Reggie Howard opposite of T.O.

[islandah]

With all the T.O. talk, we know that his issue is that he feels he out-performed his contract and since management doesn't have to guarantee/ live up to their end, why shouldn't he be able to renegotiate.

Well, isn't Reggie Howard the flip side of the same coin? He was given way too big a contract by the last regime and has under-performed. He can't even break the starting line-up ahead of a 4th round draft pick rookie. Any reason we're not asking him to take a pay cut? Is it 'cuz we're too thin at CB and can't afford to rock the boat? It just drives me crazy to know how highly the guy gets paid and counts against our cap, yet how relatively little he contributes to our success.
Or did I miss something that explains it?

 

[Miamilove20]

As far as I know we asked Reggie to take a paycut. But he declined.

 

[Muck]

As far as I know we asked Reggie to take a paycut. But he declined.

They did indeed. And the word is that this is probably his last year as a Dolphin.

 

[islandah]

They did indeed. And the word is that this is probably his last year as a Dolphin.

So basically, we asked, and he said no, knowing that we couldn't cut him because of our lack of depth at the position. And since he has demonstrated neither excessive talent nor a team mentality, he's gone next year. Is that accurate, Muck?

 

[CrunchTime]

With all the T.O. talk, we know that his issue is that he feels he out-performed his contract and since management doesn't have to guarantee/ live up to their end, why shouldn't he be able to renegotiate.

Well, isn't Reggie Howard the flip side of the same coin? He was given way too big a contract by the last regime and has under-performed. He can't even break the starting line-up ahead of a 4th round draft pick rookie. Any reason we're not asking him to take a pay cut? Is it 'cuz we're too thin at CB and can't afford to rock the boat? It just drives me crazy to know how highly the guy gets paid and counts against our cap, yet how relatively little he contributes to our success.
Or did I miss something that explains it?

If TO gets away with it then all contracts should be up for review depending on their performance.

 

[islandah]

If TO gets away with it then all contracts should be up for review depending on their performance.

Actually, IMO, the whole contract thing could be fixed with just 2 adjustments:

1. All contracts should be guaranteed by both sides, and

2. Rookie contracts should be "minimum wage" until they show they can perform at the next level.

This gives something to the players (#1) and something to the owners (#2), not to mention both are fair!
You would then see shorter contracts (2-3 years) and most would end up being heavily incentive-laden. Earn what you're paid, but know that if you perform, you'll get it.

 

[crashjensen]

So basically, we asked, and he said no, knowing that we couldn't cut him because of our lack of depth at the position. And since he has demonstrated neither excessive talent nor a team mentality, he's gone next year. Is that accurate, Muck?

actually it has nothing to do with lack of depth at the position, it is because he is signed through 2009 and cutting him now would accelerate his signing bonus and cost us a 3 million dollar cap hit. Every year that passes will decrease this number and make it easier to cut him.

 

[Drfletcherdc]

Maybe he can show some flashes of talent like he did in Carolina. I don't understand why he was so bad last year.

 

[LarryFinFan]

With all the T.O. talk, we know that his issue is that he feels he out-performed his contract and since management doesn't have to guarantee/ live up to their end, why shouldn't he be able to renegotiate.

Well, isn't Reggie Howard the flip side of the same coin? He was given way too big a contract by the last regime and has under-performed. He can't even break the starting line-up ahead of a 4th round draft pick rookie. Any reason we're not asking him to take a pay cut? Is it 'cuz we're too thin at CB and can't afford to rock the boat? It just drives me crazy to know how highly the guy gets paid and counts against our cap, yet how relatively little he contributes to our success.
Or did I miss something that explains it?

That's a good point you bring up...too bad all the TO and Heinz Ward supporters don't look at it that way...But a contract is a contract, unless you are a star player, I guess...

 

[islandah]

actually it has nothing to do with lack of depth at the position, it is because he is signed through 2009 and cutting him now would accelerate his signing bonus and cost us a 3 million dollar cap hit. Every year that passes will decrease this number and make it easier to cut him.

Thanks, I knew there had to be a reason.

 

[LarryFinFan]

Actually, IMO, the whole contract thing could be fixed with just 2 adjustments:

1. All contracts should be guaranteed by both sides, and

2. Rookie contracts should be "minimum wage" until they show they can perform at the next level.

This gives something to the players (#1) and something to the owners (#2), not to mention both are fair!
You would then see shorter contracts (2-3 years) and most would end up being heavily incentive-laden. Earn what you're paid, but know that if you perform, you'll get it.

Guaranteeing contracts would kill the sport...What would the Colts do if Peyton sustained a career ending injury...continue to pay him ?? I do agree that something needs to be done with the rookie contracts, but again you have the injury situation, except that it would be for the player, not the team...if R. Brown got a minimum contract, then blew out knees in successive years (ala Yatil Green)...would that be totally fair to him ?? Not really, it's part of life, but it wouldn't be fair to him..

 

[islandah]

Guaranteeing contracts would kill the sport...What would the Colts do if Peyton sustained a career ending injury...continue to pay him ?? I do agree that something needs to be done with the rookie contracts, but again you have the injury situation, except that it would be for the player, not the team...if R. Brown got a minimum contract, then blew out knees in successive years (ala Yatil Green)...would that be totally fair to him ?? Not really, it's part of life, but it wouldn't be fair to him..

Easily addressed- part of the compensation package includes a disability insurance policy, paid for by the team. Now if Peyton goes down, he and his family are cared for, and the team is off the hook.

Other than injury, why do you feel that guaranteeing contracts would "kill the sport?" Basketball contracts(not to mention every other contract in the real world) are guaranteed, within certain fair limitations.

 

[HybridPHIN 23]

all good points.
I think that when you sign a contract it should be final. Cuts are legal. But when you sign a multi year contract, you should honor you agreement. If you want to get more money every year, then don't sign long contracts.

 

[islandah]

all good points.
I think that when you sign a contract it should be final. Cuts are legal. But when you sign a multi year contract, you should honor you agreement. If you want to get more money every year, then don't sign long contracts.

So the player should honor his end of the contract, but the team shouldn't have to? That's what I'm inferring from the comment "Cuts are legal."

The whole purpose of a written contract is to bind BOTH sides to an agreement in the event that they disagree later. I don't see how it can be binding to one side but not the other.

 

[islandah]

If you want to get more money every year, then don't sign long contracts.

You could also say to an owner, If you don't want to get stuck paying a high contract to a worn down veteran or a rookie that never lived up to his potential, or to a player that had one unexplainable good year, then don't sign long contracts.