Why I side with players on contracts. Well said by both of "U"

Quote
jemach

The system is rigged against the players. They get tied into small contracts for years. The production outweighs the money.

Then, on the second contract, when the money paid matches the production from the years early in their career, they almost immediately start to produce less, primarily due to age/wear and tear.

Then...the pressure is on the player to survive because the money outweighs the production.

We could talk about the risk of injury as well. An Achilles rupture...and it's bye bye. They get at best a lousy injury settlement. There is no risk to the owner except for one component.

And it's that risk the players need to push to the max. The players can hang their hat on one thing. Guaranteed money. That $125 million contract...it means nothing. What matters...the $60 million guarantee. That is the real leverage for a player. In all other instances, their money is at risk.

In today's climate...the owners have little risk. The fans have little risk.

Robert Quinn may not be earning his dollars today. But how soon we forget he was vastly underpaid for years.

I get what you meant here in general but Quinn is not a good example imo... I believe Quinn was paid fairly according to his market value /production in his early years and got a raise fairly quickly while he was under his rookie contract..

NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport reported Quinn signed a new six-year, $65.6 million contract that will keep him in a Rams jersey through 2019, according to a source involved in the deal. The deal includes $41.2 million in guarantees. Quinn had two years left on his rookie contract, so the team essentially ripped up this year and next for the new six-year deal.
[www.nfl.com]

What have you done for me lately?
As you know jemach, this statement will never change and it complies with all walks in the corporate business/sports world.

Quote
Billy_T
I side with them in relative terms. As in, I'd much rather see them get the money than the boys in suits. At the same time, I'm against the concentration of wealth at the top. So I'd much rather all of it be shared broadly, all the way down to the towel staff.

I'd rather have egalitarian structures that radically shrink that gap. To me, a just, fair, moral and thriving society requires much, much higher wages for the bottom, and much, much lower wages for the top.

And multi-million dollar salaries have to come from somewhere. All of that impacts salaries and prices elsewhere. Radically increase salaries at the top, and they have to be lowered somewhere else. And/or prices have to go up. They can't keep rising without repercussions. Money doesn't grow on . . . . etc. etc.