PDA

View Full Version : I agree with Terrell Owens...


killervibe
06-09-2005, 04:20 PM
Let me precursor that and say.. I think most if not all professional athletes (NBA, MLB, NHL, NFL) are making way too much. When these spoiled brats complain they cant feed their family on $14M a year it makes my stomach crawl. However, I recently read an article that changes my paridigm on the topic of pre-season hold outs.

Prior to reading this article I thought Terrell was just about the second most selfish and greedy bastage on the planet. Right behind Latrell Spreewell. But now I actually think he and his agent have a case.



"In a league where contracts are not generally guaranteed, Rosenhaus argues that there is no such thing as the sanctity of a contract. If teams can cut his players or force them to restructure their contracts, Rosenhaus said, he's within his rights asking for more money when their performance exceeds expectations.

It is, even considering the volatile source, a fairly reasonable business argument.

"A team can call me and say, 'Hey, Drew, we know that we have your client under contract for another four or five years, but he's hurt and we're going to cut him,' " Rosenhaus said. "But it's sacrilegious, it's outrageous for me to ask for more if a player outperforms his deal. That's a joke. That stinks."

"This week, the Cincinnati Bengals approached me about [linebacker] Nate Webster," he said. "We just did a five-year contract for Nate. Last year he popped his patella tendon. They go out and draft another guy to replace him, he's not doing well and they want to cut him. But for me to go to them and ask them to redo Chad Johnson's contract who's sorely underpaid that's unbelievable. Why? Why?

"If contracts can be cut, why can't they be raised? Explain that to me.""




http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=garber_greg&id=2072819

Interesting read. I recommend it.

Bucktown
06-09-2005, 04:25 PM
I never really thought of it that way...but if contracts are so fluid and ass-wipable in the NFL...I'm wondering, why do they even sign people for more than 1 year at a time? What kind of headaches would this cause...

BibbysTowelDude
06-09-2005, 04:48 PM
They really are just 5-6-7 1 year contracts and the only thing guaranteed is the few million the stars make as a sign on bonus and if you cant feed your family on that then you have spending issues that are out of this world...

I agree that Terrell Owens has every right to ask for more money if he deserves it or not is up to you but he has that right every day of the week. On the flipside the eagles also have the right to say no and be done with it every day of the week and up until this point thats been the answer... Terrell Owens also reserves the right to hold out of camp and into the season, the eagles also reserve the right to not pay his ass for doing so, its his decision and it could cost him...

Mustache Man
06-09-2005, 05:22 PM
I never really thought of it that way...but if contracts are so fluid and ass-wipable in the NFL...I'm wondering, why do they even sign people for more than 1 year at a time? What kind of headaches would this cause...

So they can spread out the signing bonus over the length of the contract for salary cap purposes.

bleedzgreen
06-09-2005, 07:26 PM
I am a huge Eagles fan, hence the user name, and has followed this alot.

TO has no leverage! He wanted to be an eagle, threw a fit to be one and got his wish thru arbitration. He did have the opportunity to be a free agent with this arbitrator and could have signed on anywhere but thats not what he did. He wanted to be an Eagle. The eagles gave him a contract to sign, which BTW the NFLPA warned him not to sign it. So, TO choice #2, he signed the deal.

he made a commitment to the contract. He has to honor it. Theres no renogotiations. Yes, the Eagle could cut him, but he could also just retire(barry sanders). so to say that its one sided is incorrect. If he doesnt like the fact that anyteam can cut at anytime then he needs to go to his rep, the NFLPA. They agreed that all players can be treated like this due the Collective Bargining agreements.

lets not forget, last year only 2 teams wanted TO....2! the eagles and the ravens. If he holds out, then fine. no really "fine"...he will get fined for no attending madatory practice and games. If he is so concerned about $ to support his family, then he will show up.

I dont care if he is there, I truly feel the eagles are great with him, and great without him....we move on.

war eagles!

tstein7240
06-09-2005, 09:58 PM
TO forced a trade to the Eagle. This is the bed he made.

The players signed a collective bargaining agreement that allows teams to cut player. This is a bed they made.

TO is everything that is wrong about sports. I pray he never enters the record book for an individual record, because that (and money) is all he cares about.

Class of 1990
06-09-2005, 10:52 PM
A good union compromise would be that if a player is injured by playing football or training related and can't play, that he is paid a portion of his signed contract.

30% , 40% whatever. The topper is that the salary is not included in the team cap. This way players would in all purposes honor their contract and owners would be responsible for the physical toll these players do to their bodies.

Ben Hansen
06-10-2005, 11:32 AM
Actually, TO has a great point, he deserves more money because he is the best at what he does and the heart and soul of the Eagles. He busted his ass after a severe injury and although he was a little sloppy at first, it's obvious how valuable he'll be when he gets to 100 percent again.

Mustache Man
06-10-2005, 11:43 AM
TO forced a trade to the Eagle. This is the bed he made.

The players signed a collective bargaining agreement that allows teams to cut player. This is a bed they made.

TO is everything that is wrong about sports. I pray he never enters the record book for an individual record, because that (and money) is all he cares about.

It's not like they had a choice. You can't have teams hamstrung by long-term contracts for players rendered useless by injuries. But at the same time, the system is completely one-sided. Teams can cut players at any time, for performance/injury/etc., but players are forced to play out their contracts (which are always structured with dummy years for salary cap amortization purposes) or be looked at as a "villain" for holding out/complaining.

T.O. is a top-3 WR in the game...he should get as much money as he can right now. I don't fault any football player for doing that. His last agent f*cked up and got him a sh*tty deal with Philly b/c he failed to file the FA papers. In fact, that guy (David Joseph) is no longer certified as an agent by the NFLPA.

The only guaranteed money in the NFL comes in the form of signing bonuses. If the Eagles were to "guarantee" T.O.'s contract and "honor" it themselves, I'm sure he'd be happy to play it out just like Drew "A Shark Never Sleeps" Rosenhaus said. But there's no way in hell the Eagles would ever do that, since they structured it to be able to cut him after year 3. It's a bullsh*t contract like every other contract in the NFL, and T.O. is completely in the right here.

tstein7240
06-10-2005, 11:44 AM
Actually, TO has a great point, he deserves more money because he is the best at what he does and the heart and soul of the Eagles. He busted his ass after a severe injury and although he was a little sloppy at first, it's obvious how valuable he'll be when he gets to 100 percent again.

He was a free agent last year. That was his time to get the money he "deserves". But, he got caught up in a game. First, his agent F'ed up (which TO is ultimately responsible for). Then, he forced a trade to the Eagles.

HE set up a situation where the Eagles were bidding against nobody. If he wanted the big contract that he "deserves", he should not have played this game last year.

Being underpaid is the consequence for his actions last year.

I have ZERO empathy for him. He played a game... and lost. If he played within the system... he would have the money he wants


Also... Donavan is the "heart and soul" of the Eagles. TO is the best player... but Donavan is a great player with the respect of the locker room

Mustache Man
06-10-2005, 11:58 AM
If TO broke his leg in week 4 instead of week 14 last year, and the Eagles cut him in the offseason instead of paying him $3.2 mil this year, nobody would be saying sh*t about how the Eagles screwed him over, etc. That's business in the NFL. The system sucks for players, and they need to get as much $$$$ whenever they can...everyone is a play away from the end of their career.

bleedzgreen
06-10-2005, 04:22 PM
TO is NOT the heart and soul of the Eagles....the eagles are the winningest team in the last 5 years in the NFL...4 of which without TO. The eagles post the same numbers on offense in the last 3 years without TO compared to last yr with him. In the playoffs against Minn and Atl the numbers were better in those playoff games then they were with TO.

TO does not make this team....no One player makes a football team.

TakiCat
06-10-2005, 05:10 PM
TO knew the rules, and knew that NFL contracts are not guaranteed. Knowing that, he signed his current contract and should thus honor it fully. I don't blame the Eagles at all for not bending. Players know that the only really guaranteed money is within the signing bonus, and that they will rarely play out the life of the contract without getting cut and becoming a cap casualty (thus the contracts being so "back-loaded"). I don't think it is fair to use the crappy non-guaranteed contract system NFL has as leverage to tear up the contract you signed when you have after having a good year. Sure the Eagles can cut him anytime, but his signing bonus is still guaranteed, so they can't take that back if he has a bad year, can they? When you put your ink on paper, fully understanding how the league's contract system operates, honor your contract, or don't sign it from the get go.

Mustache Man
06-10-2005, 05:50 PM
TO knew the rules, and knew that NFL contracts are not guaranteed. Knowing that, he signed his current contract and should thus honor it fully. I don't blame the Eagles at all for not bending. Players know that the only really guaranteed money is within the signing bonus, and that they will rarely play out the life of the contract without getting cut and becoming a cap casualty (thus the contracts being so "back-loaded"). I don't think it is fair to use the crappy non-guaranteed contract system NFL has as leverage to tear up the contract you signed when you have after having a good year. Sure the Eagles can cut him anytime, but his signing bonus is still guaranteed, so they can't take that back if he has a bad year, can they? When you put your ink on paper, fully understanding how the league's contract system operates, honor your contract, or don't sign it from the get go.

NFL contracts aren't contracts. They're really more of a series of 1-year team options, where the player has no leverage. Taking T.O.'s current "contract" (data from nflpa.org):

2004 - $10 mil signing bonus + $660K salary = $10.6 mil
2005 - Eagles have $3.25 mil option for T.O. to play for them
2006 - Eagles have $770K option
2007 - Eagles have $5.5 mil option
2008 - Eagles have $6.5 mil option
2009 - Eagles have $7.5 mil option
2010 - Eagles have $8.5 mil option

While I'm sure T.O. would be more than happy to play in 2007-2010 for $28 mil total, the Eagles hold all the cards. They can cut him when it's too late for him to find a job, or after the market has dried up considerably. They can force him to restructure his contract (i.e., take less money) to stay with the team. Realistically, at 31, he's got 2 years left with the Eagles. At that point, who's going to give big money to him at 33 coming off who knows what type of 2006 season?

He needs to get more money NOW and I don't at all fault him for doing it when he can.

bleedzgreen
06-10-2005, 06:40 PM
^^^

but, do you think he should hold out for more money?

and who's to say he wont quit? if you do the math he is getting around 14-15 million in the first 3 yrs...at 31, see if there is a similar contract with those numbers.
Lets not forget what happens when in the spotlite on a good team does as far as endorsements go....

TO is being greedy and no other players are as loud about their contracts are structured the same exact way. he made the bed and you know the rest.

killervibe
06-10-2005, 07:05 PM
I should clarify one point.. I still think TO is a punk and a d1ck but I do believe he should have the right to get more money if the Eagles have the right to dump him on his ass.

BibbysTowelDude
06-11-2005, 07:05 AM
I thought I made this pretty damn clear, with the current system which is the best in all of sports I may add.... Terrell has the right to ask for more money and he has the right to hold out until he gets it, but the eagles also have the right to say no and not pay him while he sits at home and gives every other team in the league a reason not to pay him any more money then he gets now. Terrell and his agents arent very smart, he should play until he is cut or traded he can ask for both he can also be denied, its a very easy system...

killervibe
06-11-2005, 04:13 PM
Settle down BTD.. no one here disagreed with you.

BibbysTowelDude
06-12-2005, 03:14 AM
haha i was only being stubborn...