This is where every athlete who makes more than say, i dunno, 30K a year needs to be cut, and forced to work a regular job to see exactly how bad they have it, you fucktard:
i looked for the transcript on cnbc's website (did a search on owens and came up with nada) but the gist of it is:
he was crying when explaining why he thinks he deserves a new contract, instead of the 7 year 49 million dollar one he SIGNED. hey dickwad, even after taxes, thats still 25 million over 7 years, and about 180,000 generated by intrest. shut your fucking pie hole about having a family to raise and feed. instead of buying a 20 million dollar mansion with a regulation sized basketball court, buy something that is better suited to a family instead of having 30 rooms you douchebag.
as bad as i hate some athletes, and karl malone is the king of all my most hated athletes, ive never wished bodily harm on any of them. i am now going to pray that TO breaks his leg and can never play football again. you fucking douchebag
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am Posts: 8662 Location: IL
Peeps wrote:
This is where every athlete who makes more than say, i dunno, 30K a year needs to be cut, and forced to work a regular job to see exactly how bad they have it, you fucktard:
i looked for the transcript on cnbc's website (did a search on owens and came up with nada) but the gist of it is:
he was crying when explaining why he thinks he deserves a new contract, instead of the 7 year 49 million dollar one he SIGNED. hey dickwad, even after taxes, thats still 25 million over 7 years, and about 180,000 generated by intrest. shut your fucking pie hole about having a family to raise and feed. instead of buying a 20 million dollar mansion with a regulation sized basketball court, buy something that is better suited to a family instead of having 30 rooms you douchebag.
as bad as i hate some athletes, and karl malone is the king of all my most hated athletes, ive never wished bodily harm on any of them. i am now going to pray that TO breaks his leg and can never play football again. you fucking douchebag
i say offer them all 200K to do their job... if they say no, then let them go shovel pig shit like i did one summer in high school... they'll be begging for their jobs back at 100K a year.... it's ridiculous how much money they get... thing is, the rich don't care because professional athletes tend to waste money like no other ("rims" in chris rock's never scared does this point justice, if youve seen it)... take all the excess money and do good with it... i know it will/can never happen, but it's worth the thought... hell, most of us would play for 20K/yr if they'd have us
and t.o. is a fucking waste... plain and simple... let him hold-out... the nfl is one league that would do just fine without one of its best players
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
I always have a hard time with stuff like this. Especially strikes. I mean, you want to say, "Fuck those rich ass athletes ... do your fucking job!" But are the owners who pay them any worse off? So then I want to say, "Fuck those rich ass owners ... give the players a little more money!"
I don't know who to care about.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:09 pm Posts: 9363 Location: Manhattan Beach California
just_b wrote:
I always have a hard time with stuff like this. Especially strikes. I mean, you want to say, "Fuck those rich ass athletes ... do your fucking job!" But are the owners who pay them any worse off? So then I want to say, "Fuck those rich ass owners ... give the players a little more money!"
I don't know who to care about.
dont forget about the fans that keep paying more money every year just to watch..even though they always bitch
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm Posts: 9282 Location: Atlanta Gender: Male
Still I wish I had the Leverage TO has with my employer. That's capitalism and the entertainment industry. The Desperate Housewives cast all signed contracts for 60 grand an episode, yeah I bet they are making more now.
From the Philly perspective
USMC- You signed my contract. It would be freaking brilliant if they just didn't pay him all year.
Almost every athlete with that kind of leverage that holds out, gets paid. Philly is hard headed, it would be fantastic if they didn't cave. Or even trade him to some awful team like Arizona for Anquan Boldin and 2 #1 picks.
It's not like they can't win without him, with him he just gives them a tremendous advantage.
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Doug RR wrote:
just_b wrote:
I always have a hard time with stuff like this. Especially strikes. I mean, you want to say, "Fuck those rich ass athletes ... do your fucking job!" But are the owners who pay them any worse off? So then I want to say, "Fuck those rich ass owners ... give the players a little more money!"
I don't know who to care about.
dont forget about the fans that keep paying more money every year just to watch..even though they always bitch
I think most of the money used to pay players' salaries come from TV contracts, not ticket prices. I don't usually get too upset when a player asks for more money, because the owners (and the NFL) do make an obscene amount of money, even compared to how much the players make. But on this particular matter involving Owens...I think he's way out of line.
Even in terms of how much he improved the team...the Eagles actually made it to the Superbowl with him on the sidelines injured. And then they LOST the Superbowl WITH him on the field. So just how much did he really improve the team? And even if he did, after this contract dispute and his little jab at McNabb, I think he may have negated any good he provided.
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am Posts: 8662 Location: IL
we all know the money has to go somewhere... and if it doesnt go to thye players, then it goes to the owners... im saying that they should all get a set amount of money and use the rest to better the world (i also understand this is purely fantasy, but fuck, they all have a higher salary than the president for christ's sake)
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:52 pm Posts: 10620 Location: Chicago, IL Gender: Male
Do any of you guys have problems with the fact teams have the unfettered right to arbitrarily cut players and render players' contracts non-guaranteed for any reason whatsoever (particularly when teams face salary-cap problems because of the ridiculous contracts they signed players to)?
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Do any of you guys have problems with the fact teams have the unfettered right to arbitrarily cut players and render players' contracts non-guaranteed for any reason whatsoever (particularly when teams face salary-cap problems because of the ridiculous contracts they signed players to)?
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:51 am Posts: 6944 Location: Long Island Gender: Male
gotta give the man his money, to play like he did last year, and come back for the superbowl after breaking and spraining his ankle after only 6 weeks.....he would of been the mvp if mcnabb wasn't such a pussy....show him the money....keep in mind, nfl contracts are not guranteed, and after 2007, when he would be 33, the eagles would probably ask T.O to restructure anyway.
The biggest problem i have with athletes asking for more money, and i would never begrudge a player asking for more money when negotiating a contract, but if that player has a bad year, does the owner come up and say, you had a shitty year, i want 50% of your years salary back?
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:59 am Posts: 9057 Location: Camden, NJ
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Do any of you guys have problems with the fact teams have the unfettered right to arbitrarily cut players and render players' contracts non-guaranteed for any reason whatsoever (particularly when teams face salary-cap problems because of the ridiculous contracts they signed players to)?
true, but these guys get signing bonuses that are outrageous. All that money is guaranteed, so its not like the players are getting screwed over...
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Green Habit wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Do any of you guys have problems with the fact teams have the unfettered right to arbitrarily cut players and render players' contracts non-guaranteed for any reason whatsoever (particularly when teams face salary-cap problems because of the ridiculous contracts they signed players to)?
That's what signing bonuses are for.
I hate the double standard. I got in several arguments related to this last year when Mike McKenzie held out. A team can cut a player as soon as his contract becomes overvalued, and nobody even cares. But as soon as a player feels their contract is undervalued, he is labeled a greedy whiner. That said, the increase of signing bonus payouts has acted as an equalizer for this. Since signing bonuses are spread over the length of a contract but are accelerated when a player is cut or traded, it forces teams to honor contracts for longer than they ordinarily would. I think every team has cases of players are only around because it would be too much of a sal cap hit to cut them.
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Peeps wrote:
The biggest problem i have with athletes asking for more money, and i would never begrudge a player asking for more money when negotiating a contract, but if that player has a bad year, does the owner come up and say, you had a shitty year, i want 50% of your years salary back?
No, but they might cut you.
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm Posts: 9282 Location: Atlanta Gender: Male
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Do any of you guys have problems with the fact teams have the unfettered right to arbitrarily cut players and render players' contracts non-guaranteed for any reason whatsoever (particularly when teams face salary-cap problems because of the ridiculous contracts they signed players to)?
sure but in the end it's going to be hard for any of us to empathize with a guy slated to make 48 million that's upset that he's getting "screwed" especially when he hand picked the team he went too and he just signed that contract knowing exactly what role he would play with the team. He could have gone to Baltimore and easily made them pay whatever he wanted. He didn't seem all that upset last year to be coming to Philadelphia, 1 year later he's saying oh this is bullshit. Is it bullshit that he's making 48 million or is it bullshit that they have cap room?
They have cap room and they win, because they structure deals to where they do what's best for the team not the individual.
Look at Atlanta. They are screwed at WR because they severely overpaid for Peerless Price.
But you know, I like this pay for performance contractual idea. Sounds pretty good well for everyone but Ricky Williams when he was in NO.
Last edited by Electromatic on Fri Apr 15, 2005 3:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The biggest problem i have with athletes asking for more money, and i would never begrudge a player asking for more money when negotiating a contract, but if that player has a bad year, does the owner come up and say, you had a shitty year, i want 50% of your years salary back?
No, but they might cut you.
i have no problem with that, at any job, as soon as your value lessens, you get fired or your hours get cut
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:52 pm Posts: 10620 Location: Chicago, IL Gender: Male
Electromatic wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Do any of you guys have problems with the fact teams have the unfettered right to arbitrarily cut players and render players' contracts non-guaranteed for any reason whatsoever (particularly when teams face salary-cap problems because of the ridiculous contracts they signed players to)?
sure but in the end it's going to be hard for any of us to empathize with a guy slated to make 48 million that's upset that he's getting "screwed" especially when he hand picked the team he went too and he just signed that contract knowing exactly what role he would play with the team. He could have gone to Baltimore and easily made them pay whatever he wanted. He didn't seem all that upset last year to be coming to Philadelphia, 1 year later he's saying oh this is bullshit. Is it bullshit that he's making 48 million or is it bullshit that they have cap room?
They have cap room and they win, because they structure deals to where they do what's best for the team not the individual.
Look at Atlanta. They are screwed at WR because they severely overpaid for Peerless Price.
Oh, I'm not defending the guy. I'm just curious what people's thoughts were. I hate TO more than anyone here. I thought what the league did last year to accommodate him by voiding the trade to Baltimore was preposterous.
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Peeps wrote:
energystar wrote:
Peeps wrote:
The biggest problem i have with athletes asking for more money, and i would never begrudge a player asking for more money when negotiating a contract, but if that player has a bad year, does the owner come up and say, you had a shitty year, i want 50% of your years salary back?
No, but they might cut you.
i have no problem with that, at any job, as soon as your value lessens, you get fired or your hours get cut
Is this true even if you work a job that requires you to sign a contract for a set number of years at a set salary? Seems to me you'd be pretty locked in and safe. I don't think a typical employer could cut you just because they find somebody that can do your job for less (assuming you signed a contract). I have no evidence of this, though.
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am Posts: 8662 Location: IL
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Do any of you guys have problems with the fact teams have the unfettered right to arbitrarily cut players and render players' contracts non-guaranteed for any reason whatsoever (particularly when teams face salary-cap problems because of the ridiculous contracts they signed players to)?
no... as an untenured teacher, they can cut off my fat 30K whenever they please... don't see any problem if overpaid athletes have to lose a million here or a million there
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
