Printable View
Well, if he really wanted to play so bad, why did he retire in the first place? Personally, I don't think that his legacy would take much of a hit, but he is making this very hard on everyone, most of all his beloved Packers and their fans. The stupid thing is that immediately after he retired, people were saying "I wonder when he'll come back?" This was so obvious, it's pathetic.
That's my take on it, too. He obviously jumped the gun on his retirement decision in the first place, and now he's put the organization he played for in a potentially very awkward financial position.Quote:
Originally Posted by EP Hotties
ahhh poor packers. why doesn't anyone ever cry for the player when he's released mid contract to save cap space, and none of that salary is guarenteed? Screw the teams! They'll find a way around it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
Hey, I'm the guy that mocked the Miami Dolphins when Ricky Williams decided to retire in the midst of his contract, and they decided to go after his signing bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
Ryan Grant? Ryan Grant he's not going to get any money he's an exclusive rights FA. He's not even a restricted FA. He basically will end up signing a 1 year tender or the pakers might sign him to a 2 or maybe 3 year deal. But I doubt it, Either way he won't break the bank. At least not yet. He only had a little more than a 1/2 season of experience. As far a Favre goes, all this talk about the Bears and Vikings is funny. With his big salary a trade is almost impossible to any team. Also to cut him would be a huge hit as well. He'll either play for the Packers or nobody. His salary makes it almost impossible to go some place else. This isn't like baseball where big salaries get traded. The only big name trade I can remeber was the bailey/Portis trade a few years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
Agreed, there is NO WAY Green Bay would trade him within the division.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleWie
Trades do happen, but they tend to be for draft picks, rather than other players.
T.O., Randy Moss, Willis McGahee to name a few others.Quote:
The only big name trade I can remeber was the bailey/Portis trade a few years ago.
I agree its highly unlikely he'll be traded or released however.
I'm a huge Eagles fan, but I felt T.O. had every right to demand more money one year into his deal. If he stunk it up he'd have been released, so its gotta work both ways. At least you appear to see the difference, but far too many side with the teams and ESPECIALLY in football where career spans are so short, I'll take the players side 99% of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
Well it depends on the situation. I was glad to see Vick get his signing bonus money back. Because Vick brought the team so much revenue in ticket sales, etc. They were playing in empty stadiums without him last year. The Ryan Grant situation really irritates me. You played 10 games and you expect a long term deal. He must realize he has no leverage. He cannot sign witn another team. One of the big reasons the general public has a hard time taking the players side is, the contracts. When your busting your a$$ in a hot smelly factory for $10 an hour it's hard to feel sympathy for some athlete who has a contract paying him millions, whining he wants more money. I'll never forget Milwaukee's own Latrell Sprewell after turning down a huge multi million dollar extension. " I got a family to feed."Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
Understandable, but the owners are making millions as well on the sport and these guys, with such a short window, put their health and life on the line. They have to cash in when that window arises. T.O. just came off a big injury, overplayed his value and was at a point age wise where he needed security. He had a 7yr contract but much wasn't guarenteed. The media and fans always attack the players and seem to look the other way when a player is released mid-'contract'. The NFL players union is really weak....in the sport where guarenteed money is MOST important, these guys are signing 'contracts' that carry no weight...unless of course if your the player trying to get out of it. Then you're a hipocrite money hungry fool.Quote:
One of the big reasons the general public has a hard time taking the players side is, the contracts. When your busting your a$$ in a hot smelly factory for $10 an hour it's hard to feel sympathy for some athlete who has a contract paying him millions, whining he wants more money. I'll never forget Milwaukee's own Latrell Sprewell after turning down a huge multi million dollar extension. " I got a family to feed."
I agree with you that Sprewells statements were rediculous and insulting to many Americans going paycheck to paycheck. It is case by case and I don't think Spree ever got that big contract he was looking for. He was an idiot. I'm not familiar with Grants situation.
I guess this is where I don't understand. Security? He was getting paid peanuts before that? I don't have the exact numbers but up that point I'm sure T.O. had made tens of millions of dollars. How much security does a guy need?Quote:
They have to cash in when that window arises. T.O. just came off a big injury, overplayed his value and was at a point age wise where he needed security.
Yeah, Sprewell's comments were just terrible. He is still made fun of to this day by MANY people.
i just want favre to shut the heck up
wait a sec, i think he's just called a press conference to announce his dinner plans for tonite
He DOES have leverage, though, because the only other backs the Packers have are the same guys who did nothing last season. Besides, running backs have a shorter lifespan than any other position on the field...I can certainly understand him trying to get paid NOW.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleWie
Sprewell was an idiot, and that was one of the all time dumbest statements ever made by an athlete. The best part is...he never signed another contract again. That was his last year in the league as an active player.
Security can also mean ROSTER security. A guy with a lot of bonus money still eligible to be paid has a much better chance of remaining on a roster than a guy who's guaranteed dollars are paid out.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleWie
He has no leverage. Once the packers offer him the tender he has to sign it or he can't play with anyone. It's the same thing in baseball. Fielder cried about getting a small contract but their is nothing he can do about it. Thats the way the system works. He knows if he produces he's going to get paid. The Packers are loaded at the RB position anyway. Brandon Jackson is the future at that position. I'll bet you dollars to donuts Grant does not get any kind of big contract. Security is a weak argument. If T.O. does his job he'll have a roster spot. He is a millionaire many times over. If Dallas cuts him tomorrow he'd still get his signing bonus and somebody would sign him and if they didn't so what? He still a multi- millionaire. I find it hard to believe anyone feels bad for an athlete like T.O. who signs a huge contracts and then wants a new one the next year.Quote:
He DOES have leverage, though, because the only other backs the Packers have are the same guys who did nothing last season. Besides, running backs have a shorter lifespan than any other position on the field...I can certainly understand him trying to get paid NOW.
Sprewell was an idiot, and that was one of the all time dumbest statements ever made by an athlete. The best part is...he never signed another contract again. That was his last year in the league as an active player.