i know i know, not worthy of a thread, but it's off season. has there ever been a case where a team refused to pay a player 'garuanteed' money because a player simply stopped playing? by that i mean gholston has no passion and doesn't even fucking try. if woddy was pissed off over the coin toss, can you imagine how pissed he is at gholston laughing all the way to the bank? if a player gets arrested or caught doing drugs, then i think a team can forgo his garuanteed salary (micheal vick?, not certain on this). it would be rex all the way to say "gholston has stopped trying to play football, therefore his $21mill garuanteed is off the table". adios. i know i'm dreaming
I hate the offseason. You would have been better off just posting photos of your wife's drunk friend. Do so in this thread and you'll possibly be on the road to redemption.
Given that you are talking about the US, the answer is probably "yes" Some great (if not very successful) US law suits of the past :: Do Beautiful Women Really Come to Life When You Drink Bud Light? 1991, Richard Overton sued Anheuser-Busch for false and misleading advertising under Michigan State law. The complaint specifically referenced ads involving, among other things, fantasies of beautiful women in tropical settings that came to life for two men driving a Bud Light truck. In addition to two claims of false advertising, Mr. Overton included a third claim in his complaint in which he claimed to have suffered emotional distress, mental injury, and financial loss in excess of $10,0000 due to the misleading Bud Light ads. If you can’t sue the system, sue yourself. 1995, Robert Lee Brock sued himself for $5 million. He claimed that he had violated his own civil rights and religious beliefs by allowing himself to get drunk and commit crimes which landed him in the Indian Creek Correctional Center in Virginia, serving a 23 year sentence for grand larceny and breaking and entering. What could he possibly have to gain by suing himself? Since being in prison prevented him from having an income, he expected the state to pay. Criminals need not bear the responsibility for their crimes alone when the real money is in Hollywood. 1996, the family of Patsy Ann Byers sued Oliver Stone, Warner Brother, and others involved in the making and distribution of the movie Natural Born Killers for an unspecified amount. They claimed that the movie caused Sarah Edmondson and Benjamin Darrus to go on a crime spree which resulted in Edmonson shooting Byers during a robbery, leaving her paralyzed from the chest down. The lawsuit was originally filed in 1995, against Edmonson and Darrus, the actual perpetrators of the crime spree. Stone and the others involved with the film were added in 1996. Since when were haunted houses frightening? 2000, Cleanthi Peters sued Universal Studios for $15,000. She claimed to have suffered extreme fear, mental anguish, and emotional distress due to visiting Universal Studios’ Halloween Horror Nights haunted house, which she said was too scary. When kids commit heinous crimes, who is responsible? The makers of every video game they’ve ever played, of course. 2001, Linda Sanders and other family members of Columbine High School shooting victims sued 25 movie and video game companies for $5 billion, in a class action lawsuit.They claimed that were it not for movies includingThe Basketball Diaries and videos games including Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake, Mortal Kombat, Resident Evil, Mech Warrior, Wolfenstein, Redneck Rampage, Final Fantasy, and Nightmare Creatures, the massacre would not have occurred, and that the makers and distributors of the movies and games were partly to blame for their loved ones’ deaths. Dog killer sues victim’s owner for mental anguish. 2003, Andrew Burnett sued Sara McBurnett and the San Jose Mercury News, claiming they had caused him to suffer mental anguish and post traumatic stress disorder. Burnett filed the lawsuit while serving a three-year sentence for killing defendant McBurnett’s dog in a road rage incident, claiming that the incident had caused his suffering. Weak stomachs and gross-out TV don’t mix. 2005, Austin Aitken sued NBC for $2.5 million. He claimed that an episode of “Fear Factor” caused him “suffering, injury, and great pain.” He said that watching the contestants eat rats on television made him dizzy and light-headed, causing him to vomit and run into a doorway. Mistaken for a superstar? How insulting! 2006, Allen Heckard sued Michael Jordan and Nike founder Phil Knight for $832 million. He claimed to suffer defamation, permanent injury, and emotional pain and suffering because people often mistook him for the basketball star.
Maybe in 20 years the NFL term for bust will be Gholston. In fact if you go to Google and type Vernon Gholston the very first option for added words is bust. Try it out- I look forward to saying oh shit that pick was a Gholston.
A good rule of thumb: If you don't immediately think something deserves to be a thread, let it go. Don't try to justify it or post it with a disclaimer that you KNOW it's not a good idea, just let it go. That way, you don't waste everyone's time with some useless drivel.
Oh come on why is everyone getting to bent out of shape? It's a pretty funny idea. Plus, the Jets should look into it if he still doesn't register a sack next year.
No offense, but Ryan Leaf 100 times the bust that Gholston is. Remember when people were debating whether Indy should draft Leaf vs. Manning? :rofl:
I don't think anyone is debating that gholston is the biggest bust of all-time. I think he just deserves to be in the conversation. also not that I have any idea what the numbers on leaf's contract were, but I would guess Gholston got at least similar guaranteed money 21 million. Since gholston has i believe 30 career tackles, that means he has made 700,000 per tackle since entering the league... But thats only in terms of guaranteed money, and you know he has made some money that wasn't originally "guaranteed" to him.
Your avatar reminds me of a chick I rolled around with four a couple of hours. Same a$$ and everything.
it just seems that ghost isn't really even trying to play ball. therefore he is not holding up his end of the bargin. all we can demand is that a player trys hard to get better. but when a player like ghoston is just as happy to pull slivers out of his ass at the end of the game, well that smacks of fraud. that would make his contract nul and void on merit alone. i can't imagine the players union backing this excuse for a player.
How do you know he isn't trying? Maybe he was just drafted way too high and dosen't have the skills required of the contract he was bestowed.
