HEY BRO! WHAT UP?
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 4,362
- Reaction score
- 1
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.I can't help but wonder if they'd feel the same way if he signed with the Eagles.
Yes you were.
Fair enough. As I said I much prefer to talk football as opposed to getting down to eom's level.
First of all, apples to apples, Stallworth got a $10 million signing bonus according to reports. I've not seen details on additional gurantees. Moss got a $12 million signing bonus - and we're told $3 million more in gurantees whatever form that might be in)
But whether its an average of $4 million a year guranteed or $5 million a year, Yes, I would contend that's on the low side.
Forgive me for not recognizing what the agent claims the "true" value of a contract is - we all know that guranteed money is about all one can truly bank on.
I don't discount that he could well see every penny of it. Nor would I discount that the 3rd year could have the bulk of the salary. And I don't rule out the possibility that the Patriots have some concern about Moss getting injured.
But when the all time record holder for TDs is given a bonus not far off from someone like Stallworth - regardless of how many fake or real years are in Stallworth's contract - it should cause one to take notice and ask "why".
I think the difference you see between me and a lot of these mindless insult throwers here is that I can acknowledge the possibility that injury concerns could be a factor - but apparently none of them can acknowledge the possibility that the low bonus relates to a concern to keep Moss "hungry" as opposed to his years in Oakland.
But - because Moss signed here instead of with the Eagles as reports say he very nearly did - people feel compelled to drudge up this thread and hurl childish insults at me.
I can't help but wonder if they'd feel the same way if he signed with the Eagles.
The New England Patriots took a "take it or leave it" stance with Givens and Branch. Why should it be that much different with Randy Moss? In essence, Randy Moss obliged the New England Patriots organization and took the "home town discount".But when the all time record holder for TDs is given a bonus not far off from someone like Stallworth - regardless of how many fake or real years are in Stallworth's contract - it should cause one to take notice and ask "why".
With Kerry Collins and Aaron Brooks as my quarterbacks, I would be slightly less than fully motivated with those two clowns. Meanwhile, the Oakland Raiders offensive line has been a sieve since 2005, the year Randy Moss arrived:I think the difference you see between me and a lot of these mindless insult throwers here is that I can acknowledge the possibility that injury concerns could be a factor - but apparently none of them can acknowledge the possibility that the low bonus relates to a concern to keep Moss "hungry" as opposed to his years in Oakland.
Yeah - some jerk called "eom" dredged it up, and as people feel compelled to insult me I feel compelled to defend myself.
Sorry - just one of those things.
But yes - my premise was that after saying he wanted to play no where else and for reasonable money, Moss did in fact go back on his word and shopped himself around the NFL.
That concerned me and very possibly concerned the Patriots front office as well, who gave the all time TD record holding WR a signing bonus not far off from what Stallworth got in the same market.
I'm not wrong about that, no matter what insults folks want to throw my way.
Naw! I simply enjoy irrational thought.Moss signed already. This thread needs to die.
So you get to discount the three million that is guaranteed to him that isn't part of the signing bonus because it negatively affects your argument? At least that's what it seems like. The team agreed to guarantee an extra three million, it's guaranteed money. He's guaranteed to get that money. Am I clear on that?
He's guaranteed five million per year, if you want to look at it like that. Stallworth is guaranteed $1.43 per each year of his contract.
Moss's guarantees equal fifty-six percent of his contract. How is 56% a low figure? Stallworth is guaranteed 28% of his.
The Eagles contract has absolutely nothing to do with this argument. The only thing the Eagles contract offer (presumably) does is prove that your original point of contention was wrong, that Moss would, and did, indeed take less money to play for the New England Patriots.
I don't see any possible reason for you to not admit that your original post to start this thread was wrong. But whatever, it's your opinion and you have the right to be wrong.
The New England Patriots took a "take it or leave it" stance with Givens and Branch. Why should it be that much different with Randy Moss? In essence, Randy Moss obliged the New England Patriots organization and took the "home town discount".
With Kerry Collins and Aaron Brooks as my quarterbacks, I would be slightly less than fully motivated with those two clowns. Meanwhile, the Oakland Raiders offensive line has been a sieve since 2005, the year Randy Moss arrived:
2005 Oakland Raiders 45 sacks allowed
2006 Oakland Raiders 72 sacks allowed
2007 Oakland Raiders 41 sacks allowed
As evident in the Super Bowl, if the offensive line can't protect the quarterback, even Tom Brady can be reduced to mere mortal status.
which he didn't, dumbass.
that's kind of the entire point.
I wonder what you'd be saying if he signed w/the pats?
oh, wait..............
Yet you completely ignore the fact that the Oakland Raiders offensive line could not protect the quarterback.I'm glad you feel that Moss' attitude in Oakland was justified. I'm proud to say I do not. And I don't think Belichick would either.
Yet you completely ignore the fact that the Oakland Raiders offensive line could not protect the quarterback.
you should probably concern yourself more about your own bull**** low rent attitude -- you could take a lesson from randy.
or was this forum just created as a platform for you to rip others, because you seem to cry like a ***** when you become the target --- difference being your ripping has merit.
Now come on now - you know I didn't do that.
I compared signing bonus to signing bonus. That's not my problem if you somehow think that's unfair. But as I said, I'm fine if you want to compare Stallworth's signing bonus to Moss's total guarantee. $10 million for 3 TDs to $15 million for 23 TDs.
...
Apparently EVERYONE ELSE KNOWS why Moss' contract was limited to 3 years - because they are SURE I'm wrong.
C'mon guys - what's the matter - can't you admit you were wrong? That there's a slight possibility I'm right?
Let's give EOM a big hand here folks - he's the one who decided it would be a good idea to pull this thread off of page 3 and get the discussion going again.
So that's what your whole argument now boils down to.No - I just said that doesn't justify his attitude in Oakland.
Yet it's difficult to ignore how the market values Moss in terms of guranteed money (which most would agree is the only relevant $):
Moss - 23 TDs, 98 catches 1493 yards = $12 million
Stallworth - 3 TDs. 46 catches, 697 yards = $10 million.
Without further eloquence, I leave the floor to Mr. VJCPatriot.For your own sake, please just give it up now. The numbers completely destroy your argument, and you're just making yourself look foolish on this forum. As they say, Pride comes before the fall. And oh how you are falling by the minute as you continue to perpetuate this ridiculous thread with your stubborn insistence on being "right."