the answer to all contract and $$ disputes! (or the best idea that will never happen)

[PaulSoleil]

i'm pretty tired of all these whine-y millionaire players who sign big contracts than all of a sudden want MORE.

it's ridiculous. what business actually does that? in my field (entertainment), when i sign a contract for a project, i don't suddenly demand more half way through because the crew says that i'm carrying the picture.

so how about THIS more money if you perform (through performance bonuses - say 1000 yard receiver = bonus)

AND LESS MONEY IF YOU DON'T PERFORM!!!

so you signed a 6 mil a year contract, and you want more money after 3, well, it works both ways. you had a bad year,we're only gonna give you $4 mil this year, cuz that's all you were worth. so players should either stick to the contracts they signed, or have it be a sliding scale BOTH directions, and be faced with making LESS than their contract if they don't do well

that way, it frees up money to give to the player who DID do well

case solved

(i wonder how many players would accept that)

[BigRed11]

Most contracts already have escalators in them.

[PaulSoleil]

Most contracts already have escalators in them.

yeah, well that "bonus" system is fine. you deserve a bonus if you perform. but a whole new contract because you feel like you deserve more than the contract you were happy with and signed 3 years ago? - no.

if the player feels like his contract is null because he deserves more, than the team ownership should be able to say his contract is null because he's NOT performing and give him less.

[EuroCard]

yeah, well that "bonus" system is fine. you deserve a bonus if you perform. but a whole new contract because you feel like you deserve more than the contract you were happy with and signed 3 years ago? - no.

if the player feels like his contract is null because he deserves more, than the team ownership should be able to say his contract is null because he's NOT performing and give him less.

Including escalators is actually agreeing a sliding scale. If no escalators are met you get what we would give to a non performing athelete. Perform to normal expectations you get some escalators to bring you up to a normal salary, perform above expectations then the next set of escalators kick in and you get what your performance merits.

All contracts should be set up this way and any front office failing to do so is an ***.

[beauwinden]

The only problem I see with that is for whiners in the league like Terrell Owens, who constantly wants the ball thrown at him, many players feel they can't control their number of receptions, or in a running back's case, number of touches.

[Ditship]

i'm pretty tired of all these whine-y millionaire players who sign big contracts than all of a sudden want MORE.

it's ridiculous. what business actually does that? in my field (entertainment), when i sign a contract for a project, i don't suddenly demand more half way through because the crew says that i'm carrying the picture.

so how about THIS more money if you perform (through performance bonuses - say 1000 yard receiver = bonus)

AND LESS MONEY IF YOU DON'T PERFORM!!!

so you signed a 6 mil a year contract, and you want more money after 3, well, it works both ways. you had a bad year,we're only gonna give you $4 mil this year, cuz that's all you were worth. so players should either stick to the contracts they signed, or have it be a sliding scale BOTH directions, and be faced with making LESS than their contract if they don't do well

that way, it frees up money to give to the player who DID do well

case solved

(i wonder how many players would accept that)Dude.. You and Master P are all over it! Go back and look at the contract Ricky Williams had coming out of the draft with the Saints. He had all these crazy escalators that would have made him insane money.. Instead he got hurt and I'm sure was the laughing stock of the Players Union. I think he got rid of that contract as fast as he could.

[finally]

I agree with the idea to some point but think it would destroy the NFL.

What if it's the last drive of the year and THT needs 3 more yards to hit a bonus but Whiz thinks Wells gives us the best chance to win?

What if Fitz needs 1 more catch but Breaston is wide open?

What if a LB needs 1 more sack but is asked to drop into coverage?

What if a LT loses a bonus if he gives up 1 more sack so he wants help from the TE but Whiz wants the TE to catch a pass oer the middle?

What if Warner needs to throw 1 more TD but we're up and we need to feed the Bean?

If you think the league has a lot of "me" guys and divas now.....

[PaulSoleil]

I agree with the idea to some point but think it would destroy the NFL.

What if it's the last drive of the year and THT needs 3 more yards to hit a bonus but Whiz thinks Wells gives us the best chance to win?

What if Fitz needs 1 more catch but Breaston is wide open?

What if a LB needs 1 more sack but is asked to drop into coverage?

What if a LT loses a bonus if he gives up 1 more sack so he wants help from the TE but Whiz wants the TE to catch a pass oer the middle?

What if Warner needs to throw 1 more TD but we're up and we need to feed the Bean?

If you think the league has a lot of "me" guys and divas now.....



great point.

like you and the other guys were referring to, this is the tricky part. so then they could make it not just based on total yardage but also other stats.

for instance:

rbs: 1000 yards OR over 4 yards per carry. either one.

that way if they don't get that 5 extra yards at the end of the season, you still have your great per carry average.

also, the sliding scale could be optional. you either make 6 mil a year - no negotiating

OR

6 mil a year base and it can slide between 4 and 8 depending on performance (but no lower than 4)

(again, these guys are rich regardless)


it's not a perfect idea yet, but if players wanna bump things up, they need to be willing to have it go both ways.

[NJCardFan]

I'd like to see owners start suing players who are under contract yet sit out. To me that's a breech of contract. You signed a contract for X amount of money for X amount of years. Just because you have a career year after the first year means you can voluntarily void the contract you signed in good faith or demand a new contract. This is why I'm glad the front office is playing hard ball with Q. But for some reason players are allowed to fleece franchises when they feel the contract they signed in good faith isn't enough. Hell, Mike Vick broke his contract by going to prison yet he was allowed to keep the $60 million bonus. How screwy is that?

But believe you me that if an owner decided to sue a player for breech of contract and wins that suit you wouldn't see as many holdouts for new contracts.

[finally]

I'd like to see owners start suing players who are under contract yet sit out. To me that's a breech of contract. You signed a contract for X amount of money for X amount of years. Just because you have a career year after the first year means you can voluntarily void the contract you signed in good faith or demand a new contract. This is why I'm glad the front office is playing hard ball with Q. But for some reason players are allowed to fleece franchises when they feel the contract they signed in good faith isn't enough. Hell, Mike Vick broke his contract by going to prison yet he was allowed to keep the $60 million bonus. How screwy is that?

But believe you me that if an owner decided to sue a player for breech of contract and wins that suit you wouldn't see as many holdouts for new contracts.

while they do not sue the player, there is definately some huge leverage they have with fining players that don't show up. I think it's like 10,000 per day but that's just off the top of my head.

And Mike Vick had to pay back some serious money to ATL

[finally]

great point.

like you and the other guys were referring to, this is the tricky part. so then they could make it not just based on total yardage but also other stats.

for instance:

rbs: 1000 yards OR over 4 yards per carry. either one.

that way if they don't get that 5 extra yards at the end of the season, you still have your great per carry average.

also, the sliding scale could be optional. you either make 6 mil a year - no negotiating

OR

6 mil a year base and it can slide between 4 and 8 depending on performance (but no lower than 4)

(again, these guys are rich regardless)


it's not a perfect idea yet, but if players wanna bump things up, they need to be willing to have it go both ways.

I think this thinking is better suited for baseball because in baseball your value to a team can almst directly be related to the stats you put up. Either you're a .250 hitter or you're a .320 hitter. Either your ERA is below 3 or it isn't.

In football, often results are out of the hands of individuals because of schemes, play calls, formations, etc. How would you pay a blocking TE? FB? A guy like Gerald Hayes? A nose guard whos job is to suck up blocks so the LB's can make plays? What about the OL that gives their QB 6 seconds but then gives up a sack because the QB doesn't get rid of the ball? What about a true shut down corner that never gets thrown at?

In football you can control a game without putting up stats.

[PaulSoleil]

I think this thinking is better suited for baseball because in baseball your value to a team can almst directly be related to the stats you put up. Either you're a .250 hitter or you're a .320 hitter. Either your ERA is below 3 or it isn't.

In football, often results are out of the hands of individuals because of schemes, play calls, formations, etc. How would you pay a blocking TE? FB? A guy like Gerald Hayes? A nose guard whos job is to suck up blocks so the LB's can make plays? What about the OL that gives their QB 6 seconds but then gives up a sack because the QB doesn't get rid of the ball? What about a true shut down corner that never gets thrown at?

In football you can control a game without putting up stats.


good point.

what alternative do you recommend then?

[PaulSoleil]

I'd like to see owners start suing players who are under contract yet sit out. To me that's a breech of contract. You signed a contract for X amount of money for X amount of years. Just because you have a career year after the first year means you can voluntarily void the contract you signed in good faith or demand a new contract. This is why I'm glad the front office is playing hard ball with Q. But for some reason players are allowed to fleece franchises when they feel the contract they signed in good faith isn't enough. Hell, Mike Vick broke his contract by going to prison yet he was allowed to keep the $60 million bonus. How screwy is that?

But believe you me that if an owner decided to sue a player for breech of contract and wins that suit you wouldn't see as many holdouts for new contracts.


exactly!


and like "finally" said, i think vic had to pay back a lot of money