1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Finally.....someone is seeing the light!

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by net, Jul 8, 2005.

  1. net

    net Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    944
    Ratings:
    +62
    If you want to go back...I raised this very issue here and elsewhere around the time of the Walker nonsense...signing bonus money is never included when these morons talk about their compensation. Javon...where did the millions go? Grady?

    This is from one of the coolest football websites...ProFootballtalk by Mike Florio...
    --------

    BACKLASH BUILDING AGAINST HOLDOUTS



    As more and more NFL players -- seemingly, more than ever -- complain that they have "outperformed" their contracts and are willing to resort to breaching their agreements in an effort to finagle more money, there's a rising tide of resentment against these guys, both among the fan base and in front offices.



    As one league source told us Wednesday evening, the players who are poor-mouthing their current pay conveniently omit reference to one key fact.



    The signing bonus.



    "As in the case of [Packers defensive tackle] Grady Jackson," the source said, "that fat SOB was given a signing bonus."



    Media reports regarding Jackson's looming holdout make reference to the fact that he'll earn $665,000 in 2005. But the total package was for two years and $2.31 million, with a signing bonus.



    And a signing bonus isn't free money. It's advance compensation that, for salary cap purposes, is divided evenly over the various years of the contract.



    The payment of the bonus contemplates the guy's performance in the future years of the deal. If the player retires or is suspended or blows out a knee while making like Evel Knievel, a portion of the bonus money is subject to recovery.



    "The agreement made at the time a deal is consummated is that the signing bonus is part of the salary. It is understood by everyone at the time of the signing . . . [and] none of them bitches when that is done.



    "I want to meet the player that says he will take less signing bonus so he can have a higher . . . base salary at the back end of the contract."



    The problem, as we see it, is that because base salaries generally aren't guaranteed, players and their agents want to get as much money as possible up front. Indeed, the signing bonus is the only sure thing in a system where players can be released by their teams if they "underperform."



    But what players aren't realizing is that, in those situations, they really do end up with "free money" because they keep the full signing bonus without being required to fulfill the full term of the contract. Still, the risk of termination for underachievement has become the primary excuse offered up by players and agents who want to rip up the deal and get paid all over again when the player "overperforms".



    But in any contract in any setting, both sides assume the risk that the arrangement will be viewed as a "bad deal" in hindsight. Indeed, for every Javon Walker who thinks he's bringing more to the table than he's taking away from it, there's a Joe Johnson who pocketed millions and did relatively nothing.



    It's just the way the system works, and plenty of people are getting fed up with the players and agents who refuse to play by the rules.



    Another thing that's hurting players like Walker is the prose emanating from their pie holes in an effort to justify blatant violations of their contracts.



    Said Walker recently: "Anybody can say, 'OK, he had a great year [in 2004], so let's see if he can do it again.' That's like trying to tell a person to go to war in Iraq, but let me see if you can go to war again and come back, and then we'll give you the Medal of Honor. You don't send a soldier out to a battlefield twice for him to [prove he is] consistent."



    No, Javon, you don't send a soldier out to the battlefield twice to prove he is consistent. You send the soldier back out there because he has made a commitment that he intends to honor.



    Honor. That's the key word. Soldiers honor their commitments, whatever the consequence. Considering that most of these guys carrying guns in Iraq and Afghanistan are getting peanuts in comparison to the risks they're taking, is it really too much to ask a kid who's making hundreds of thousands of dollars in a profession that doesn't entail the ever-present risk of a gruesome and violent demise to do the same?



    Especially when, by virtue of his signing bonus, he's already been partially paid to do so?


    ----
    Right on!
     
  2. vixtalkn

    vixtalkn Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    197
    Ratings:
    +0
    Florio makes an excellent argument about the bonus money. As a caveat, fed-up-fans and sports writers also should dispel this notion that guys like Walker, for example, have "outperformed" their contract. One does not or cannot "outperform" a contract.

    For one, Walker is only half way through the 6-year contract he signed in 2002. He's only "halfperformed" at this point, not "outperformed."

    For two, if anything, it's the Packers, not Walker, who have outperformed their half of the contract. They paid Walker a large portion of the 6-year money as a signing bonus before Walker even caught one football. But, this is what the Packers agreed to do, so, in essence, they simply performed their half of the bargain, not outperformed.

    Be reminded that if guys like Walker agree to catch footballs and score touchdowns for six years for a sum certain, he performs that contract by catching footballs and scoring touchdowns for six years. Insofar as Walker may have exceeded his own expectations by catching as many balls and scoring as many touchdowns as he has at this point, he is simply doing what he agreed to do. He might deserve more money compared to other guys who get paid more to do the same thing, but he doesn't deserve more money because he "outperformed."

    My two cents.
     
  3. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Great points.....Walker was paid to catch the foootball and score touchdowns like a first round draft pick for 6 years. So far he has done it for 1.
     
  4. wpr

    wpr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,517
    Ratings:
    +0
    I saw that yesterday Net and was going to post it but got busy. Good job.
    I too have been saying this all along.
    Here's an interesting thought that Vix's comments made me think of.
    Did JW not think he was going to put up the kind of numbers that he did in 2004? Did he not think he could would so in 3 yrs?
    If he thought he was capable of those numbers then why sign a contract for that length? Perhaps he did think he was able to put up those numbers in this period of time.
    If he is so concerned today about being compensated for his success and needs a new contract he should have been just as concerned back on day one and not signed for more than 4 years. No one put a gun to his head and made him go for the extra years. I think it was a bit of a sticking point in the negotiations so GB put some extra money in the SB to compensate him for the back years of the contract.
    By signing the deal he clearly thought he was being fairly compensated over the whole contract.
     
  5. Chamuko

    Chamuko Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,067
    Ratings:
    +0
    Javon has no right to compare him A SPOILED GUY WHO GETS PAID EXTREMELLY WELL FOR DOING SOMETHING THAT WE WILL ALL BE WILLING TO PAY FOR, with a SOLDIER WHO IS RISKING HIS LIFE ON A DAILY BASIS HE IS A TOTAL A****LE :evil:
     
  6. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Chamuko....nice to hear from you. I like your sign off by Phillip of Macedon.
     
  7. Steel Wheels

    Steel Wheels Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    268
    Ratings:
    +0

    DePack, you sure aren't the one seeing the light.
     
  8. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Careful chase....you don't want to get in a p1ssing match on this forum. With your incredible lack of self-control and schitzo personality, it's just a matter of time til you blow up and get tossed off this forum too. How's life in the Jersey projects?
     
  9. kuston

    kuston Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    73
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm still trying to figure out how Chase got on this board to begin with.
     

Share This Page