PDaDdy

Check the new signature!

Your killin me Darth. You were by far the loudest voice in favor of drafting a QB but you don't think we have the worst QB situation in the league? Based on performance this is almost indisputable. We can make all of the excuses that we want but when there were opportunities our QBs, with varying degrees of failure, could not capitalize. Let's both start the campaign now. JAKE LOCKER IN 2011 !!!!

So what are your thoughts on my actual statement? I think you just verbatim regurgitated what you said before. You probably don't want to see the logic of my statement as it shoots down your argument. Employees should be able to leave an employer any time they want just like an employer can fire the employee anytime they want. How do people NOT see that as being fair? There are many points of contention on this subject but how someone can't understand that very basic statement is truly beyond me. But then again I usually think people are smarter than they often are.

The NFL is a special case though. It is a de facto monopoly in my opinion. The teams are individual companies but the system prevents employees, Andre Johnson of the Texans, from leaving that company and going to work for a company that would compensate him in line with his current talents and performance, The Bills. ROFLOL. We aren't talking about the players getting a larger chunk of the pie. That is a whole other discussion and they likely get a large enough share of the pie already. What this is about is that some fans expect players to honor contracts while the owners can "dishonor" those contracts whenever they see fit. That is a BS double standard. If not for anything else it could be considered collusion or something along those lines. The example of a couple major cereal manufacturers colluded to drive up the price of their cereals. Sure there were other options. You could go out and buy a generic brand. You could cook your own bacon and eggs etc. Still their practice was illegal. Sure these guys could go to the CFL or the arena league but we all know that the only real game in town is the NFL.

It's all good we often get to heated in these forums and I know that I have been a major offender in the past but we are a passionate fan base. As I attempted to articulate previously NO I don't think that guaranteed money is part of the SALARY portion of the contract. I see it as a signing bonus. Just like stock options, annual bonuses, profit sharing etc. That being said it was probably pretty dumb of Andres Johnson to sign a one sided owner friendly contract that basically says he would get paid 5 million to play this year. That was stupid. We now have the benefit of hindsight though to see that he became what he is today and is deserving of much greater. A WR can't throw himself the ball and he himself might not have realized his true potential. For anyone, player OR GM, it is difficult indeed to predict the certainty of future great performance. Unfortunately we don't know all of the details but we all know that on some of these deals there are hand shake promises and smiles about ..."sign the contract now....we know it won't REALLY last as long as the specified terms....if you start lighting it up ...we will take care of you as an organization" It's a business. If it's not in writing it didn't or won't happen.

On this you have a great point. If I was a player that was at the top of my game I personally wouldn't want to sign a contract that was longer than 3 years. Your assertion though that players have "security" by signing a longer contract is 100% FALSE. Since as has been beat to death organizations can release the player at any point a long term deal guarantees or secures NOTHING!!!

I knew you couldn't answer a simple yes or no question. LOL. I have trouble with that too. I at least will answer the question directly even if it is not a yes or no answer. Sounds like you might be making a case for no contracts in the NFL. What is "rEdiculous" is that the owners have exactly the same option that our employers have in that they can fire us as employees anytime they want. Do you see that? What the players DON'T have is the option that you or I have in that we can walk out the door anytime we want and go work for anyone who will hire us if they are offering more money. Do you see how that is not a fair and equivalent system? Again I will ask... Do you think 5 million a year for probably the best WR in football is fair compensation? Perhaps I should rephrase this to say do you think that 5 million a year is fair compensation for the 2010 season for the best WR in the NFL? Do you think your personal 2007 earnings have anything to do with how much money you or I are paid to do our job in 2010?

So as you have stated owners have the ability to get rid of a player when they underperform. What are the players options when they out perform their contract? You make it sound like the owners can't hire someone else to do their job. They are free to fill their vacant position with anyone they like who is not already signed by another team.

I understand that there are some bad choices made by owners like Daniel Snyder and whoever did the deal fro Jake Delhomme. But you can't indite the system because of a few bad examples. I understand that you are trying to spread out the guaranteed money over the course of the contract to look at it like salary but in some cases it is a signing bonus in others it's like a guaranteed bonus every year. I don't know what line of work you are in but those aren't exactly equivalent. Some clarification which may sharpen your perspective on this is that. Guaranteed Money =/= Guaranteed Contract Guaranteed Money =/= Salary

Absolutely. As someone educated me I think that like the NBA NFL contracts should be guaranteed. YES, agents AND GMs will have to learn how to write good contracts in the new system. Any contract over 5 years is a complete and total joke. You could even make a case that any contract over 3 years is a joke. So much changes from year to year that trying to set a price for a players services 2, 3, 5, 6, years down the road is folly. The adjustment that COULD be made especially for star athletes is to attempt to put in a clause that increases the players salary by the percentage increase in the salary cap from year to year. This way an awesome player who is the best at their position will still be paid like it a couple years down the road. You could also add a clause like they use for the franchise tag. Player X will be paid the average of the top 5 players at his position. It's a built in raise structure. That even being said I still think the answer is truly guaranteed contracts. Unbreakable by the player AND the organization.

Other than you hate basketball, I have absolutely no idea what that has to do with my statement that you don't hear about contract issues in the NBA compared to the NFL and that they must be doing something right.

Part of the guaranteed money in my opinion is about covering for exactly that situation. We forget the stories of the promising athletes that due to an injury had potentially bright futures ruined. In a way it is like an insurance policy or signing bonus. I don't know if you have ever gotten an equivalent of a signing bonus, AKA "guaranteed money", but it is to attract good talent. This is the case in the business world and in the NFL which is if people have forgotten first and foremost a business. I guess I'm having trouble following you. I you trying to say that since a player could get injured and is still due their signing bonus that owners should have the right to void contracts whenever they feel like it? I don't get it. People can't see the forest for the trees. Let's look at the Andre Johnson situation. Do you think 5 million a year for probably the best WR in football is fair compensation? It is a yes or no question by the way. Do you think your personal 2007 earnings have anything to do with how much money you or I are paid to do are job in 2010? Also a yes or no question.

Ugh...ya....contracts aren't guaranteed. Do we need to repeat it again? Guaranteed money is guaranteed unless you have violated the contract in some way where the owners can actually come after that. If the contracts were actually guaranteed the phrase "guaranteed money" wouldn't be in the public lexicon. I could also be wrong but I don't think most NFL players get that much if any guaranteed money.

Incentives are bonuses to your salary not to take the place of your salary. Just like in our real world. They aren't the only measuring stick and they are even a bad one at that. How do you come up with incentives for a CB? INTs? Now you have motivated the player to gamble and try to pick off the ball perhaps more than they should. Passes defensed? What about the CB that is so good QB's don't throw the ball his way? etc, etc, etc. Much much much better would be a commission based system like sales people. How the heck you could set that up I don't know but it would be better than incentives for statistics which I love but would not be a good way to financially compensate a player. Perhaps the entire team would get a greater salary based on how well the team played. Huge bonuses for making the play offs. Average margin of victory. Power rankings. Team based incentives are the way to go in this team game.

There are always going to be examples both good and bad for how the system works. I don't know the details but assuming your examples are good examples of bad examples (lol) it's still a small handful over the years representing a small percentage of NBA players. The REALLY crazy thing...is that most fans look at some of the players that got those contracts and laughed because some were such an obviously bad idea it was laughable. In the world of the NBA as I am being educated to it would seem that shorter contracts would be the way to go. I wouldn't give anything more than a 2 or MAYBE a 3 year contract to a player unless they were a proven performer with a reasonable guarantee of future good performance or had a lot of upside. Stars would get 5 year contracts. I RARELY ever hear about anything related to contract issues in the NBA. That is a good thing. Football could learn something there. Instead we hear more about contract disputes and hold outs than actual on field football news. Tell me about how the Saint's 3 - 4/ 4 - 3 hybrid defense was so effective instead of Darren Sharper is shopping his talents on the open market.

How does that message compare to the message the Bills have repeatedly sent the last 10 years? We are cheap. We won't pay top dollar for top talent but we will over pay for mediocre to above average talent. Do you think that players and agents are NOT getting that message. Do you think that good players who want to win a super bowl want to go to a cold weather town that refuses to pay the most talented players that have come through the organization? I think they get THAT message loud and clear.

Absolutely 100% correct. All the heat is from sniveling whiners that, although repeatedly reminded, can't remember the NFL is a BUSINESS FIRST!!!! I am not a baseball fan but I am a NBA fan. Funny I don't know a darn thing about contracts and hold outs in those sports. Now I know why. Contracts are actually guaranteed. Hrmmmm...let me turn the brain on here.....why doesn't the NFL operate under the same model? Because the owners are greedy bastards that want it both ways. Contracts are guaranteed when a player wants to get the money he deserves for being great but when an owner wants to dump them contracts aren't even worth the paper they are written on. Complete BS double standard.

Screw the class hatred. Players get rooked by a double standard. If you really want to make it fair let the NFL run itself like every other business in the good old US of A. If a competitor will pay me 4 times my current salary to do the same job somewhere else and with the recognition and respect that goes along with it "The Flash" couldn't beat me out the door!!!! Some people are chumps and will bust their ass for years and get paid peanuts while their employer reaps the benefits of their low cost high yield work. IDIOTS. I don't advocate holding out for more than you are worth, but getting paid what you are worth is the American way. It's capitalism baby! Love it or leave it!

What are you talking about? The owners ALREADY HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!!! If a player under performs their contract do you think an owner will keep them on the books for the remaining "5 years" if they aren't performing up to their previous level by a significant margin? NO, they release them and void the contract. Why wouldn't players expect the same to work for them? If they out perform their contract why shouldn't they get paid for it? The problem is not the players it is the system. Make contracts guaranteed whether a player out performs or under performs and then you've got something to talk about.

A bit on the negative side but there is a lot of truth in your statements as I have sited in defense of Peters and his hold out. Buffalo doesn't pay for good talent!!! What we DO do is overpay for mediocre to above average talent. We have a bunch of high motor sometimes try hard guys that can't make a difference. We also poorly coach that talent because we won't pay for great coaches and give them the players that they want/need. Maybe we'll get lucky this time around. Hopefully it won't just be more of the same. My shred of hope for this season is that we won't be mind numbingly boring, ineffective and conservative on offense. A good sign is that our first pick is indeed a PLAYMAKER and that is what Nix and Gailey want/need to implement their plan.

Perhaps we should take a 30 year sample until we can say that Edwards sucks at it......OR....we could just look at the sample size we do have and use our eyes to know that he can't.

What do you want a 30 year sample size? LOL. Their careers don't last that long. Relative to the length of the average career a sample size of 3 years is pretty decent in my opinion. I know people hate on Lynch for his stupidity off field but the guy is a better producer at RB.

100% Correct. I couldn't agree more. I really do love them BOTH but one guy scores TD...you know...the THINGS THAT PUT POINTS ON THE BOARD AND WINS GAMES?!?!?!? That being said queue the haters!!!!....they have all manor of excuse and opinion of why they like Jackson over Lynch but the 1000% undeniable fact is Lynch scores more TDs. While the moral minority has a great point about Lynch not being a smart guy off the field he is better on the field in toughness, refusal to go down and freakin TDs people. This will be an unpopular opinion with some but if one of the 3 RBs needs to go....it should be Jackson. If Spiller comes as advertised he is a MUCH MUCH better and faster version of Fred Jackson. Lynch is the probowl alternate wrecking ball that refuses to go down and drags 2 to 3 defenders for the extra 4 yards to make a first down. If given an actual whole to run through for once Lynch does also have some nice moves to make defenders miss. In the probowl 2 years ago Lynch was the RB that was called upon when the AFC needed to make a crucial first down. I would like to keep all 3 of our current RBs and have Chan come up with something that puts the wild cat to shame with all 3 of those guys on the field. Barring that one of the 3 should be traded to fill holes elsewhere. I like em both but Lynch is a better compliment to Spiller IMO so I would deal Jackson.

Not that Fitz is the answer either but where did you get those stats??? Until I read this article I hadn't known of a source that recorded the distance pass attempts traveled in the air NOT how many yards a pass went for including YAC. Can you provide the link? I will bookmark it imediately.

Really? Dude, you have got to be kidding. Talk to women much?