Comments on: “Offset” language could be an issue for top eight contracts

By: makeham98

makeham98 — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 12:57:26 +0000

The rookie pay scale was created through collective bargaining. The veterans wanted more of the money being paid to rookies as much as the owners wanted to end the ridiculous contracts that were out there.

By: soundslikehail

soundslikehail — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 07:36:30 +0000

Yep. I’m now going to manufacture some outrage based on whether I associate more with a nfl owner, or an athelete. My preference will have a political aire, and I will imply that the people onthe other side (of this preposterous argument) are stupid. This is in contrast to my strident, yet equally absurd, emotional reaction to my “side”. A side I have, and never will be on. I am, after all, an avid consumer of football. I will pay for any jersey, ticket, or sports package. I just want my nothing life to have some greater purpose: posting meaningless, unheard comments regarding subject I neither have stake in nor fully understand. I do so with confidence. Anyone need life insurance?

By: piemasteruk

piemasteruk — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 06:28:42 +0000

Is it me or are the agents and NFL lawyers just trying to create work for themselves to justify their existence in what should now be a very straightforward process?

By: applecool1981

applecool1981 — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 03:38:42 +0000

This is ridiculous. I understand the whole rookie wage scale as no players should come from college and make as much as Tom Brady without even stepping on the NFL field yet. However, the teams are getting these guys dirt cheap and are actually able to cut them plus in some circumstances be off the hook for the signing bonus if said player decides to continue his career and earn a living with another team. When the shoe is on the other foot, and a player is being underpaid by their rookie contract in comparison to their production, the team will be getting off basically scot-free there too and worse that their moronic fans will be telling the player to honor their contract despite the fact that teams are trying to haggle their way out of them now before the player has even signed.

By: thegreatgabbert

thegreatgabbert — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 01:51:27 +0000

The extra $1 million is to “offset” moving expenses.

By: ranadicus

ranadicus — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 01:39:32 +0000

I wonder how long it will take for the players to realize how badly they got hosed in the new CBA and thereafter to dump the clearly inept Demaurice Smith. Then again it’s their own fault to begin with. This is what you get when you vote for the guy who shouts the loudest.

By: DCBlueStar

DCBlueStar — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 00:17:43 +0000

Well… I don’t think that’s the case for the Cowboys and Claiborne. Being a Cowboy fan, you know I check in on the news every once in a while.

The Cowboys have always taken their time to sign their players, and this season they were waiting for Newmans “June 1st” designation cap space to clear up.

Our draft picks will probably signed by mid June.

By: pftstory

pftstory — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 00:12:49 +0000

I still dont get this. In the NFL, if one team makes a bad deal with a draft pick every team that picked before them has to suffer with worse terms than that deal. (works the other way too, player makes the bad deal, the other players suffer.)

If the Panthers are not conderned with the offset, or feel they got something in return for excluding it, why can’t the eight teams before them come to their own conclusions?

By: covercorner

covercorner — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 00:11:24 +0000

The owners have a new way to gyp the players out of money.