How deep is Donahoe's love for Willis?

[Frez]

Bills | Rosenhaus won't Push for McGahee Extension, Yet

Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:01:05 -0700

 

Adam Schefter, of NFL.com, reports agent Drew Rosenhaus is not expected to push for a contract extension for Buffalo Bills RB Willis McGahee, at least for this season. Rosenhaus has brought up the topic of a McGahee extension to the Bills, but he did nothing more than that. Should McGahee have the big year that many are expecting, the Bills can expect to hear from Rosenhaus shortly after the coming season.

[IDBillzFan]

Bills | Rosenhaus won't Push for McGahee Extension, Yet

Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:01:05 -0700

 

Adam Schefter, of NFL.com, reports agent Drew Rosenhaus is not expected to push for a contract extension for Buffalo Bills RB Willis McGahee, at least for this season. Rosenhaus has brought up the topic of a McGahee extension to the Bills, but he did nothing more than that. Should McGahee have the big year that many are expecting, the Bills can expect to hear from Rosenhaus shortly after the coming season.

379368[/snapback]

My god. It's like reading a Drew Rosenhaus newsletter.

 

Players I May Make Hold Out

By Drew Rosenhaus.

 

Hi. I'm Drew Rosenhaus. Does your player work for me? Is he thinking of working for me? Does that player have even the slightest of egos? Well....get your checkbook out if he starts looking good, cuz I WILL be a-coming to visit you. Maybe. If it's a good year. And I'm gonna make me lots o'money off other people's inability to believe that keeping a commitment means anything.

 

Save yourself the trouble. Call my toll free number now, and let's just get it over with. Call Now. That number is BR-549. That's BR-549.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

On the flip-side, if you think he's going to be great, do you try to make him play-out his cheap rookie contract and then see him bad-mouth the team and want to leave, a la Shawn Alexander, or do you pre-empt a messy holdout and bad feelings, bite the bullet, and do the extension early?

[Kelly the Dog]

Knee deep.

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

If Willis has a big year pay him and be done with it.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

If Willis has a big year pay him and be done with it.

379423[/snapback]

 

Exactly. I see no issue here beyond the overly conflicted and worried. Either a bad year or a good year for WM maks the decision an easy one.

 

If he has a medium year it depends on how medium it is and the answesr to this question are who knows and we will see.

 

Anyone who wants to have a fact-free opinion about this is being neurotic and anyone who draws conclusions from this until something real happens is just plain psychotic.

[Buftex]

Exactly. I see no issue here beyond the overly conflicted and worried.  Either a bad year or a good year for WM maks the decision an easy one.

 

If he has a medium year it depends on how medium it is and the answesr to this question are who knows and we will see.

 

Anyone who wants to have a fact-free opinion about this is being neurotic and anyone who draws conclusions from this until something real happens is just plain psychotic.

379432[/snapback]

 

 

I dunno. I really don't see TD letting Rosenhaus dictate the teams salary cap like that. You have to remember, not far into the future, Lee Evans and Jp Losman will be thinking contract extensions as well...if Losman, in particualr, shows to be the type of franchise QB that the Bills are expecting, it would likely be wiser to sew him up, to a multi year extension, before a running back. In the case of Willis McGahee, I have seen nothing in Buffalo (or in Pittsburgh) that would lead me to believe that TD is going to place too much value on one player, no matter how good, at the expense of the greater good of the team.

[PromoTheRobot]

You can only worry about 2005. 2006 is a million miles away. But you can bet that TD is thinking about life without Willis if his agent starts acting like a Level-1 A-hole. Why do you think we keep drafting and signing RB's? It would not shock me if Willis gets dealt in 2006. TD will not be dictated to by a player or his agent.

 

PTR

[OBXBILLSFAN]

You can only worry about 2005.  2006 is a million miles away.  But you can bet that TD is thinking about life without Willis if his agent starts acting like a Level-1 A-hole.  Why do you think we keep drafting and signing RB's?  It would not shock me if Willis gets dealt in 2006.  TD will not be dictated to by a player or his agent.

 

PTR

379448[/snapback]

One more reason to keep TH.

[cåblelady]

One more reason to keep TH.

379478[/snapback]

 

[Mickey]

My god. It's like reading a Drew Rosenhaus newsletter.

 

Players I May Make Hold Out

By Drew Rosenhaus.

 

Hi. I'm Drew Rosenhaus. Does your player work for me? Is he thinking of working for me? Does that player have even the slightest of egos? Well....get your checkbook out if he starts looking good, cuz I WILL be a-coming to visit you. Maybe. If it's a good year. And I'm gonna make me lots o'money off other people's inability to believe that keeping a commitment means anything.

 

Save yourself the trouble. Call my toll free number now, and let's just get it over with. Call Now. That number is BR-549. That's BR-549.

379376[/snapback]

The player is no less committed than the teams are. If a player performs poorly, he is gone. If a player is not paid market value, he is gone. If they hold out, they don't get paid and the team doesn't get the benefit of their performance. The NFL has a virtual monopoly and the reason they never take player's to court on a breach of contract claim in a typical hold out situation is because they would lose and they know it. Rather than have that precedent established ultimately leading to unlimited free agency, the teams deal with hold outs the way they always do.

This is a business and loyalty means about as much to players as it does to teams which is not at all. The teams and the players basically just use whatever tools the CBA gives them to pursue their goals. For now, neither wants to involve the courts and risk killing the golden goose.

 

Frankly, it is pretty much capitalism at its best. The players balance the league's monopoly power with the CBA and, for the limited few who are the top performers, hold outs. The result is about as free a labor market as you can have and still keep intact the team structure, league balance and the draft. As much as it drives us all crazy sometimes, the NFL is a healthy, stable league with a great product and a decent enough bottom line. I wouldn't mess with it. The minute teams start clamping down too hard on hold outs, they would be inviting law suits whose results could make things much, much worse.

 

I think Willis should make as much money as he can while he can and he should do that by gaining lots and lots of yards. If the price of having the top rusher in the league is a hold out and larger salary, there are worse fates.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I think Willis should make as much money as he can while he can and he should do that by gaining lots and lots of yards.  If the price of having the top rusher in the league is a hold out and larger salary, there are worse fates.

But then again, should he have to repay his salary from his rookie year, since he didn't play a down? And should players be expected to give back pay if they don't play well or can't play? I know in my job, I can't demand a huge pay raise if I had a great year, but I also know my employer can't dock me for subpar years, although they have the option to fire me.

[todd]

On the flip-side, if you think he's going to be great, do you try to make him play-out his cheap rookie contract and then see him bad-mouth the team and want to leave, a la Shawn Alexander, or do you pre-empt a messy holdout and bad feelings, bite the bullet, and do the extension early?

379417[/snapback]

 

I don't think Willis has a cheap rookie contract. I think, unless I'm mistaken, his contract has lots of incentives and if he reaches them he's going to be a very, very rich guy.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I don't think Willis has a cheap rookie contract. I think, unless I'm mistaken, his contract has lots of incentives and if he reaches them he's going to be a very, very rich guy.

That's what I thought, but with Rosensleaze talking about an extension with TD (read: bigger contract), it might not be as great as we think.

[d_wag]

That's what I thought, but with Rosensleaze talking about an extension with TD (read: bigger contract), it might not be as great as we think.

379512[/snapback]

 

the max willis can make on his 5 year deal is 15.528M........but i will point out willis was paid 4.15M in bonus money which he would have kept if he never even played a down.......i doubt he would have returned a penny if he couldn't perform, which is why it boggles my mind that guys think just because they outperformed their contract they can go back on their word (i.e. a signed contract that stated they will play for X amount for X years)

[obie_wan]

On the flip-side, if you think he's going to be great, do you try to make him play-out his cheap rookie contract and then see him bad-mouth the team and want to leave, a la Shawn Alexander, or do you pre-empt a messy holdout and bad feelings, bite the bullet, and do the extension early?

379417[/snapback]

 

do too early and he'll be back in another year looking for more.

[IDBillzFan]

the max willis can make on his 5 year deal is 15.528M........but i will point out willis was paid 4.15M in bonus money which he would have kept if he never even played a down.......i doubt he would have returned a penny if he couldn't perform, which is why it boggles my mind that guys think just because they outperformed their contract they can go back on their word (i.e. a signed contract that stated they will play for X amount for X years)

379513[/snapback]

Mickey is right in that this is a two-way street. Teams ask players to restructure all the time. Or cut them. But my question is, if the player gets cut, does the team still honor the financial contract? And, if they ask a player to restructure, and the player says no, does the team then dump that player and give them no money?

[d_wag]

Mickey is right in that this is a two-way street. Teams ask players to restructure all the time. Or cut them. But my question is, if the player gets cut, does the team still honor the financial contract? And, if they ask a player to restructure, and the player says no, does the team then dump that player and give them no money?

379563[/snapback]

 

either way, the player still keeps the ENTIRE signing bonus.......it's not refunded on a "pro-rata" basis........that is the players guarantee......

[Bill from NYC]

Mickey is right in that this is a two-way street. Teams ask players to restructure all the time. Or cut them. But my question is, if the player gets cut, does the team still honor the financial contract? And, if they ask a player to restructure, and the player says no, does the team then dump that player and give them no money?

379563[/snapback]

 

NFL contracts are not guaranteed. When a player is cut, he gets nothing. His signing bonus still counts toward the salary cap.

When a player is trades, the team he is traded from eats what is left of the pro-rated signing bonus.

[DIEHARD BILLSFAN]

.

This is a business and loyalty means about as much to players as it does to teams which is not at all.  The teams and the players basically just use whatever tools the CBA gives them to pursue their goals. 

 

For the fans this is a real turnoff.Rookie contracts should at least run full term. How can we root for a team that drafts well and loses players due to contact squables. What kind of example does this set for our children?Just doent look like the NFL is heading in the right direction as far as this issue goes.