. He is an elite player and he is getting a contract that reflects that. Whether the deal is guaranteed or not has ZERO impact on that.

 

[Audiman]

Which is exactly my point. Owners would be a lot more careful about who they gave their money to. Ware will never be the type of player that plays strictly for a contract, so it's safe to sign him to a guaranteed deal. Same goes with guys like Peyton Manning, Jerry Rice, Jim Brown, Micheal Irvin. There could also be clauses in the contract to pick up the option on more years (just like baseball). Don't get me wrong they all want to be paid, but it's not THE one single motivation with players like that. If Jones had to guarantee Roy Williams' (Safety) or Zach Thomas' contracts he never would have drawn them up. Same with Snyder, and Haynesworth, and Hall. Neither one of them would have sniffed the inflated contracts that they just signed if it was a guaranteed deal. They would have been paid comensurate to what they've brought to the table throughout their careers rather than cashing in because they played lights out in the final year of their deal.

Jamarcus Russell is a symptom of a whole other problem in the NFL. Rookie contracts. I'd almost bet my house that the owners will not touch a new CBA that doesn't have some type of rookie contract cap.

the problem with your thinking is that NOBODY knows how a player is going to do when he gets drafted or signed. nobody knew Ware would play like he plays, nobody knew Irvin, P.Manning, Aikman, Emmitt, or Rice would have the careers they had. it's easy to look back on a player and say "should have".

 

[dozin_theknick]

That's not good logic. Haynesworth is the top paid D-lineman because he was a UFA this off season and he's one of the league's best defenders - of the guys who got deals this off season, he is the best D-lineman. He is an elite player and he is getting a contract that reflects that. Whether the deal is guaranteed or not has ZERO impact on that.

It is to me. If his contract was guaranteed he would not have received what he did. Guaranteed contracts would reduce alot of the deals offered to guys who are known to play for the pay. The guys who have their best seasons in a contract year. Haynesworth has a rep as a lazy guy who had his best season in a contract year.

 

[DWhite Fan]

Hot Dog! The return of the "Rhinestone" Cowboys! :laugh2: