Pollack slotted

[redsfan2]

Reporting on Bengals.com that James ( #18 ) has signed in Minnesota. with Johnson ( #16 ) already being signed in Houston, it would seem that the cards are all on the table. The numbers are what they are, and now we get to see for sure whether this is a hold out or a hold up.

If this has already been posted, Sorry ........ but I didn't see it.

[Michigan Bengal]

If Pollack doesn't sign by the end of the week then forget him. Trade his rights to Cleveland or release him and let him enter next year's draft. I'm sick of these greedy players holding out. It's why I have almost stopped watching the NFL. These players complain about making millions for playing a game, while 99.9% of people are out there working 9 to 5 busting their butts for much less than even the rookie minimum. Pollack hasn't played a down in the NFL and he wants huge money. The Bengals are already offering him 10 million dollars and that's STILL not enough for him! Don't offer him one cent more. Let him go back to Snellville and sit out a year and then see how much another team is willing to pay him.

[DontPushMe]

These players complain about making millions for playing a game, while 99.9% of people are out there working 9 to 5 busting their butts for much less than even the rookie minimum.

Such a foolish, yet commonly used comment. The reason 99.9% of the people make below the rookie minimum, is because they are just another face in the crowd. They all offer nothing that stands out, nothing that couldnt be easily found with someone else. The difference between that, and an NFL player, is an NFL player offers a service that almost no one else in the league can match. THAT is why they get paid more then the 9-5ers.

And he complains because he CAN. Since you love comparing world class athletes to average joes. Would you take a pay cut to work more? I HIGHLY doubt it.

[Kazkal]

And he complains because he CAN. Since you love comparing world class athletes to average joes. Would you take a pay cut to work more? I HIGHLY doubt it.

I know i'd be pissed...I'm sure alot of people would play for alotless money then pollack because they love the sport so much,but then again none of them would be good so it would be wasting money

[jjakq27]

These players complain about making millions for playing a game, while 99.9% of people are out there working 9 to 5 busting their butts for much less than even the rookie minimum.

Such a foolish, yet commonly used comment. The reason 99.9% of the people make below the rookie minimum, is because they are just another face in the crowd. They all offer nothing that stands out, nothing that couldnt be easily found with someone else. The difference between that, and an NFL player, is an NFL player offers a service that almost no one else in the league can match. THAT is why they get paid more then the 9-5ers.

And he complains because he CAN. Since you love comparing world class athletes to average joes. Would you take a pay cut to work more? I HIGHLY doubt it.

I have a hard time comprehending a "pay cut" that is three to four times what I make in a year. Therefore don't expect the rest of us Average Joes to feel sorry for the guy.

Hopefully this is it. Let's get this guy in here and see what he can do. Hopefully he can contribute at some point early in the season.

[HoosierCat]

I have a hard time comprehending a "pay cut" that is three to four times what I make in a year.  Therefore don't expect the rest of us Average Joes to feel sorry for the guy.

With all due respect, jj, what would Pollack have gotten had he bowed to the "average Joes" and signed the Bengals' offer?

Ripped off, that's what.

The numbers have come in on the James deal. Per Hobson, the overall figure is $9.8 million, several hundred grand higher than the Bengals' reported $9.5 million (and putting Pollack's slot's total at about $10 million, where it seemed it ought to have been in the first place).

Guaranteed money is $7.37 million per Hobson, who adds that he believes that Pollack was seeking a bit over $7 million guaranteed while the Bengals were looking to guarantee less than $7 million.

Maybe, just maybe...everybody ought to get off the kid's back. From what we have heard about Pollack's deal, and what we've now heard of James' deal, it looks very much like your typical Bengals lowball offer.

[membengal]

I have a hard time comprehending a "pay cut" that is three to four times what I make in a year.  Therefore don't expect the rest of us Average Joes to feel sorry for the guy.

With all due respect, jj, what would Pollack have gotten had he bowed to the "average Joes" and signed the Bengals' offer?

Ripped off, that's what.

The numbers have come in on the James deal. Per Hobson, the overall figure is $9.8 million, several hundred grand higher than the Bengals' reported $9.5 million (and putting Pollack's slot's total at about $10 million, where it seemed it ought to have been in the first place).

Guaranteed money is $7.37 million per Hobson, who adds that he believes that Pollack was seeking a bit over $7 million guaranteed while the Bengals were looking to guarantee less than $7 million.

Maybe, just maybe...everybody ought to get off the kid's back. From what we have heard about Pollack's deal, and what we've now heard of James' deal, it looks very much like your typical Bengals lowball offer.

What I have thought all along is that the Pollack haters and the Mike Brown haters should all just chill and the let the process work itself out. Which it will. But good lord a lot of keypads have been pounded screaming at stuff that is beyond everyone's control.

The truth is in the middle of the two camps...the Bengals want the best deal possible because they want as much cap flexability as possible to re-sign players the next few years, can't blame them for that. Pollack wants the best deal possible because, as Adam Kieft reminds, one wrong turn and so much promise can be delayed. Can't blame him for that.

The reality is that somewhere between those two needs lies a number. They will get there. The rest of this is just so much screaming into the wind.

[skyline]

From what we have heard about Pollack's deal, and what we've now heard of James' deal, it looks very much like your typical Bengals lowball offer.

... or the Vikings caved and gave James way too much.

[HoosierCat]

What I have thought all along is that the Pollack haters and the Mike Brown haters should all just chill and the let the process work itself out. Which it will. But good lord a lot of keypads have been pounded screaming at stuff that is beyond everyone's control.

I agree completely. My initial reaction was to advise people to sit back and have another drink, that Pollack would be here when he'd be here. But the Pollack-bashing got so bad -- at least in MHO -- that I got sucked away from the bar and back to the keyboard. I tried to caution everyone that the Bengals weren't exactly known for open-handed generosity in rookie contract negotiations and that maybe we should wait before jumping on Pollack. But no one wanted to hear it -- especially after the Bengals, via Blackburn, initiated their little public disinformation campaign with the bit about him demanding a richer deal than the guy ahead of him.

But in any event...it's all water under the bridge now. Deals on both sides of Pollack are done, and neither his agent nor the Bengals have much to argue about anymore. Split the difference, sign the deal, call it a day, and get the kid to camp while there's still some time left.

[derekshank]

These players complain about making millions for playing a game, while 99.9% of people are out there working 9 to 5 busting their butts for much less than even the rookie minimum.

Such a foolish, yet commonly used comment. The reason 99.9% of the people make below the rookie minimum, is because they are just another face in the crowd. They all offer nothing that stands out, nothing that couldnt be easily found with someone else. The difference between that, and an NFL player, is an NFL player offers a service that almost no one else in the league can match. THAT is why they get paid more then the 9-5ers.

And he complains because he CAN. Since you love comparing world class athletes to average joes. Would you take a pay cut to work more? I HIGHLY doubt it.

Way to be DPM... I agree completely.

The average athlete makes less money than the average 9-5 worker, because the play on semi-pro teams, or over-seas where they make crap in the way of money.

So to complain that the best athletes in the world make a lot of money is like complaining that the best teachers in the world are making millions working at a university and publishing books, while your average high-school teacher is only making 40k/year.

He has been slotted, and hopefully he gets in soon... but stop talking about greed here. Most times it's about respect and getting a fair deal, not getting ripped off for all you've worked for. He'll be in, lets stop whining.

[skyline]

ESPNs little scroll thingy during sportscenter said James signed a 7 year deal. That can't be right.

It's for 5 years, isn't it?

[HoosierCat]

It's a 7-year deal that voids to 5. Yet another wrinkle of the type the bengals hate.

[BlackJesus]

When will the Dumb Polak sign?

Nobody has a Clue

[markymark69]

I have a hard time comprehending a "pay cut" that is three to four times what I make in a year.  Therefore don't expect the rest of us Average Joes to feel sorry for the guy.

With all due respect, jj, what would Pollack have gotten had he bowed to the "average Joes" and signed the Bengals' offer?

Ripped off, that's what.

The numbers have come in on the James deal. Per Hobson, the overall figure is $9.8 million, several hundred grand higher than the Bengals' reported $9.5 million (and putting Pollack's slot's total at about $10 million, where it seemed it ought to have been in the first place).

Guaranteed money is $7.37 million per Hobson, who adds that he believes that Pollack was seeking a bit over $7 million guaranteed while the Bengals were looking to guarantee less than $7 million.

Maybe, just maybe...everybody ought to get off the kid's back. From what we have heard about Pollack's deal, and what we've now heard of James' deal, it looks very much like your typical Bengals lowball offer.

9.5 million for five years. Where can I sign to be ripped off like that!!!!!!!!!

[BengalPappaw]

If Pollack doesn't sign by the end of the week then forget him. Trade his rights to Cleveland or release him and let him enter next year's draft. I'm sick of these greedy players holding out. It's why I have almost stopped watching the NFL. These players complain about making millions for playing a game, while 99.9% of people are out there working 9 to 5 busting their butts for much less than even the rookie minimum. Pollack hasn't played a down in the NFL and he wants huge money. The Bengals are already offering him 10 million dollars and that's STILL not enough for him! Don't offer him one cent more. Let him go back to Snellville and sit out a year and then see how much another team is willing to pay him.

The GREEDY one is MIKEE BROWN -- if you read the article the rest of the first round players are getting 15% increases over last years -- But the CHEAP A** Brown is only offering 10%.

I want Pollack here more than most -- because I believe he is difference between a 9-7 (without him) and the 10-6 (with him)

Pollack is an upgrade at OLB over Johnson -- if you don't believe that listen to ML comments. Marvin said that Johnson is back (at OLB) where he would have been had the Bengals not drafted Pollack.

IMO Pollack is a special player and should be here is the Bengals managment weren't playing their usual games with not paying the draft choices what they should in the beginning.

The good news is that the Bengals usual come thru and pay the player -- BUT after the players have lost the training they need in the camp. That means Pollack's usefulness this coming year is reduce because MIKEE want to be CHEAP!!! AGAIN!!!

[The_Next_Big_Thing]

The GREEDY one is MIKEE BROWN -- if you read the article the rest of the first round players are getting 15% increases over last years -- But the CHEAP A** Brown is only offering 10%.

The Bengals are offering a raise but are staying within the rookie pool so as not to be penalized. The Bengals are offering a raise but trying to save as much money as they can so that they can try to extend one of the plethora of 2006 Unrestricted Free Agents we have.

Perhaps Mike Brown is being cheap, but he's not being Greedy. If he was, you would be watching the Los Angeles Bengals, or the Baltimore Bengals, not the Cincinnati Bengals. You wouldn't have some of the CHEAPEST ticket prices in the league.

Better a cheapass than a dumbass!

[Jet23]

Wasn't the Agent for James waiting for Pollack to sign? I guess they finally gave up. I was blaming Pollack, but now I have to put this squarely on the Bengals. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Still tripping over dollars trying to pick up nickles...

[HoosierCat]

The Bengals are offering a raise but are staying within the rookie pool so as not to be penalized.

How did everyone else manage to give a 15% raise and stay within the bounds of the rookie pool -- except us?

The Bengals are offering a raise but trying to save as much money as they can so that they can try to extend one of the plethora of 2006 Unrestricted Free Agents we have.

Increasing Pollack's cap hit in 2006 by 100k (and it'd probably be less) won't have any appreciable impact on our ability to re-sign anyone.

[HairOnFire]

How did everyone else manage to give a 15% raise and stay within the bounds of the rookie pool --  except us?

Thurman's five-year deal and the higher signing bonus that came with it?

[HoosierCat]

How did everyone else manage to give a 15% raise and stay within the bounds of the rookie pool --  except us?

Thurman's five-year deal and the higher signing bonus that came with it?

There were other 5-year deals in the second round.

But even if that's the case, why should Pollack be financially penalized because the Blackburns gave Thurman too much?

[The_Next_Big_Thing]

How did everyone else manage to give a 15% raise and stay within the bounds of the rookie pool --  except us?

Thurman's five-year deal and the higher signing bonus that came with it?

There were other 5-year deals in the second round.

But even if that's the case, why should Pollack be financially penalized because the Blackburns gave Thurman too much?

How is he being penalized? He's making MILLIONS. He's not being penalized because his partner is being paid too much but because the Bengals drafted first round talent in the first THREE rounds and paid accordingly in order to get longer term deals.

[HoosierCat]

How is he being penalized? He's making MILLIONS.

So?

If the Bengals offer is half a million bucks short of the slot -- and they've budgeted $9.5 million, per Troy, for a slot thats turned out to be worth $10 million -- why should he accept?

$500,000 is a lot of money, isn't it?

As for the whole bit about Thurman et. al. costing more, as I recall, everyone else was slotted, too, right?

Basically, your whole argument comes down to: Pollack shouldn't fight over a few hundred thousand because he already has millions. Which makes absolutely no sense.

[ArmyBengal]

I'm in the middle on this one... I hate Pollack for not being in camp, but understand he's looking out for his best interest. I hate the Bengals for not getting the contract done in a timely manner, but understand there is more to this than just paying someone.

Pollack will get done sooner or later and will get trained up, per ML. He's not going to be a starter and I'm happy about that. Landon will do great while Pollack learns the ropes.

Lets remember the team still has to figure the upcoming problems with the CBA and is trying to keep us out of salary cap hell. I for one don't mind taking some time to figure out how to make it work without jeopardizing the future of the team.

WHODEY !!!

[BengalByTheBay]

From what we have heard about Pollack's deal, and what we've now heard of James' deal, it looks very much like your typical Bengals lowball offer.

... or the Vikings caved and gave James way too much.

There's plenty of blame here to go around. However, the Bengals appear to have misplayed the waiting game, so they have no one to blame but themselves for the Vikings having caved to James. They could've compromised a little and reached a deal first which probably would have helped the Vikes get a better run at James. They waited and the Vikes caved and they have to live with the results. Without making a value judgment -- that's just the way it worked out. As a strategy, bad move.

Having rectified the mistake of naming DP a starter -- the team's leverage will not be any better than it is now. The deal should be made because it will only get worse from here.

Choosing between who is more greedy as between an NFL owner and a player's agent is a little like deciding whether you would rather be killed by a bear or a lion. There's plenty of greed to go around.

[DontPushMe]

How is he being penalized? He's making MILLIONS.

Next time you ask for a raise, haggle a price down, or do something to get the price of something you are buying down, just think, theres probly someone in a 3rd world country thinking. "Why does he care about a couple dollars, hes making THOUSANDS!"