pats_premi
Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,240
- Reaction score
- 1,065
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Obviously they care about it not being guaranteed. If they didn't, they wouldn't bring it up repeatedly.
And, for the record, I didn't cry about players holding out. I simply said that they should fine Wilfork for every mandatory day missed and not rescind the fine once things were resolved. The rest was follow up in response to others.
I have no problem with the Patriots fining players that hold out and I would as well if I were them. The problem is that if you actually want to re-sign the player then it's a bad idea to no rescind them since they will be an employee going forward. If they don't plan on keeping him, like in the Branch case, I think the team should absolutely fine the player and not rescind them.
I think the fundamental difference between our opinions is that I have no problem with players or the team doing what's in their best interest. For some reason you don't think the players should do what is in their best interest though. If it wasn't in the player's best interest then there wouldn't be so many holdouts. It's pretty common now which is why I don't understand why people get so fired up about it. I'm sure you also get upset when college coaches sign extensions and then leave the next year for a better gig.
No, the fundamental difference is that I have a problem with people who violate their contracts and you don't. Once a player does that, I lose all respect for him. They are breaking their word over something as stupid as money.
And, please, don't give me that "money's not stupid" argument. We're talking about people who're going to be comfortable enough to live the rest of their lives on what they'll make and never have to work again if they are frugal, whether or not the holdout is successful. Breaking your word because you're starving or in physical danger is one thing, and is understandable even if it's not honorable. Breaking it so you can buy that second mansion is another matter entirely.
I lose respect for players when they miss games, not OTAs. Obviously most of these guys are set for life but the average career in the NFL is very short which is why I have no problem with players trying to get all they can within that short window.
Just because they make a lot of money doesn't mean they shouldn't try to maximize their earnings like almost every other person does. Their career can end at any time and the NFL is a business. There is no loyalty towards players so there is no reason to think they should be loyal to teams. Yes they signed contracts but Wilfork is underpaid and the CBA allows for players to hold out while allowing teams to fine them. Each side is trying to do what is best for themselves as they should.
You also didn't answer the question if you feel the same way about college coaches that sign contracts and then leave before they fulfill them.
Mandatory = mandatory
Wilfork is not underpaid. There's not a single player in the NFL who's underpaid, EXCEPT WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE VERY CBA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY BEING BROKEN, AND IN COMPARISON TO OTHER PLAYERS WHO ARE ALSO NOT UNDERPAID. I
Because, obviously, the contracts aren't of the same nature. It's a red herring that you threw out. If schools want to prevent coaches from leaving, they can write that into the contract. In fact, more and more of them are putting 'escape clause' material in, which forces the coach to buy out his contract.
:ugh: Let me guess...Bitter your not in the NFL?
In a previous post you were talking about money...1) Plenty of former NFL players are now broke and 2) It also about respect, If you and a coworker do the same job but your coworker is paid more than you and you do your job just as well you too would be pissed.
Reiss' article sounded more positive and it sounds like he's letting his agent deal with it but I'd feel better if Big Vince just zipped it.
Here's the thing- he's the best NT in the league and with more teams dabbling in the 3-4 JMO but there's a market for Big Vince; if we don't pay him someone else will.
I hope it doesn't come to that and I hope he doesn't talk with the media too much more either.
1.) Former NFL players have nothing to do with current players refusing to fulfill contractual obligations.
2.) It's not about respect. If it were about respect, they would, oh, you know.... respect the contract.
3.) No, I'm not bitter that I'm not in the NFL. I never had any interest in playing professional football. I also don't begrudge them the money. I begrudge them the contract violation. There's a difference.
And, please, don't give me that "money's not stupid" argument. We're talking about people who're going to be comfortable enough to live the rest of their lives on what they'll make and never have to work again
OTA's are not mandatory so I have no idea what you're talking about.Mandatory = mandatory
Wilfork is not underpaid. There's not a single player in the NFL who's underpaid, EXCEPT WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE VERY CBA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY BEING BROKEN, AND IN COMPARISON TO OTHER PLAYERS WHO ARE ALSO NOT UNDERPAID. I