Rumors of an Xavien Howard Holdout

[EDGECRUSHER]

Howard has agreed to a restructured contract with extra incentives added on.   This will give him the chance to earn the extra money he's been demanding but protect the team if he gets hurt again.    

All things considered, this was the best case scenario from a bad situation. No doubt this will be revisited next offseason but let's just focus on the season now.

[ArtieChokePhin]

I am a big fan of incentive laden contracts.  If I was a GM I would push them heavy.  Say a guy who would normally get a $5 million per year contract, gets a $2 million dollar contract a bonus worth $3 million that requires 90% production from last year and another $2 million if he hits 120% and another $3 million if he hits 150%.  Meaning if he is playing like a $10 million dollar player he gets $10 million, but if he sucks he makes less.

I agree with this.   That way the team doesn't take a huge cap hit if they decide to part ways with a player that sucks. 

You just have to manage your cap very carefully because incentives that are met count against the following year's cap

[Dolphster]

I am a big fan of incentive laden contracts.  If I was a GM I would push them heavy.  Say a guy who would normally get a $5 million per year contract, gets a $2 million dollar contract a bonus worth $3 million that requires 90% production from last year and another $2 million if he hits 120% and another $3 million if he hits 150%.  Meaning if he is playing like a $10 million dollar player he gets $10 million, but if he sucks he makes less.

I'm not an expert on managing the salary cap, but from what I do understand of it, I agree with you.  Incentives give a certain amount of protection to the team and also gives the player a reason to try to overachieve. 

[Spider-Dan]

And miraculously, his "injury" will be just fine now.  I'm glad he is ready to go to work now.  But generally speaking, I find the whole fake injury tactic and the holdout tactic to be sorry ass moves when players do that.  You are under contract.  If you want to try to renegotiate, fine.  But don't hold out and don't fake an injury to use as leverage.  You were happy with the contract when you signed it.  Suck it up.  And I never seen any of these guys racing to the bank to made a withdrawl to repay their team when they don't play up to their contract.  I'm not just talking about Xavien.  I don't like it when anyone does it.

The contracts that the players (and the teams!) sign has exactly those injury allowances written into it.

We shouldn't argue in favor of a system where if the team screws over a player within the rules, the rules are the rules and business is business, but when the player screws over the team within the rules, now the player needs to suck it up and live up to their end of the bargain.

[pondwater]

The contracts that the players (and the teams!) sign has exactly those injury allowances written into it.

We shouldn't argue in favor of a system where if the team screws over a player within the rules, the rules are the rules and business is business, but when the player screws over the team within the rules, now the player needs to suck it up and live up to their end of the bargain.

Then don't sign a legally binding contract with terms you don't agree with.

[Dolphster]

The contracts that the players (and the teams!) sign has exactly those injury allowances written into it.

We shouldn't argue in favor of a system where if the team screws over a player within the rules, the rules are the rules and business is business, but when the player screws over the team within the rules, now the player needs to suck it up and live up to their end of the bargain.

I'm actually interested in your take on the whole concept here.  I believe you have stated before that you believe that your preferred system is socialism.  If I'm not remembering that correctly, I apologize and you can disregard the following question.  You have stated before your disdain for what business executives, corporate leaders, etc. earn and the income disparity that results.  I figured you would respond with something about teams screwing players as you did.  But how do you feel about the money that professional athletes make.  Although their compensation packages still leave them far behind that of team owners, but the players are millionaires in their own right.  You seem to be okay with "when the player screws over the team within the rules" so does that mean you are okay with them making millions of dollars?  Especially the income inequality between the players and let's say maybe the assistant equipment manager or some similar position.  I know everyone here loves to come up with "Gotcha Questions" to hit each other with, but that is not what I'm trying to do with my question.  I'm actually interested in where you think that millionaire professional athletes fit into what you would like to see in a socialist society. 

[ArtieChokePhin]

I'm actually interested in your take on the whole concept here.  I believe you have stated before that you believe that your preferred system is socialism.  If I'm not remembering that correctly, I apologize and you can disregard the following question.  You have stated before your disdain for what business executives, corporate leaders, etc. earn and the income disparity that results.  I figured you would respond with something about teams screwing players as you did.  But how do you feel about the money that professional athletes make.  Although their compensation packages still leave them far behind that of team owners, but the players are millionaires in their own right.  You seem to be okay with "when the player screws over the team within the rules" so does that mean you are okay with them making millions of dollars?  Especially the income inequality between the players and let's say maybe the assistant equipment manager or some similar position.  I know everyone here loves to come up with "Gotcha Questions" to hit each other with, but that is not what I'm trying to do with my question.  I'm actually interested in where you think that millionaire professional athletes fit into what you would like to see in a socialist society. 

Keep in mind that team owners don't really make money off their sports teams.  Some actually lose money.  The team is their toy to play with.  They are billionaires because of other ventures.

[Sunstroke]

Keep in mind that team owners don't really make money off their sports teams.  Some actually lose money.  The team is their toy to play with.  They are billionaires because of other ventures.

There sure have been times that some teams in the NFL aren't very profitable, but I think you have to look at investment value as the profit here. Even last year, with the pandemic going on and no butts (or very few butts anyway) in seats, the valuation of all 32 NFL franchises increased by an average of 7% in 2020.

If there is red ink on the ledger, it's disappearing ink... 

[EDGECRUSHER]

There sure have been times that some teams in the NFL aren't very profitable, but I think you have to look at investment value as the profit here. Even last year, with the pandemic going on and no butts (or very few butts anyway) in seats, the valuation of all 32 NFL franchises increased by an average of 7% in 2020.

If there is red ink on the ledger, it's disappearing ink... 

Tom Brady just went off about this too, saying the NFLPA needs to stand up and not accept reduced caps when owners are still making money. Listen, sports owners and small business owners are NOT the same thing. Small Business owners usually take great personal sacrifice, both financially and timewise to make a succesful business and their model of success is profit. Sports owners are already billionaires who don't sacrifice much except money and none of it will make or break them. Their model of success should be WINNING but instead too many of them care about profits over the on field play.

I think I speak for everyone here when I say I don't give a shit what our books look like in January if our record is 6-11. I didn't buy a jersey for the guy in accounting. If you can't afford to sacrifice some profits to put a winning team on the field, you shouldn't be a sports owner. Owning a franchise is a luxury item and nothing more, don't say you can't sail your Yacht because Yacht Wax got too expensive.

[Dave Gray]

It's also not a free market.  You can't really compare these contracts to regular jobs, regardless of the salary.  You don't get drafted out of college to work between IBM or Dell.  It's a managed monopoly, and with that, the rules have to be different.

My view on contracts have really changed over the years.  I used to be much more of a black-and-white, what's-on-the-paper type of guy.  But as I've aged and seen how things work, not to mention, I've worked in a law firm that deals with contracts for over 10 years, it's really altered my perspective.

Contracts are about intent.  It's an agreement made between parties, where everyone is playing by the same set of rules.  And risks are OK, but both parties have to understand those risks.  When things pan out well outside those lists of norms (for any number of reasons), there's reason to expect that a contract be questioned that doesn't reflect those new values.

That happens in sports, but you're also seeing it in things like movies, where COVID has changed how the contracts are perceived and how payouts work.

What I don't think is fair for us to do is not to allow people their share of their worth, in terms of profit-sharing, just because the numbers are higher than we can relate to.  It's hard to have sympathy for a guy who is making 10 million, thinking he should make 12 million, but the money is coming in regardless.  It's just a question of who it should go to.

[EDGECRUSHER]

^^^^^

One of the things I look at the most is that money is coming into the league solely due to the work of the players and their special abilities. This isn't like someone working at Applebee's that can be replaced by anyone, how many people can do what Xavien does? Their share of the profits should be higher considering what they bring to the league. Complaining about $12 Million a year seems dumb until you realize he brings in more than that on the field and off while the owners sit back and just take in profits for minimal work.

[Spider-Dan]

Then don't sign a legally binding contract with terms you don't agree with.

The team signed a contract stating that if the player is injured, he gets paid anyway.
"If you don't like the terms, don't sign" goes both ways.

[Spider-Dan]

You seem to be okay with "when the player screws over the team within the rules" so does that mean you are okay with them making millions of dollars?  Especially the income inequality between the players and let's say maybe the assistant equipment manager or some similar position.

I don't think everyone should have exactly the same income, but I do believe that no one working full-time should be expected to survive on less than a living wage.  So to the extent that NFL teams are paying full-time employees so little that a) they need another job to make ends meet or b) they qualify for government assistance, I do think that non-player employees should make more.

However, I'm not sure how relevant the question is, because I don't think that raise should come out of the portion of revenue allocated to players; it should come out of the ownership side.

[Spider-Dan]

Keep in mind that team owners don't really make money off their sports teams.  Some actually lose money.

Every single owner of literally every team in a major American pro sports league makes money.  It's not even close.

If I bought an old house in Brooklyn 20 years ago for $300,000, and I've averaged $10,000 a year repairing it over the last decade, but the house is now worth $3 million, I did not "lose money" on that house.

[Dave Gray]

Right.  Also, it's like not Applebees where the server IS the product.  Xavien Howard is the product.