Greedy...I dont think so. | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Greedy...I dont think so.

the difference between normal jobs where you ask for a raise and NFL is:

1. in your job you dont sign a contract to work for X amount of days for a certain amount. You get hired at a wage, until your fired.

1b. If it is a contract job, you have to agree to it. If you dont like it too bad, the contract always wins in a court of law.
-------------------------------------------------------

He may produce like a top 5 reciever but he has the headcase of someone who if adequate would not be in the league. If you were that much of a nutcase, I dont care how good you were you would be fired.

A team can cut him at any time. Yeah but if they cut him in the first year, they still have to pay him a good portion of his salary. So basically he gets his normal salary from another team plus what prorated amount the team that cut him owes him. Like a normal jobs severence package.

I swear rosenhaus' philosiphy is holdout. I hate that guy, he is why agents are called sleeze. I know the oweners are just as bad, look at the other thread I wrote on NE. But hell at least the owners say they will pay you if you play.

What if an owner after your season ended said well you played crappy, so we are witholding some wages until you produce better. They just hold out the funds they are supposed to owe you. Im sure TO would hate that. He earned the money and they dont give it to him, because he underperformed. So if he over performs, he agreed to work for that money and by wanting more he is basically holding out his services for money that has been paid to him. Because he still gets paid the full amount if he holds out. Just has to be eligible for 4 games.

As for ogun i was dissapointed in him, I figured once we got to cruch time he would break the holdout and sign an offer down the middle, or closest to what he wanted and we offered. But damn drew slezenbitch, gets all his clients to not play. If I were owners I wouldnt deal with any players that had him as an agent. Just do it league wide, then this holdout crap would stop.
 
Personally, I would prefer going back to the days where there was no free agency and you lived and died by the draft. If you didn't like what you were getting paid you could go out into the real world and get paid what you were worth. Which in the case of Terrel owens would be a dishwasher's salary
 
kbeath said:
Why are all these players that are holding out considered Greedy?:confused: We all want all the money we bring to our respective companies not a cent less but when its a pro athlete than its GREED. :shakeno: I keep hearing "respect your contract" that is funny I dont remember too many contracts that the teams keep. They are always cutting people to free up salary cap space and to stop from paying all the money from the back loaded contract. FOOTBALL CONTRACTS ARE NOT GUARENTEED. Only the signing bonuses. TO may be a jerk but come on the guy is getting paid like the 10th best WR in the league when you are lying if you think you can name 3 better. Same thing goes for Walker as far as getting what your worth. Like it or not these players bring millions of dollars in revenue for there teams and the city they live in. It is unfair to throw the lable GREEDY around. If we were the 10th highest paid employeer for a company we were the absolute most productive worker at, we would all be Pissed! So isnt all this GREEDY stuff HYPOCRITICAL!:fire:
Click to expand...

They are greedy!! 10 Million a year, 13 million a year....give me 1/10th a million a year and I would be smiling ear to ear. I am in the military and get paid squat for the job we do so yes, they are greedy!!
 
Awsi Dooger said:
The most ignorant fans always side with ownership. It's an excellent litmus test. They throw out simpleton whiz like "he makes more money than I'll make in 20 years" and act as if that's relevant. Meanwhile, the excesses and greed of the organization and owner are concealed in dozens of different forms. We never hear the backroom conversations about raising ticket prices or concession prices or parking prices. I had several college friends who majored in sports administration and later worked for professional teams. The stories they tell about company greed and misrepresentation are beyond belief yet never made the news. But when a player asks for more money the organization makes sure it gets full coverage so they can assume the upper hand in the minds of the tunnelvision fans.

I remember when I worked at the Horseshoe sportsbook as a supervisor. Casino owner Jack Binion would do all these TV interviews about the World Series of Poker and talk about how wonderful everyone was and how he was sure it would be a great time for all. Meanwhile, he would come into the sportsbook office and rip them unmercifully and talk gleefully about how the casino was going to take every single dollar out of as many pockets as possible. Whenever we had a huge junket, especially Asian junket, he practically already had the money spent beforfehand, sure he would take the group for millions.

For some reason, fans seem to forgive other entertainers more than athletes. In Las Vegas many of my friends work in major hotels in the entertainment aspect. Again, the stories are surreal. So many of the performers make outrageous demands like room temperature to the tenth of a degree or a specific type and color of toilet paper or making sure no one occupies rooms on either side of theirs. Those are actual examples friends have told me. But fans don't seem to care. They must not relate to being able to sing like that, but somehow think a star football player is merely playing a game for huge cash and warrants the abuse. In my mind, it works the other way. The athletes have extremely limited shelf life, unlike other entertainers. Their careers can end via physical injury at any moment and the company will throw them away without concern. Every contract is absolutely critical and the player deserves every red cent and then some.
Click to expand...

I don't consider myself ignorant, and prefer that you refrain from calling me that....I am not naive enough to believe that owners don't have themselves in mind first and foremost...that is human nature. BTW, so do the players and the agents have themselves first in mind. I also think you should not blanket EVERY case as "the exesses and greed of the ownership." It is only one side of the story. The balance of the owners ability to write contracts that protect their organization and the players right to earn as much as possible is very critical to the success of the NFL, versus say the NHL or NBA or MLB. Is it fair 100% of the time to the players ? NO. Is it fair 100% of the time to the owners ? NO. You tag the sports and entertainment world as corporate America, but they are not your typical corporation. The entertainment dollar is the most tenative dollar in America or the world for that matter. It can be taken away easily by a holdout of a player or the raising of ticket prices by 4% this year.
An athletes window is short, as you said. But the argument there is that you or I could take that $7.25 million bonus and parlay it into a healthy and comfortable way to live for 30 more years. That is why most fans side with the owners. So the amount a contract pays does make a difference. Look at the Kellen Winslow, Jr. case. Here is a guy that just plain made a mistake of youth and it may well cost him his career. While I feel for him, HE is the one that made that mistake (or misfortune), and he'll be the one that has to live with it. But also think of how this has hurt the Browns organization. How many lost tickets will they suffer thru ? How much repair work will the Browns have to do to get some of the fans back ? There is a cost to that, as well as the cost of losing games and losing (in effect) the bonus money they paid to a guy for not playing for them. And when or if they do go after a portion of the bonus paid out, guess who'll look like the bad guys ? The owners !
But the fact of the matter is that we, as fans, do tend to look only at the side that we can most easily recognize, which for most of us is not the owners side.
There are two sides to every situation and every situation is not the same...TOs situation is actually, IMO, a situation where his agents didn't look out for his best interests. He does deserve to get paid as one of the top recievers in the league, but due to either negligence or ignorance, he has a contract that is subpar for his production...That is the opposite situation of the Winslow case (or the Boston case here simply because there is a question as to what role the steroids played in his condition) where players recieve large sums of money to not play.
No sir...I don't support the owners side of the TO situation because I am an ignorant, but because it is the side that I feel is right..in THIS case.
 
The other thing to remember is that just because TO chooses to ask for a new contract, doesn't mean the Eagles have to give it. He really has no leverage when it comes down to it, as his only option would be to hold out and forfeit his salary for the year which is over 3 million. He won't do that because he needs to feed his family. When the team doesn't cave, which I don't think they will, TO will end up crawling back and playing, and wondering why he latched onto Rosenhaus, the only guy with an ego bigger than his!
 
Randy McMichael deserves to be paid better than he is being now, no one will dispute that......however if TO was as important to the Eagles as he thinks he is, wouldn't the Eagles have reworked his contract by now. To has burned so many bridges in this league that he may find himself out of a job and no where to go. Or he might end up playing for a lot less than he is making now.

Note: The Eagles have made it clear that they will not rework his contract.
 
LarryFinFan said:
I don't consider myself ignorant, and prefer that you refrain from calling me that....I am not naive enough to believe that owners don't have themselves in mind first and foremost...that is human nature. BTW, so do the players and the agents have themselves first in mind. I also think you should not blanket EVERY case as "the exesses and greed of the ownership." It is only one side of the story. The balance of the owners ability to write contracts that protect their organization and the players right to earn as much as possible is very critical to the success of the NFL, versus say the NHL or NBA or MLB. Is it fair 100% of the time to the players ? NO. Is it fair 100% of the time to the owners ? NO. You tag the sports and entertainment world as corporate America, but they are not your typical corporation. The entertainment dollar is the most tenative dollar in America or the world for that matter. It can be taken away easily by a holdout of a player or the raising of ticket prices by 4% this year.
An athletes window is short, as you said. But the argument there is that you or I could take that $7.25 million bonus and parlay it into a healthy and comfortable way to live for 30 more years. That is why most fans side with the owners. So the amount a contract pays does make a difference. Look at the Kellen Winslow, Jr. case. Here is a guy that just plain made a mistake of youth and it may well cost him his career. While I feel for him, HE is the one that made that mistake (or misfortune), and he'll be the one that has to live with it. But also think of how this has hurt the Browns organization. How many lost tickets will they suffer thru ? How much repair work will the Browns have to do to get some of the fans back ? There is a cost to that, as well as the cost of losing games and losing (in effect) the bonus money they paid to a guy for not playing for them. And when or if they do go after a portion of the bonus paid out, guess who'll look like the bad guys ? The owners !
But the fact of the matter is that we, as fans, do tend to look only at the side that we can most easily recognize, which for most of us is not the owners side.
There are two sides to every situation and every situation is not the same...TOs situation is actually, IMO, a situation where his agents didn't look out for his best interests. He does deserve to get paid as one of the top recievers in the league, but due to either negligence or ignorance, he has a contract that is subpar for his production...That is the opposite situation of the Winslow case (or the Boston case here simply because there is a question as to what role the steroids played in his condition) where players recieve large sums of money to not play.
No sir...I don't support the owners side of the TO situation because I am an ignorant, but because it is the side that I feel is right..in THIS case.
Click to expand...

Excellent post in response to an ignorant post(notice I didn't say poster).

In this case TO is just blantantly wrong, all parties are operating under the rules and procedures agreed to by the players union and the owners. His selfishness is hurting his team.

If he chooses to not honor his contract signed one year ago and hold out, the Eagles have every right to let him rot, and I hope they do.
 
Drew Rosenhaus

Being your in Miami can you look up Rosenhaus Sports for me?

I need to ask him about representation and cant get a contact thread for him online.
thanks
B
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom