There is an implication in this article that the QB has the upper hand regardless of contracts and there is a little a team can do about it. Nonsense.
First, new contracts can be written to include language to account for this trend of QBs that just decide they want to move and ignore their contractual obligations. FA was designed for this purpose. Rogers bypassed FA for more money to stay.
Second, a team with cajones can just say "no". If the player under contract wants to sit out... or retire.... and lose millions, so be it. Rogers for instance. Don't ever think it's not about the money. Of course it's about the money...... lots of guaranteed money. So..... let him decide if he wants to sit at home and pout and lose near $3 mil for every week he does, or come to work. And if he comes but malingers, that's covered too in standard contract language (I can't imagine a contract without it).
Frankly we can call this trend "business". But if it is business for the player, it's also business for the team. Draft picks for elite QBs is not fair compensation; it's a loser for the team that loses the elite player. I don't care if it was 4 1st rounders.
I hope Green Bay holds Rogers' feet to the fire. But.....if you're Houston, what do you do? Do you really want to be strapped to a guy as nuclear hot as Watson? A PR nightmare? And who would want him even if he didn't wind up going to jail but only paid a lot of compensation to the women involved to satisfy them? If he was a RB or almost any other position, the solution is easy. But a very good young QB? Yikes.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2021 11:02AM by RockRam.
