Coles

[Guest MrRant]

The last word: "All of this could have been avoided. There should have been no cat-and-mouse game. Don't try to say, 'We'll give you six (million dollars in a signing bonus),' if I'm asking for 10 (million). You don't have to treat me like a guy you just met off the street. Let's not even go through the game, the talking back and forth. Just pay me my money."

-- Wide receiver Laveranues Coles, now of the Washington Redskins, on early negotiations aimed at keeping him with the New York Jets

 

Unbelievable. Pay me my money?

[Guest CanadianChris]

And athletes wonder why they're held in such low regard. That's right up there with "Well, we make a lot of money, but we SPEND a lot of money too."

[Guest Smues]

That's right up there with "Well, we make a lot of money, but we SPEND a lot of money too."

Who said that one?

[Guest CanadianChris]

Patrick Ewing, during the NBA lockout a few years ago.

[Guest the pinjockey]

Good to see he believes in negotiating. Give me the money I want or I walk.

 

Didn't Kenny Anderson say something during the lockout that he needed the money to pay off all of his cars or something along those lines, while the cars in question were a fleet of ferraris,porsches, etc?

[Guest AlwaysPissedOff]

Yeah, he did.

 

ANother Patbrick Ewing gem was when he said that not decertifying the union would be taking food out of his kids' mouths...

 

Boy, did I bust a gut when that puppy came out.

[Guest jimmy no nose]

Coles could have said that better. I think what he meant was that he knew there was going to be a team willing to give him the $10 million, so he went in asking for that and he felt that if the Jets wanted to keep him they'd give him the money that he "deserves" rather than offering considerably less. The way he said it made him sound worse, but it may have come out bad either way.

[Guest Redhawk]

Ewing also said something like, "You're forcing guys to pinch pennies" during the lockout. I still like when guys say they're being "disrespected" by a $5 million-plus offer.

[Guest El Satanico]

other than him being able to word what he said better, I'm not offended or anything about this.

 

That's the business they're in and of course we can't understand it. To us 6 mill is more than enough, but that's meaningless since $100,000 is a GREAT salary to most of us.

 

That's the thing that bothers me. Everyone gets on these atheletes for being "greedy", when everyone reading this would do the exact same thing if we were in their shoes. If you know a team will pay you 10 mill compared to 6 mill offered by another team, well then you'd be a total dumbass to say "no that's ok...they offered me a fair salary so I'll pass on making more.

 

It would be the same as you turning down a job offer that had the same insurance and everything of your current employer, but offering $5 a hour more than you're making.

[Guest DrTom]

I still like when guys say they're being "disrespected" by a $5 million-plus offer.

I think the worst example of that was Kevin Garnett saying an offer of over $100 million for six years was "insulting" a few years ago. Hell, I'd love to be insulted like that, and for even half the price, I think I'd let the "insulter" smack me in the face with a rubber hose a few times. I think athletes face a lot of resentment because statements like that indicate they think they have a right to a lot of money, like they're entitled to $15 million a year, plus all their endorsements and shoe contracts. While I don't have a problem with the salaries in sports, the reality is that pro athletes get paid to play kids' games, and they're resented when they bitch about the money involved.

[Guest El Satanico]

As long as the owners are willing to dish out mega money then the athletes have every right to make as much as possible.

 

Mega contracts would stop if owners league wide had the balls to say enough is enough. Until they do that, they'll be raped by free agents and I can't feel bad for them since it's their fault.

[Guest Redhawk]

That's the thing that bothers me. Everyone gets on these atheletes for being "greedy", when everyone reading this would do the exact same thing if we were in their shoes. If you know a team will pay you 10 mill compared to 6 mill offered by another team, well then you'd be a total dumbass to say "no that's ok...they offered me a fair salary so I'll pass on making more.

 

Of course we'd all go for more money if we were in their shoes. That's why I hate Mariners fans who talk about A-Rod, because who WOULDN'T take $250 million? However, there are some guys -- former Seahawk RB Ricky Watters is one person I can think of -- who have just not signed with anyone because they wanted a certain number (I think Watters wanted at least $2 million) and no one wanted to pay it. If someone's offering you $1 million to play football, you'd better jump on that and quite tripping over that extra million.

[Guest MrRant]

I hate A-Rod for taking money over winning a championship.

[Guest Redhawk]

Who said the Mariners were going to win a championship? And A-Rod signed a 10-year contract. Is it totally inconceivable that Texas could be contenders during that span?

[Guest alkeiper]

Mega contracts would stop if owners league wide had the balls to say enough is enough. Until they do that, they'll be raped by free agents and I can't feel bad for them since it's their fault.

 

Most owners take in more than enough money to cover their payrolls in any case, and still make hundreds of millions in profits.

 

To paraphrase Branch Rickey, guys like A-Rod aren't the problem. If you're getting the best players in return, its a good investment. The problem is when mediocre players make millions for what minor leaguers could produce. That's what skews the salary scale.

[Guest CanadianChris]

Is it totally inconceivable that Texas could be contenders during that span?

Given that 1/3 to 1/2 of their total payroll is now going to one player, yes it is. No one but the Yankees could afford that contract and still be contenders.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Here here.

 

I used to be against athletes making millions, and then I went out into the real world...

[Guest Mad Dog]

I hate A-Rod for getting the biggest contract and then saying it wasn't about the money.

 

Good for him for getting all that money but at least be honest.

[Guest alkeiper]

Given that 1/3 to 1/2 of their total payroll is now going to one player, yes it is. No one but the Yankees could afford that contract and still be contenders.

 

Last year the Rangers spent $105 million on payroll, $22 mil of which went to A-Rod. So Rodriguez is actually 1/4 to 1/5 of their payroll. If you removed A-Rod's salary entirely, the Rangers would still have spent more than 23 other teams.

[Guest Luke Cage]

One misplaced step or a bad hit can mean the end of a career, personal mobility or worse.

As long as someone is willing to pay them, pro athletes deserve whatever they get.

[Guest DrTom]

As long as the owners are willing to dish out mega money then the athletes have every right to make as much as possible.

Sure. I don't have a problem with the athletes getting the big contract, since the market has dictated what they're worth. What I dislike are people who are already very well-paid claiming to be "insulted" by more money than most people will ever see in their lifetimes. Remarks like that are just insults to Joe Fan, who ends up bearing the burden of those salaries, IMO.

[Guest jimmy no nose]

I hate A-Rod for getting the biggest contract and then saying it wasn't about the money.

 

Good for him for getting all that money but at least be honest.

It's very possibe that it wasn't totally about the money. Several teams put out offers and if you looked at Texas it seemed like they were putting together somewhat of an all star team that at that time was looking like a sure playoff team. The money was just a bonus. Too bad it didnt work out.

[Guest alkeiper]

It may work out yet. Mark Teixeira could be the next best thing. The Rangers are not as bad as they look.

[Guest DrTom]

It's very possibe that it wasn't totally about the money. Several teams put out offers and if you looked at Texas it seemed like they were putting together somewhat of an all star team that at that time was looking like a sure playoff team.

When A-Rod was considering the contracts before him, no one else had even offered him $200 million yet. I think the second-highest offer was around $185 million. Compare that to a quarter of a billion dollars and the choice is easy. Maybe there were a couple other reasons besides the money, but when you have an offer that's $70 million better than the next highest, there's one really big reason you're signing your name.

[Guest alkeiper]

I don't think anyone else offered much more than $100 million, or over 5-6 years for that matter. Besides the money, 10 years of job security is important for a ball player.

[Guest starvenger]

As long as the owners are willing to dish out mega money then the athletes have every right to make as much as possible.

Sure. I don't have a problem with the athletes getting the big contract, since the market has dictated what they're worth. What I dislike are people who are already very well-paid claiming to be "insulted" by more money than most people will ever see in their lifetimes. Remarks like that are just insults to Joe Fan, who ends up bearing the burden of those salaries, IMO.

Still, I would say that Coles is playing it smart. Remember, only the first year of an NFL player's contract is guaranteed, so the more money you get up front, the more guaranteed money you'll have in the future. Assuming you don't blow it all in one go, anyways.