Keenan McCardell - What's your take?

[Huckleberry]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/writers/michael_silver/09/24/keenan.mccardell/index.html?cnn=yes

[rkmsuf]

Keenan McLoser

[Huckleberry]

Okay, so the poll results are what I expected. Why doesn't the media talk about that angle? Is it simply their desire to stay in good with the players?

[Raiders Army]

The longer he sits out, the more news there is.

[rkmsuf]

McCardell is doing all the talking I'd guess. Gruden had no comment.

That Tampa offense would be bad with or without McCardell.

[gstelmack]

Here's the bit I don't get: "But they don't want me to be there.". That's bunk. You mean "But they don't want to pay me more money." They want him there, just at the money he was making. They don't want him at more money.

[gottimd]

I'd rather have a steaming pile of diarrhea than have someone like that on my team. Kind of reminds me of those Budweiser commercials for that guy "Leon".

[TroyF]

FWIW: I voted renegotiate.

He did outplay his contract. The NFL is the one league where the owners can drop a guy and not pay him his full contract if his level of play drops, I feel the player should have the same right.

Now, were this basketball, hockey or baseball where you could suck it up for 5 years and still get your full contract, I'd have a different take.

If Kennan sucked, TB would have cut him and not payed him this year. Why shouldn't he get more if he's clearly outplayed the contract?

[JAG]

The only bargaining power he has is to sit out...and that hurts himself a lot more than them (as if anyone will pay what he's asking for a 36-yr old receiver when his contract is up). At the same time, if the Bucs really wanted to have him back, they could likely do so easily by offering a few minor concessions to allow McCardell to save face.

[rkmsuf]

FWIW: I voted renegotiate.

He did outplay his contract. The NFL is the one league where the owners can drop a guy and not pay him his full contract if his level of play drops, I feel the player should have the same right.

Now, were this basketball, hockey or baseball where you could suck it up for 5 years and still get your full contract, I'd have a different take.

If Kennan sucked, TB would have cut him and not payed him this year. Why shouldn't he get more if he's clearly outplayed the contract?

Because that's not the way the league works. It isn't the other sports cited.

The player gets some form of guranteed money. They owners get no guranteed performance. Do the players give back some of their salary because they sucked? Even if they renogotiate they don't give back guaranteed money.

[Huckleberry]

Troy -

I can see your side of it, but that's an issue he needs to take up with his Player's Union. If you ask me, the team should have a 4-year obligation to the player if they sign a 4-year contract. Even if they cut him. Why not just have the contractual obligation to pay the player remain but not count it against the cap?

[Raiders Army]

Not that it's a justification, but the teams have a salary cap with which to deal. Players don't have to deal with the salary cap directly (they are indirectly affected, as in this case). That being said, it should be a two-way street, but I have to side with the Buccs on this one. Plus, if he doesn't play on Sunday, that's (slightly) better for the Raiders.

[rkmsuf]

Maybe after catching 90+ balls two years in a row he should have signed a contract he felt was consistent with his perceived value.

Since a Buc he's had one very mediocre year and one good one. His salary to me is right in line with his skill and contribution. I just don't get the notion he's severly outplayed his deal.

[TroyF]

Because that's not the way the league works. It isn't the other sports cited.

The player gets some form of guranteed money. They owners get no guranteed performance. Do the players give back some of their salary because they sucked? Even if they renogotiate they don't give back guaranteed money.


Yes, he gets some form of locked down cash. . . but he can outplay that contract. Again, in another sport, he signs the deal and they are required to pay him no matter what he does. In the NFL, they aren't. He gets his bonus and his yearly salary isn't a given. Well, what do you do if you've outplayed that bonus? You renegotiate it.

It happens all of the time in this league. Renegotiating for poor OR good play are common. The Bucs don't shed any tears for cutting players with 10-12 million left on their deals. Given that, they should be willing to give a guy a slight bump if he does ouplay his deal. Most every other team in the league does act that way. (or they trade the player away for a pick if they honestly feel he isn't worth it)

Actually, the Bucs are being hurt by this as well. The longer it goes on, the less they can get for him. A third round pick will become a fourth round pick which will become a conditional 7th by the time it's over. For a team needing young players, that could be a huge deal down the road.

I think McCardell has earned more coin and I hope he gets it. (I'm the Chiefs, I'm BEGGING TB to let him go for a 4th rounder)

[TroyF]

Troy -

I can see your side of it, but that's an issue he needs to take up with his Player's Union. If you ask me, the team should have a 4-year obligation to the player if they sign a 4-year contract. Even if they cut him. Why not just have the contractual obligation to pay the player remain but not count it against the cap?


Thing is Huck, in 99% of the cases, teams do work with players when they outplay their deals. One of the simplest reasons as to why is that other players will see how you deal with your own. I think, eventually this will hurt the Bucs because of how they are handling it.

It's important to note that the way McCardell is being treated is different than the way most players are. In most cases, the team has the guts to either release or trade a player they aren't willing to pay, rather than watch them twist in the wind. Especially a player they claim they don't need anyway.

[rkmsuf]

Yes, he gets some form of locked down cash. . . but he can outplay that contract. Again, in another sport, he signs the deal and they are required to pay him no matter what he does. In the NFL, they aren't. He gets his bonus and his yearly salary isn't a given. Well, what do you do if you've outplayed that bonus? You renegotiate it.

It happens all of the time in this league. Renegotiating for poor OR good play are common. The Bucs don't shed any tears for cutting players with 10-12 million left on their deals. Given that, they should be willing to give a guy a slight bump if he does ouplay his deal. Most every other team in the league does act that way. (or they trade the player away for a pick if they honestly feel he isn't worth it)

Actually, the Bucs are being hurt by this as well. The longer it goes on, the less they can get for him. A third round pick will become a fourth round pick which will become a conditional 7th by the time it's over. For a team needing young players, that could be a huge deal down the road.

I think McCardell has earned more coin and I hope he gets it. (I'm the Chiefs, I'm BEGGING TB to let him go for a 4th rounder)

A slight bump? That's not what he is looking for. And I don't get what this has to do with other sports. The NFL has clearly set up their structure.

I doubt a trade has anything to do with it. Had there been legitimate interest a deal would have been done. Nobody else wants the guy at 2 mil + either.

[gstelmack]

Since a Buc he's had one very mediocre year and one good one. His salary to me is right in line with his skill and contribution. I just don't get the notion he's severly outplayed his deal.

This is my opinion as well. I don't think he HAS outplayed his deal enough to renegotiate. He may be their best receiver, but that doesn't make him as good as the #1 guys he's trying to compare himself to. He's a solid #2 being made to look a bit better because no one else on the team is all that good.

[TroyF]

This is my opinion as well. I don't think he HAS outplayed his deal enough to renegotiate. He may be their best receiver, but that doesn't make him as good as the #1 guys he's trying to compare himself to. He's a solid #2 being made to look a bit better because no one else on the team is all that good.


I don't think his contract is even up to a solid #2. Just my opinion.

I hate defending a player who is refusing to play out a contract, but the NFL is a special case IMHO.

[rkmsuf]

I don't think his contract is even up to a solid #2. Just my opinion.

I hate defending a player who is refusing to play out a contract, but the NFL is a special case IMHO.

Well he made more in 2003 than:

Hines Ward
Donald Driver
Curtis Conway
Darrell Jackson
Ashlie Lelie
Eddie Kennison
Terry Glenn
Chrebet
Morton
Tai Streets
Corey Bradford
Travis Taylor
Troy Brown

and there are others but these are #2 types outside of Ward and Jackson.

[TroyF]

Well he made more in 2003 than:

Hines Ward
Donald Driver
Curtis Conway
Darrell Jackson
Ashlie Lelie
Eddie Kennison
Terry Glenn
Chrebet
Morton
Tai Streets
Corey Bradford
Travis Taylor
Troy Brown

and there are others but these are #2 types outside of Ward and Jackson.

Ward and Jackson are #1's. McCardell was FAR better than most every other player on that list.

[Huckleberry]

Oh, and for the record, I want him back and back happily. My boy Simms is gonna need all the help he can get in that offense. ;)

[Raiders Army]

Simms isn't starting this week. Chucky already said so....unless something changed that I don't know about.

[Huckleberry]

Nothing changed. I'm talking more about the last part of the season.

[rkmsuf]

Ward and Jackson are #1's. McCardell was FAR better than most every other player on that list.

And he made more money than them...In some cases millions more. I guess it comes down to what far better is.

Jackson and Ward are #1 and he outearned them.

McCardell would have a case if he was younger and only getting 6 figures. The guy is due 2 million plus which is not an outrageous number.

Anywho, I can't relate to the problems associtated with making that much a year be it one, two or 50 million.

[Crapshoot]

FWIW: I voted renegotiate.

He did outplay his contract. The NFL is the one league where the owners can drop a guy and not pay him his full contract if his level of play drops, I feel the player should have the same right.

Now, were this basketball, hockey or baseball where you could suck it up for 5 years and still get your full contract, I'd have a different take.

If Kennan sucked, TB would have cut him and not payed him this year. Why shouldn't he get more if he's clearly outplayed the contract?

Aye. Its a hypocrisy, and fans help perpetuate it.

[Huckleberry]

Aye. Its a hypocrisy, and fans help perpetuate it.

Did the fans sign the CBA?

[TroyF]

Did the fans sign the CBA?

I just want to point out that as a fan, I love the system. I think it works a majority of the time. I love the way this league does things.

I think there are certain cases where the teams make mistakes. This is one of them. I also think that we should factor the leagues setup when we make judgements that a guy is a jerk for acting in a certain way.

[Abe Sargent]

I don't see why people view this as any different than a normal job atmosphere. I make 30+k a year and I do a damn good job at my job. When I was hired, 30k for a person right out of grad school was a really good deal. Now, after four years, it seems low. My field is very transient, with a constant turnover. Trained, experienced staff, like myself, are rare. In addition, I am very good at my job. I am able to go to my supervisor, and give my request for a raise and greater compensation to reflect my greater free market worth and greater value to the organization. If my boss says no, or lowballs me, I am free to take any methods available to me.

Keenan has the method of holding out. Why give him a hard time because he exercises it? I'd rather him hold out then show up and play half-assed football.

-Anxiety

[gstelmack]

I'm not mad at Keenan, nor expressing outrage. I just have no sympathy for him.

[BC Bob]

I voted "shut up and play." Although a quick glance would suggest that these deals are one-sided in favor of the owners because they can release a player and not owe him the remaining year(s) salaries, there is a trade-off of risks and it goes both ways.

The team takes the risk that the amount it is agreeing to pay as a signing bonus will prove to be too much guaranteed money to the player given the level of performance and that, releasing him, will result in too great a cap hit. So, the player may end up remaining on the team and being compensated (considering both the already paid bonus and that year's salary) that overpays for the performance being given.

The player's risk is that the amount he is agreeing to take in compensation will prove insufficient either because (a) he performs at a higher level, or (b) the portion he agreed to take in salary encourages the team to release him rather than pay him that amount (regardless of his performance) and no one else will be willing to pay him that much either.

Since both sides take this risk -- which, in effect, was part of the collective bargaining agreement between players and management -- the player needs to honor his side of th bargain when the risk he took comes to fruition.

[GrantDawg]

Ok, he is scheduled to make $2.2 million and he wants $4.4 million? There is no way he is worth that at his age. I think Gruden is burning a lot of bridges with his managment style, but this time I think McCardell is waaay over-estimating his worth.

[gstelmack]

Don't forget injuries. How many big-name big-contract players are out right now because they're hurt? And they're still getting paid. That's another owner risk.

[Antmeister]

Ok, he is scheduled to make $2.2 million and he wants $4.4 million? There is no way he is worth that at his age. I think Gruden is burning a lot of bridges with his managment style, but this time I think McCardell is waaay over-estimating his worth.

I think this is a valid point, but the problem lies with what Gruden promised. I believe Gruden has led a lot of veterans to believe they were going to have renegotiated contracts verbally, but has never fallen through. He doesn't deserve 4.4 million, but no one is even talking about meeting anywhere near the middle.

[TroyF]

Ok, he is scheduled to make $2.2 million and he wants $4.4 million? There is no way he is worth that at his age. I think Gruden is burning a lot of bridges with his managment style, but this time I think McCardell is waaay over-estimating his worth.


This I'll agree with, but this is where compromise can and should come into play. The Bucs haven't even offered to bump him up to 3 million a year (probably his true worth in the grand scheme of things.)

[totoro]

NFL is a business. You signed a contract and bonded to it. You want to hold out? Fine, then sit and don't get paid. If you deserves the price, they'll definitelly pay you. But, depends on who do the evaluation. A player should be responsible to his decision as well as team management. With a player with his age, personally, I don't see a point to raise his salary to the requested level. In the mean time, there might be someone who thinks he worth it. So, both sides have their right and reason. But, yeah, it's a lose-lose situation.

[Huckleberry]

I don't see why people view this as any different than a normal job atmosphere. I make 30+k a year and I do a damn good job at my job. When I was hired, 30k for a person right out of grad school was a really good deal. Now, after four years, it seems low. My field is very transient, with a constant turnover. Trained, experienced staff, like myself, are rare. In addition, I am very good at my job. I am able to go to my supervisor, and give my request for a raise and greater compensation to reflect my greater free market worth and greater value to the organization. If my boss says no, or lowballs me, I am free to take any methods available to me.

Keenan has the method of holding out. Why give him a hard time because he exercises it? I'd rather him hold out then show up and play half-assed football.

-Anxiety

Did you sign a contract saying that you would work for that company at that salary for a specific amount of time?

[GrantDawg]

This I'll agree with, but this is where compromise can and should come into play. The Bucs haven't even offered to bump him up to 3 million a year (probably his true worth in the grand scheme of things.)
I wouldn't pay him more than $2.5, and that depending on if he wanted to add years or not. Personal opinion and all that. Of course, it also depends on what the cap looks like for the team for the next couple of years, too.

[GrantDawg]

I think this is a valid point, but the problem lies with what Gruden promised. I believe Gruden has led a lot of veterans to believe they were going to have renegotiated contracts verbally, but has never fallen through. He doesn't deserve 4.4 million, but no one is even talking about meeting anywhere near the middle.
That's part of what I meant by Gruden's managment style. He seems to sometimes make promises that he cannot keep.