patsox23
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 7,430
- Reaction score
- 60
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.RayClay said:I've changed my mind recently and I think they're going to sign Law.
It's all about the ego with Law.
He's not going to get the big payday with anybody, so if we give him a back loaded contract he can say he's playing for the team or the ring or the hall, things he can't say elsewhere.
Some kind of board issue, it seemingly randomely does that.mikesjag said:Why does it say
"Last edited by AStack75 : 09-12-2005 at 08:41 PM." on my first post on a date before I joined?
MoLewisrocks said:I think just the opposite on the contract approach. We are not going to revisit 2004-2005. I think BB has been trying to get through to Ty about reality, and legacy, and that ain't gonna include any backloaded cap catastrophe can't survive without a restructure deal. Fair up front money, lots of easily achievable incentives that perhaps trigger realistic and bankable guarantees in a contract he and we can live with to the un-bitter end. Not a one and done hissy scenario that leaves him on the street with his thumb out again, or paints BB as the "liar" for not honoring a couple of salary backloaded phantom years everyone but Ty apparently knew he was never going to see.
I think that is what Pioli is now exchanging proposals on. Something with potential the Poston's can momentarily spin that is still rooted in reality. If the Redskins cap guy could confuse Carl to their advantage on the Arrington deal, Pioli should be able to razzle dazzle him to the point his eyes cross before he gets through the fine print.