TAKING A STAND AGAINST WHINER HOLDOUTS THAT DON"T HONOR THEIR DEALS

[Bretsky]

I'm going to say something I've hardly ever said.

The Bengals are being smart here. Dear Carson Palmer. The Bengals gave you a hugh signing bonus along with a sweet deal every poster in here would love to have. So you leek info that you'll only play if they trade you. Mike Brown....KUDOS...comes out and says....you are under contract....we are not trading you...enjoy your retirement.
CLASSIC

The only other thing the Bengals should do..if they aren't....is recover the part of their signing bonus that they are entitled to for walking out on the team.
Carson Palmer............GOODBYE


FRANK GORE.....It appears you are going to hold out as well. Dear Frank.....you are always hurt. You are not a superstar. You are paid very good money. S.U.A.P...............SHUT UP AND PLAY

It appears SF is about to give Frankie some tough love as well. It's not like he's severaly outperformed his contract. Get into camp dude; tear up a seson like you have not done in a while. You signed the deal....honor it.


D JACKSON
This one will be interesting. He's grossly underpaid. Remors have him being unhappy with his deal but the Eagles normally aren't a team volunteering to redo deals early. Jackson is a questionalble character and that's why he was drafted as late as he was....after Jordy Nelson....he's one erratic dude.

He's also outspoken. It should be interesting to see how this plays out. If he lips off through the media, I could see it getting really ugly and the Eagles letting him fly away.

[Joemailman]

Mike Brown may be the worst owner in football, but he was right on this one:

“I’m not expecting [Carson Palmer] to be back. Carson signed a contract, he made a commitment. He gave us his word. We relied on his word and his commitment. We expected him to perform here. If he is going to walk away from his commitment we aren’t going to reward him for doing it,” Brown said via the Cincinnati Enquirer when asked about a possible trade.

[Lurker64]

Mike Brown is right, but holding out is just part of the game. If a player is willing to withhold his services, pay the associated fines, and pass on the associated paychecks by all means he can. It's not like guys who are legitimately underpaid actually have another option beyond "counting on the goodness of the hearts of their general manager."

That being said, Packer players who hold out are just being mislead by their evil greed agents and should report to camp ASAP and replace said agents, but it's fine when members of other teams do it, of course.

[Patler]

I see a bit of a difference with Palmer than with a typical holdout. Palmer isn't trying to get more out of the team. He isn't refusing to play for the money that he agreed to. He has simply said that he is fed up with the fiasco in Cincinnati and would rather retire than continue to play there. He has given the Bengals an option to get something for him by trading him, but absent that he will simply retire.

It's really no different than what Barry Sanders did, except that Palmer has been public about his willingness to accept a trade while Sanders and the Lions kept it out of the public eye, and Palmer is doing it quite a while after signing his contract and Sanders did it shortly after signing his. Sanders retired just two years after signing a 6 year contract with an 11 million signing bonus, and the Lions sued him to get some of it back. Palmer is still under the contract he signed during the 2005 season, I think. He has played 5 years of that contract, which he signed three years before his old one expired to give the Bengals salary cap room. He received a 15 million signing bonus in 2005 and a $9 million option in 2007. Significantly he still has 54 million in salary and bonuses under that contract in the next 4 years, so even with the bonuses, the contract was backloaded fairly well. In the end, that may very well prevent him from being traded.

Players can retire when they want, it isn't demanded that they wait until their contract is up to retire. When a player takes a lot of upfront money and retires soon thereafter, like Sanders did, there is an unfairness to it; but Palmer hasn't done that. He has played 5 seasons since signing the contract.

Palmer isn't demanding more from the Bengals, he is just telling them that the situation in Cincinnati has sapped his desire to play.

Both players kept their mouths shut about team management and/or coaching that made their teams among the worst run teams in the league. Neither complained during his career. Each finally got to the point at which their will to play for those franchises was gone.

[Fritz]

While Mike Brown has the right to not trade Palmer under the rules, is it in the best interest of the team? If Mike Brown has an obligation to attempt to make the Bungals into winners, then he ought to explore every means, including getting what you can for your best player, who otherwise will not play at all.

If, however, it's Mike Brown's party and he can cry if he wants to, and he feels no strong sense of obligation to create a winner, then by all means he can sit on Palmer's contract and do nothing.

[MJZiggy]

While Mike Brown has the right to not trade Palmer under the rules, is it in the best interest of the team? If Mike Brown has an obligation to attempt to make the Bungals into winners, then he ought to explore every means, including getting what you can for your best player, who otherwise will not play at all.

If, however, it's Mike Brown's party and he can cry if he wants to, and he feels no strong sense of obligation to create a winner, then by all means he can sit on Palmer's contract and do nothing.

I wonder if he thinks money demands are coming, or perhaps if Palmer wants something he hasn't told the media about.

[pbmax]

As long as the NFL has the ability to treat long term contracts as a series of one year deals (with some disincentives built-in) and the players are required to treat them as iron clad, then this is the inevitable result. And I don't hold it against the player who uses the holdout to gain an advantage. There is of course a point where the player is no longer worth the bother, but that point is different for each player.

Some players have more of a case than others (for instance Haynesworth didn't have much of one). But the reason the players have this leverage Bretsky, and the reason it is immaterial that you would remove a limb to play for this money, is that the players are not interchangeable parts. And that is why despite being a colossal bozo, Albert Haynesworth is now playing for the Patriots. No one cares (and no one should care) that you would honor the contract. You bring nothing to the deal. It would be like winning the lottery for you.

This could be eliminated if the NFL went to actual contracts, that in the down is up world of sports would be known as guaranteed contracts. Injury protection (for the team this time) could be built in and no one would ever hold out again. And poorly run teams (Redskins) would pay the full price for bad decisions.

[pbmax]

While Mike Brown has the right to not trade Palmer under the rules, is it in the best interest of the team? If Mike Brown has an obligation to attempt to make the Bungals into winners, then he ought to explore every means, including getting what you can for your best player, who otherwise will not play at all.

If, however, it's Mike Brown's party and he can cry if he wants to, and he feels no strong sense of obligation to create a winner, then by all means he can sit on Palmer's contract and do nothing.

That is the long standing problem with franchises like the Bengals. They can survive quite well financially and be entirely mediocre at the same time. This team doesn't even employ a full-time scouting department. They should be relegated to the Big 10.

[K-town]

That is the long standing problem with franchises like the Bengals. They can survive quite well financially and be entirely mediocre at the same time. This team doesn't even employ a full-time scouting department. They should be relegated to the Big 10.

The Big Ten already has crappy, poorly-run teams (Minnesota, Indiana). The Big Ten also has teams with programs unable to comply with the law (The Ohio State, Michigan). Does this conference need the Bangles, a chancre on the penis of progress? I think not.

[Noodle]

PBMax nailed it. I don't like it when it happens to my team, but NFL owners have an incredibly sweet deal, and a player has to do what he has to do.

The NFL is the toughest league in the world for guys in that 6-9 year mark. Bang, wake up, you're cut. Thanks for the services. Now clean out your locker. And don't look for any more paychecks. It arguably keeps the quality of play high, but it's hell on the players.

[vince]

Hence the players' drive for guaranteed money.

[pbmax]

Hence the players' drive for guaranteed money.

And the infatuation with publishing inflated contract numbers after every signing. Much of the "guaranteed" money in contracts agreed to in the last two days will be money the players are NOT guaranteed to see.

[smuggler]

A.J. Green just signed a rookie contract that is 100% guaranteed. I just thought that would be of some relevance to this thread. ;P

[Freak Out]

I can't blame Palmer one bit.

[pbmax]

A.J. Green just signed a rookie contract that is 100% guaranteed. I just thought that would be of some relevance to this thread. ;P

Actually it will, because guaranteed money is the one negotiable left for first rounders. Though I wouldn't underestimate the creativity of lawyers finding a way to game the option year.