I am tired of

[nero47]

Players using the "I have to take my family into account" reason for outlandish contracts. What have they been doing with the money they have already made, albeit making only 250,000+ per year isn't much .

 

Be honest and say "I'm going to get as much as I can, because i'm as greedy as the next player".

 

Don't try to soften going to another team by giving us stupid "family" statements. clements and fletcher.

[stuckincincy]

Players using the "I have to take my family into account" reason for outlandish contracts. What have they been doing with the money they have already made, albeit making only 250,000+ per year isn't much .

 

Be honest and say "I'm going to get as much as I can, because i'm as greedy as the next player".

 

Don't try to soften going to another team by giving us stupid "family" statements. clements and fletcher.

 

Harsh...

[ricojes]

Players using the "I have to take my family into account" reason for outlandish contracts. What have they been doing with the money they have already made, albeit making only 250,000+ per year isn't much .

 

Be honest and say "I'm going to get as much as I can, because i'm as greedy as the next player".

 

Don't try to soften going to another team by giving us stupid "family" statements. clements and fletcher.

If you listen to the audio of NC, it doesn't sound like he's using his family as a reason to sign for the most money. HS asked him if his intentions were to sign for the most money and he said no, 5 years ago may have been a different story, but now (he is finacially secure) and he has to take his family into account (would his family want to live in ____?). I don't think he came across as using his family to get more money at all.

[keepthefaith]

Players using the "I have to take my family into account" reason for outlandish contracts. What have they been doing with the money they have already made, albeit making only 250,000+ per year isn't much .

 

Be honest and say "I'm going to get as much as I can, because i'm as greedy as the next player".

 

Don't try to soften going to another team by giving us stupid "family" statements. clements and fletcher.

 

Put yourself in the player's shoes. You visit 4-5 teams as a free agent, you get 2 offers. One for 4 years from the Bills, $10 signing bonus with a total package of $25 million. Second offer is for 5 years, $15 signing bonus, $32 million total package. Higher offer is from a good team. You meet the people, you like them, you like where they are headed. You go back to the Bills and they don't want to match the better offer. What would you do?

 

I would pack my bags unless the situation in Buffalo compelled me to stay for other reasons. If the Bills were on the verge of a championship, maybe. Maybe not.

 

$5 million goes a long way over the course of a lifetime.

[Kelly the Dog]

Players using the "I have to take my family into account" reason for outlandish contracts. What have they been doing with the money they have already made, albeit making only 250,000+ per year isn't much .

 

Be honest and say "I'm going to get as much as I can, because i'm as greedy as the next player".

 

Don't try to soften going to another team by giving us stupid "family" statements. clements and fletcher.

I am tired of fans complaining that professional athletes are asking for too much money. First off, most everyone everywhere wants to make as much money as his employers are willing to pay. It's the American way.

 

Second, these guys only have 1-10 years to make all of the money they will make in the chosen profession (Granted, there are a lot of years they can milk that name they made for themselves so this really isn't as bad as it sounds).

 

Third, the players if anyone, should be getting the big money and not the owners, who it would go to.

 

Fourth, and one thing that is rarely mentioned but is probably the single biggest factor in player salaries in professional sports, most everyone in the league at your position would hate your guts if you took a lot less than you were capable of being paid. If Nate Clements takes less money than he could be paid, owners and GMs use that against other players, and those other players are pissed. There is enormous pressure from the union for these guys to get everything they can. Granted, one could say that if one guy gets too much it lessens the pot for other players but for the most part these guys do not resent other players getting paid what they think they are worth. Especially in Nate's case, where the Bills were several million under the cap.

 

Fifth, agents are a necessary evil and wield tremendous power. Your agent is negotiating for the player, and if the agent gets a penny less than he could possibly get, he loses stature amongst other players and gets less clients. So they cannot condone very many hometown discounts, which are extremely rare when you actually see the numbers.

[IDBillzFan]

I am tired of fans complaining that professional athletes are asking for too much money. First off, most everyone everywhere wants to make as much money as his employers are willing to pay. It's the American way.

That's almost as tiring as "Ralph has billions of dollars and he owes it to us to spend it."

[Beerball]

I am tired of fans complaining that professional athletes are asking for too much money. First off, most everyone everywhere wants to make as much money as his employers are willing to pay. It's the American way.

 

Second, these guys only have 1-10 years to make all of the money they will make in the chosen profession (Granted, there are a lot of years they can milk that name they made for themselves so this really isn't as bad as it sounds).

 

Third, the players if anyone, should be getting the big money and not the owners, who it would go to.

 

Fourth, and one thing that is rarely mentioned but is probably the single biggest factor in player salaries in professional sports, most everyone in the league at your position would hate your guts if you took a lot less than you were capable of being paid. If Nate Clements takes less money than he could be paid, owners and GMs use that against other players, and those other players are pissed. There is enormous pressure from the union for these guys to get everything they can. Granted, one could say that if one guy gets too much it lessens the pot for other players but for the most part these guys do not resent other players getting paid what they think they are worth. Especially in Nate's case, where the Bills were several million under the cap.

 

Fifth, agents are a necessary evil and wield tremendous power. Your agent is negotiating for the player, and if the agent gets a penny less than he could possibly get, he loses stature amongst other players and gets less clients. So they cannot condone very many hometown discounts, which are extremely rare when you actually see the numbers.

I am tired of fans complaining about fans complaining about professional athletes complaining about needing an extra million to feed their family.

 

[apuszczalowski]

I am tired of fans complaining that professional athletes are asking for too much money. First off, most everyone everywhere wants to make as much money as his employers are willing to pay. It's the American way.

 

Second, these guys only have 1-10 years to make all of the money they will make in the chosen profession (Granted, there are a lot of years they can milk that name they made for themselves so this really isn't as bad as it sounds).

 

Third, the players if anyone, should be getting the big money and not the owners, who it would go to.

 

Fourth, and one thing that is rarely mentioned but is probably the single biggest factor in player salaries in professional sports, most everyone in the league at your position would hate your guts if you took a lot less than you were capable of being paid. If Nate Clements takes less money than he could be paid, owners and GMs use that against other players, and those other players are pissed. There is enormous pressure from the union for these guys to get everything they can. Granted, one could say that if one guy gets too much it lessens the pot for other players but for the most part these guys do not resent other players getting paid what they think they are worth. Especially in Nate's case, where the Bills were several million under the cap.

 

Fifth, agents are a necessary evil and wield tremendous power. Your agent is negotiating for the player, and if the agent gets a penny less than he could possibly get, he loses stature amongst other players and gets less clients. So they cannot condone very many hometown discounts, which are extremely rare when you actually see the numbers.

 

I disagree with this point. The owners should make lots of the money, because it is their money they are essentially gambling with to put a team on the field and supply the area with a team and the NFL. When a team plays bad, its not the players who lose money, its the owner, yet all the owner can do is try to field the best group of guys they feel give them the best chance to win. The players are there just to play. They have a bad game or screw up, the team might suffer, but the player isn't going to lose any money if they miss a catch, or forget a block. The owners could have always taken their money and invested it somewhere else and no into a league or a franchise, instead they chose to gamble with it and should reap the rewards

[Kelly the Dog]

I am tired of fans complaining about fans complaining about professional athletes complaining about needing an extra million to feed their family.

 

I welcome fans complaining about other fans complaining because it proves my point that you're a bunch of whiners.

 

P.S. The first complaining about complaining is not complaining, so don't go there, unless you want to make a public admission that the best comeback you're capable of is "I know you are but what am I".

[RayFinkle]

You are searching for a job:

 

Company A is willing to pay you $40,000 a year.

Company B is willing to pay you $60,000 a year plus a company car.

 

Which one do you pick?

 

 

EDIT: For all you high rollers out there just adjust the numbers accordingly.

[Kelly the Dog]

I disagree with this point. The owners should make lots of the money, because it is their money they are essentially gambling with to put a team on the field and supply the area with a team and the NFL. When a team plays bad, its not the players who lose money, its the owner, yet all the owner can do is try to field the best group of guys they feel give them the best chance to win. The players are there just to play. They have a bad game or screw up, the team might suffer, but the player isn't going to lose any money if they miss a catch, or forget a block. The owners could have always taken their money and invested it somewhere else and no into a league or a franchise, instead they chose to gamble with it and should reap the rewards

Good point. Plantations rule.

[apuszczalowski]

Good point. Plantations rule.

I don't know if this is supposed to be a shot at what I said or not, but just to clarify. I'm not saying Owners should pay little to players and make millions more, I am just saying that the owners deserve to make more because it is their money on the line, and not the players, so the owners should benefit more.

[tennesseeboy]

Well...when WM brings up all those illegitimate kids....

 

Or...given the problems the NFL has had with some athletes.."You know the price of cocaine these days?"

[Beerball]

I welcome fans complaining about other fans complaining because it proves my point that you're a bunch of whiners.

 

P.S. The first complaining about complaining is not complaining, so don't go there, unless you want to make a public admission that the best comeback you're capable of is "I know you are but what am I".

Don't lump me with that bunch of chronic complainers. If there's one thing I hate is complainers complaining!

 

As for the first complaint about complaining not being complaining...try telling that to my wife!

[Kelly the Dog]

I don't know if this is supposed to be a shot at what I said or not, but just to clarify. I'm not saying Owners should pay little to players and make millions more, I am just saying that the owners deserve to make more because it is their money on the line, and not the players, so the owners should benefit more.

They do. In tens of millions a year. And there is ZERO risk for an NFL owner, who can always sell his team for a huge profit not to mention what he makes on a yearly basis. Granted, that is not true in other major sports but a] we're talking about the NFL here and b] the vast majority of these guys (okay, all of them) become pro sports team owners with money making being secondary or way down the line. They are in it for the ego and notoriety and the fun and the love of sports before money making, first, simply because if you had 300 million or a billion you could find a lot more ways to make money than a pro sports franchise. That is not to say they don't like making money, they clearly do and want to, and they are all tough businessmen in their own right. But it is not the primary reason. Not even Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder and Bob Kraft. It's ego.

 

The players are the game. The sole reason the fans pay for tickets and TV networks pay billions to broadcast them. These players, too, not minor league quality players whom no one would pay to see.

[Kelly the Dog]

Don't lump me with that bunch of chronic complainers. If there's one thing I hate is complainers complaining!

 

As for the first complaint about complaining not being complaining...try telling that to my wife!

Well, that just proves you're the main complainer if you're complaining that your wife is the first complainer about the complaining. I'm on her side on this one!

[BuffaloBilliever]

Fletcher could use it for money, he knows he's near the end of his career.

 

Nate might've even meant that he's watching out for his family in the case that they wouldn't want to leave their house and friends in Buffalo.

 

Optimistic? Yes, but a possibility.

[l< j]

I disagree with this point. The owners should make lots of the money, because it is their money they are essentially gambling with to put a team on the field and supply the area with a team and the NFL. When a team plays bad, its not the players who lose money, its the owner

 

It is my understanding, however, that fielding a team just isn't as much of a gamble as you portray. As a whole the league 'gambles' that revenues will increase, that they will attract sufficient fan increase to justify major growth in TV revenues (the bread and butter, correct?) and the other, probably smaller revenue sources (tickets, licensing of bobbleheads). But at the franchise level, there is a significant chunk of guaranteed dollars. That is why the franchise fees are so huge, because they are buying the rights to a guaranteed revenue stream.

 

Someone correct my fuzzy memory on the economics of NFL franchises, please.

 

And the 'gamble' that the player makes is arguably greater. Look at the life expectancy of pro football players compared to the general population.

 

kj

[Mikie2times]

Third, the players if anyone, should be getting the big money and not the owners, who it would go to.

They fight for what they get as any of us would do, but they don't deserve this anymore then you or I deserve a raise. Sure players undergo physical risks, and they have extremely demanding professions. If it was a normal business model they would be entitled to benefits to cover these issues, not completely disproportionate incomes compared to the CEO’s and higher ups in the company/team. Without the dozens of original NFL and AFL owners who took huge risks this league would be nothing.

 

A company can't survive without the people who make the product/are the product, but at the same time the CEO/owner is the one who's developed the idea, or believed in what nobody else did. In real world he would be the one making the disproportionate salary, and if employees had a beef they would be let go without a thought. If the company did incredibly well like the NFL has they'll probably get a raise, but in the real world most that money is going back into the pockets of the men who took the risks to begin with. Players get what they get because the media, and fans. If some local newspaper strikes people don't care. If a professional sports league strikes it's talked about all day, and if it's the NFL it's 24/7. If people didn't attach themselves to players so much they would just be another employee who could be replaced. Just another person working for a company, making the same disproportionate salary most people make compared to the higher ups.

[eball]

It's easy to bash someone for making a decision you'll never have the opportunity to make yourself. We look at the situation from a selfish fan's perspective and say wonderfully insightful things like, "why can't [player x] support his family with $4M a year?" when that player takes $4.5M from another team.

 

I'd like to see any of you stare down a $500K check every year for the next 4-5 years and then walk away from it.

 

Of course it's about the money. It has to be. Only for an older player who has already made gazillions does the decision suddenly become about "getting the ring." There are rare exceptions, but that's why they're called exceptions.

 

I won't blame Nate for 1/2 a second when he takes the best offer he receives.