Melvin Gordon
- Thread starter morley10
- Start date
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
Didn't need him and frankly, I didn't want him.
SteveGarvey1
Well-Known Member
He's on my dynasty fantasy team so this isn't good. Following Le'veon's plan for success probably.
homes
Well-Known Member
Exactly. Sign for less and play for an inferior team.
kameltoez102
Well-Known Member
I don't get these guys. They signed a contract to play. If you want more money or think you are worth more prove it on the field and the offers will roll in. I don't get this mind set for positions like that. The lifespan of a back in the league isn't very long and to give up your spot to hold out doesn't do you any favors in my opinion. Take into account the league is not required to pay you and can cut you anytime I don't get it.
If I was San Diego I would cut him and pick up a free agent or wait until camp cuts are made and you will be able to find someone that will produce for you.
If I was San Diego I would cut him and pick up a free agent or wait until camp cuts are made and you will be able to find someone that will produce for you.
Fryowa
Administrator
That’s just it though. If they cut him they have to pay him.
If he doesn’t play they can just bench him and not pay.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
I think the problem is RBs have the shortest career spans, so they would rather hold out a year and get a bigger guaranteed contract. It's probably better than risking injury. LeVeon would have gotten $14.5 last year, but he got a $35 million guarantee this year. It's actually pretty reasonable for RBs given the insanely high likelihood of injury at the position. Thing is, you'll never see a top franchise paying that kind of long term money for RBs because the position has become too fungible and the careers are just way too short. Barkley is probably the only RB worth a big salary now, but he's on such a bad team we may never know.
Stanzi
Well-Known Member
Bell is a moron. He wasted a year of his career to sign a worse deal than what the Steelers were offering. He would have made $14.5 guaranteed under the franchise tag, and the Steelers were offering a 4 year extension that included roughly $20 million guaranteed if I remember correctly.
Instead, he sat out a year wasting valuable time given the track records of RB's once they hit 30. Sure, this season and next are fully guaranteed, but after that he has just as good a chance as getting cut as he would have had he signed with the Steelers. If I'm the Steelers I'm very happy he and Brown are gone. Talk about a couple of malcontents with no real good reason for being that way.
EstronHawkKing
Well-Known Member
Speaking of Running Backs, anyone know what Shonn Greene is doing these day's?
Ree4
Well-Known Member
Did he waste a year though? Are RB career years limited by the number of hits that they take or by age? I'd argue it's the former. If that's the case, by not playing a year he didn't shorten his career at all. For example if a RB only can play a total of 3-4 years in the NFL because their body won't withstand more punishment, skipping a year doesn't count against that 3 or 4 year career. Of course this assumes they stay in game shape, etc
kameltoez102
Well-Known Member
The problem Bell has is not necessarily his age but the number of carries he has had not only in the NFL but at Michigan State. Regardless how healthy he is that is still going to be held above his head as to how much he has left in the tank. So regardless if he took the year off he will have the increasing age and the number of carries so it was in my opinion a really bad move on his part.
A large part of it is some of these guys are all about the money and not concerned about winning, which I get to a point. That is the only reason he went to NY. He gambled and lost because he pissed the Steelers off who probably would have overpaid for him to keep him had he played and he screwed himself by looking bad and had to take less money at non contender. The same may happen to Gordon. His team is pretty talented and he is not guaranteed to land with a contender if he gambles with his future like that and is traded. Play out your contract and you have a lot more power to decide where you want to go rather than end up being traded to a bottom dweller.
trj
Well-Known Member
Leveon will never make up the 14.5 million that he missed out on. He needed to get at least Todd Gurley money to consider sitting out a season a success. If you are going to take less money than the Steelers were offering you better end up on a better franchise than the Jets. LB and his representatives misplayed their hand.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
ShockHawk22
Well-Known Member
One way to look at it is that he signed a contract and should honor it.
The other way to look at it (from the players point of view) is that the second he isn’t useful to the Chargers, they will throw him aside and sign someone younger with less damage. So take advantage of all the money you can cuz you are one hit away from the end.
It’s a business.
The other way to look at it (from the players point of view) is that the second he isn’t useful to the Chargers, they will throw him aside and sign someone younger with less damage. So take advantage of all the money you can cuz you are one hit away from the end.
It’s a business.
Belichick and the Patriots are one of the smartest teams managing their contracts and they cut or trade some of their best players because they know their are lots of hungry young guys out there who want to prove it and get paid.
The patriots and a few other teams maybe have better scouts and personnel players who find these unknown diamond in the rough players who they plug into their systems and win a lot.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
When the next CBA comes up for re-negotiation in a couple years it will be interesting to see if the players call for fewer years for the rookie deal. It seems like every year several players reach that fourth year and want a new deal. I agree that they should take what their union has collectively bargained. I do think many NFL players are underpaid relative to the revenue the league generates but that's a different story. The players have never had the balls to stand up to the owners at the negotiating table because the players know they can be replaced and people will still watch.
I dont blame the guy for wanting more money, rb's dont age well and hes one hit away from his career being over.
I see the point of 'you signed a contract so honor it', but thats not how the league works, and hasnt been for a long time.
Players have to look out for their own interests. I wont for one second believe any of them dont want to win, but they arnt going to play forever.
Look ar Aaron Rodgers, he almost single handedly is making sure he will never get another superbowl chance because he's mortgaged his team to the point thwy cant surround him with the talent needed to compete at an elite level in all 3 stages. He'll still be a HoFer regardless, so as much as he wants to win he clearly is looking moreso for himself than the team.
I see the point of 'you signed a contract so honor it', but thats not how the league works, and hasnt been for a long time.
Players have to look out for their own interests. I wont for one second believe any of them dont want to win, but they arnt going to play forever.
Look ar Aaron Rodgers, he almost single handedly is making sure he will never get another superbowl chance because he's mortgaged his team to the point thwy cant surround him with the talent needed to compete at an elite level in all 3 stages. He'll still be a HoFer regardless, so as much as he wants to win he clearly is looking moreso for himself than the team.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
There's a collective action problem, though. It's always huge in union negotiations. The current members are voting on behalf of future members, none of whom are represented at the bargaining table. The last time there was a material CBA amendment, it added the rookie salary scale, which totally devalued the top picks' compensation, but the trade for this is that they got more juice for the current players.
You see this in union contracts all the time. The Illinois public workers have no problem bargaining away future members' ability to participate in the pension, but if you try to change the existing members' pensions, whoa nelly.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
That's what saved baseball players in 1981, and five years earlier when free agency started. Marvin Miller sold the players on the idea of being underpaid relative to value for six years, then having the right to sell their services to the highest bidder. The owners thought they had the players by the balls and thought they still held the upper hand. They weren't counting on the veteran players in the early eighties looking out for the rights of future players. But Miller unified the players. When the owners saw the holes they dug for themselves and tried to get rid of free agency, it was too late. Several owners were skating on thin ice for several years there. But now the revenue flow in the game is healthy enough that there is plenty to go around for owners and players. When another strike hit in 1994 and the salary cap became a big sticking point, baseball ordered the owners to hand over the books, which they wouldn't. Now when a team does come up for sale, which is fairly rare, potential buyers come running like Pavlov's dogs.
No one feels sorry for owners. They're doing okay.
