Lawyer Milloy and NFL Moneyball

[Guest Vitamin X]

You're correct. I will not ever convince you. But I would like to point out that very few athletes complain about not making enough money.

[MARTYEWR 0]

It still seemed pretty pointless to have ever bothered drafting Rivers. No wonder the Mannings wanted nothing to do with San Diego.

Just like Al said above about few people knowing what's going to happen, who knew that Drew Brees and the rest of the Chargers were going to have the season they did last year? To be frank, it would've been VERY possible for the Bolts to cut Brees after the season he had when they went 4-12. That's probably why they went looking for another quarterback at the time.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

You're correct. I will not ever convince you. But I would like to point out that very few athletes complain about not making enough money.

I didn't say all of them.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

For those of you who think football players make too much money, read ESPN.com's series on Mike Webster. Here's the link to the first installment:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1972285

 

Of all the major sports, I have no problem with football players' salaries. Most will never be the same again after they're done playing, so give them their damned money.

[Guest Vitamin X]

It still seemed pretty pointless to have ever bothered drafting Rivers. No wonder the Mannings wanted nothing to do with San Diego.

Just like Al said above about few people knowing what's going to happen, who knew that Drew Brees and the rest of the Chargers were going to have the season they did last year? To be frank, it would've been VERY possible for the Bolts to cut Brees after the season he had when they went 4-12. That's probably why they went looking for another quarterback at the time.

I could have told you that. I didn't expect them to end up as the #3 seed in the playoffs, though, but they were a lot better than their records had suggested. They gave up on Brees way too quickly, you need to give a QB at least 3-4 years out of college to really see what they're capable of producing in the NFL. In this day and age of WIN NOW, that's often overlooked, and with BenRo having the rookie season he had (while still doing relatively nothing to actually help his team win, more like just keep them from losing- at least, until the playoffs hit) it's going to be hard to change that.

 

I didn't say all of them.

I know, I just wanted an excuse to bring Mike McKenzie into this thread. What a fucking bitch.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

Lawyer Milloy could have lived like a king in Boston for the rest of his life. He was getting free shit everywhere. I think he's just bitter about his personal decision to be honest. I mean the man use to be on Sports Final(The Sunday night sports show on the local CBS affiliate) just about weekly and talked about how the fans always stopped on the street and thanked him and everything.

 

I mean hell, Fred Smurlas and Steve Diosi(sp?) are treated like royalty here and they won NOTHING here, just played with the Pats.

 

As for Ty Law, if he's willing to restructure then he can return. He said he wants to be back next year and eventually retire with this team. We'll see if he means it.

[Ripper 0]

Nothing you could ever say can convince me that $70 million ($7mill x 10 year career if lucky) isn't enough. Nothing.

well considering the tax bracket they are in they have to pay roughly 40% of that to income tax. Take away property taxes, paying off depts incured by themselves and family before they became rich, their take home could be more like 20 million if you are lucky to play 10 years.

 

Seeing as that is nowhere near the average of a NFL career and 7 million is nowhere near what most of them would be making, on top of the risk that one play in year 1 of that 10 years could mean you lose your job and never be able to work again, they do have the right to use "need to feed my family as an excuse.

 

I mean, a guy signs a 4 year, 20 million dollar deal in the NFL and gets hurt in training camp, they can cut him and not have to pay him that because of the non-guarenteed contracts. So I say no, 7 million over 10 years is not enough when you are offerend 10 million over 10. Its about security and looking out for ones family.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I mean, a guy signs a 4 year, 20 million dollar deal in the NFL and gets hurt in training camp, they can cut him and not have to pay him that because of the non-guarenteed contracts. So I say no, 7 million over 10 years is not enough when you are offerend 10 million over 10. Its about security and looking out for ones family.

I'm not sure about the non-guaranteed contracts, I'm pretty sure at least part of the contract is guaranteed at least in regards to the salary cap and whatnot, and you're also forgetting all the bonuses, and signing bonus in particular these guys often get.

[Dr. Tom 0]

Only signing bonuses are guaranteed. Random things like a "roster bonus" look nice on paper, but if some chap is about to get $2m just for showing up to camp on a certain date, he often gets cut just before then so the renegotiation can begin.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

If you want to listen to Lawyer Milloy on the Big Show then here's a link to it

 

Download

[nl5xsk1 0]

In the 'real world' where people don't get million dollar contracts or signing bonuses I can understand going for the job that'll pay you the most money. When you're talking 5 digit salaries (e.g. less than 100k) then you're talking about having to plan on house-payments, car-payments, kids & college, and everyday living expenses.

 

When you're talking multi-million dollar contracts, you know all the things that I listed are taken care of. Once you know that you have enough to live comfortably, you should take other things into consideration when picking a place to "work" (as in play) ... is the location near your family? is it warm? is it a winning organization?

 

And regarding Ripper's assertions that they are really fucking up their health & life by playing in such a violent and dangerous sport: it's not like they'd be playing for peanuts compared to playing for millions. An even average player gets a signing bonus that's literally 5x my annual salary, and potentially get more than one signing bonus that's much larger than that. (So, I'd have to work for 5 years to earn what they get for signing their name.)

 

Forgive me for not crying in my soup over them getting cut because they're hurt or not producing well enough. Even if they have to enter the regular job-market, they have a good sized nest egg to fall back on while they get a 'real' job.

[MARTYEWR 0]

Only signing bonuses are guaranteed. Random things like a "roster bonus" look nice on paper, but if some chap is about to get $2m just for showing up to camp on a certain date, he often gets cut just before then so the renegotiation can begin.

To add to what Tom just said, here's a link to everything you need to know about the NFL Salary Cap and its system in general:

 

http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

The whole idea of playing for a winner is kind of overrated. Teams don't spend money on new players because they ARE NOT trying to win. That's the whole purpose of free agency. If a team offers significantly more money that you're making, it's foolish to not consider at all just because your original team has a better record. That's what the idea of parity is about. I'm not saying that you can't go to a team that you think will win, but a talented player is going ot make a difference on a new team and make that team better.

 

Who really turns down money?

[Guest Vitamin X]

It's not just about that, though. Baseball players in particular said in their strike that they wanted free agency because they felt "locked down" with their teams and had no freedom to pursue a chance if they felt like it. Which is understandable, as I think everyone should have the right to finish out a contract and go to another team if they're unhappy, and quite frankly we can't ever know what was going on with them behind the scenes to tell if they were happy or not.

 

What angers me about the original point Milloy was making is trashing people for taking paycuts and staying loyal to a franchise instead of going for big money, especially if they already had a championship ring. If you're happy where you are, and already make a ton of money, there's nothing wrong with staying there instead of going after "market value", which is a horrendous term agents have propogated in the offseason, increasing how much unproven rookies and one-season wonders are getting paid (I'm looking at you, KGB).

[Guest Vitamin X]

The whole idea of playing for a winner is kind of overrated. Teams don't spend money on new players because they ARE NOT trying to win. That's the whole purpose of free agency. If a team offers significantly more money that you're making, it's foolish to not consider at all just because your original team has a better record. That's what the idea of parity is about. I'm not saying that you can't go to a team that you think will win, but a talented player is going ot make a difference on a new team and make that team better.

 

Who really turns down money?

Sure, tell that to these guys:

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

Ignore the point of my whole post and look at one sentence. I was really talking about leaving a proven winner.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

Believe it or not some people would rather stay on a winner and try for more championships than go after big pay days. Ask Tedy Bruschi.

[Guest El Satanico]

Tedy Brusci isn't a very good example, as no one would've gave him a big money contract.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

That's extremely laughable. He may have had the most productive season of any Middle LBer this season. He would have gotten a big money deal had he hit Free Agency.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Ignore the point of my whole post and look at one sentence. I was really talking about leaving a proven winner.

I'd already addressed your post in the one I made prior to that, but still wanted to point out that one sentence as well.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

That's extremely laughable. He may have had the most productive season of any Middle LBer this season.

 

[Guest Failed Mascot]

I'd take Bruschi over Farrior.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I wouldn't. Farrior hits harder and has a better nose for the ball; Bruschi is a better pass defender.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I'd take Bruschi over Farrior, but it'd be a close call. Bruschi can defend the run pretty damn well too. Big guy and extremely athletic.

 

Packers almost tried to make a move for Bruschi a couple years back, I think it was `01, but they couldn't match the Patriots' offer. They instead drafted along the d-line in one of the more memorable Packer draft busts (Jamal Reynolds) with the 10th pick, and didn't address the MLB problem till they got the undersized but speedy Barnett who would probably play better outside.

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

While SOME people want to play for less money and be on a winning team, that does not reflect the majority of players in sports. Even in practice, it's not always guaranteed to work. Take last year's Laker team for example. My point before is that a player leaving for another team is doing so because that team is TRYING to win and be more competitive. The whole point behind free agency and parity is to field competitive teams and not have the same teams always win. The system is designed to allow players to get more money from other teams and for teams to try to imrove themselves. It's not guaranteed that an already succesful team will win a championship.

[CanadianChris 0]

What angers me about the original point Milloy was making is trashing people for taking paycuts and staying loyal to a franchise instead of going for big money, especially if they already had a championship ring. If you're happy where you are, and already make a ton of money, there's nothing wrong with staying there instead of going after "market value", which is a horrendous term agents have propogated in the offseason, increasing how much unproven rookies and one-season wonders are getting paid (I'm looking at you, KGB).

This point needs to be emphasized.

 

If you decide to take more money to play for a lesser team, that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But if you mock others for taking less money to stay on a winning team, practically talking down to them, you're a straight-up, bona fine idiot. Everyone has their own priorities in life, and to criticize others for not having the same priorities as you is ignorant.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Malloy wasn't mocking his ex-teammates though. He was just making an observation. Most of the bitching in that column is really just Peter King's rantings.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Really?

"You can't feed your families off of Super Bowl rings,'' Milloy said. "The more they focus on, 'We don't have any stars' and all that, the more you get overlooked as far as individual accolades and contracts.''

 

This is the selfish, primadonna, immature attitude that's really destroying sports as of late. Sure the players are faster, bigger, stronger, and some may say even more talented, but they're also bitchier when it comes to shit like this. There's no denying that.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Is that not a true statement? The only payment a Super Bowl ring gets you is if you pawn it, an act that will certainly merit its share of displeasure. The statement is literally true.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

If you get a Super Bowl ring then you get some of the playoff shares. So you can infact feed your family off of that unless they eat alot.