This is why players hold out.

[joeshmo]

He signed a 6 year $9.5 million deal. He's already been paid a lot of that money. He'll manage...

Will he manage, yes. Will he get what he is worth no. And that is the real deal behind this whole thing. I dont know about anyone else, but I want what I deserve at work as well, and it is all relaive according to what biz you are in, and Walker is in the Biz of Football which is exactly the perspective we need to look at this debate.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Will he manage, yes. Will he get what he is worth no. And that is the real deal behind this whole thing. I dont know about anyone else, but I want what I deserve at work as well, and it is all relaive according to what biz you are in, and Walker is in the Biz of Football which is exactly the perspective we need to look at this debate.

I believe that if you sign a contract you should play it out regardless of your performance. If you want it to be based on performance, sign a deal loaded with incentives, otherwise - if you signed the contract shut up and play until it runs out, then break the bank. I'm sick of guys jumping for joy when they sign their multi-million-dollar deals and a few years later holding out because they feel they're being underappreciated.

 

[joeshmo]

I believe that if you sign a contract you should play it out regardless of your performance. If you want it to be based on performance, sign a deal loaded with incentives, otherwise - if you signed the contract shut up and play until it runs out, then break the bank. I'm sick of guys jumping for joy when they sign their multi-million-dollar deals and a few years later holding out because they feel they're being underappreciated.

It goes both ways. If a team can cut you for underperforming to a signed contract, a player can ask for more for overperforming. Turn about is fair play is it not.

I dont mind teams cutting players at all if they are underperforming, so why should I mind a player holding out if they have a resonable issue with being underpaid?

 

[Pariah]

It goes both ways. If a team can cut you for underperforming to a signed contract, a player can ask for more for overperforming. Turn about is fair play is it not.

Well, if turn about really is fairplay, then Walker should have held out. He has no one to blame but himself, right?

I mean, if the Packers keep an underpreforming player at a high salary when everyone was say "cut him, he's no good," can they blame the player?

Look, I'm not saying I don't have sympathy for the kid--I do. But he's not going to be out on the street like you or I might be if we can't work anymore.

 

[joeshmo]

Well, if turn about really is fairplay, then Walker should have held out. He has no one to blame but himself, right?

But he had to show up to training camp and play in the games or not recieve his 50,000 game checks, risk even more being fined under the CBA, and maybe even playoff checks or pro bowl checks. He is already being underpiad in a football perspective which is how we need to look at it, and not the 9 to 5er perspective, which is how most of you are looking at. You really think a guy who is already being underpaid will miss out on his 50,000 game checks, I think not, its being stuck between a rock and a hard place.

I dont have sympathy for him at all but I do I see both sides of the playing field in a football biz perspective.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

He is already being underpaid in a football perspective which is how we need to look at it, and not the 9 to 5er perspective, which is how most of you are looking at.

He's being paid what he agreed to be paid. Period.

 

[Pariah]

But he had to show up to training camp and play in the games or not recieve his 50,000 game checks, risk even more being fined under the CBA, and maybe even playoff checks or pro bowl checks.

Yeah, that was his choice--show up and get paid what it stipulates in the contract you signed, or don't and not get paid. You think you're worth more, and if you are, the team will pay you more. That's the leverage the players have. If they overestimate their value (see Corey Simon), they won't get paid. If they are actually worth what they think, they will get paid.

I'm not looking at it from a 9 to 5 perspective. I'm looking at it from an NFL perspective. Those are his options and they're vastly different from anything in the "real world."

 

[duckfallas]

Yeah, it does. When you should have been making 10 or so + million.

Hey man, I'm paying you about a buck over minimum wage. You were doing a great job, but I wanted to wait and see if you could keep it up. If you kept it up, I'd give you twenty-five bucks an hour. Oh, but now you're hurt. So I won't give you a raise at all. But hey, you're still making above the poverty line, so I can't feel sorry for you (as I am not).

You may scoff at it, but it's not a question about, 'you should be happy with 750,000'. It should be 'you didn't get what you were worth'.

I mock you self-righteous boo-hooers, because you'd be crying just as hard if it was you.

No I wouldn't. I'd take the 750K, retire, and be happy.

 

[CardinalChris]

Will he manage, yes. Will he get what he is worth no. And that is the real deal behind this whole thing. I dont know about anyone else, but I want what I deserve at work as well, and it is all relaive according to what biz you are in, and Walker is in the Biz of Football which is exactly the perspective we need to look at this debate.

Not advocating he doesn't deserve it, but in the business of football, he was paid very well for his first 4 years. That business a low 1st rounder is what he was paid like. So if you use that arguement, he got what his industry dictates he should have made for that point in his career.

Now, fixing the system is another arguement. Like a few have said, this won't hurt him too much. Knee injuries like this are very possible to come back just as good as prior to it.

 

[joeshmo]

Not advocating he doesn't deserve it, but in the business of football, he was paid very well for his first 4 years. That business a low 1st rounder is what he was paid like. So if you use that arguement, he got what his industry dictates he should have made for that point in his career.

Yes, and no. He got paid at industry standards becuase of the draft slotting but he also out performed that contract and deserved even more according to industry standards, which gave him the right to hold out, which is also why I think a team has the right to cut a player for not playing up to his contract.

If someone does not mind teams cutting players for underperorming then there is no way you cannot agree with players wanting more money for outperforming their contracts either. Thats all i am saying. Now a player holding out and not deserving the pay raise is another issue all together.

 

[Stout]

No I wouldn't. I'd take the 750K, retire, and be happy.

Cool. Wanna buy some ocean front land in Kansas? No, really, I have it to sell. Trust me.

 

[Stout]

He's being paid what he agreed to be paid. Period.

Bull excrement. Level the playing field, and force the owners to be unable to terminate a contract, and THEN you can say that. Otherwise, you're siding with the owners and want to screw the players. It's got to be the same for both sides.

It boils down to the system being crap. How about a tiered system for both rookies and vets, with incentive plateaus to reward good players? That levels the salary scale. Then make it so either the team keeps the player for the length of the contract, or they cut the player but still have to pay out the deal. Sounds fair to me.

 

[duckfallas]

Sounds good to me! Let's make the base 750K and roll back ticket prices while we're at it.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

How come nobody is crying about the Cards not getting their money's worth out of Wendell Bryant, Thomas Jones, Tom Knight,or Andre Wadsworth? Guys who underperformed their contracts but were paid based on potential. It works both ways.I don't feel sorry one bit for Walker. How many millions did Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith get? Do you feel sorry for the Chargers or Bengals or the coaches who drafted them that are now fired?

 

[Stout]

How come nobody is crying about the Cards not getting their money's worth out of Wendell Bryant, Thomas Jones, Tom Knight,or Andre Wadsworth? Guys who underperformed their contracts but were paid based on potential. It works both ways.I don't feel sorry one bit for Walker. How many millions did Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith get? Do you feel sorry for the Chargers or Bengals or the coaches who drafted them that are now fired?

Um, YES, I do feel quite bad for them. And none of them, with the possible exception of Jones, played out their contracts. They underperformed, and were thus cut. So, if ownership can cut a player that has underperformed, a player that has overperformed should logically be allowed recourse to get what he's worth. Simple logic.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Um, YES, I do feel quite bad for them. And none of them, with the possible exception of Jones, played out their contracts. They underperformed, and were thus cut. So, if ownership can cut a player that has underperformed, a player that has overperformed should logically be allowed recourse to get what he's worth. Simple logic.

Yes, but their initial contract is based on potential. Walker fulfilled his and would have been rewarded once his current contract expired.But intially he was overpaid because he had done nothing in the NFL to earn his money. I guess it's just what your view is on how the system works.I don't blame players for trying to get the maximum amount of money.I just don't feel sorry for them when they don't.

 

[Stout]

Yes, but their initial contract is based on potential. Walker fulfilled his and would have been rewarded once his current contract expired.But intially he was overpaid because he had done nothing in the NFL to earn his money. I guess it's just what your view is on how the system works.I don't blame players for trying to get the maximum amount of money.I just don't feel sorry for them when they don't.

Personally, I don't feel sorry when overpaid players get cut, and I don't feel bad when underpaid players hold out.

 

[blindseyed]

It seems to me that players don't realize it's a priveledge not a right to play in the NFL. They out-perform a contract, fine...then the owners should step up and pay them what they're worth....after the contract. Stout lemme ask you, you walk into McDonalds and your the best fry guy on the block and out perform with your mad frying skills but you signed a deal that said you were gonna be paid $5/hr for 2 yrs to be that fry guy. After a year you make more fires than anybody and you say you're not coming back to Micky D's till you get a raise....what happens? You're fired. That's the REAL world! Athletes, owners and all this superman "Im better want more money need to feed my famuily BS" makes me feel sorry for no one NO ONE! I love football,I don't know these guys, they don't pay my bills So cry me a river cuz you can't make 4 million dollars this year but have to make your base of almost a Mil..

You pay me a Mil right now or even 750K, I can live the rest of my life. Im not saying he doesn't deserve the $$, I'm saying the whole things is a stupid discussion since normal everyday people like us have to work and make less monet in a year than they make for one game. Sorry your knee is busted up Javon, welcome to life.

 

[CardinalChris]

Yes, and no. He got paid at industry standards becuase of the draft slotting but he also out performed that contract and deserved even more according to industry standards, which gave him the right to hold out, which is also why I think a team has the right to cut a player for not playing up to his contract.

If someone does not mind teams cutting players for underperorming then there is no way you cannot agree with players wanting more money for outperforming their contracts either. Thats all i am saying. Now a player holding out and not deserving the pay raise is another issue all together.

I agree, and that is his choice. But to me it looks like GB wasn't going to shell out the huge money for him. So he was gonna play out his contract and get a big payday from somebody else next year. Again, how is this that bad for him? He will get his big payday. Anybody who thinks differently is fooling themselves about ACL injuries. So why I agree players should hold out if they want (and I have no problem with it) to say he's underpaid is silly. He's underpaid if GB wanted to keep him. BUT if they decide their business relationship will end after this year due to cost, it is fine for the team to force him to play out his more than suitable rookie contract and move on.

 

[CardinalChris]

Personally, I don't feel sorry when overpaid players get cut, and I don't feel bad when underpaid players hold out.

Yes, and remember if it wasn't for the cheap labor of 1st to 4th year player, the cap issue would be a mess. From a pure business sense the cheap labor allows for the more expensive contracts later in a player's career. Without it you get baseball. So I agree like you do that both players and trams have every right, but the notion that Walker is doomed is silly. He gets paid this year, will get his huge payday in the offseason from somebody and be right back where he would have been. Now, if he was playing and his leg fell off or something, the discussion is different. But he popped his ACL.