finknottle Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Bottom line is a contract is meaningless in NFL...The fact that teams are allowed todrop your contract (especially the backloaded ones), means that there should be no obligation on the part of the player to honor the terms of the contract...NFL is a tough sport.....today you might be the best player...tomorrow due to an injury everything will go down the tubes....Ask Andre Reed how he felt when that idiot Jets safety Green lifted him and threw him and caused his groin tear.....That was his contract year....... 387941[/snapback] It's amazing that people simply do not accept these contracts. When you take a job at a certain salary, do you get mad because they can terminate it if they want? Do you think they should be legally obligated to keep you on until retirement? Would you refuse a 200k job offer if they put in a clause that if you quit (versus them firing you), then for one calander year you couldn't work in the same field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 There is no bending or twisting by the owners. The NFLPA ratified the collective bargaining aggreement, which is a legal document. When TO joined the union, he accepted the terms of the CBA. He is violating not only the contract he signed with the Eagles but the CBA. The uncertainty due to the violence and speed a great point and that is why the bonus is so important. They get paid in the first year or two, and the team spreads out the cap hit. But they did get paid. What would be awful would be if a team tried to redeem the bonus money after a player was injured. The only time that I have heard that a team has tried to redeem the bonus money is after a player unexpectedly retires ala Ricky Williams or Barry Sanders. However, if I'm the Eagles GM, and TO holds out, I'd try to get that bonus money back... 388013[/snapback] Great post. NFL players may not have fully guaranteed contracts, but the players in general always get their huge piece of the revenue pie. Conditional contracts make sure that the best and the healthiest players ON THE WHOLE get the most compensation and that is the way it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 It's amazing that people simply do not accept these contracts. When you take a job at a certain salary, do you get mad because they can terminate it if they want? Do you think they should be legally obligated to keep you on until retirement? Would you refuse a 200k job offer if they put in a clause that if you quit (versus them firing you), then for one calander year you couldn't work in the same field? 388520[/snapback] A contract is a contract....you go by what rules apply to the contract in its wordings. Your comparison to a job doesn't make sense...because you don't sign a fixed contract for your job...that is why employers can fire you without any obligation...that is part of the kind of contract you negotiate...If you do sign a fixed contract there are penalties that employers must incur if they terminate you early. As for your 200K question it depends...If you think 200K is pretty good money to live on for a year, then you will take it....I know (having gone through 3 acquisitions) that the top mgmt sign clauses during the acquisition that if they terminate their employment with their new company then they will get xxxx money, but cannot work in the same field...and they do it often...because upper mgmt is non-technical enough that they can move from one field to another in the same industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Great post. NFL players may not have fully guaranteed contracts, but the players in general always get their huge piece of the revenue pie. Conditional contracts make sure that the best and the healthiest players ON THE WHOLE get the most compensation and that is the way it should be. 388523[/snapback] But the same CBA does not prevent a player from holding out and not honoring his contract just as it does not hold the NFL team from terminating a players contract for not playing well...The bottom line is if you played well then you get your money (like TO) and if you don't play is not up to the standards at which you are earning, a NFL team can cut the player..It goes both ways... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 I just heard TO speaking on ESPNews. "He's doing this because it's what's best for his family. I don't really have to play for the Eagles, I can go for any other team." I thought agents were suppose to be intelligent. If so, why don't they advise their clients to never say that." "If we can't reach an agreement we can be adults and they can trade me, release me." I guess TO has never heard of the salary cap, because if he had, he'd know there is no way Phily can trade him one year into a seven year deal. He also basically said he'd like to play in Atlanta. Man, this is one great football player but one giant @$$hole. He should learn to just shut up and let Drew do the talking. 387783[/snapback] FLMAO, I thought he wanted out of San Fran because he wanted a QB who could throw deep and maybe win a championship. WTF changed in 1 year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Owens to be at camp Eagles: Owens says he'll be at camp by Fanball Staff - Fanball.com Friday, July 22, 2005 News Eagles wideout Terrell Owens has told the Philadelphia Inquirer he would report to training camp on Aug. 1. "I'll be there," Owens told the paper on Friday. "I mean, the bottom line is that I still believe I deserve a new contract. I still believe I deserve more than what they've given me. But I'm not stupid. I'm not about to miss training camp, get fined every day and give them even more reasons to keep from paying me. I'll be there but I won't be happy, I can tell you that much. Take from that whatever you want." Owens has spent most of the offseason demanding a new contract. He is one year into a seven-year, $49 million deal that he signed last offseason. Views Owens said yesterday that he'd be willing to play with another team if it meant he gets his new contract, but it looks highly unlikely that the Eagles will deal him. That means the two sides are going to have to work something out before the season starts, and this is a step towards resolving the issue. It remains to be seen what kind of attitude Owens brings with him into camp, but the fact he is willing to show up at all is progress. And if he ends up getting a new contract, it may deter other Drew Rosenhaus clients from holding out to get their new deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 And if he ends up getting a new contract, it may deter other Drew Rosenhaus clients from holding out to get their new deals. 388659[/snapback] This sentence makes no sense at all. If TO DOES get a new contract, owners and teams are !@#$ed and every player worth their salt will start holding out, and any enjoyment this game has in terms of it truly being a team sport will in all likelihood go straight to hell. I don't care if it's within TO's legal rights to do this. It's selfish, moronic crap that simply proves this his word is absolutely worthless. Anyone who would sign him better be sure that the money they're parting with best be applied to only one year of service, because that's all you get from TO. One year. Hey, Terrell. STFU! Your words carry no meaning and you make this game suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zona Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Are there still posters out there that wished we signed TO? I am sure there are. But this entire thread is the reason why I didnt want that POS on the Bills. I want to win a SB as bad as anybody here, but I dont want to root for a team of guys like TO to do it. That is one thing I am most proud of the bills for. We generally dont sign A-holes like TO. Fug TO! Go Bills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 TO is a selfish prick of herculean proportions but the thing is, I don't know why people listen to him. He's an idiot off the field, everyone knows that. But the thing that separates him from other idiots is that when he is on the field, he tries his ass off. He blocks down field, he doesn't loaf when the ball doesn't come to him, he blocks on running plays, he makes plays everywhere, he is awesome. People just should tune him out. Who cares what these guys say? He'll end up starting on opening day for the Eagles and he'll end up playing great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 TO is a selfish prick of herculean proportions but the thing is, I don't know why people listen to him. He's an idiot off the field, everyone knows that. But the thing that separates him from other idiots is that when he is on the field, he tries his ass off. He blocks down field, he doesn't loaf when the ball doesn't come to him, he blocks on running plays, he makes plays everywhere, he is awesome. People just should tune him out. Who cares what these guys say? He'll end up starting on opening day for the Eagles and he'll end up playing great. 388731[/snapback] Marvin Harrison's head on TO's body would make the greatest wide receiver ever known to man... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 A contract is a contract....you go by what rules apply to the contract in itswordings. 388645[/snapback] Exactly! And NFL contracts are structured to allow for early termination, the terminating party getting stiffed on the signing bonus. They also add the wrinkle of in essence a no-compete clause, preventing a self-terminating player from working elsewhere in the NFL until his obligations are fulfilled. Your comparison to a job doesn't make sense...because you don't sign a fixed contract for your job...that is why employers can fire you without any obligation...that is part of the kind of contract you negotiate...If you do sign a fixed contract there are penalties that employers must incur if they terminate you early. 388645[/snapback] Many jobs such as consultanting are fixed contract, particularly when you are contracting to provide a service and the other party (the government or a company say) cannot make financial obligations beyond a certain date. As for your 200K question it depends...If you think 200K is pretty good money to live on for a year, then you will take it....I know (having gone through 3 acquisitions) that the top mgmt sign clauses during the acquisition that if they terminate their employment with their new company then they will get xxxx money, but cannot work in the same field...and they do it often...because upper mgmt is non-technical enough that they can move from one field to another in the same industry. 388645[/snapback] Right, it is rare but not unusual at the higher levels to contractually prohibit leaving for the competition. I have seen it used not just to keep people around as in the examples you've cited, but more pointedly when the work involves sensitive proprietary information. They don't want to give you access to their most competative technology, for example, and then have you reappear in six months doing R&D for the competition. A more common example (though less analogous) is with senior federal government employees, who when they quit are uniformly prohibited for some period of time from representing companies with whom they previously did business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Marvin Harrison's head on TO's body would make the greatest wide receiver ever known to man... 388736[/snapback] Is it Marvin Harrison's head or body that makes him block, or not block, as the case may be? Plus, Harrison just falls down when TO blows through tackles at times. Harrison is a great, great receiver, I just think TO is better all around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 TO is a selfish prick of herculean proportions but the thing is, I don't know why people listen to him. He's an idiot off the field, everyone knows that. But the thing that separates him from other idiots is that when he is on the field, he tries his ass off. He blocks down field, he doesn't loaf when the ball doesn't come to him, he blocks on running plays, he makes plays everywhere, he is awesome. People just should tune him out. Who cares what these guys say? He'll end up starting on opening day for the Eagles and he'll end up playing great. 388731[/snapback] and he will doing it under his current contract. The Eagles are the worst team to be pulling this crap on because they absolutely will not break their long standing policy of caving in to extortionists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40+ Year Bills Fan Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 I would love to have the 'PROBLEM' of taking care of my family on $7,000,000.00! This guy makes me sick when I think of so many out of work, etc, etc, etc!!!! LET HIM SIT!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts