Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Sports Talk
Reload this Page >

What's up with all the "knuckleheads" this year in the NFL?

Sports Talk Discuss all things Sports Related

What's up with all the "knuckleheads" this year in the NFL?

Old 08-09-05, 04:32 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: in Bush territory!
Posts: 11,613
What's up with all the "knuckleheads" this year in the NFL?

What happened? Has the NFL turned into the NBA? It used to be you only had Randy Moss and the Dallas Cowboys stirring up trouble. But this year, it seems like everybody is griping or bitching about something. Everytime I turn on ESPN it's another nobody holding out for more money or dissin' someone else?

[Rant]They need to stop with this nonsense already.....and the comissioner needs to pass a new rule fixing this stupid "holding out" phenomenon before it gets out of control. I think the NFL should say....you have the option holding out, but you have to go flip burgers or deliver mail for 1 full year before you can return. You signed the contract! Now go out there and do your effing job! If you don't want to play, FINE!

[SoupNazi] No paycheck for you! [/SoupNazi]

I don't wanna hear you bitching about how your kids ain't getting enough to eat on TV. As Clint Eastwood once said....."deserves ain't got nothin' to do wid it"[/Rant]
wabio is offline  
Old 08-09-05, 04:47 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Money Pit
Posts: 8,160
Yeah, Adam "pacman" Jones is really making a stink in Titans land.
vaporware is offline  
Old 08-09-05, 04:52 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Legend
 
chrisih8u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A few miles north of the Cape
Posts: 18,335
Originally Posted by waporvare
Yeah, Adam "pacman" Jones is really making a stink in Titans land.

''But then I have to hear Keith Bulluck talking about me, how he doesn't even know who Pacman is... . But as far as the respect level off the field and me calling him for advice, that will never happen now... Keith has never been in the situation I am in Keith ain't never been drafted high.''

What an idiot.
chrisih8u is offline  
Old 08-09-05, 05:04 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,437
Hines Ward is holding out because he wants a new contract.

The Steelers will not negotiate new contracts with players that are holding out.

Ward has just wasted a week and a half of time that he could have used to negotiate that new contract - but that's not quite as important as "making a statement" I guess.
ToddSm66 is offline  
Old 08-09-05, 07:57 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 6,241
Originally Posted by wabio
[Rant]They need to stop with this nonsense already.....and the comissioner needs to pass a new rule fixing this stupid "holding out" phenomenon before it gets out of control. I think the NFL should say....you have the option holding out, but you have to go flip burgers or deliver mail for 1 full year before you can return. You signed the contract! Now go out there and do your effing job! If you don't want to play, FINE!
Well, that's the case. If they hold out, they are not getting paid.

The thing is that you never have "average" players hold out, its always the all-star caliber player. That player has the ability to affect the teams fortunes, so more often then not, the teams give in.

I hate players asking for more "respect" (ie. money) too, but the NFL's CBA is to blame...no one thought big signing bonuses, deferred money, and non guaranteed contracts would be a problem?
clemente is offline  
Old 08-09-05, 09:55 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,204
Originally Posted by wabio
You signed the contract! Now go out there and do your effing job! If you don't want to play, FINE!
Why is it that a team can cut a player who is under contract, and it's just business... but when a player holds out, suddenly their contract becomes some kind of sacred blood oath???

The average lifespan of an NFL player is about 3 years. Even for the superstars of the league, 10 years is pretty much the limit. After they retire, they're lucky to be able to comb their hair or walk without a cane. During that 10 year span, they should make as much money as they possibly can... and the holdout is really their only weapon.
NCMojo is offline  
Old 08-10-05, 12:08 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,437
Originally Posted by NCMojo
Why is it that a team can cut a player who is under contract, and it's just business... but when a player holds out, suddenly their contract becomes some kind of sacred blood oath???

How many players do you see lining up to give up their huge, up-front signing bonuses in exchange for guaranteed contracts?
ToddSm66 is offline  
Old 08-10-05, 01:34 AM
  #8  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Under a dead Ohio sky
Posts: 5,820
Originally Posted by ToddSm66
How many players do you see lining up to give up their huge, up-front signing bonuses in exchange for guaranteed contracts?
I think the players would trade signing bonuses for guaranteed contracts in a heartbeat, the owners wont go for it though. The vast majority of players don't get huge signing bonuses. NFL players on average are the worst paid athletes of the big 3 sports by far. And has already been mentioned they take the most punishment and have the shortest careers. Yet the NFL makes the most money of all the sports leagues by wide margin.
The owners have all the power and the players union is a joke.
Thrush is offline  
Old 08-10-05, 09:25 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: DVDTalk's Surgeon General
Posts: 5,518
Teams use players and players use teams. If either dosn't like they way they are being used they can work on renegotiating the contract. Teams get to waive players so the only things players can do is hold out.
shadowhawk2020 is offline  
Old 08-10-05, 09:39 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,204
Originally Posted by ToddSm66
How many players do you see lining up to give up their huge, up-front signing bonuses in exchange for guaranteed contracts?
Well, the NBA and MLB don't really have the huge upfront signing bonuses. You know why? Because they have guaranteed contracts. They know that if they sign for 6 years and $60 million that they'll actually collect $60 million. In the NFL, many players sign "huge" contracts that are so backloaded that it's practically an inside joke.
NCMojo is offline  
Old 08-10-05, 10:58 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell
Posts: 30,510
[TO]NO COMMENT![/TO]
devilshalo is offline  
Old 08-11-05, 11:03 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Un-Happy Valley, PA
Posts: 2,718
Originally Posted by NCMojo
Well, the NBA and MLB don't really have the huge upfront signing bonuses. You know why? Because they have guaranteed contracts. They know that if they sign for 6 years and $60 million that they'll actually collect $60 million. In the NFL, many players sign "huge" contracts that are so backloaded that it's practically an inside joke.
Well, you do understand that the NFL is exactly the type of sport in which guaranteed player contracts as a norm is or would be impossible. Due to the nature of the sport, and given the high incident of injury, use of guaranteed contracts as norm could easily cripple a franchise give the use of a salary cap.

That said, it is very true that the lack contract guarantees is NOT a fixed term under the NFL CBA. Any player is welcome to negotiate for a guaranteed contract with his team. If the player has enough leverage (ie. star power) AND (and here's the kicker) is willing to forgoe any signing bonus, roster bonus and similar upfront cash, such contracts CAN and have been done under the curent CBA. However, again due to the risks of the game and the fact the most teams would be reluctant to do guarantees more than 3 years in length, it is in the player's best interest to collect as much upfront cash as possible.

Overall, the NFLPA has done a good job in protecting the rights of most NFL players. As always those on the margins (ie. superstars and grunts), take slight hits for the betterment of those in the median.
wlmowery is offline  
Old 08-11-05, 03:29 PM
  #13  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 2,502
Great comments by all. Very interesting thread. Some situations I can understand a player holding out and some I cant.

Example: Javon Walker.
He's still in his rookie contract making about 500k/yr. Although he only had one "breakout" year he has shown potential from the start and finally got a chance to be the go-to guy last year. He may be considered a Top 10 WR in the league (at least Top 20). What if he suffers a career ending injury this year (very possible)? I can understand his want for more money now.

T.O. on the other hand IMHO is doing this because of his ego. He has made and currently makes enough cash (7 mil/yr) to live comfortably (Im sure he wants more but I dont think money is his main issue). T.O. is comparing his contracts with some of bigger contracts at his position and amongst other positions and he feels slighted. My problem with him is that he hand picked where he wanted to play by demanding a trade away from SF and refusing to play for Baltimore. Both places couldve gave him top tier cash but he whined and moaned until he got his way. To me, he's paying the price (pun intended) for choosing his team the way he did.

This is why I dont like to lump all hold out players into one big category. Each situation deserves its own fair disection.
gmal2003 is offline  
Old 08-11-05, 03:49 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell
Posts: 30,510
Originally Posted by wlmowery
Well, you do understand that the NFL is exactly the type of sport in which guaranteed player contracts as a norm is or would be impossible. Due to the nature of the sport, and given the high incident of injury, use of guaranteed contracts as norm could easily cripple a franchise give the use of a salary cap.
devilshalo is offline  
Old 08-11-05, 04:40 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,204
Originally Posted by wlmowery
Well, you do understand that the NFL is exactly the type of sport in which guaranteed player contracts as a norm is or would be impossible. Due to the nature of the sport, and given the high incident of injury, use of guaranteed contracts as norm could easily cripple a franchise give the use of a salary cap.

That said, it is very true that the lack contract guarantees is NOT a fixed term under the NFL CBA. Any player is welcome to negotiate for a guaranteed contract with his team. If the player has enough leverage (ie. star power) AND (and here's the kicker) is willing to forgoe any signing bonus, roster bonus and similar upfront cash, such contracts CAN and have been done under the curent CBA. However, again due to the risks of the game and the fact the most teams would be reluctant to do guarantees more than 3 years in length, it is in the player's best interest to collect as much upfront cash as possible.

Overall, the NFLPA has done a good job in protecting the rights of most NFL players. As always those on the margins (ie. superstars and grunts), take slight hits for the betterment of those in the median.
I just can't reconcile your final paragraph with the two that come before it. How has the NFLPA not done a disservice to it's members by not pushing for guaranteed, no-cut contracts? Especially "given the high incident of injury", the fact that a player can sign a contract that is not even worth the paper it is signed on is just ludicrous. No other sport cries out more for guaranteed contracts than the NFL, and yet a tiny number of contracts -- less than sixty since 1993 -- have included even the tiniest percentage of guaranteed funds.

Arguing about how guaranteed contracts are impossible in light of the strict salary cap is absurd. The NBA has had a hard cap and guaranteed contracts for years, and they work within the system. Actually, what the lack of guaranteed contracts does is circumvent the intent of the CBA and the negotiated salary cap -- it prevents a team from truly mapping out a long-term strategy, requiring yearly salary adjustments by NFL veterans just to keep everyone in line. Again, other professional sports leagues find ways to remain flexible under the cap... why can't the NFL, with it's regular history of injury grievances and underfunded pensions?

The NFLPA has done nothing but suck up to the owners since the 1987 strike. The NFL is the most popular and succesful pro league in America, and yet its players are some of the lowest paid around, with the shortest careers and the highest rate of injury. I'm not in favor of throwing out the CBA and going to unlimited free agency a la major league baseball -- but I'd like to see the NFL do more to protect and reward the men who put their bodies on the line Sunday after Sunday.
NCMojo is offline  
Old 08-11-05, 04:58 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,437
Look at Hines Ward...he will probably end up getting a deal lets say $6 million per year for 5 years...plus around a $10 million signing bonus.

He is getting paid for almost two full years of service in advance - before he even plays a single down...all that just for the chance that he may get cut before the contract expires. How is that a bad deal for the player?

It's not - that why you don't see players fighting to get guaranteed contracts. Would you rather get a lump some of two years of work all in advance plus a yearly salary, or would you rather have a steady job for 5 years with no upfront cash and just a weekly game check?



Look at Kellen Winslow, Jr. The guy has already made, what...$17 million? Even if the Browns cut him and take back part of the bonus for the motorcycle accident, he still goes away with $12 million...all for playing 4 whole games over two years. How exactly is that hurting the player?
ToddSm66 is offline  
Old 08-11-05, 10:53 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Skull 1
Posts: 945
Originally Posted by NCMojo
The NBA has had a hard cap...
The NBA's cap is far from "hard". Teams can go way above the cap by re-signing their own free agents, taking on a bunch of crappy contracts or offering the mid-level exception every year. Look at the Knicks, who have a $90 million plus payroll yet the "cap" is less than $50 million.

I'm not so sure that guaranteed contracts can coexist with a "hard cap" unless teams are allowed to "cut" the players and have their salaries eliminated from counting against cap (while still paying the money owed the player of course). Indeed, if you release someone in the NBA, their salary still counts against the cap. If such a hard cap were in place and the team's star RB blows out his knee and can only play at 50% of his ability compared to before, the team is shit out of luck until his contract expires. Considering the prevalence of injury in the NFL, that is not an unrealistic scenario.

That's not to say that guaranteed contracts can't work within the NFL, but that the cap will have to softened before they become more commonplace.
Fokker's Feint is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 08:57 AM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
Originally Posted by gmal2003
T.O. on the other hand IMHO is doing this because of his ego. He has made and currently makes enough cash (7 mil/yr) to live comfortably (Im sure he wants more but I dont think money is his main issue). T.O. is comparing his contracts with some of bigger contracts at his position and amongst other positions and he feels slighted. My problem with him is that he hand picked where he wanted to play by demanding a trade away from SF and refusing to play for Baltimore. Both places couldve gave him top tier cash but he whined and moaned until he got his way. To me, he's paying the price (pun intended) for choosing his team the way he did.
TO was -traded- with a contract in place from SF. Baltimore would not restructure his deal. The Eagles DID. I think you have things backwards.

TO is paid well. His problem is that the 2nd year of his contract only pays him 3.5 million and he knows the Eagles will release him after this year and he won't see the big money in years 3+. But if he kept his mouth shut and performed, Andy Reid probably WOULD have kept him around for additional years.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 12:22 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,790
Drew Rosenhaus....a lot of his clients holdout for bigger contracts
Dabaomb is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 01:15 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Columbia, MD, USA
Posts: 11,140
Originally Posted by NCMojo
Why is it that a team can cut a player who is under contract, and it's just business... but when a player holds out, suddenly their contract becomes some kind of sacred blood oath???

The average lifespan of an NFL player is about 3 years. Even for the superstars of the league, 10 years is pretty much the limit. After they retire, they're lucky to be able to comb their hair or walk without a cane. During that 10 year span, they should make as much money as they possibly can... and the holdout is really their only weapon.
Mainly because team's have the option to cut a player in the contract. It's just like any other clause of the contract, and exercising such a clause is legal and in good faith. Not honoring a contract, on the other hand, is in bad faith.

For much the same reasoning that I can be fired whenever my employer wants, yet I can't sit at home and expect to be paid (or much less have a job). Why is this s hard to reconcile. You want to hold-out? Negotiate it into your contract that you can holdout, or better yet have a termination clause.
Jericho is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 01:20 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Columbia, MD, USA
Posts: 11,140
Originally Posted by Thrush
I think the players would trade signing bonuses for guaranteed contracts in a heartbeat, the owners wont go for it though. The vast majority of players don't get huge signing bonuses. NFL players on average are the worst paid athletes of the big 3 sports by far. And has already been mentioned they take the most punishment and have the shortest careers. Yet the NFL makes the most money of all the sports leagues by wide margin.
The owners have all the power and the players union is a joke.
Well the NFL also has a lot more players. I don't have exact figures, but I think the percentage of profits is similar for the NHL, NBA, and NFL. It's just the NFL has to divide the pie among 53+ players (by the time you get through practice squad and injury fill-ins it gets much larger), many more coaches, more equipment costs, trainers, etc...

Now it's true that the NFL does take the most punishment, but that's partly why you don't have guaranteed deals. Who's gonna get a long term deal if there's a good chance the guy will get hurt at any time? And you know what else? It's a risk of employment. Coal mining and timber butting can be risky jobs too, what of it?
Jericho is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 01:24 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,204
Originally Posted by Jericho
Mainly because team's have the option to cut a player in the contract. It's just like any other clause of the contract, and exercising such a clause is legal and in good faith. Not honoring a contract, on the other hand, is in bad faith.

For much the same reasoning that I can be fired whenever my employer wants, yet I can't sit at home and expect to be paid (or much less have a job). Why is this s hard to reconcile. You want to hold-out? Negotiate it into your contract that you can holdout, or better yet have a termination clause.
My original point had to do with public opinion -- when a player holds out, they're greedy, selfish, and unloyal... but when a team cuts a 10 year veteran, it suddenly becomes a "savvy business move".

In my mind, loyalty is a two-way street. If I am working for a company, and I see that they take care of their employees, then I would probably not spend a lot of time perusing the want ads or sending our resumes. But if I see them regularly "downsizing" employees and cutting benefits... I'll do my best to take care of myself and my family.

And the very fact that the teams have the option to cut a player in mid-contract is an indictment of the NFLPA.
NCMojo is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 01:26 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Columbia, MD, USA
Posts: 11,140
Originally Posted by Fokker's Feint
The NBA's cap is far from "hard". Teams can go way above the cap by re-signing their own free agents, taking on a bunch of crappy contracts or offering the mid-level exception every year. Look at the Knicks, who have a $90 million plus payroll yet the "cap" is less than $50 million.

I'm not so sure that guaranteed contracts can coexist with a "hard cap" unless teams are allowed to "cut" the players and have their salaries eliminated from counting against cap (while still paying the money owed the player of course). Indeed, if you release someone in the NBA, their salary still counts against the cap. If such a hard cap were in place and the team's star RB blows out his knee and can only play at 50% of his ability compared to before, the team is shit out of luck until his contract expires. Considering the prevalence of injury in the NFL, that is not an unrealistic scenario.

That's not to say that guaranteed contracts can't work within the NFL, but that the cap will have to softened before they become more commonplace.
I guess one has to wait and see how the NHL works out. They will have the tandem of a hard cap and guaranteed contracts. With so many teams looking for players, you've seen some crazy deals in the past week in the NHL. But the deals aren't usually that long-term, even good players like Forsberg and Kariya only got two years.

Because the cap is tied to league revenues, it will be interesting to see how it all plays out. There's a lot of concern the cap will decrease next year and several teams who spent a lot of money may be in big troble. Already you saw Philly give away Jeremy Roenick just to take on Peter Forsberg. It could get interesting in a nother few years.
Jericho is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 01:31 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Columbia, MD, USA
Posts: 11,140
Originally Posted by NCMojo
My original point had to do with public opinion -- when a player holds out, they're greedy, selfish, and unloyal... but when a team cuts a 10 year veteran, it suddenly becomes a "savvy business move".

In my mind, loyalty is a two-way street. If I am working for a company, and I see that they take care of their employees, then I would probably not spend a lot of time perusing the want ads or sending our resumes. But if I see them regularly "downsizing" employees and cutting benefits... I'll do my best to take care of myself and my family.

And the very fact that the teams have the option to cut a player in mid-contract is an indictment of the NFLPA.
But public opinion can be tied to what is right. Doing what you have a right to do in the contract is good faith, thus good opinion. Doing what you have no right to do is bad faith, thus bad public opinion.

It's true that I've over-simplified things. Players probably get a lot of hate because they are viewed as egotisitical, rich, whiners, whatever... Some of that is true, some it isn't. And the NFL is essentially a monopoly on the sport of football, making comparisons tough. But players agreed to play at a certain rate and signed that deal. Teams never agreed to pay them that rate (or more accurately agreed on a condition that they want them). Who's breaking their word? In this case it's ONLY the players
Jericho is offline  
Old 08-12-05, 01:32 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Posts: 14,351
Originally Posted by Thrush
NFL players on average are the worst paid athletes of the big 3 sports by far. .
I hate comparisons between sports leagues. Big F'in deal if they are paid the least. They are 3 separate entities and if players are so envious of athletes in another sport (or any job for that matter), they should have played that sport instead. As an accountant who works for a small, private company, I may not have the same pay scale and benefits as accountants in different companies. However, it was my choice to choose this path. If I would have wanted to be paid like a partner in a national firm or as a professional athlete, I should have pursued those paths. I have no expectation of equality. There is no law that says the NFL has to do anything the same as any other league.

BTW, the NFL is by far the strongest league, so they must be doing something right. Want to see what giving the players all of the power can do to a league, check out the NBA.
cdollaz is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.