Contract Hold Outs

[metallicatz]

Quote: Originally Posted by dsallupinyaarea

I understand all of that. The question still stands though. Isn't is a double standard that teams can cut a player for under-performing and no one cares, but we criticize players who hold out because they over-performed their contract?

Yes, it is. That's why I believe a better solution is a contract system based on escalators (realistic ones). You hit those escalators and you get paid accordingly. If not, then you don't. If I were an employer I wouldn't want to be bound to paying a guy a ridiculous wage if he weren't performing to the level of that wage, or bound to keeping him if he wasn't maintaining starter-calibur production. Pro Football is a cut-throat business dedicated to winning. As a player you have to know that if you aren't keeping yourself in consideration by your team as a central part of the plan for winning then you're out of there. That's the game. They know it going in. It can be cruel many times, I know, but that's the business.

[dsallupinyaarea]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

Very good point. I think people want to compare this to the business world, or the normal world. Well in business you can get fired but you can't demand a raise when you do well on a project with the threat of not doing any more work if you don't get it. You can, but chances are you'll end up fired anyway. There's a hierarchy that no one wants to respect. The players are not on the same level as the owner, they work for him/her. So there is a difference between an owner or coach cutting a player whenever they want and a player demanding more money whenever they want. The difference between the NFL and the business world is that players have more leverage than the average Joe but that doesn't make it less of a **** move (imo). You bring in the shelf life and chance of injury which also make sense, but it's rare that a hold out isn't making enough money to live comfortably on if that were to happen. This year is a little different bc of the unsettled future of the league and different rules that screwed over players like Vincent Jackson, but guys like Revis and Chris Johnson are trying to cash in a lottery ticket IMO. And I don't like the trend of having a big year and trying to cash in on it before maybe your true colors shine through (if it's not that then honor it or put a string of years on the level you're trying to get paid together and then talk to me).

So basically we are conditioned to respect this double standard and live with it? That's really disappointing. No one cares that the Raiders released Jamarcus Russell with 3 years left on his contract, but we get all up in arms that Revis is holding out with 3 years left. Same scenario, the sides are just different. Jamarcus woefully under-performed his contract so he got cut (right move). So why Revis can’t get paid now that he's greatly out-performed his contract? So far all I’ve gotten is it’s the way the world works, deal with it.

[cubsball899]

Quote: Originally Posted by dsallupinyaarea

So basically we are conditioned to respect this double standard and live with it? That's really disappointing. thought you were talking about marijuana vs. alcohol for a second No one cares that the Raiders released Jamarcus Russell with 3 years left on his contract, but we get all up in arms that Revis is holding out with 3 years left. Same scenario, the sides are just different. Jamarcus woefully under-performed his contract so he got cut (right move). So why Revis can’t get paid now that he's greatly out-performed his contract? So far all I’ve gotten is it’s the way the world works, deal with it.

don't teams suffer cap penalties for cutting players before their contract is expired? or does that just happen when i do it in madden? lol. i haven't looked this up so don't take my word as fact but i think thats what happens. and as THAT guy said before if Revis were to get cut there will be 31 other teams about to put cash in his pocket. whereas if he holds out the jets completely lose his services during the holdout

[dsallupinyaarea]

Quote: Originally Posted by cubsball899

don't teams suffer cap penalties for cutting players before their contract is expired? or does that just happen when i do it in madden? lol. i haven't looked this up so don't take my word as fact but i think thats what happens. and as THAT guy said before if Revis were to get cut there will be 31 other teams about to put cash in his pocket. whereas if he holds out the jets completely lose his services during the holdout

This year is uncapped so the penalties are meaningless, if they even exist.

[ASB37]

Quote: Originally Posted by dsallupinyaarea

So basically we are conditioned to respect this double standard and live with it? That's really disappointing. No one cares that the Raiders released Jamarcus Russell with 3 years left on his contract, but we get all up in arms that Revis is holding out with 3 years left. Same scenario, the sides are just different. Jamarcus woefully under-performed his contract so he got cut (right move). So why Revis can’t get paid now that he's greatly out-performed his contract? So far all I’ve gotten is it’s the way the world works, deal with it.

I mean pretty much, the owners are paying you to preform a service. If you don't preform said service then you will be cut. Now if you feel like you are preforming above your pay grade, that's too bad. You signed a contract, and you should honor it until your contract is up at which point you can cash in.

I mean are the owners obligated to give some player a raise every time he has a breakthrough season? What happens if Revis has an absolutely INSANE year this year? Should he hold out and ask for $40 million a year?

[dsallupinyaarea]

Quote: Originally Posted by ASB37

I mean pretty much, the owners are paying you to preform a service. If you don't preform said service then you will be cut. Now if you feel like you are preforming above your pay grade, that's too bad. You signed a contract, and you should honor it until your contract is up at which point you can cash in. I mean are the owners obligated to give some player a raise every time he has a breakthrough season? What happens if Revis has an absolutely INSANE year this year? Should he hold out and ask for $40 million a year?

Total double standard/contradiction in the same sentence. Why aren't the owners obligated to honor a contract they signed if a player under performs?

[ASB37]

Quote: Originally Posted by dsallupinyaarea

I get that. Question is, why aren't the owner's obligated to honor the contract they sign if a player under-performs?

Because that's not how the employee/employer relationships works?

If I do a crappy job at work, should I be let go and paid for the rest of the year? While it does happen in the business world with buyouts and what not, I guess I just find something fundamentally wrong with someone paying me to do something, and me not doing it.

[ASB37]

Quote: Originally Posted by dsallupinyaarea

Total double standard/contradiction in the same sentence. Why aren't the owners obligated to honor a contract they signed if a player under performs?

You make it sound like if the owners cut a player, they are taking away any money the player made before that point.

It's not like if a player is signed for a 5 year contract and gets cut after 3 seasons, he isn't being paid for seasons 1-3.