Jump to content

Dec. 2, Sharks vs Habs, 7 PM


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

I don't blame goal scoring on price sucking and not being worth 10 mill. I blame price for price sucking and not being worth 10 mill. Need NFL rules. You want the contract? He you go. Don't perform to your contract? There you go. Bye bye 

 

Boy, those seem like ridiculous rules to me, and -while I don't follow the NFL at all - I never understood why its players' union knuckled under to such atrocious terms. No one puts a gun to a team's head; they freely choose to award these contracts to the players. How much protection to GMs need from their own stupidity? They already have a salary cap FFS. Now players are also supposed to accept a radical lack of security just because some GMs award questionable contracts under the cap? What kind of contract is it where you say, 'we'll honour the contract but only if we feel like it?'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stars in the nfl get guaranteed money included in their contract. If a contract is 100 million it might include a 50 million guarantee. If he's garbage you give them their 50 million and cut their overpaid useless ass.  Great system. Alzner type player would never get guaranteed money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BCHabnut said:

The stars in the nfl get guaranteed money included in their contract. If a contract is 100 million it might include a 50 million guarantee. If he's garbage you give them their 50 million and cut their overpaid useless ass.  Great system. Alzner type player would never get guaranteed money.

 

And a player has to balance the base contract and the guarantee. The more you want guaranteed the less you will get in total contract (upside).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

The stars in the nfl get guaranteed money included in their contract. If a contract is 100 million it might include a 50 million guarantee. If he's garbage you give them their 50 million and cut their overpaid useless ass.  Great system. Alzner type player would never get guaranteed money.

 

That's great for the super-rich. Meanwhile all the other guys are putting their long-term health at great risk and their teams can f*ck them right up the arse to boot. What a brutally exploitative system - a metaphor for the economy under globalization if I ever heard one.

 

How about this alternative: don't be a dumbass GM and give Karl Alzner huge term and money in the first place. Beyond that, teams SHOULD pay a price for managerial stupidity. The idea that GMs and organizations don't have to take responsibility, but only players do, is dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

That's great for the super-rich. Meanwhile all the other guys are putting their long-term health at great risk and their teams can f*ck them right up the arse to boot. What a brutally exploitative system - a metaphor for the economy under globalization if I ever heard one.

 

How about this alternative: don't be a dumbass GM and give Karl Alzner huge term and money in the first place. Beyond that, teams SHOULD pay a price for managerial stupidity. The idea that GMs and organizations don't have to take responsibility, but only players do, is dumb.

 

Im mostly concerned about players who get hurt and then are cut because of the injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

That's great for the super-rich. Meanwhile all the other guys are putting their long-term health at great risk and their teams can f*ck them right up the arse to boot. What a brutally exploitative system - a metaphor for the economy under globalization if I ever heard one.

 

How about this alternative: don't be a dumbass GM and give Karl Alzner huge term and money in the first place. Beyond that, teams SHOULD pay a price for managerial stupidity. The idea that GMs and organizations don't have to take responsibility, but only players do, is dumb.

We as fans pay their wages for entertainment. I want to be entertained. If you promise to be 10 million entertaining, and give me 4 million entertaining you have broken your contract. You didn't deliver what you said you could. Breach of contract. Cut

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

That's great for the super-rich. Meanwhile all the other guys are putting their long-term health at great risk and their teams can f*ck them right up the arse to boot. What a brutally exploitative system - a metaphor for the economy under globalization if I ever heard one.

 

How about this alternative: don't be a dumbass GM and give Karl Alzner huge term and money in the first place. Beyond that, teams SHOULD pay a price for managerial stupidity. The idea that GMs and organizations don't have to take responsibility, but only players do, is dumb.

In what job field is an employee able to keep his job when he's not performing?

If Karl Alzner was getting paid 1.5 million this year he would still be a healthy scratch and then waived. As bad as Benn is, he's still better then Alzner as an example.  99% of the time the contracts being bought out are not the bottom end of salaries in the league and more so the higher contracts to underperforming players. 

 

Again, Alzner got the money he deserved as a UFA left Dman in a thin UFA market for defencemen. He was unable to perform to the contract he earned and is now in Laval.

 

the NFL has it bang on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

In what job field is an employee able to keep his job when he's not performing?

If Karl Alzner was getting paid 1.5 million this year he would still be a healthy scratch and then waived. As bad as Benn is, he's still better then Alzner as an example.  99% of the time the contracts being bought out are not the bottom end of salaries in the league and more so the higher contracts to underperforming players. 

 

Again, Alzner got the money he deserved as a UFA left Dman in a thin UFA market for defencemen. He was unable to perform to the contract he earned and is now in Laval.

 

the NFL has it bang on!

 

Yes, well - in what other job field is employee compensation artificially capped by collusion between nominal competitors? Today's players are getting paid WAAAAY under market value for their services. Now I support the salary cap, because it clearly serves the good of the game, allowing smaller market teams to be competitive in acquiring and retaining elite talent. But let's not kid ourselves: it is a massive distortion of market principles, at the direct expense of the players, and to the direct benefit of the fat-cat owners, who get to pocket far more money as a result than they would if they actually had to pay the players for what their services are actually worth. So the players are already taking a substantial hit 'for the good of the game.' The kind of brutal exploitation you are proposing has nothing to do with the good of the game; it is purely about letting teams off the hook for their own damned stupidity. Therefore I don't see an argument for it - unless we got rid of the cap. Then it might make sense as a trade-off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure Price is a great example. I've disliked the way he has performed the past few years, but I wouldn't want him cut off the team due to his lack of performance. I'm not convinced that having his 10 million cap hit becoming available to us would make our team better in the short term. We'd then have to go out and have some other all star (want to) join our team. Not to mention, there's certainly still hope for Price. After spending last year with 8 million dollars in cap space available in our pockets, it's going to take some time for me to find myself overly worried about how hard it is to fit everyone in with our "limited space". I'm not sure Price would be cut, even if it were an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

It seems to work well for the number one sport in north America.

 

That's debatable, when you look at all the stories of NFL players whose brains have been destroyed by the game, or their knees, or their backs, or other areas... have no medical coverage from the league, and their careers were over, and the money gone, the season after they got hurt (or the same season if hurt in the preseason). 

 

I don't agree with the way the league treats players as disposable when an injury from playing the game makes them unable to perform. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Yes, well - in what other job field is employee compensation artificially capped by collusion between nominal competitors? Today's players are getting paid WAAAAY under market value for their services. Now I support the salary cap, because it clearly serves the good of the game, allowing smaller market teams to be competitive in acquiring and retaining elite talent. But let's not kid ourselves: it is a massive distortion of market principles, at the direct expense of the players, and to the direct benefit of the fat-cat owners, who get to pocket far more money as a result than they would if they actually had to pay the players for what their services are actually worth. So the players are already taking a substantial hit 'for the good of the game.' The kind of brutal exploitation you are proposing has nothing to do with the good of the game; it is purely about letting teams off the hook for their own damned stupidity. Therefore I don't see an argument for it - unless we got rid of the cap. Then it might make sense as a trade-off.

 

This idea that there is no other job field than sports with guaranteed contracts is false. 

 

Most CEOs of big companies have huge severance packages attached to their contracts... guaranteeing their money even if they are fired. 

This is also true of people who work in the public sector, executives of hospitals, executives of universities, other high level civil servants. 

It extends further to a number of high-end lawyers, doctors, accountants, and other professionals (not all obviously, but there are quite a few out there). 

 

So yes, people who make money similar to what these athletes are making, are often doing so on guaranteed contracts. 

 

We want to compare them to the common worker, but I'm not sure that is the best comparison here given the specialized skills they have that very few others have, and the amount of money they make as a result.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

That's debatable, when you look at all the stories of NFL players whose brains have been destroyed by the game, or their knees, or their backs, or other areas... have no medical coverage from the league, and their careers were over, and the money gone, the season after they got hurt (or the same season if hurt in the preseason). 

 

I don't agree with the way the league treats players as disposable when an injury from playing the game makes them unable to perform. 

 

 

There are way too many injuries in NFL football to be able to keep paying players for years after a career ending injury.

This would not be substainable for the franchises  and insurance companies would not accept to insure NFL players  (or  BOOOOST their prices.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JoeLassister said:

There are way too many injuries in NFL football to be able to keep paying players for years after a career ending injury.

This would not be substainable for the franchises  and insurance companies would not accept to insure NFL players  (or  BOOOOST their prices.)

 

The nfl makes loads of money.  They could afford to pay guaranteed contracts. It would change the landscape and maybe some other deals would be lower.. but they could pay guaranteed contracts if it was put into the system.

 

For obvious reasons, owners wont agree to it in a cba.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

The nfl makes loads of money.  They could afford to pay guaranteed contracts. It would change the landscape and maybe some other deals would be lower.. but they could pay guaranteed contracts if it was put into the system.

 

For obvious reasons, owners wont agree to it in a cba.

A lot lower.  There is no way they'd give  Derek Carr that kind of money on guaranteed contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the NFL scenario, a player can ask for $X guaranteed, or $2X not guaranteed. Or something like that. If you accept less money per year, I am absolutely certain you can still get a guaranteed contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, tomh009 said:

In the NFL scenario, a player can ask for $X guaranteed, or $2X not guaranteed. Or something like that. If you accept less money per year, I am absolutely certain you can still get a guaranteed contract.

 

Guys on the bottom end of rosters dont have the power or negotiating position to ask for guaranteed money.  

 

The average NFL career is 3 seasons.  So plenty of guys who play one season or less... with no guaranteed money... and who suffer an injury that will bother them the rest of their lives.  Oh and they live in a country where health care is freaking expensive especially if you now have a pre-existing condition from a former nfl injury.

 

So yeah, im not cool with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Guys on the bottom end of rosters dont have the power or negotiating position to ask for guaranteed money.  

 

The average NFL career is 3 seasons.  So plenty of guys who play one season or less... with no guaranteed money... and who suffer an injury that will bother them the rest of their lives.  Oh and they live in a country where health care is freaking expensive especially if you now have a pre-existing condition from a former nfl injury.

 

So yeah, im not cool with that.

 

Sorry, don't follow NFL at all. I think I have maybe seen the total of one game in the last three years ... my thinking was more of the "NFL contract scenario in the NHL context".

 

But even in the NFL, there will be a point where a bottom-end guy could get guaranteed money. If the team offers $1M per year (not guaranteed) and the player says that he'd instead want $500K or $250K per year (or whatever) guaranteed for four years, don't you think the team would consider that? If not, why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

 

Sorry, don't follow NFL at all. I think I have maybe seen the total of one game in the last three years ... my thinking was more of the "NFL contract scenario in the NHL context".

 

But even in the NFL, there will be a point where a bottom-end guy could get guaranteed money. If the team offers $1M per year (not guaranteed) and the player says that he'd instead want $500K or $250K per year (or whatever) guaranteed for four years, don't you think the team would consider that? If not, why not?

 

There isnt much offered in guaranteed money.  Especially in the context of rookie deals in the nfl.

 

First and second rounders get some signing bonus money

Undeafted free agents can get 10k-50k depending how many teams bid on them.

 

But really its not big for guys drafted in mid rounds.

 

There are plenty of stories of players who are broke and broken after playing in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of those broke stories are about money management.  I think that's the biggest problem there. They make massive money and blow it all. The injury arguement is the strongest one when taking about their contract system. I'm not sure how they are taken care of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

A lot of those broke stories are about money management.  I think that's the biggest problem there. They make massive money and blow it all. The injury arguement is the strongest one when taking about their contract system. I'm not sure how they are taken care of. 

 

Some are.

 

Some are guys who legit didn't make that much when you take in the cost of medical treatments in the US and the fact they suffered chronic injuries.  I'm talking about marginal players who got hurt at their first training camp, or when on the practice squad, or only playing one year as a backup.... guys who made a few hundred thousand, lost a big portion in taxes, then lost some to an agent, then had hundreds of thousands in medical bills over the next 4-5 years after their career was over, and now have nothing left.   Thats a big problem for that league, and doesn't get talked about enough. 

 

I'm also of the opinion that in pro sports leagues that the fans pay to see the players, not the owners.  Most leagues are close to 50/50 right now in revenues.  The players have given up a lot in CBA negotiations with every league.  i don't feel we need to give the owners more advantages to get out of their mistakes. 

 

If we want non-guaranteed contracts, maybe the NFL should make it work both ways.  Oh... some player exploded this season and greatly overperformed his contract.  Lets let him cancel the remainder of the contract at the end of the year and go right to free agency and sign with the highest bidder.  Why does the team get the ability to cut underperforming players without financial consequences, but if a player is on a $5 million contract, for 3-years and plays like a $10 million player in year 1, that he can't cancel the deal and be a free agent. Seems unfair that it only works one-way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...