Jetsfan80 Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 I agree with this. I'm not upset with Mo because he's not there. Contractually he isn't obligated to be there, so it's all good. I do think it isn't productive to his cause because he has no leverage here. It puts him behind in the learning of the new system, and there is a very qualified guy trying to take his job, and heightens his chance of being injured which would be disastrous for him in a contract year. Eh, I find it hard to believe Wilk couldn't figure it out pretty quickly. He's played nearly every position on the DL at this point in his career. And there's no one who is good enough to take his job away. Williams is 20 years old, after all, and even if he starts, Wilkerson isn't out of a spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 If a player wants to re-evaluate his contract after every season, no problem, just sign a one year contract. This isn't what the players want, they want long term security, and that big signing bonus. That's why they hate the franchise tag. They are being paid as one of the best at their position, no job security, no giant bonus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 If a player wants to re-evaluate his contract after every season, no problem, just sign a one year contract. This isn't what the players want, they want long term security, and that big signing bonus. That's why they hate the franchise tag. They are being paid as one of the best at their position, no job security, no giant bonus Ever notice some players have a career year when they are due for a new contract?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBallhawk Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 There is if you have more time on your contract, you are in violation of the contract. That's why they have contracts, and heavy penalty articles for ill-legal hold outs. Works that same way in the real world. I might sign a contract that awards me $100,000 if I fulfill certain criteria in 60 days. Sounds great. If something happens out of my control that has me 1 week late in completing the service , I suddenly discover that it is no longer a $100,000 contract, it is a $65,000 contract because I am being fined $5,000 a day for every day over schedule. Very common clause in contracts. As 80 pointed out there are heavy financial penalties if a player doesn't show up when he is contractually obligated to. Same as the real world You can't compare the two. Working at the docks and coming in late has nothing to do with an NFL player holding out after a few years when he outperforms his contract. Players get fined/fired for being late or not showing up just like everybody else in the "real world". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Eh, I find it hard to believe Wilk couldn't figure it out pretty quickly. He's played nearly every position on the DL at this point in his career. And there's no one who is good enough to take his job away. Williams is 20 years old, after all, and even if he starts, Wilkerson isn't out of a spot. They difficulty is in the language. NFL systems aren't what they used to be. "Catch em and kill em". Very sophisticated now, is literally a whole different language. Any split second delay, might, and often does, get a player hurt. Williams won't take his job of course, but he will take reps. Mo at some point will be a FA. He needs reps to pad his stats, which will convert in money when the time comes. I like Mo and really hope this is resolved, but he is not in a particularly good situation right now with the Jets. i wouldn't be at all stunned to see this go the "trade me" route at some point before camp if there is no progress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 You can't compare the two. Working at the docks and coming in late has nothing to do with an NFL player holding out after a few years when he outperforms his contract. Players get fined/fired for being late or not showing up just like everybody else in the "real world". Actually I can compare the two. And so can the courts if a contract dispute gets that far. They seldom, if ever, do. The court will decide based on the language of the contrat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 They difficulty is in the language. NFL systems aren't what they used to be. "Catch em and kill em". Very sophisticated now, is literally a whole different language. Any split second delay, might, and often does, get a player hurt. Williams won't take his job of course, but he will take reps. Mo at some point will be a FA. He needs reps to pad his stats, which will convert in money when the time comes. I like Mo and really hope this is resolved, but he is not in a particularly good situation right now with the Jets. i wouldn't be at all stunned to see this go the "trade me" route at some point before camp if there is no progress He will if if whats in your last sentence becomes fact.. I hope Mo signs and stays but players look at things in a business sense so I understand why he wants the most he can get.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBallhawk Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Actually I can compare the two. And so can the courts if a contract dispute gets that far. They seldom, if ever, do. The court will decide based on the language of the contrat Good, you figured it all out. Meanwhile, nothing is going to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Actually I can compare the two. And so can the courts if a contract dispute gets that far. They seldom, if ever, do. The court will decide based on the language of the contrat I agree you can compare the two but many fans look at it like the poor player is being abused by a nasty billionaire owner.. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Sheldon and Brandon marshall also not at OTA should we trade them too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Sheldon and Brandon marshall also not at OTA should we trade them too? But they have been there not quite the same Bit.. Plus the are not complaining about their contracts.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Sheldon and Brandon marshall also not at OTA should we trade them too? I agree with the fact that they are not obligated to be there. IMO extended absence from OTA's hurt the player more then it does the team. I suspect the CS is aware of the reasons Richardson and Marshall aren't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Good, you figured it all out. Meanwhile, nothing is going to change. Not real hard to figure out. Our judicial system makes it pretty clear what contracts are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBallhawk Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Not real hard to figure out. Our judicial system makes it pretty clear what contracts are. Has anybody ever told you anything about this secret thing called CBA? That all teams, owners & players agreed upon? Tom Brady doesn't go to Judge Judy if somebody hits him low or if he doesn't get his paycheck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 But they have been there not quite the same Bit.. Plus the are not complaining about their contracts.. How is it different? players don't have to go to this. They choose to go or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Has anybody ever told you anything about this secret thing called CBA? That all teams, owners & players agreed upon? Tom Brady doesn't go to Judge Judy if somebody hits him low or if he doesn't get his paycheck. LOL I have mentioned several times here that at this point Wilkerson hasn't done anything in violation of the CBA, or his contract. If he doesn't show up for the June mini-camps, the game changes. If you haven't noticed that's exactly what Brady is threatening to do if he loses his appeal. Taking this outside the NFL to Judge Judy. That's exactly why Kraft capitulated in his appeal. He realized once he got to the owners meeting that he was going to lose the appeal, leaving his only option to go to Judge Judy. Being a member of a very elite billionaires club he didn't want to go that route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 How is it different? players don't have to go to this. They choose to go or not. From what I understood Mo is not there due to his contract gripe.. The non voluntary OTA is more for new players but most vets show up for some part of it and Sheldon has and Brandon is a old Pro so I'm not surprised he's taking it easy.. Lets see if Mo shows up for the mandatory camp or if he's still pouting.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBallhawk Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 LOL I have mentioned several times here that at this point Wilkerson hasn't done anything in violation of the CBA, or his contract. If he doesn't show up for the June mini-camps, the game changes. If you haven't noticed that's exactly what Brady is threatening to do if he loses his appeal. Taking this outside the NFL to Judge Judy. That's exactly why Kraft capitulated in his appeal. He realized once he got to the owners meeting that he was going to lose the appeal, leaving his only option to go to Judge Judy. Being a member of a very elite billionaires club he didn't want to go that route. 1) If he doesn't want to show up it's his right. He doesn't have to. If he doesn't show up in camp he'll be fined, that's what the contract says. And here you are arguing that teams or players don't honor contracts when everything pretty much is dictated by contracts? 2) Notice how everything gets handled in the NFL, within the NFL. Of course you can later still go to a regular judge, that's not the point. The point is that teams, players, owners have a deal in place, that separates them from "us". Try spitting somebody in the face at your work place, try taking out their knees and see how that works out for you. I doubt your supervisor is going to throw a flag... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 1) If he doesn't want to show up it's his right. He doesn't have to. If he doesn't show up in camp he'll be fined, that's what the contract says. And here you are arguing that teams or players don't honor contracts when everything pretty much is dictated by contracts? 2) Notice how everything gets handled in the NFL, within the NFL. Of course you can later still go to a regular judge, that's not the point. The point is that teams, players, owners have a deal in place, that separates them from "us". Try spitting somebody in the face at your work place, try taking out their knees and see how that works out for you. I doubt your supervisor is going to throw a flag... 1) No I'm arguing that contracts are the same in the NFL as they are in the real world. 2) Depends where you work. LOL The deal the NFL and players have in place doesn't include violating contracts, that's why as a part of the CBA players are now heavily fined for hold outs. If a player, or a team decides to take it out of the NFL, and that has happened several times, (see Al Davis, Freeman McNeal) The courts are going to resolve the suit according to the words and articles in the contract. They aren't different. It just works better for both sides to keep it in house Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Whoever negotiated the CBA on the player's side should not be allowed near a negotiating table again. The last CBA really screwed the players at a time when NFL was financially on an upswing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Whoever negotiated the CBA on the player's side should not be allowed near a negotiating table again. The last CBA really screwed the players at a time when NFL was financially on an upswing. Yea, they got boned, but not sure they really had an option. The only power that the players have is to go on strike. The 32 owners are billionaires that make money outside the NFL, the vast majority of the 2000 or so players make money only by playing football. Outside of some veterans, the players will always cave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Yea, they got boned, but not sure they really had an option. The only power that the players have is to go on strike. The 32 owners are billionaires that make money outside the NFL, the vast majority of the 2000 or so players make money only by playing football. Outside of some veterans, the players will always cave. Players in other leagues have the same issues but they do not seem to get boned as much. A lot of it does come down to negotiating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Players in other leagues have the same issues but they do not seem to get boned as much. A lot of it does come down to negotiating. And this whole process was not something that the NFLPA really cared to go to battle for; why would the majority of the league care what happens to a few guys who get punished when the other 99% seemingly stay out of trouble? They wanted more money, less practices etc. I think they got boned, like all players do, but don't think this is a great example of it. Edit: Thought we were talking about Goodell's power in the CBA. Wrong thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 And this whole process was not something that the NFLPA really cared to go to battle for; why would the majority of the league care what happens to a few guys who get punished when the other 99% seemingly stay out of trouble? They wanted more money, less practices etc. I think they got boned, like all players do, but don't think this is a great example of it. Please be more specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Please be more specific. I thought we were referring to Goodell's power to punish, I had a couple threads opened. I agree that in regards to holding out, the CBA did not do the players any favors. I usually have no problem, other than being annoyed when it's my team, when a player holds out, so the language they put it to make it almost impossible certainly does suck for the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.