-
Welcome!
Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!
Or simply create a new Huddle account.
Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!
-
-
-
-
Topics
-
-
-
-
Posts
-
I agree, but I've already said that the players will definitely take more money up front because it's more security. But they want more guaranteed money and NFL FOs don't want to do that for several and various reasons, and that's what's at issue. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-second-round-rookies-finally-starting-to-sign-what-took-so-long-and-what-it-means-for-future-contracts/ It's a tug of war between teams and players, and, sure, paying a player a signing bonus may satisfy them, especially if--and sometimes "only if"--it ultimately leads to a guarantee of more of their contract, but the teams are on the hook for all of those guarantees when cap time comes, so if they guarantee more money, they're ultimately losing the contract game. -
By kungfoodude · Posted
TBH, these are the kind of players that get weeded out of professional sports pretty quickly. Also, CMC is not that guy. There is zero indication that he isn't competitive. -
By kungfoodude · Posted
I like the free agency. It actually helps basically all schools across the board. Pretty much only ancient HC's and/or HC's that haven't been able to adjust have been complaining about the free agency. Your fortunes can be made or broken every offseason. It's not like before where a bad recruiting class or two meant multiyear purgatory. I will never understand all the bellyaching about the NIL. If you want to talk about what ruined college athletics, it has been naked greed. Conference expansions for TV revenue, ever skyrocketing AD and facilities costs and now the attempts to permanently ruin the postseasons(football and basketball). All the kids did was get a very well deserved piece of a very, very, VERY broken pie.
-
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.