NFL Off-Season Thread

[JDailey23]

There has been no argument to suggest it contributes to “parity” at all.

Stripping the rights away from players and allowing teams the luxury of forcing them into contracts doesn’t contribute to parity, it just contributes to inequity for players.

If the argument is just baseless projection that everyone would just go play in “large markets,” in spite of overwhelming evidence and systematic salary cap constraints in place to prevent it, then I’d love to hear it.

Worked for Cousins

 

[JDailey23]

There has been no argument to suggest it contributes to “parity” at all.

Stripping the rights away from players and allowing teams the luxury of forcing them into contracts doesn’t contribute to parity, it just contributes to inequity for players.

If the argument is just baseless projection that everyone would just go play in “large markets,” in spite of overwhelming evidence and systematic salary cap constraints in place to prevent it, then I’d love to hear it.

The NBA is garbage because all the little teams have no shot. When Bron has left, the Cavs became shit.
OKC, crap when Durant left.
Magic, crap when Shaq and then Howard left.

 

[AZ_]

Worked for Cousins

Cousins left as a free agent, after two years in which he had zero rights as a franchise player.

The NBA is garbage because all the little teams have no shot. When Bron has left, the Cavs became shit.
OKC, crap when Durant left.
Magic, crap when Shaq and then Howard left.

Sucks for them. That’s the NBA.

Just because you want them chained to a city for their career, doesn’t give you the right.

 

[Ohio]

There has been no argument to suggest it contributes to “parity” at all.

Stripping the rights away from players and allowing teams the luxury of forcing them into contracts doesn’t contribute to parity, it just contributes to inequity for players.

If the argument is just baseless projection that everyone would just go play in “large markets,” in spite of overwhelming evidence and systematic salary cap constraints in place to prevent it, then I’d love to hear it.

If there is a salary cap constraint that prevents franchise players from going to large markets, I'd love to hear about it.

I'd love even more to hear about why you think the franchise tag has remained in the league for 30 years now - provided they aren't faux reasons such as fans feelings.

 

[JDailey23]

Cousins left as a free agent, after two years in which he had zero rights as a franchise player.




Sucks for them. That’s the NBA.

Just because you want them chained to a city for their career, doesn’t give you the right.

He had rights. He didn’t have to play. He wasn’t forced to play and make $10s of millions a year.
The skins let him go because he was too much $$. Same probably would have happened to Watson HAD HE NOT SIGNED a contract, willingly and happily.

 

[AZ_]

If there is a salary cap constraint that prevents franchise players from going to large markets, I'd love to hear about it.

I'd love even more to hear about why you think the franchise tag has remained in the league for 30 years now - provided they aren't faux reasons such as fans feelings.

You’re not entitled to restrain players or prevent them from going to any market.

Why would you think you are?

The franchise tag has remained in the league for 30 years because of that exact broken mentality, and why the NFLPA wants to get rid of it.

 

[AZ_]

He had rights. He didn’t have to play. He wasn’t forced to play and make $10s of millions a year.
The skins let him go because he was too much $$. Same probably would have happened to Watson HAD HE NOT SIGNED a contract, willingly and happily.

So...

Either give up your rights and play (franchise tender), sit and earn nothing, or submit and sign long term.

All three options ignore the players freedom, who is NOT under contract, to be controlled by their team...

Suppose that’s the difference between you and I.

I respect the freedom of workers, and you don’t. You demand that billionaires control the rights of players they draft, I respect their rights as Americans to see through their contract and move on if they wish.

Athletes need to “man up” and play through their contract, teams don’t need to do anything, slap the franchise tag on them and prevent them from earning their value in an open market.


One of these is rooted in deep control issues, and an unrelenting need to submit to an authority who would otherwise have no rights over you.

Deeply weird, and anti-capitalist. But I guess that’s your take...

 

[bubba52782]

Came in this thread to see if there was any actual news from around the league only to see we are STILL debating the merits of Watson’s trade demands. I’ll see myself out and check back next week.

 

[Ohio]

You’re not entitled to restrain players or prevent them from going to any market.

Why would you think you are?

The franchise tag has remained in the league for 30 years because of that exact broken mentality, and why the NFLPA wants to get rid of it.

I'm not entitled to anything. Why are you talking about me?

Franchises are entitled to tag a player as many as 3 times to keep him on their team, which helps keep the league balanced and contributes to parity.

If a player wishes to leave at that point, they are welcome to do so.

 

[AZ_]

I'm not entitled to anything. Why are you talking about me?

Franchises are entitled to tag a player as many as 3 times to keep him on their team, which helps keep the league balanced and contributes to parity.

If a player wishes to leave at that point, they are welcome to do so.

Why should teams be entitled to prevent players from being free agents?

Their contract is expired.


Im aware of what the rules are, I’m asking you to debate the merit of those rules.

Teams have no business forcing athletes who are not under contract to remain with their team, this shouldn’t be something that’s even debatable IMO.

Teams aren’t entitled to control players they would otherwise not have the rights to.


The entitlement is the entirety of the problem with the “franchise” process. And I still have yet to hear an argument for why it’s necessary for “parity.”

That argument doesn’t seem to exist without a false equivalence to the NBA league structure.

 

[JDailey23]

Why should teams be entitled to prevent players from being free agents?

Their contract is expired.


Im aware of what the rules are, I’m asking you to debate the merit of those rules.

Teams have no business forcing athletes who are not under contract to remain with their team, this shouldn’t be something that’s even debatable IMO.

Teams aren’t entitled to control players they would otherwise not have the rights to.


The entitlement is the entirety of the problem with the “franchise” process. And I still have yet to hear an argument for why it’s necessary for “parity.”

That argument doesn’t seem to exist without a false equivalence to the NBA league structure.

If you need an explanation as to why it is around, then you don’t know the sport
It’s obvious you are not a fan of owners and the people who run teams. I think I have a good reason as to why too.

 

[JDailey23]

So...

Either give up your rights and play (franchise tender), sit and earn nothing, or submit and sign long term.

All three options ignore the players freedom, who is NOT under contract, to be controlled by their team...

Suppose that’s the difference between you and I.

I respect the freedom of workers, and you don’t. You demand that billionaires control the rights of players they draft, I respect their rights as Americans to see through their contract and move on if they wish.

Athletes need to “man up” and play through their contract, teams don’t need to do anything, slap the franchise tag on them and prevent them from earning their value in an open market.


One of these is rooted in deep control issues, and an unrelenting need to submit to an authority who would otherwise have no rights over you.

Deeply weird, and anti-capitalist. But I guess that’s your take...

Worked for Le’veon Bell. Sat out a year and then got to pick his destination. Point won’t change. He didn’t have to sign that mega extension. He knew where the team was heading. He could have signed one year, a second year and sat out the third or second. His value would still be there.

He took a gamble by signing early and only after the first year, it’s not great. He and the team have plenty of years left to get it straight. Bailing after year is a puss move

 

[AZ_]

If you need an explanation as to why it is around, then you don’t know the sport
It’s obvious you are not a fan of owners and the people who run teams. I think I have a good reason as to why too.

That’s not an answer to my question.

I know you don’t have one, because that would require some semblance of an argument and instead you copped out behind “you don’t know the sport”

Considering you used to hop in my DM’s and ask me for advice, I think we both know that I do.

Quite frankly, you’re trying to hard to race bait at this point that I don’t even think you know what you’re arguing any more.

Worked for Le’veon Bell. Sat out a year and then got to pick his destination. Point won’t change. He didn’t have to sign that mega extension. He knew where the team was heading. He could have signed one year, a second year and sat out the third or second. His value would still be there.

He took a gamble by signing early and only after the first year, it’s not great. He and the team have plenty of years left to get it straight. Bailing after year is a puss move

Also not an answer to my question, just an example of player who lost a season because of the franchise tag.

Good players sitting out the season might sound like the ideal situation for you, although I suspect you’re just being disingenuous.

If you can’t answer as to why you think players must “man up” when a team perpetually fails to be honest and goes out of their way to disrespect a player, yet think owners should be able to hold players rights hostage after their contract is up, you’re only further exposing the obvious.


Teams should “man up” and negotiate in good faith, both for players under contract and those who aren’t.

That’s just basic human decency in business.

 

[col63onel]

Can we break this off to another thread? I keep seeing this thread having new posts and thinking someone has been traded or released.

 

[AZ_]

Here’s the update from today:

Jack shit happened, because it’s February.

It’s fine.