Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

You think Hardy saw Michael Bennett's remarks on a "discount"?


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#41 The_Mango55

The_Mango55

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 22-September 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,420
  • Reputation: 443
HUDDLER

Posted 12 February 2014 - 08:15 PM

I did answer your question you just didnt like the answer. There is also the fact most team try to resign good player before they become FAs(like Hardy) but some like to gamble and go for the cash. So yes they do try to give them extra money for overperforming and some take it and some dont. Just ask Capt, DG offered him a decent contract for his skills but he wanted the most cash he could get. Only reason he was a Panther last year was because no one wanted him. So he lost his contract and had to play for the min. So he gave up being payed what he was worth for the hope he would get a random, but it was his choice.

 

So once again, You are the weakest link, good bye.

 

Since you don't seem to have the capacity to pick up my point, I'll spell it out for you more clearly.

 

You said that players are "greedy" when they try to get as large of a contract as they can, because it's possible that they could underperform and wouldn't give any of the money back. However, despite the red herrings and strawmen you have been trying to answer my question with, teams who have a player that performs to a higher level than his contract, they DO NOT pay their players retroactively as a reward for past performance. They might offer a larger contract next time, but they are paying for predicted future performance, not as a reward for past performance. They are simply competing with every other team for the player's future services.

 

And when teams offer to extend contracts, it's to prevent players from hitting free agency, it's not as a reward. Here's another hypothetical for you, although I'm doubtful you will understand this one either considering your track record. If a player was making league minimum over a season but still ended up breaking records and winning MVP, then destroyed his knee in the last game of the season and had to retire, would his team give him the millions he should have earned over the season anyway?

If your answer is no (and no is the correct answer), then your argument about players being greedy because they might underperform falls apart.



#42 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 44,825
  • Reputation: 13,362
  • LocationSC
SUPPORTER

Posted 12 February 2014 - 08:40 PM

For sure. Everything hardy has said makes me believe he won't be a panther next year. People need to prepare theirselves for that. It's a 99% chance.

 

Pretty much.

 

Most of his discussion has been about etting a big payday.  Just don't see us being the top bidder.
 



#43 Snake

Snake

    Rivera did What???

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,641
  • Reputation: 1,231
HUDDLER

Posted 12 February 2014 - 08:49 PM

Since you don't seem to have the capacity to pick up my point, I'll spell it out for you more clearly.

 

You said that players are "greedy" when they try to get as large of a contract as they can, because it's possible that they could underperform and wouldn't give any of the money back. However, despite the red herrings and strawmen you have been trying to answer my question with, teams who have a player that performs to a higher level than his contract, they DO NOT pay their players retroactively as a reward for past performance. They might offer a larger contract next time, but they are paying for predicted future performance, not as a reward for past performance. They are simply competing with every other team for the player's future services.

 

And when teams offer to extend contracts, it's to prevent players from hitting free agency, it's not as a reward. Here's another hypothetical for you, although I'm doubtful you will understand this one either considering your track record. If a player was making league minimum over a season but still ended up breaking records and winning MVP, then destroyed his knee in the last game of the season and had to retire, would his team give him the millions he should have earned over the season anyway?

If your answer is no (and no is the correct answer), then your argument about players being greedy because they might underperform falls apart.

 

I see your point. I just dont agree with it nor think it makes much sense. Players that perform get paid, simple as that. Some are greedy some are not.
 



#44 Evengelion

Evengelion

    HUDDLER

  • Joined: 02-December 13
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,450
  • Reputation: 248
HUDDLER

Posted 12 February 2014 - 09:22 PM

tag and trade. That's my dream scenario.



#45 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed KB 2014

  • Joined: 11-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 8,944
  • Reputation: 899
  • LocationDa City
HUDDLER

Posted 12 February 2014 - 10:29 PM

Unless you're a drafted rookie under the new CBA...their contracts are 100% guaranteed.

If there were no such thing as guaranteed contracts in the NFL, we wouldn't have millions of dollars of our salary cap going to players that are no longer on the team.


Again some money is guaranteed, but not all. I can sign a deal for 5 years for $35 mill, but get guaranteed only $15 mill. That $15 I will see, I might see the rest of the money on that contract. Compare that to other leagues, I will see all or very close to that $35 mill.

#46 neverlosethefeeling

neverlosethefeeling

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,408
  • Reputation: 582
HUDDLER

Posted 13 February 2014 - 06:31 AM

Again some money is guaranteed, but not all. I can sign a deal for 5 years for $35 mill, but get guaranteed only $15 mill. That $15 I will see, I might see the rest of the money on that contract. Compare that to other leagues, I will see all or very close to that $35 mill.

 

Depends on the contract. Each of our first round picks under the new CBA has a fully guaranteed contract.



#47 jtm

jtm

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,701
  • Reputation: 173
HUDDLER

Posted 13 February 2014 - 07:22 AM

NFL players are just like all of us here; they want the best for themselves and their family and this usually means $, but sometimes quality of life is taken into consideration. As a result, you rarely see players take discounts and it is hypocritical for any fan to want or expect a player to do this when they wouldn't for their employer. Yes, the NFL is a business and is one of the largest, most powerful businesses in the world.

Smart players will take less if they fit into a particular scheme or have a relationship with a coach that will help them have a better career. Some guys look at potential endorsements for an area. Make no mistake, it is always about the money.

Guys, Hardy is gone, face it.

#48 coralreefer_1

coralreefer_1

    Member

  • Joined: 12-January 09
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 402
  • Reputation: 160
HUDDLER

Posted 13 February 2014 - 07:33 AM

I think many people who were making the kind of millions we are potentially talking about absolutely would consider a hometown discount to stay where they are loved, known, and comfortable, as opposed to perhaps a million more per season someplace else. Its not really a fair comparison to say anyone here would do such, as noone here is potentially making 5-10 million a year.

 

With that said...how awesome would it be if Hardy himself popped back up on here to say directly to thje fans that care so much what the deal is, or come back at the statements (which are facts) that his stats were padded by a single game against a crap team. We can dream~

 

 

 

 



#49 jtm

jtm

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,701
  • Reputation: 173
HUDDLER

Posted 13 February 2014 - 07:41 AM

So if Hardy gives us a big discount and signs a long term deal and has a serious injury next year, do you think the same fans won't be calling for him to get cut or resign a lower contract? All of us know the answer to this and this is why our opinion means very little to players.

#50 RoaringRiot

RoaringRiot

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 04-March 13
  • posts: 4,660
  • Reputation: 4,579
  • LocationCharlotte, NC
SUPPORTER

Posted 13 February 2014 - 07:50 AM

we need to be able to let go of this idea or at least understand that even if we don't trade hardy for something that the team will still be benefitting from letting him walk as opposed to signing him to some big contract.

if we let him walk we'll be having enough cap space to help keep a more important player or two and some money to improve in other areas, plus we'll be getting a comp. pick. sure, it's basically an early 4th rounder, but still if that's all that we can pull off then we have to be fine with it.

we can't force anyone to trade with us. we can't force hardy to agree to go to a place that wants to trade with us. if we do want to get more than what i listed above, we can't afford to be too greedy and we will have to accept that we may have to settle for something that may be far less than what we think he's worth...and that means maybe an actual second or third round pick.

is he worth a couple first rounders? sure...but no one is going to pay that for him.


Thank you for this. I got ripped for suggesting the whole "tag and trade" wasn't going to be as simple as people kept putting it. This summarizes it very well.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users