Guarenteed Contracts

[patmoran2006]

This is a direct quote from Buffalo news columnist Bob DiCeasare. I'm posting this because I agree with it a trillion perecnt.

"• I’m inclined to think a contract should be binding, but I have no problem with Jason Peters holding out for money commensurate with his accomplishments. I’d feel differently if the league guaranteed player contracts on their end. Why should Peters honor a deal when the Buffalo Bills have the option of terminating him at any time? Guaranteed contracts might be the olive branch needed to help solve the next round of labor negotiations. "

If I were Peters I'd do the same thing. I know that sucks to hear when it has to do with "our" team, but its the facts. YOu hear all the time people saying they have "outperformed" their contract.. Well in this case, he clearly has. He's one of the three best tackles in the NFL, and he's like the 45th highest paid.. That's ridiculous. Lock his ass up and spend the money you're getting from Toronto.

What do you guys think, not just about Peters, but about the quote printed. I think it's an excellent point.

[Coach Sal]

He's right that guaranteed deals will most likely be part of the next deal. Players may take less of the pie (currently 60% total revenue) in exchange for having some parameters that allow guaranteed deals.

However, the problem I have with situations like Peters isn't that he wants more money to be in line with others at his position that he's outperformed, it's that he's asking for it so soon after signing another deal, and still with three years remaining on it.

Everyone wants security in their job - and as he gets closer to the last year it's more and more understandable that he would want to re-do it to be better compensated. But now? Already? What happens if he has another Pro Bowl season? Or if the Bills win the Super Bowl? Or if he gets tons of recognition as the "best OL in the game?" Is he going to want more again?!

Also, if he gets a new deal now for, say $8-9 mil/year for 5 years, that will be surpassed and topped by lots of guys not as god as him within the next 3-4 years. Is he going to holdout again, claiming the same inequities?

Sure, the owners have the players by the balls with NFL contracts compared to most sports, but at some point the player has to make a good-faith effort, as well, for it all to work for both sides. Especially for a guy like Peters who went UNDRAFTED -had the Bills take a chance on him - and then invested a lot of time and resources into converting him to Left Tackle from TE. He would never even be in this great position financially without the Bills organization stepping up and helping him, coaching him (Jim McNally) and developing him.

Personally, I also think Jason Peters would never even be putting the Bills in this situation if he didn't have Eugene Parker for an agent. This guy is notorious for holding teams hostage.

[patmoran2006]

Sal.
You're points make it critical that guarenteed contracts are part of the next CBA. They simply have to be.

From a player or agent standpoint, they want to get everything they can, as often as they can get it. The reason is because of the current structure. A a team can release you from your contract, with no notice and not have to pay you **** except for whatever money you got guarenteed. I think until this stops you're going to see many Peters-like situations.

Even though the NFL is a minor league sport in comparison to the NFL, I like their salary concept. EVERY contract is guarenteed, and if you buy someone out you have to pay them 2/3 of their remaining contract (such as Toronto recently did with Darcy Tucker). If you give out ludricous contracts, you're stuck with them. THat's why there are also so many more trades in the NHL.

But take Brian Campbell. He won't be holding out again. Because the $56 grrrr he got from Chicago is basically guarenteed. I think it also puts a higher premium on the GM to make wise decisions.

[Dr. Lecter]

One thing the NFL does since they don't have guarenteed deals is give out signing bonuses and roster bonuses. Those will disappear once deals are guarenteed. For the most part the NHL and NBA do not have those bonuses.

[patmoran2006]

They dont need them.. because the money is guarenteed unless they buy the contract out. The NFL simply cuts your ass

[Dr. Lecter]

Understood.

My point is that the NFL players often get guarenteed money as well, but they use the bonus system instead.

There also is the presence of the minor leagues and 2-way deals in the NHL, a luxury the NFL does not have.

Not all deals can or will be guarenteed. The owners will never guarentee a deal for a 7th round pick or a UDFA. It also could hurt the careers of a guy like a Jason Whittle. Who wants to bring in a vet who might not make the team if his deal is locked in?

[theanswer74]

I blame 26" rims and diamond necklaces. You know most of the players dump millions on their cars and jewelry.

Get rid of rims and jewelry and holdouts would go down.

[raphael120]

I blame 26" rims and diamond necklaces. You know most of the players dump millions on their cars and jewelry.

Get rid of rims and jewelry and holdouts would go down.

And expensive champagne that you splash on crowds of people, and expensive strippers you throw gobs of money at.

Holdouts would go down and "incidents" would go down also.

[Ebenezer]

....um...guaranteed....

[Spiderweb]

....um...guaranteed....

Thanks, the spelling was getting to me also, yet the point made seem valid none the less.

[acehole]

You could build a whole team around J Peters.

You do it if you want to build a winner.



This is a direct quote from Buffalo news columnist Bob DiCeasare. I'm posting this because I agree with it a trillion perecnt.

"• I’m inclined to think a contract should be binding, but I have no problem with Jason Peters holding out for money commensurate with his accomplishments. I’d feel differently if the league guaranteed player contracts on their end. Why should Peters honor a deal when the Buffalo Bills have the option of terminating him at any time? Guaranteed contracts might be the olive branch needed to help solve the next round of labor negotiations. "

If I were Peters I'd do the same thing. I know that sucks to hear when it has to do with "our" team, but its the facts. YOu hear all the time people saying they have "outperformed" their contract.. Well in this case, he clearly has. He's one of the three best tackles in the NFL, and he's like the 45th highest paid.. That's ridiculous. Lock his ass up and spend the money you're getting from Toronto.

What do you guys think, not just about Peters, but about the quote printed. I think it's an excellent point.

[HAMMER]

....um...guaranteed....

That's our little special ed. Junior Journalist.

[patmoran2006]

I'll start running a spell check and more importantly, pay attention to grammar while posting on Billszone. My bad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[patmoran2006]

....um...guaranteed....
You seriously must be the most useless MOD on this entire board. All your posts are little more than quips, slams and attempts to discredit any posts, rather than rarely if ever adding anything that has to do with the conversation.

This is a message board, a football one at that. The majority of people, especially myself really am not worried about spelling and punctuation here. This is football talk, not a term paper. And trust me, you shouldn't be sarcastically ridiculing my writing credentials, you have no clue what you're talking about. I've been watching your comments and posts for some time, and you bring about as much good here as FTP or even Ice before he was banned. Good work!

[trapezeus]

two things i saw in this thread

1. the guarantee situation - i agree. peters is playing within the rules. if a team can drop you in year 2 because you hurt yourself, you should be able to ask for a raise in year 2 when you do well. additionally, that's what makes the kyle williams signing so annoying. why would you "lock up" a DT for 5 years for "cheap". you outpay him this year hoping that he plays well. if he does, year 2 he'll ask for more. Pay the people who have earned it from last year's play.

2. I find it interesting that people care what the players spend it on. Technically, they probably live more of a "trickle down" economic life. They have their money passed through friends and families. This is exactly what reaganomics would have said would help the economy. Yet, when rich executives make millions to billions, they horde it and keep it in portfolios where only a handful get a benefit from it. If they spent as freely as some of these "minor league" millionaires, then maybe we'd all be in a better place. Personally, i don't care what players spend their money on.

[Captain gameboy]

Yet, when rich executives make millions to billions, they horde it and keep it in portfolios where only a handful get a benefit from it. If they spent as freely as some of these "minor league" millionaires, then maybe we'd all be in a better place.

Interesting view.

[trapezeus]

yeah, it's something i recently thought about. it may not be the most thoroughly thought out premise, but i think there is some truth in it.

[Dr. Pepper]

I was a fan of the Sabres and hockey in general before I started watching football and the Bills, so I'm used to contracts being guarenteed. That being said, the idea that a player can hold out for more money or get cut from the team while under contract is absurd to me. It seems like a cut throat way of doing business. It sucks for the fans too... do you think less of your favorite player for holding out? Well it's their right.... but they did sign a contract... is he worth more? does he not like the Bills? It just leads me to have a lot of conflicting feelings towards the players and Bills.