Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Tell me about Deion Branch. And Terrell Owens. And continue the list.
|
Bullshit response. The few players who hold out are typically viewed as assholes, even though they are trying to make an adjustment based on their actual value just as teams do without penalty. It is beyond uncommon and players only do it when they are
way undervalued.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Also, what about Ty's point? Guaranteed contracts are not prohibited. While unguaranteed is the norm, there have been guaranteed contracts in recent years (few, true). But, surprise, for a lot less money. How can you say that they aren't making a reasonable choice of risk/reward?
|
Jesus. Are we really having this argument? Guaranteed contracts aren't
prohibited, true. But when so few players are in a position to demand them because they aren't required by the cba,
of course there will be fewer guaranteed contracts and of course players will have to give something up to get them. What is your point? If guaranteed contracts were required by the cba, some contracts would go down, but other players' contracts would go up. And non-superstars would have some security.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Does it benefit owners? Sure, because they won't have to pay out to injured players. But does it benefit players? Yes, because the owners aren't paying out a bunch of dead money, and they can play that to performing players.
|
Right. But you're not saying anything. It benefits a very few players. Guaranteed contracts benefit the lion's share of players. The current system overwhelmingly favors the teams.
Maybe it's better that way due to the violent nature of the game. That's an argument I can accept a lot more than the one you're pitching.
TM
