Contract Debate

[BengalBobNC]

It was reported recently that Mike McKenzie, CB, Green Bay, reported to the team to play. After all, he is currently under contract to play for the Packers and has had $161k in salary withheld. Must be nice not to care about a "slap in the face" $161,000! (That is for one week!)

McKenzie became upset when several cornerbacks that he considered of lesser talent surpassed him in compensation. McKenzie is entering the third season of a five-year, $17.1 million contract he signed in January 2002.

SI Full Story

I am so sick of hearing about these guys, who are under contract, holding out for more money (Erik Dickerson was a master of the holdout). If the contract was good when you signed it, it is good through the full term. If you want new deals every year, then only sign a one year contract and pray you do not get hurt. Or get an insurance policy. They expect the owners to honor the terms of a contract. Shouldn't the owners get the same in return?

Exceptions can be noted I'm sure.

Which team was it added a "no holdout" clause in Dickerson's contract and he did it anyway, or threatened retirement? Wasn't that the Colts?

[membengal]

I tend to cut these particular guys some slack. Since NFL contracts are not guaranteed, getting what you can when you can make some sense. NFL teams don't have to "honor" contracts, they can cut anyone at any time. This is an NFL players only real leverage back. So if McCardell or McKenzie try for a better deal, well, so be it.

[BengalBobNC]

Since NFL contracts are not guaranteed, getting what you can when you can make some sense.

Agents are getting guaranteed money for their clients all the time. In this day and age of free agents and salary caps, it just bugs me. I see your point and I do not fault a player for getting what they think they are worth, but that is what he did when he signed that contract. Now, 3 yrs into it, he wants more. Sometimes I think they just don't want to go through training camp, because he is back now with no mention in that article of a new contract.

[membengal]

I hear you, I do. But that same team three years into a five year contract can cut a guy if they wish, so, McCardell pushing back for more at this point seems somehow fair to me. Bucs really should have met him halfway in my estimation.

Bengals deserve some huge props here, by the way. For all the s**t Mike Brown takes, that was a first class move they made one year ago, extending CJ's contract and tossing all that up front money to him. The Bengals dealt with him fairly, and, in so doing, ensured his loyalty, and I would imagine, engendered some good will in the locker room. CJ was undervalued under the contract he signed as a rookie, and the Bengals addressed it before it became an issue. That may have been one of the biggest indications that things were headed in a better direction last year.

[BengalBobNC]

True on both statements.

I know very little about contracts. The only thing I can think of is Ki-Jana Carter. We couldn't cut him, trade him or release him. Which makes me think there are contracts that owners have to honor. Otherwise Carter would've been gone and not cost us anything. With that in mind I'd have to think if a team cuts a player they are still paying for the term of the contract. Unless there is a non-football injury clause or something.

It's all too complicated for me. I'm just glad we do not/did not have any lengthy holdouts this year.

[skyline]

I agree that the McKenzie thing is absurd.

I'm a logical person, and if I use the logical part of my mind, I'd end up agreeing with membengal. He's just trying to get what he's worth. Fair enough.

The emotional side of me, though, gets tied up in knots over this stuff. You signed a contract, now honor it. That's what way I was raised, and I'd like to think that if I were making millions, I wouldn't hurt my team (or company...whatever) in order to make myself just that much richer. I'm a teacher for crying out loud. If I had the mindset of some of these holdout players, my students wouldn't be taught by me for quite some time...

[membengal]

Without getting into it too deep, the reason cutting a player affects teams are if he got a bunch of "up front" money. If so, then cutting him means that whatever they paid him up front is proportionally accelerated into the year he is cut. So a guy who got a $10 million dollar bonus up front over a five year contract, well, if he is cut in year three, a certain percentage of that bonus, maybe as much as 50% gets counted against the team's cap for that year. It's why you might hang on to a guy rather than cut him. But the guy who is cut? He gets nothing. He only has what he as already been paid.

It's why trading Dillon couldn't happen during the year last year, for instance. It's why next year's free agency for Cincy should be so much better...lots of "dead money" comes off the books.

But the cut guy still stops getting money.

[BengalBobNC]

But the cut guy still stops getting money.

Just like I don't like a guy holding out while under contract I think owners should honor the contract as well. BUT, if the owners don't have to honor the contract, then more power to the player risking career ending knee injuries to get more money. An owner's career isn't over if they destroy their ACL.

[kevnz]

I think sometimes a player has a right to hold out. If they signed a contract at a certain rate, but then there level of play increases past their current pay rate, then yeah, it's time to talk about getting a raise. If for instance in your job, they like what you do and give you more responsibility because you showed you can handle it, then wouldn't you ask for a raise? If you are being paid like a backup but starting, then you should go hey, I need more money now, I'm starting and I'm one injury away from never playing again.

But players already getting the big money and want to start holding out, well screw that. Like when When Ricky Williams "retired" then said he'd come back for more money after he had already been given a new contract a couple of years ago. That's the kinda spoiled rich brat attitude I don't like. But with McKenzie he should be pissed at his agent (he did fire him) not the team. But if you look at Keenan McCardell then I think he's got a real gripe. He signed on to be a #3 or #2 at best WR, but he is his teams #1 WR now and he should get a raise.

[jditty47]

move this to nfl forum.

[CTBengalsFan]

more rich people unsatisfied with 3 million a year.

i think mccardell's is the most ridiculous... he isn't that good. i don't think he deserves any more money than he's getting. he ain't gettin any younger...