Carson Palmer Thread

[BengalszoneBilly]

It's NOT punitive. In fact, what Brown is doing doesn't even meet the definition of punishment.

Well Mike Browns record as owner is punishing me. It's dismal at best. Why do you keep defending this loser?

[HairOnFire]

Why do you keep defending this loser?

Because guys like you continue to attack the man for the wrong reasons.

The man is a punching bag. And in some ways I admit he's a card-carrying loser.

But for lack of a better word I say he's being betrayed.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Why do you keep defending this loser?

Because guys like you continue to attack the man for the wrong reasons.

The man is a punching bag. And in some ways I admit he's a card-carrying loser.

But for lack of a better word I say he's being betrayed.

Wrong reasons!?! There is only one reason Mike is on my s**t list. His record as an owner. The place where the buck stops.

Give me one solid reason why I shouldn't betray him. I feel he's betrayed us. I feel he's only in this for financial gain for himself and his family. I feel winning isn't his highest priority. I feel he's only going through the motions of running a franchise, and I feel we'll never go anywhere as long as he's in charge.

Need I go on? He's nothing close to what his father was. God I wish he was, but that will never happen.

[HoosierCat]

But more specifically, that signing bonus was a prepayment for services he would be expected to make in the contracts final years.

Indeed, those are the rules of the NFL -- as long as teams don't amortize the bonus money early. Once that's done, the money becomes payment for services delivered. Which is why the Bengals can't go after Carson for a portion of his signing bonus. The Bengals wrote off the money early in order to use up cap space over the last few years and spend less actual cash. By the NFL's own rules, Palmer isn't walking away with a single dime he didn't earn.

[HairOnFire]

Give me one solid reason why I shouldn't betray him [Mike Brown].

Because he won't notice if you do.

We're not talking about you. You're not under contract. You haven't signed a legal document that strictly and purposefully limits the conditions and location of where you can work for the next four years. You haven't pocketed tens of millions of dollars paid specifically because of your willingness to be paid and treated in accordance with the way any player considered to be a core building block would be treated.

[HairOnFire]

But more specifically, that signing bonus was a prepayment for services he would be expected to make in the contracts final years.

Indeed, those are the rules of the NFL -- as long as teams don't amortize the bonus money early. Once that's done, the money becomes payment for services delivered. Which is why the Bengals can't go after Carson for a portion of his signing bonus. The Bengals wrote off the money early in order to use up cap space over the last few years and spend less actual cash. By the NFL's own rules, Palmer isn't walking away with a single dime he didn't earn.

Please forgive, but how is any of your response relevant? Amortizing expenses is an accounting tool, right? Nobody would actually argue it was a valid excuse for moral douchebaggery, would they?

Would you?

Haven't we been over this already? Didn't we beat this to death months ago? Didn't we all agree to agree how neither side owes the other side any money. But nor do they owe each other any considerations in regards to the other important things that make up a legal contract.

For example, the length or term of the contract.

Mike Brown isn't asking for Palmer to return a single penny. And to date, Carson Palmer hasn't complained about the amount of money he's being paid. In fact, the only time money has been mentioned is when Palmer crowed about how much he already has, and how the security it brings actually makes it easier for Palmer to walk away from a contract he once willingly and happily signed.

[HoosierCat]

Nobody would actually argue it was a valid excuse for moral douchebaggery, would they?

At the risk of repeating myself, "moral douchbaggery" is what the NFL is built on. Nothing in Carson's contract prevented him from walking away any time he liked, nor did it prevent the Bengals from showing him the door whenever they wanted.

[HairOnFire]

Nobody would actually argue it was a valid excuse for moral douchebaggery, would they?

At the risk of repeating myself, "moral douchbaggery" is what the NFL is built on. Nothing in Carson's contract prevented him from walking away any time he liked, nor did it prevent the Bengals from showing him the door whenever they wanted.

If you're defending Carson Palmer's right to retire, and you seem to be doing just that, I'll promptly point out how Palmer's right to retire has never been in dispute by anyone. In fact, I believe the very source of your latest complaint is based upon the Bengals willingness to acknowledge Palmer's rights, as well as his actions, and act accordingly.

Let's face the facts.

Your tired trade Palmer rant is based upon acknowledging Palmer's right to retire AND the seemingly contradictory fact that retirement isn't Palmer's ultimate goal. Rather, we all acknowledge how Palmer is using the threat of retirement as leverage in his attempt to break a contract that still has four years remaining. And there's the rub because Palmer's contract dispute isn't over money. It's over term of service, and he doesn't have a gimpy leg to stand on.

Any further rantings about amortization will amount to little more than a gob of warm spit. It's simply not relevant. Furthermore, the matter of signing bonuses is relevant only as a way of demonstrating how Palmer has already been compensated for the risk of being cut/released/traded. And yeah, in return for that compensation Palmer agreed to a 7-year contract extension that gave the Bengals control over where he could play.

Frankly, I see no valid reason to even discuss money matters when debating the Palmer Problem unless someone wants to guess how much franchise value the Bengals lost the moment Palmer's threats became public. And obviously the only reason I bring it up now is because so many of you seem oddly confused about the reasons Mike Brown might refuse to reward Palmer.

[HoosierCat]

Nobody would actually argue it was a valid excuse for moral douchebaggery, would they?

At the risk of repeating myself, "moral douchbaggery" is what the NFL is built on. Nothing in Carson's contract prevented him from walking away any time he liked, nor did it prevent the Bengals from showing him the door whenever they wanted.

If you're defending Carson Palmer's right to retire,

Nope, just that nothing prevents him from walking away, whatever his reasons -- money, a trade, retirement, etc. Palmer isn't the first player to do it, and he won't be the last, because NFL contracts are founded on falsehood. Both sides know the other side will walk away the minute the deal is no longer in their interest.

[membengal]

Who is saying anything prevents him from walking away? Of course hr can do that. But when he does that, he doesn't get to control what happens next, other than being first in line for the evening buffet line at Golden Corral.

[Sea Ray]

The only Palmer discussions worthy of debate at this point center around his trade value, not money, and whether it behooves the Bengals to trade him. In my mind I only trade him now if some team is willing to cough up a nice package that starts with a 1st rounder. I do re-evaluate this after the 2011 season. My guess is Mike Brown will be more willing to trade him then after "teaching him a lesson" by losing a year off his career

[HairOnFire]

Who is saying anything prevents him from walking away? Of course he can do that.

Arguing points that aren't in dispute by anyone is a Hoosier specialty.

If I was forced to guess what point Hoosier is attempting to make, but won't actually come right out and say, is because Palmer doesn't owe the Bengals any of the money he's already been paid it can be argued that some portion, if not the bulk of the contract has been satisfied. That even if the terms and conditions included in the contract haven't been met....the moral obligation has been. Obviously none of this is even remotely true, and it's certainly not true in a very binding legal sense. But Hoosier seems prepared to argue that close enough is good enough.

Furthermore, I believe Hoosier is asking the reader to ignore the matter of four years remaining on Palmer's contract by claiming ALL NFL contracts are dishonestly written and can be ignored by either party should selfish reasoning give them enough incentive to do so. Obviously, that isn't true either. But once again, for some of us close enough is good enough.

Frankly, when discussing all matters Palmer I don't think there are many points left for debate. Most of those who loudly demand Mike Brown trade Palmer do so only after admitting that Palmer is responsible for his actions and deserves no further consideration from the Bengals. But so what, you ask? Cold logic and hard facts have no place in a debate where the fate of tasty peanuts are at stake, right?

Wrong.

[derekshank]

Frankly, when discussing all matters Palmer I don't think there are many points left for debate.

It's true. But...

[derekshank]

...we're only...

[derekshank]

...680 posts...

[derekshank]

...away from...

[derekshank]

...100 pages!

[HoosierCat]

Who is saying anything prevents him from walking away? Of course hr can do that. But when he does that, he doesn't get to control what happens next, other than being first in line for the evening buffet line at Golden Corral.

And who's saying that he ought to be in control of what happens next? Quite obviously, he isn't, Mike Brown is. Thats the crux of the matter. The only question is whether to cling to him, or trade him and move on.

[cincyhokie]

When this is all said and done, let's print out all 100+ pages and meet up somewhere and burn this sucker. With a few beers. Or we could roll it up and smoke it.

I'll be glad when it's over. I abstain, I get sucked back in, I abstain, I get sucked back in.

[HoosierCat]

Furthermore, I believe Hoosier is asking the reader to ignore the matter of four years remaining on Palmer's contract by claiming ALL NFL contracts are dishonestly written and can be ignored by either party should selfish reasoning give them enough incentive to do so. Obviously, that isn't true either.

Yeah, it is.

[HairOnFire]

Well, I don't think there's any doubt about whether this thread will eventually become 100 pages long. After all, the very same people who now insist it's Carson Palmer's right to retire are the very same ones who refuse to accept any scenario where the team actually treats Palmer as if he had retired.

IMHO you can't work you way through bulls**t like that overnight.

[BengalByTheBay]

I abstain, I get sucked back in, I abstain, I get sucked back in.

puff puff give

[blueridge]

Another Bengals message board is rampant with some rumor that something may be imminent with Carson Palmer. This is really based on some tweets by Willie Anderson. I don't buy it, but that's not stopping me from spreading the f**king rumor. So there.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Another Bengals message board is rampant with some rumor that something may be imminent with Carson Palmer. This is really based on some tweets by Willie Anderson. I don't buy it, but that's not stopping me from spreading the f**king rumor. So there.

God I hope it's a trade for a player of value.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

God I hope it's a trade for a player of value.

We'll see, but I'm not holding my breath. Who's still in play - Dolphins?