Not alot of difference from the private sector.
You hire an executive and negotiate on salary, bonuses etc..
That's your bad if you agree to pay that executive $1M in salary and not tie most of the earnings as pay for performance instead.
Then most likely there is a termination clause that pays out the exec for early termination.
The exec can loaf around and not perform... you can fire that person.. but then probably will need to payout the termination clause.
At the end of the day, 2 parties entered into a contract....
Pay for performance type contracts can be both a win win for the Player and company.
But it has to be lucrative enough for the Player.
At the same time, there is competition for talent. If the player is offered $10M guaranteed vs $10M pay for performance, it's a no brainer which one anyone would choose. So the organization is at fault for having a player friendly contract, which they had to do as they are competing against other teams who are also offering player friendly contract.
People made at the player, should really be mad at the organization.
