But you did make my point.
Is not guaranteed money (or lack of it) one of several contract terms? Should a team not have to pay the guaranteed money if the club decides they're paying the player too much and cuts them?
Of course a club isn't going to give all it's players "guaranteed money". That is reserved as a bargaining point for those who are good enough to have it agreed to in their contracts. And for teams to hold out as a carrot for those players they really want.
You just want these risks to all be on the club. You want a player to be able to ditch his contract terms, but the club can't.
I have no issues with a player that gets a massive contract whereby teams are stuck with it ACCORDING TO THE CONTRACT TERMS (Jared Goff, anyone?). But, when a player does very well under a current and agreed to contract and deems he will NOT honor it ACCORDING TO THE CONTRACT TERMS, you seem to think it is ethical and moral for him to do so and the team and all of us fans should just wink and nod and applaud this player.
I don't. It's cheating. It's refusing to do what you agreed to do for the price you agreed to do it. And all because you're a football player.
Wait until the contract has been fulfilled.... or if the club wants to be sure they don't lose you, they tear up the old deal for a better one before it expires... that is fair and ethical.
