millbank Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Article by Dan Le Batard contrary to most here NFL stars are justified if they opt to hold out The NFL player who holds out has to stick up for himself -- even if it means it hurts his team, his future bosses and his reputation. Because the football holdout isn't getting help from anywhere else. He isn't getting it from his clown union, the worst in the big sports. He isn't getting it from NFL front offices that continue to use public pressure to strong-arm these kids. He isn't getting it from the coach who issues ultimatums and threats to get him into camp. And he isn't getting it from management shills like Cote, who uses rhetorical gimmicks like ''greedy'' and ''selfish'' and ''entitlement'' to appease a cheering populace that just wants Adewale Ogunleye, Keenan McCardell, Phillip Rivers and Ben Watson in camp at any cost because, hey, what's a few million dollars? Football contracts are a joke compared to baseball, basketball and hockey. They are, unlike the other sports, non-guaranteed, which sort of defeats the purpose of having a contract in the first place. Everything is tilted in the favor of management, which can waive a Jason Taylor today without worrying about the next few years he is allegedly owed. How would you like this in your line of work? A contract that gives you no leverage and gives management all the options? Especially when, in cases like the one with a Nigerian prince like Ogunleye, your team needs you more than you need your team and its money? I wonder if Cote would be so pro-management if The Herald fired him tomorrow because it just felt like it. All NFL contracts do is lock the player in at a price while the team can waive him whenever and for whatever reasons it pleases, up to and including salary-cap mismanagement involving other players. This is particularly unbelievable when you consider how dangerous football is and that the average career lifespan is shorter than it is in the other sports. The NFL, America's most popular league, makes more money than other leagues while sharing less of it with its players because of a small salary cap. Basketball has a bigger salary cap for 12 players than football does for 53. And, again, the money isn't guaranteed amid football's violence, so Juwan Howard and Mike Hampton are guaranteed more money than Peyton Manning while Austin Croshere is guaranteed more than Marshall Faulk. It is in this environment that players hold out, as they should, using the leverage they have in the rare instances when they have it. I don't blame Ogunleye, Winslow and Rivers. I applaud them. Players
Mark VI Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Most of us are non-union employees. Our companies could dismiss us anytime, citing cutbacks or any bogus reason. Plus we make pennies compared to these guys. Does he really believe we feel sorry for them ? What the hell is he talking about ? :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:
ajzepp Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 The situations that cause me to lose respect for a player are those like Keenan McCardell's. I can see if you come in as a rookie with a modest contract, you end up being one of the better in the league at your position, and you then think you should be compensated for what you've achieved. But when you are a veteran and you sign a pretty nice deal to go to a team, and then hold out for more money just beause you have one year that's better than your "average" year, that's a bunch of crap. Rookies, for the most part, are slotted. Not a whole lot of leverage there. But this guy signed a contract and he should damn well be honoring it. I hope Tim Brown has a killer year and they forget all about "Me"enan
Nanker Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 What if they held a game... and nobody showed up? Would they just play with themselves for the sheer pleasure of it?
Gavin in Va Beach Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Most of us are non-union employees. Our companies could dismiss us anytime, citing cutbacks or any bogus reason. Plus we make pennies compared to these guys. Does he really believe we feel sorry for them ? What the hell is he talking about ? :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: 2069[/snapback] Dan Le Retard made it a career choice a long time ago to suck up to the players of all sports and be their 'buddy' in an attempt to get stories and inside info from them. You can count on him to defend a player for just about any action short of being caught making a snuff film. Pro-union also goes without saying and he among other 'sports journalists' make it their mission to tear down the NFL union at every opportunity. Frankly I'm of the opinion it's not the NFL union that's too weak, it's the other sports unions that are too strong. See the NHL for a union that is really damaging it's sport with ridiculous player demands. Can baseball and basketball be far behind? Oh Le Bastard - :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:
zow2 Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 This is just Lebetard's way of staying in the hip pocket of all the players in the League and continuing to get scoops like the Ricky Williams retirement. He can make a better career for himself going against the mainstream thinking.
millbank Posted August 21, 2004 Author Posted August 21, 2004 Its true that Dan Le Batard does write most from players perspective , he being one of few you can count on your hand that do. For every story that Dan gets from players by having their back, there are a thousand who kiss the ass of management to get their stories. Having a bias is not impossible its presnet in all of us to some degree the vocalness being relative, at least he does not pretend otherwise. If we are a better culture because of less union employment is for the other board and likely a interesting issue to ponder.
Campy Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Most of us are non-union employees. Our companies could dismiss us anytime, citing cutbacks or any bogus reason. Plus we make pennies compared to these guys. Does he really believe we feel sorry for them ? What the hell is he talking about ? :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: 2069[/snapback] EXACTLY! Or maybe, just maybe, they could parlay their free education into a REAL JOB. Oh? What do you mean he quit school? Hmm, maybe they can use some of that 1,2, or 3 year salary and PAY TUITION to go back to school and get a real job! Since free agency began 10+ years ago, I have NO PITY for the state of modern players' finances. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: A productive life doesn't have to end when you leave football.
RuntheDamnBall Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Frankly I'm of the opinion it's not the NFL union that's too weak, it's the other sports unions that are too strong. See the NHL for a union that is really damaging it's sport with ridiculous player demands. Can baseball and basketball be far behind? 2078[/snapback] They aren't. They have the richest contracts. The top guys make 30 mill a year and then get their shoe endorsements or whatever else. Baseball needs a cap and a team-spending minimum so that teams aren't just throwing their revenue sharing money in the bank or into pointless new stadiums. In football I think there needs to be some middle ground. I think we all agree they are paid too much in general, but a market value has been established so therein lies the problem. No one would ever go for this, but how about a "maximum wage" with plenty of incentives for rookies, 1st, 2nd year players? Think about it. Rooks wouldn't be coming in, making ridiculous money for nothing a la Ryan Leaf, and they work hard, everyone gets a great return on their investment. I know there's a bit of a guideline for this with the draft pool but I think there should be some absolutes set. If you make $400,000 a year you can't cry poverty. You can't. Period. And if you're making or set to make way more than that, don't expect anyone to feel sorry for you. And regarding the notion that football contracts aren't guaranteed, that's why they give out signing bonuses. That is ridiculous guaranteed money that a player doesn't have to do anything for -- besides having played well to date, and the expectation that he will continue to do so. If a player is very good, he stands to get one. If he's not, he goes out and earns his money like everyone else. The only situation where guarantees should be made is regarding injury, to protect players in a punishing sport. I am not familiar with the details on that; any refreshers anyone?
hamtenp Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Apparently! The author has never been a car salesman. All the contracts he sells mean nothing. they can change your contract anytime. Life is a B word Article by Dan Le Batard contrary to most here NFL stars are justified if they opt to hold out The NFL player who holds out has to stick up for himself -- even if it means it hurts his team, his future bosses and his reputation. Because the football holdout isn't getting help from anywhere else. He isn't getting it from his clown union, the worst in the big sports. He isn't getting it from NFL front offices that continue to use public pressure to strong-arm these kids. He isn't getting it from the coach who issues ultimatums and threats to get him into camp. And he isn't getting it from management shills like Cote, who uses rhetorical gimmicks like ''greedy'' and ''selfish'' and ''entitlement'' to appease a cheering populace that just wants Adewale Ogunleye, Keenan McCardell, Phillip Rivers and Ben Watson in camp at any cost because, hey, what's a few million dollars? Football contracts are a joke compared to baseball, basketball and hockey. They are, unlike the other sports, non-guaranteed, which sort of defeats the purpose of having a contract in the first place. Everything is tilted in the favor of management, which can waive a Jason Taylor today without worrying about the next few years he is allegedly owed. How would you like this in your line of work? A contract that gives you no leverage and gives management all the options? Especially when, in cases like the one with a Nigerian prince like Ogunleye, your team needs you more than you need your team and its money? I wonder if Cote would be so pro-management if The Herald fired him tomorrow because it just felt like it. All NFL contracts do is lock the player in at a price while the team can waive him whenever and for whatever reasons it pleases, up to and including salary-cap mismanagement involving other players. This is particularly unbelievable when you consider how dangerous football is and that the average career lifespan is shorter than it is in the other sports. The NFL, America's most popular league, makes more money than other leagues while sharing less of it with its players because of a small salary cap. Basketball has a bigger salary cap for 12 players than football does for 53. And, again, the money isn't guaranteed amid football's violence, so Juwan Howard and Mike Hampton are guaranteed more money than Peyton Manning while Austin Croshere is guaranteed more than Marshall Faulk. It is in this environment that players hold out, as they should, using the leverage they have in the rare instances when they have it. I don't blame Ogunleye, Winslow and Rivers. I applaud them. Players 2064[/snapback]
MadBuffaloDisease Posted August 21, 2004 Posted August 21, 2004 Le Bastard is a moron. First of all, using the example of 3 other leagues that are floundering is probably about as brilliant as using Enron as a business model. Second of all, the NFL designates 2/3 of their revenue to be ear-marked for player salaries. I wonder if any companies spend 2/3 of their revenue on their employees?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.