Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Jennings' contract question...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jaybadger82" data-source="post: 461533" data-attributes="member: 6211"><p>You might want to reread the conversation above: I said suggesting that Jennings wanted to get paid for "past performance" was condescending and reflected a rather management-centric outlook. He would like to get paid what he's worth on the market and that's probably more than the Packers are willing to invest.</p><p> </p><p>And I took issue with the term "security" because it's inaccurate. "Security" refers to a degree of protection (or a financial instrument). This really isn't what players are receiving when they sign with a team and the word perpetuates an inaccurate perception of NFL contracts amongst many casual fans.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Yep. "Consideration" refers to both money and promises exchanged as part of a contract, individually <em>and</em> collectively.</p><p> </p><p>"Security" is a rather disingenuous descriptor of what players are receiving: When a player signs a contract he forgoes the right to play for another organization during the term of the agreement. He cannot terminate this contract and work for a higher bidder, even when he outperforms his compensation. On the other hand, teams are free to tear up a contract whenever the agreement no longer suits them. "Security" generally refers to a degree of protection, and this isn't what players receive when they sign contracts. The security in this arrangement lies with franchises that get to monopolize a player's services at a fixed price with the option to terminate at will.</p><p> </p><p>Players receive consideration, not security.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Good points all and we're largely in agreement with the dynamics you're describing here.</p><p> </p><p>Much of the earlier back-and-forth between HRE and I centered on the way these concepts were being described and presented. For example, the continued use of the term "security" for what is actually "consideration" is irksome but I'll shut up.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jaybadger82, post: 461533, member: 6211"] You might want to reread the conversation above: I said suggesting that Jennings wanted to get paid for "past performance" was condescending and reflected a rather management-centric outlook. He would like to get paid what he's worth on the market and that's probably more than the Packers are willing to invest. And I took issue with the term "security" because it's inaccurate. "Security" refers to a degree of protection (or a financial instrument). This really isn't what players are receiving when they sign with a team and the word perpetuates an inaccurate perception of NFL contracts amongst many casual fans. Yep. "Consideration" refers to both money and promises exchanged as part of a contract, individually [I]and[/I] collectively. "Security" is a rather disingenuous descriptor of what players are receiving: When a player signs a contract he forgoes the right to play for another organization during the term of the agreement. He cannot terminate this contract and work for a higher bidder, even when he outperforms his compensation. On the other hand, teams are free to tear up a contract whenever the agreement no longer suits them. "Security" generally refers to a degree of protection, and this isn't what players receive when they sign contracts. The security in this arrangement lies with franchises that get to monopolize a player's services at a fixed price with the option to terminate at will. Players receive consideration, not security. Good points all and we're largely in agreement with the dynamics you're describing here. Much of the earlier back-and-forth between HRE and I centered on the way these concepts were being described and presented. For example, the continued use of the term "security" for what is actually "consideration" is irksome but I'll shut up. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 12:58 AM
Draft Talk
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Yesterday at 10:55 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 3rd round #88 MarShawn Lloyd RB
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 10:38 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: RicFlairoftheNFL
Yesterday at 10:05 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: Thirteen Below
Yesterday at 10:04 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Jennings' contract question...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top