![]() |
|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#26 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 48
Posts: 1,340
|
Re: Carl Banks quasi-defends T.O. on Sirius
Quote:
The only point I took issue with was justifying holdouts by saying, "hey, they're just businessmen trying to make the most they can." I deal with businessmen every day, and in no scenario are they allowed to breach contracts in order to make more money (at least, they are not allowed to without fully expecting a lawsuit being thrown back at them). So I just don't like the analogy. Simply saying that there is nothing wrong with a guy wanting more money is not enough to compare TO to Ralph Lauren.........it's, for me, more about the way in which they are trying to get that money. Take, for example, Hines Ward. Now I know I've brought his name up a few times before, but just yesterday or the day before I saw that the negotiations are not going as quickly and smoothly as he expected. So what did he do? He purchased a $5 million injury protection insurance policy so that he wouldn't have to miss a single day with his team while the negotiations continue, and he also doesn't have to worry about a financial hit if he gets injured. As long as I see guys doing it the right way, I won't forgive players like TO for doing it the wrong way. Actually, looking back on it, I guess I also took issue with the argument that it's ok to hold out because the team can cut the player whenever they want. I just wanted to show that I don't think there is anything wrong with that when the player is getting so much guaranteed money up front. The team has, essentially, paid for that right to cut the player after handing them a truckload of money before they even caught a single pass. Just trying to offer another perspective.
__________________
"Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!" |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|