Yukon Cornelius Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 hey he signed the contract...... fn feline Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedroz13 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 That's the difference ... Walker has performed, or at least he did last year. If he continues to perform why would the Pack not give him a good contract. Favre is right, but people don't want to realize it. I would imagine the players (at least the smart ones), would have insurance policies that would pay them if they got injured and couldn't play again ... similar to the one McGahee took out before his Fiesta bowl injury. It all comes down to good ole' fashion selfishness. The team concept doesn't amount to crap anymore in the NFL (for some guys). It's the guys with this me first and me now attitude that give the game a bad name. Unfortunately, they are usually the ones that make the game exciting too. 888650[/snapback] I definitely agree, but gotta mention that basically all major sports are this way now. I'm basically talking about baseball and basketball in addition to football. The old-school, team-first, play through injuries, loyal to the team thing is a thing of the past and will probably never return. I know nothing of hockey and don't care to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 You think so? His first year he caught 23 balls. And he received a "$2-3 million signing bonus" PLUS his rookie base salary. I'd say he was severely OVERPAID in 2002. 888557[/snapback] With any player, the team is paying for future performance. Could you possibly be serious about a rookie WR being "overpaid? It's understood that they're not going to live to their contracts in the first year. Apparently, Anquan Boldin and Randy Moss are the only rookie receivers who WEREN'T overpaid?? Do you honestly think the Packers won't pay him next year? Of course they will. 888557[/snapback] I think they WOULD have, but if all Rosenhaus wants is a "promise" that they'll pay Javon during this season (assuming similar performance) and he's not getting that, then I'm not sure. I've got a new theory, but I'll save it for my next post (see below). But they do not want to set a dangerous precedent of re-doing contracts. Next thing you know Grady Jackson wants a new deal. And so on. 888557[/snapback] I agree; that's a big factor. Play out your contract. You signed it. 888557[/snapback] Hook, I can tell you're a smart guy and I respect your opinion, but that statement is so short-sighted and cliche'. I'm surprised you feel that way. It sounds like you read the article on PFT a couple of weeks ago about how signing bonuses are the "answer" to non-guaranteed contracts. It was pretty convincing, but it's only a small part of the story. It's all about FAIR MARKET VALUE. Teams almost NEVER "overpay" for a player. They either force him to restructure or cut him. Meanwhile, players are underpaid all the time (in comparison to their peers). As for "honoring" the contract, why don't you ask teams to do the same thing? In fact, Rosenhaus has already said that if the Eagles are willing to honor the entire contract, T.O. will play the whole thing out without a problem. Gee...I wonder why they don't agree to that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 (edited) As for "honoring" the contract, why don't you ask teams to do the same thing? In fact, Rosenhaus has already said that if the Eagles are willing to honor the entire contract, T.O. will play the whole thing out without a problem. Gee...I wonder why they don't agree to that? 890380[/snapback] The nfl doesnt guarantee any contracts hence signing bonuses... do we want another nba no fn way and the players realize that to i think Edited July 22, 2005 by Yukon Cornelius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 The nfl doesnt guarantee any contracts hence signing bonuses... do we want another nba no fn way and the players realize that to i think 890390[/snapback] Didn't suggest that. I LIKE non-guaranteed contracts. That's why you don't hear me b*tching when a player gets released. Owners can do what they see fit and so can players. If an owner wants to be cheap with one of his best players, fine. But don't be surprised or critical if he holds out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 If an owner wants to be cheap with one of his best players, fine. But don't be surprised or critical if he holds out. 890415[/snapback] true but how many balls do yah think favre will throw to him this year anyway. DD is going to be a happy camper this year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 OK, so he is worth more now... What about the first few years in the league where he was dropping passes and running the wrong routes left and right... He should pay back those first few years in full, then lets talk about a new contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 (edited) My "theory" on this mess is this: Ted Thompson will be a very good GM. However, he has given me the definite impression that he's going to do things HIS way. I sense a good amount of arrogance in him. The kind of arrogance that would allow him to take an offensive player in the 2nd round of the draft, AFTER taking an offensive player in the 1st as well. That 2nd-round player is Terrence Murphy and (along with the arrogance factor), it was Thompson's complete infatuation with Murphy that caused him to forsake the defense again and choose him. So, he has a WR who he REALLY likes getting ready to play for 2nd-round money. Because he's so confident in himself, he has no doubt Murphy is going to be a stud. He also knows Driver and Ferguson are both starting-caliber players. Plus, Antonio Chatman looked great in mini-camps. So, at the most, all Murphy has to do this year is be the 3rd WR. Thompson is sure he can do that. From that perspective, Walker doesn't seem nearly as valuable. Edited July 22, 2005 by Swiss Cheezhead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 My "theory" on this mess is this: Ted Thompson will be a very good GM. However, he has given me the definite impression that he's going to do things HIS way. I sense a good amount of arrogance in him. The kind of arrogance that would allow him to take an offensive player in the 2nd round of the draft, AFTER taking an offensive player in the 1st as well. That 2nd-round player is Terrence Murphy and (along with the arrogance factor), it was Thompson's complete infatuation with Murphy that caused him to forsake the defense again and choose him. So, he has a WR who he REALLY likes getting ready to play for 2nd-round money. Because he's so confident in himself, he has no doubt Murphy is going to be a stud. He also knows Driver and Ferguson are both starting-caliber players. Plus, Antonio Chatman looked great in mini-camps. So, at the most, all Murphy has to do this year is be the 3rd WR. Thompson is sure he can do that. From that perspective, Walker doesn't seem nearly as valuable. 890465[/snapback] you make some good points. I hope you're wrong though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Swiss, deep down, you know that reguardless if we picked defense with every one of our picks, we're still not going to win the super bowl. This teams cap situation is so screwed, he's doing what he can... He is preparing for the future of the franchise. I'd rather consistantly win ten games and go to the playoffs then every few years have a strong team thats a top contender, then go through droughts and rebuilding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 I don't think its Javon Walker that makes Javon Walker good... Its Brett Favre. He made Antonio spare Freeman a stud, he left, and did absolutley nothing. I want them to trade Javon Walker. I think he's a lot of hype. I think the duo of Ferguson and Driver will work just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whipdancer Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 (edited) Walker deserves more money and he's already earned it. Everybody please stop with the "he's only had one good year" B.S. He's done everything asked of him since joining the team. He got to camp on time in his rookie year, he worked hard to fix his drops, and he's improved steadily throughout his career -- just like a WR is supposed to. He's also stepped up and made big catches at crucial times. That's the kind of player you WANT to reward with a new contract. 888511[/snapback] But that's just it, he has only had 1 good year. The others were purely average for a 1st/2nd year WR. How does being a stand out 1 year make you worth top 5 money? Rosenwhatzitz doesn't want just a promise of a new contract, he wants the promise of a new contract for top 5 money. Edited July 22, 2005 by Whipdancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicster Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 I'm going to have to agree with Swiss on a couple of points he has made and would like to take it a step further in implying that Walker will be dealt, and that he SHOULD be dealt. This is Favre's last year as we all know. The team is trying to cope with the cap trouble they have. As such, how can we afford to put a top 5 investment in a receiver? There are plenty of examples of how teams can get by without a top 5 receiver and win. Aaron Rodgers, or whoever is behind the center next year, will have to learn and grow with the young talent the team is bringing in. I think a year working with Murphy behind the scenes will allow Rodgers and Murphy to have a kind of chemistry coming into the season for next year. It may not work out for the best but I believe that moving Walker is the best move for the team. Receivers are a dime a dozen and pulling quality guys who can play at other positions is a must in today's NFL. Give me a team of quality team players over 3 or 4 studs and I'll take my chances. As far as the renegotiating a deal with Walker... I would just look for takers on moving him and either getting draft picks or a nice young player in return and letting the rest of the receiver corp go on without him. IF we could move Walker for a decent player on defense, and/or draft pick, let's do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 (edited) With any player, the team is paying for future performance. Could you possibly be serious about a rookie WR being "overpaid? It's understood that they're not going to live to their contracts in the first year. Apparently, Anquan Boldin and Randy Moss are the only rookie receivers who WEREN'T overpaid??890380[/snapback] Sorry it took so long to reply, but I was out of town for the weekend. I agree with this statement. The team pays for future performance. They paid Walker good money his first couple years even though he wasn't worth it, because they felt he would develop into a good WR. When he finally does, he decides he deserves more?? Hook, I can tell you're a smart guy and I respect your opinion, but that statement is so short-sighted and cliche'. I'm surprised you feel that way. It sounds like you read the article on PFT a couple of weeks ago about how signing bonuses are the "answer" to non-guaranteed contracts. It was pretty convincing, but it's only a small part of the story.890380[/snapback] Listen, NFL players know exactly what they are getting into when they sign their deals. They know the team can cut them at any time. That is why they AGREE to take money up front that is guaranteed. That is the trade-off. You get money at the start of the contract, and the team hopes it gets a better bargain later in the deal. If you want more money later in the contact, negotiate it. Don't start bitching and moaning about a contract that you signed, just because you spent all your signing bonus. Oh, and I agree with the earlier post about Walker being a byproduct of Brett Favre. The Pack would be nuts to sign him to top-5 WR money. Especially after only one year. Edited July 25, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 Until the NFL starts using guaranteed contracts, this debate will go on and on and on ................ : Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 Until the NFL starts using guaranteed contracts, this debate will go on and on and on ................ : 893237[/snapback] I hope that day never comes. MLB and NBA have proven what a disaster that is. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 I hope that day never comes. MLB and NBA have proven what a disaster that is. . . 893261[/snapback] Agreed. When the new CBA is finalized, however, I guarantee players will be getting a much bigger piece of the pie. Hopefully, that will decrease holdouts somewhat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marsbennett Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 thanks for the post....frankly, the entire GB offense is giving me the heebie geebies this year. I think I'm gonna feel sorry of Brett this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 Agreed. When the new CBA is finalized, however, I guarantee players will be getting a much bigger piece of the pie. Hopefully, that will decrease holdouts somewhat. 893269[/snapback] No, the holdouts will still continue. If there is any possibility for more money to be made, someone will hold out for it. Its an evil that will no doubt always be around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
migarvin Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 Interesting point of views all around.... Lets clear a few things up: I mostly agree with Cheesehead about his philosophy on the nature of guaranteed contracts and also for refuting the "javon walker is a lady dog, should report to camp, had one good year, is only good because of favre" nonsense. Favre can be nasty at times but is too inconsistent for the reverence bestowed on him. So as favre goes the packers go and that is problem #1 about this team. Now, Farve feels he has the right to speak about someone else's contract. Farve would not understand Walker's feelings anyway. Farve received an extension after his 3rd year in the nfl and then a 100 million dollar contract 6 years after. NFL gm's don't play around with franchise quaterbacks; receivers are deemed more replaceable Green bay fun facts: When the packers won the superbowl in the mid 90's they had the nfl's #1 ranked defense. Desmond howard made the game changing play to seal the victory They played drew bledsoe, need i say more? Nobody likes when guys holdout and its easy to call a professional athlete selfish and even easier to call his agent a slime ball. But the agent is actually not "satan" at all, he's really the GOD of agents so there is no reason to criticize him. His job is to give his clients financial security and that is what he is doing by encouraging Walker to hold out. Why should i not criticize Rosenhaus and empathize with Javon Walker's situation? Its quite simple, it's because he plays for the packers. They have demonstrated they cater to noone but Favre. Mike Mckensie is an awesome cb for the Saints but the Packers could have cared less. He still hasn't received a very lucrative deal but trusts the Saints management more than the packers (sad realization) Bye Bye darren sharper. Mike wahle? peace. Maybe they are in cap hell. Or maybe they truly feel they can win with whomever they assemble around Favre. If he's not favre he's replaceable. Except for as soon as Javon Walker left the Greenbay/ Minnesota shootoout last year, it became a Minnesota blowout. If anyone on this board does not think Javon isi premier you are missing something. The guy developed late at Florida State but has been right on track in the NFL. He caught nine td's 2 years ago good for tied for 10th in the nfl while being on a team with the top NFC rusher. Hey that was his breakout year and last year was even better. Try this: 1 good year plus 1 good year = 2 good years for Javon Walker GB chose the wrong receiver to pay big: donald driver. They should make amends for it by locking up Javon now. Cincy locked up Chad Johnson. Jimmy Smith and Joe Horn complained and were rewarded. Mccardel was traded. Eric Moulds was locked up immediately. In today's NFL, not everyone can be Ed Reed. He has consistently proved he is as good as it gets at the safety position, and Ozzie Newsome is as good as it gets as far as locking up top talent. Why do you think Ed Reed, who has more right to hold out than any player in any sport, is not holding out. He knows the ravens will get it done. Don't blame Rosenhaus, Walker, or Favre (except for the ill-advised comments on Javon) for this mess as much as you criticize the Packers for being a mess of an organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 He caught nine td's 2 years ago good for tied for 10th in the nfl while being on a team with the top NFC rusher. Hey that was his breakout year and last year was even better. Try this: 1 good year plus 1 good year = 2 good years for Javon Walker893948[/snapback] However, he only started 3 games that year and had 41 catches. The 9 TD catches make those numbers look better, but don't kid yourself. That is not a "good" year. Oh, and last year, 200 yards and 3 TD's came against the Colts sucky secondary. They ain't on the schedule for 3 more years. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
migarvin Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 thats a darn fine year for a 2nd year wideout. Its not like he hasn't done anything for my falcons as peelress priceless received a 10 or 12 million signing bonus for blowing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gspot Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 You think so? His first year he caught 23 balls. And he received a "$2-3 million signing bonus" PLUS his rookie base salary. I'd say he was severely OVERPAID in 2002. Do you honestly think the Packers won't pay him next year? Of course they will. But they do not want to set a dangerous precedent of re-doing contracts. Next thing you know Grady Jackson wants a new deal. And so on. Play out your contract. You signed it. 888557[/snapback] I agree and I did see a report indicating the entire league (owners) have privately agreed to hold the line on all hold-outs. The mindset is, if they give into these now, the entire system they have in-place now may fold as every player with a big season will employ the tactic. I agree that Walker is underpaid using just the one season as a "Snapshot", but as Hook puts it, rookies usually don't play up to their contract until year 3. Understanding the owners and league are holding the line in an effort to set a precident for the future, I suspect no one will give in to these hold out demands. On the Grady Jackson front, he already threatened to hold-out, but it gets even more laughable. During the season, he contacted the Packers front office indicating "he needed money". The Packers advanced him a portion of this year's contract. Under the rules of the CBA, that COUNTED as a restructuring preventing Jackson and the Packers from reworking the deal again according to the player's union. I guess a contract can only be reworked once under league rules and his advanced counted as a rework! How you can make millions and need money is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizards Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 You would think that the Packers would budge a little and "SHOW" Walker "THE MONEY"! Afterall...a kid who has never taken a snap in an NFL game just 50 million over 6 years with a 24 mil signing bonus...Smith has 24 mil in his bank account and may not do squat this year...where's the justice for Walker....I don't believe in holdouts...but many Javon needs to go to the 49ers to get some love...and they could surely use him.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Maybe the problem is not that Walker is paid too little (one season does not make a stud), but that Smith is paid way way way too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.