He's supposedly a top 10 QB. The money they gave him is crazy, but I love it because I hate the Cowboys. I hope that it will cause them to have to cut every other good player they have, and they wind up being one of the worst teams in the NFL over the next 10 years.
I'm not sure that they will bankrupt the NFL. Look at how much money the NFL and NFL teams rake in with their TV contracts, team gear, etc. The value of franchises has exploded exponentially over the last 10-20 years. IMO they can afford to pay players a LOT more and they should.
At least the cowboys still have all their draft picks. Can you imagine if they re-upped Dak to a big contract AND lost 4 first round draft picks in the process? Man..they'd be s c r e w e d!
Really a lot more? How much more than $75m does Zak need next season to make it fairer for him? I have no idea what an NFL team makes a season tbh I do know that some soccer teams are on their arse including Barcelona due to the fact they are paying footballers far more than they are worth. Let's face the honest truth, nobody is worth that much because they can throw a football, kick a soccer ball better than some others, yes they get paid for being the best but there should still be levels to this. Messi gets 1m a week to kick a ball (which pails into insignificance to US sports) it is not sustainable, when the TV deals dry up soccer is fucked.
Zak doesn't need any more. I didn't say Zak should get a lot more, I said the "players" meaning the value of the NFL minimum contract, and all the position players and backups. Star QBs like Zak, Mahomes and Watson make enough. On one hand, I agree that no player is worth the ridiculous amounts that they are getting. OTOH, when teams and the NFL are raking in tens, if not hundreds of millions a year, then the players deserve more because they are the ones putting their health and even lives at risk. No basketball or soccer player really puts their life on the line the way football players do. Baseball players come closest because of the risk of getting hit in the head with a 100 mph fastball or a line drive off a bat. With what NFL teams make, PSLs should be done away with as should charges for parking. Ticket prices should be a good bit cheaper as should concession prices. In cities where they have built new stadiums for the team, the team should have to reimburse the city. The greed in this world is obscene.
It's easy to blame the players for this, and of course they do deserve part of the blame, but how about the owners? Where is their share? Owners who hand out outrageous contracts to a star or two while Scrooging the rest, and owners who simply suck up all the profit and don't invest in players and facilities? Did Messi hold a gun to the head of the Barcelona owners? Did Peyton Manning or now Dak Prescott? It's possible to find some balance in all this if the principles want to, but so far as you pointed out greed is preventing that. But let's not place all the blame on one side.
Maybe they will. But that’s pure speculation. With limited free agent money available every year, I don’t think players would turn down a lucrative deal from the Texans simply because Watson didn’t want to play for them. And it’s a historical fact that players will make decisions based on money.
And who sets the cap space number? Not the players. This isn't to say that players who demand an inordinate share of the pot are right to complain when there isn't enough left to pay for enough talent around them. And the players also have to take the blame for not standing together to have a stronger union so that they could get more equity and equitable treatment. Still, it's the owners who make the rules without much real input from the players because they don't really have to listen to them.
So you think Watson’s value will go down if he sits out and it will be impossible for the Texans to ever recapture value from having him under contract? I doubt it. plus you are ignoring that fact that at some point he will have to decide to stay on his couch and never play NFL football again, forfeiting likely over $200-250 million in salary over the next ten years, rather than report and play out his contract if they don’t trade him. Do you honestly think Watson is really that big of an idiot that he would just stay “home on his couch”?
If you have no retort, trying to laugh off your inability to counter an argument doesn’t make you look better. You’re better off not posting anything rather than prove your inability to formulate a counter-argument.
You watched a game of Rugby Union I agree the profits should be spread out better, for one the cost to the people, season tickets should be reduced, the price of a shirt should be halved as that is a ludicrous price atm. I understood you meant in general all the players but let's just take it dow not some no mark on our D getting 8m a year for sub standard play, I think I would also take my chances at playing a sport for a living, there has been some nasty injuries but then a shattered leg is a shattered leg in any contact sport, I am unsure of the death stats for the NFL but off the top of my head I can't ever remember reading about a player dying on the field but I do know that some soccer players have done (that funny undiagnosed heart condition mainly to blame.)
Always feeling bad for the poor highly paid athlete, man. It's negotiated with the players association and agreed upon. They're in full control. The cap at $180 million on the low end leaves $3.4 million per player on a 53 man roster. There's plenty of money to go around. Play better and you'll create higher demand for yourself and be able to negotiate a higher contract total. As I said - I do not feel any sort of animosity towards a player seeking as much money as possible and executing that contract with their agent. But they have to understand that they will need to overcompensate for the loss on other parts of the roster at the quarterback position if they take an exorbitant contract. To come back and complain and suddenly want to dictate what your employer does regarding the rest of the team is hypocritical when you end up being the reason the team has no maneuverability to improve the rest of the team.
When Trumaine Johnson left a playoff team to sign with the shitty Jets, nobody assumed it had to do with anything but money. Money was more important to him than winning. Why should we think anything different about a QB when he signs a highly lucrative deal? Dak’s priority was money. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t want to win or doesn’t think he will, just that it is secondary to him. There is no guarantee he’d win if he took less money so you may as well get paid as much as you can even if it means you reduce your chances to win somewhat.
Always defending the greedy owners, man. And they certainly are NOT in "full control" - and by that I'm referring to what happens with the team and their role on it. As any human being of course they are in "full control" of their own individual choices, but they have very little influence as an individual on a team or a company. That's where unions and collective bargaining come into play. And as I specifically mentioned the players have to take the blame for not having a stronger union to gain a bigger influence, but even if they had the strongest union they would still not have "full control" - that lies with the owners. And where did I say that it's okay for players to dictate to the owners? Even with the Watson situation, where I do think he is owed a voice since it was apparently promised to him, I don't agree that he can "dictate" to the owners. And I even said this: The NFL has the strongest, most powerful collection of owners in sports. The problems with the game are predominantly of their own making. That's not to say the players don't have any role in that, but the bigger share of blame lies with ownership.
Definitely. And I respect them in that way - I'm all about the money too. I think quarterbacks are a bit of a different entity though because they're more protected by the league (even though they still get hurt as evident by Dak) and they can have longer careers than most position players because their position is not generally based on foot speed or quickness. Even as their arm degrades over time, they can still win with intelligence to a certain extent. Relatively speaking, cornerbacks have virtually zero chance of playing until they're 36+ and certainly not at high contract numbers if they make it that far.
If Dak didn't have the serious knee injury, he probably would've prioritized winning over money. Now who knows if he will ever look the same again after his injury. I don't blame him for prioritizing money over winning.
No doubt. CB’s have very limited opportunities to make an excessive amount of money, while QB’s are going to make an excessive amount for a decade, it’s simply a matter of how excessive. Some QB’s may leave some on the table to help build a team around them, and that is very noble. Others want to simply maximize their earnings, which may not be noble but certainly isn’t unreasonable. It’s up to the team to decide whether they want to increase the dependency of their success on the QB knowing there will likely be less talent around him. As a fan, criticize the team if they make that decision, not the QB IMO.
I've heard whenever the Union is negotiating something there's always a riff between the Vets and the non-vets. The vets usually win. for example, the vets want more money for 2nd/3rd/4th contracts, and less money for rookies coming in. So the Union agreed to a rookie pay scale that 'slots' rookies according to draft rankings. I can remember the days of the top drafted QBs and other top guys holding out for enormous contracts before they even took one snap. Those days are gone. And training camp has been re-written to be very vet friendly. Far fewer padded practices, no 2-a-day practices, etc. Easier TC, good for the vets, not so good for the rookies trying to win/steal jobs from the vets. I think the players already get like 62% of the total revenue (most coming from TV). Up from less than 50% not too long ago. The next issue to get hammered out is QBs getting $45-$50 per, essentially robbing the rest of the players. If QBs were capped at say $25, there'd be an extra $500,000 per player to dole out. Players act 'happy' when their QB gets paid, but 90% of the players also feel robbed. So that's gonna change too.
Boohoo. Welcome to the world of being an employee and not owning your own business. They're unionized which means they generally are more protected than employees that are not especially in at-will employment states. If they don't want tons of money and want to be able to control their destiny at all times, then they should not enter into contracts that extend past one year. There's a reason they do.
