Mr. WEO Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 I totally disagree. Bosa isn't taking them to the promised land. They are the employer and they don't need him to continue on, for better or for worse. Without the team he's screwed. I wouldn't give in either if I were in the Charger camp. But then, I'd have let the Missouri football players walk or pay for tuition. No he isn't taking him the promise land. They are never going to get there as is. Theirs is a disastrously owned organization. Blowing a deal for your 1st round pick (he's asking no more than others were readily offered this year) adds to the rep that this team is a clown show spinning it's wheels endlessly. This is nickel and dime stuff-should be a slam dunk, what do they gain here? Looks dumb and cheap--but that's the Spanos way. Why would any player take them seriously?
Augie Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 My understanding is the other teams don't give up on this and Bosa is taking a stand. The argument is over precedent. If Bosa makes it through his deal there's no down side to him. He's worried about his failure. That's not inspiring for a guy picked that high.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 For what I believe is the first time since the new CBA made signing rookies so easy some teams sign them all in a week, Joey Bosa is holding out into training camp. Both sides cite "precedent" - Bosa saying that top 5 picks don't have offset language and SD saying they just don't leave that out as as organization. There is also the issue of when he signing bonus is paid out. Apparently, Bosa is so eager to get to camp that they are now willing to bend on one of the two issues. But SD won't budge. And they reportedly aren't even talking. Mike McCoy has thrown shade at Bosa saying he is missing important stuff and needs to be there. All true, but how hard is it to get the guy signed when the deals are practically written for you now? http://www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2016/8/1/12341572/bosa-watch-are-bosa-and-the-team-even-talking?utm_campaign=boltsfromtheblue&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter Moma says they should have pulled an Eli.
Mr. WEO Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 jared Goff, also with a California team,signed a deal which guaranteed him his signing bonus before the end of the 2016 season AND removed the offset language. Ok, he was picked two spots higher. Jalen Ramsey, picked 2 spots LOWER, also has both of these things in his deal and his state has no income tax. thats the thing - they said he was their guy from the beginning. They've wanted him for 3 years, never wavered. According to the FO. Now they want him to take a deal no other #3 pick has accepted since slotting started in 2012. My understanding is the other teams don't give up on this and Bosa is taking a stand. The argument is over precedent. If Bosa makes it through his deal there's no down side to him. He's worried about his failure. That's not inspiring for a guy picked that high. Is Yolo wrong? Also, him wanting as much as he can get is hardly "worrying about his failure". That's a novel hot take.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 i kind of agree. While I do see his side, I always think about Brady Quinn. He held out awhile, and I think it really hurt his potential. Wasn't worth it IMO. Otoh, a pass rusher is different than a QB in terms of how much time you need and I do think he can pick things up relatively quickly. I think SD is holding tight to the purse strings and being stubborn and it is just hurting the team. Spanos related to Ralph ?
Augie Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 I don't blame him for wanting as much as he can get. Not for a second. I also admit to leaning toward the employer over the employee for most cases. That may be different from what some others here think. The employer has a billion plus invested in his business. He can move on without the employee and hardly miss a beat. (Yes, Bosa won't change what they are by much.) Bosa has more to lose, so why give up the position of power?
Mr. WEO Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 I don't blame him for wanting as much as he can get. Not for a second. I also admit to leaning toward the employer over the employee for most cases. That may be different from what some others here think. The employer has a billion plus invested in his business. He can move on without the employee and hardly miss a beat. (Yes, Bosa won't change what they are by much.) Bosa has more to lose, so why give up the position of power? As Yolo said, he's asking for what other #3 picks have gotten without question. The Chargers are claiming a precedent which, for them, doesn't exist. How do they benefit then? They again just look stoopid, not "powerful". And Spanos does not have anywhere near a billion invested--he owned the team for a small fraction of that.
Augie Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 I wouldn't give in either, based on what admittedly is little knowledge on the specifics of contracts and the CBA. The other 31 (30?) first rounders have signed. How many had that language? I don't know. But if the Bills got $1.4 BILLION in Buffalo, it doesn't matter what Spanos has in the game. He has an asset worth a billion +.
BaaadThingsMan Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 @sdutgehlken Joey Bosa's mother frustrated with contract dispute between Chargers, son: "Wish we pulled an Eli Manning." this is hilarious, not the other tweet
Buffalo Barbarian Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 I wouldn't give in either, based on what admittedly is little knowledge on the specifics of contracts and the CBA. The other 31 (30?) first rounders have signed. How many had that language? I don't know. But if the Bills got $1.4 BILLION in Buffalo, it doesn't matter what Spanos has in the game. He has an asset worth a billion +. Spanos will survive, Typical greedy business owner who think their employees are worms and don't deserve what they are already getting. If they could get away with slavery they would and would cry bankruptcy if they had to start paying..
Helpmenow Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 The Chargers are the needy side here. Crappy team going nowhere[/quote They will gone from America's finest city
thebandit27 Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 Spanos will survive, Typical greedy business owner who think their employees are worms and don't deserve what they are already getting. If they could get away with slavery they would and would cry bankruptcy if they had to start paying.. Well, you may not agree with him on this particular issue, but read his book--you couldn't be more wrong about his persona.
Malazan Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 Well, you may not agree with him on this particular issue, but read his book--you couldn't be more wrong about his persona. What people write in their book tends to be the...uhh...best version of themselves.
thebandit27 Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 What people write in their book tends to be the...uhh...best version of themselves. Of course, but that wasn't really my point. If we're going to call a guy greedy, it's worth knowing about him, and the philanthropic efforts of the Spanos family across all of North America are quite substantial
NoSaint Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 As Yolo said, he's asking for what other #3 picks have gotten without question. The Chargers are claiming a precedent which, for them, doesn't exist. How do they benefit then? They again just look stoopid, not "powerful". And Spanos does not have anywhere near a billion invested--he owned the team for a small fraction of that. agreed. what they are doing is only a minor step up from "we only gave our first rounder a 4 year 10m contract last year, so why would we do different for this first rounder?" Its standard inclusion for top picks and denying because they didnt give the same perk to lower picks in the past is asinine.
Mr. WEO Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 The Chargers are the needy side here. Crappy team going nowhere[/quote They will gone from America's finest city Finest City?? Nice weather, decent beaches. Not much of a city... Well, you may not agree with him on this particular issue, but read his book--you couldn't be more wrong about his persona. Dean Spanos wrote a book? Of course, but that wasn't really my point. If we're going to call a guy greedy, it's worth knowing about him, and the philanthropic efforts of the Spanos family across all of North America are quite substantial Who doesn't know about Dean Spanos at this point? In 2014, he said the NFL should not allow a team to move to LA. Then he couldn't wait to jump in with genetically whacked Mark Davis on a half baked LA stadium plan. When the other owners humiliated him and Davis, he came crawling back to SD again demanding the City build him a new stadium.
PostRalphEra Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 (edited) Those who are bashing Bosa don't realize what's going on. Due to the structure of the contract, he's slated to make LESS this year than the picks who went AFTER him. That's not right. The offset language is another issue. Edited August 8, 2016 by PostRalphEra
thebandit27 Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 (edited) Those who are bashing Bosa don't realize what's going on. Due to the structure of the contract, he's slated to make LESS than the picks who went AFTER him. That's not right. The offset language is another issue. No, he's slated to make less money immediately. The entire contract is guaranteed; it's all about when he gets the money. His camp is saying that they want a greater portion of the cash flow now, so that he can start earning interest that will help him carry the burden of the state tax he has to pay on his income. Now I believe that the team is being unnecessarily frugal here--they're the ones that picked him No. 3 overall. That said, both sides are being silly. There are two issues at play: offsets and cash flow. Each side compromise on one and let's move on. Who doesn't know about Dean Spanos at this point? In 2014, he said the NFL should not allow a team to move to LA. Then he couldn't wait to jump in with genetically whacked Mark Davis on a half baked LA stadium plan. When the other owners humiliated him and Davis, he came crawling back to SD again demanding the City build him a new stadium. ^ You could practically craft the guy's biography from cradle-to-grave based on that--good point Edited August 8, 2016 by thebandit27
PostRalphEra Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 No, he's slated to make less money immediately. The entire contract is guaranteed; it's all about when he gets the money. His camp is saying that they want a greater portion of the cash flow now, so that he can start earning interest that will help him carry the burden of the state tax he has to pay on his income. Correct. Which is a pretty big deal for a rookie. Other teams, like Jacksonville, have structured it to be player friendly.
thebandit27 Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 Correct. Which is a pretty big deal for a rookie. Other teams, like Jacksonville, have structured it to be player friendly. I understand that--as I said in my post, I think the team is being unnecessarily frugal. He is not, however, going to make less money overall. He's going to make less money this year. He's going to make more money than Jalen Ramsey from their respective first contracts. IMO offset language is a stupid fight for both teams--to me, it's like the team saying they think they could've made a mistake, and the player saying that he thinks he may not play well enough to get his 5th year option. If I'm the team, and I'm looking to make a concession, I'd give in and say "okay, no offsets". That way, you get the contract done and you probably get the player to defer at least a portion of his upfront cash.
Recommended Posts