It''s no more nefarious than when players who wildly outperform their contracts squeeze teams. How dare they demand to be fairly compensated for what the are doing while they're doing it? I also thank god that football contracts aren't fully guaranteed. But they are and should be partially guaranteed, and that is based on the length of the deal and the value of what can only ever be projected production. That is based on age to some extent but a lot more goes into the equation including prior production and consistency of production and prior durability and work ethic and how the player performed when he got paid as opposed to before. I'm all for redistributing wealth to the more deserving, ken. Just ask Ocho's fans...or Moss' or Seymour's or Asante's.
I think we agree much more than we disagree on this. I've said before, I have no problem with Welker trying to get the best deal he can. I had no problem with him talking contract with the media as a strategy. I didn't think it was a wise decision, but I would never criticize him for it.
I'm also 100% for PARTIALLY guaranteed contracts. Where we MIGHT disagree is on the different philosophy of how to assess the player's value in the 2nd contract. You might want to reward past performance, but I would make a judgement based on projected future results.
And as for your last comment all I can say is that mistakes have been made. Ocho is one, but I would argue that Seymour and Samuel weren't
It drives me nuts - a real pet peeve of mine - when people persistently mistate things as if fact. Welker made $18M in the past 5 years, and he earned every nickle of it and more by consistently outperforming the contract many begrudged him back in 2007. Brady's contracts went from $300K per to $6M to $10M to $18M...that bastid. Damn him for earning it.
Hey, Mo, I'm on record, several times, stating that Welker outperformed his initial contract. So what! Let me ask you, what do you think the percentages are on how often a player performs up to the level of his 2nd contract (under performs, equals, or over performs). I'm just guessing, but I'd bet that, under performs would be greater than equals and over performed combined. So I don't feel that bad when the team "wins" one every now and then.
What these guys make and what teachers make is irrelevant, although many of them make 6-7 times today what you did in the olden days...and still whine even though they work shorter hours than the rest of us and have months of vacation time we can only dream about. Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach or drive a truck or install HVAC or program computers or whatever. They can't all act, or perform neorosurgery or head a Fortune 500. And if they could they probably would and they'd want to be paid just as much money as the next guy who is doing what they do. Newsflash, ken, that's human nature. As for some is irrational jealousy.
NOW you hit one of my pet peeves. I spent over a decade teaching. Since then I've done an number of things in the business world from financial services to security consultant and made a ton of money. But BY FAR, the single toughest job I've ever held was as a teacher.(but also the most rewarding) Just picture having to do 5, 48minute shows a day to a very tough audience. Then do it 5 days a week for 180 days. And that's just the classroom part. You can almost double the classroom time if you add up the preparation and paperwork responsibilities.It is exhausting, especially if you are coaching as well. .
In other jobs I'd have to sometimes work 50-52 weeks a year, but none were harder on you than teaching. And it pisses me off when people who have never tried it smugly dismiss what it takes under the guise of "months of vacation time we can only dream about".
My point about the money was to show that "even in my day" athletes were paid well, more than most professionals. However the gap wasn't nearly as pronounced as it is today, even when you consider inflation. Back then the thought of doubling my salary was almost unimaginable Today in a similar situation I'd be looking at making almost TEN times what a starting teacher makes, if I were to make the minimum rookie salary. And the ultimate point is to show that the players have it pretty good these days.
And they also pay the price at the end of a 10 or 12 year career for most if they are lucky. And if you still in this enlightened age can't grasp the magnitude of that, then there really isn't much to be gained in indulging in your idle musings let alone any point in paying any attention to any of your periodic rantings.
Well, Mo, there is often a price to pay at a lot of jobs after a long career. Miners, cops, firemen, iron workers, construction workers, farm workers, etc, etc, etc, all face physical issues after long careers . Football at the NFL level CAN be hazardous to your health. I AM SHOCKED by that revelation. 300lb men traveling at high speeds running into each other may be harmful to your long term health. OMG, why didn't anyone tell me.
I am all for player safety, but don't try and tell me that grown men didn't understand that they were in a profession that could cause them physical problems down the road. Especially players of the last 20 years.
BTW 3 other totally OT comments.
1. I wish the league and the media would do a better job of explaining that playing HS and college football is a LOT less dangerous than in the NFL where the the speed of the game and the size of its players are stressing the human body to its limits. At the slower speeds and smaller body sizes, the HS game, especially is MUCH safer. I worry that if this message doesn't get out and the differences explained clearly enough, this game we all love will dry up and disappear in a couple of generations. Worse yet, and awesome learning experience will be lost for millions of young kids.
2. Nothing is 100% safe. I just saw a program (20-20 maybe) that highlighted the growing problem of life changing concussion injuries to young girls playing soccer.
3. What is it going to take for Ian to add a
feature that would make it easier to have a detailed discussion of issues. Its a standard feature on most sights I visit, including many that don't get nearly the amount of traffic this one does.
