Sorry SHARK but the team doesnt honor the deal, why should he?

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

How have the Bears not honored his deal?

You really don't see the difference between someone who is employed under a contract and the average joe who hopes (and expects) a yearly raise? Sure, Briggs could be cut tomorrow but you can be fired just as easily...the difference is he will have received a multi-million dollar bonus just for signing his contract. When looking at an NFL players salary the signing bonus is the "guaranteed money" that seems to get overlooked.

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance

They don't always get a "signing" bonus. Most of the so called guaranteed money isn't usually guaranteed. They have to be on the roster by a particular date in order to receive some of it.

_________________

When it's not a iron clad contract, no I don't see the difference. The amount of money also is irrelevant here.

_________________
Team Cutler.

They have so far. But they could cut him tommorow with no reprecussions. Should he wait til they cut him to ask for more money?

If they are worried about the length of their careers just set up a system where
they get one year contracts you can throw in signing bonuses if they are worried about
getting cut so they still will get most of the money up front.
That way they never become underpaid for their position.
It should be 1 yr contracts and if one is to short 3 max should be the rule.

_________________
https://www.backroadspubandgrill.com

That's not true. It's just the way the contract is structured. He was paid with up front guaranteed money that counteracted the fact that the owners could drop them. The owners are basically saying "Here is the money up front but we have the option of keeping you for X years". There is a team option to drop him at any year because they already paid for that option in terms of guaranteed money up front.

It is definitely a contract, and any player who doesn't like it is free to sign a series of 1 or 2 year deals. However, the guaranteed money will be significantly lower.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

My company didn't give me any money up front. If my company said "We'll give you 60% of your salary for the next 5 years right now, but we can fire you whenever we want" I'd be signing as quick as possible.

The deals are good for the players. They don't have to wait for the money and if they get cut they get to keep all the money they made.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Youre right it is technically a contract.

However that contract structure heavily favors one side. I would holdout too if I thought I was worth it. Play for 1 or two year deals? Nah, Ill holdout for more cash, my team needs me and they know it.

Thats why I think its fine as is. If Chris Johnson holds out you find a way to pay him, if Lance Briggs holds out, you laugh out loud. It all works itself out.

If the Bears cut him tomorrow they'd still be honoring the deal.

Contracts have clauses that cancel the deal all the time. Normally, there is some financial penalty. In this case, it's paid up front with huge signing bonuses.

Briggs was free to sign a 1 or 2 year deal if he was really concerned that it was unfair. Briggs wasn't complaining when he got that $13 million guaranteed in 2008.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

The contract didn't favor one side though. It was fair at the time. Briggs knew the day he signed it that in 2011 he'd be where he is financially. It didn't stop him from accepting the contract.
Well, Chris Johnson is a little different because I think he's still on a rookie deal. Those aren't really negotiated.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

That doesnt mean its fair. He had to sign it because there is not a competing league and Gene Upshaw was a terrible Union head.

As much as the cuts are part of these deals, the fact that a player might end up holdout has to be factored in as well.

So they are honoring the contract technically but its not a "fair deal" IMO.

Well, Chris Johnson is a little different because I think he's still on a rookie deal. Those aren't really negotiated.[/quote]
Replace Chris Johnson with Tom Brady. Point beng if youre good enough the holdout will work if you're not it wont.

This was the best deal that Briggs could have gotten and it was right in line at the time with the expected contract for a player like Briggs. He signed a 6 year deal. He was confident enough in it to think that 5 years later it would be fair.

He was paid market value. That's a fair deal. It's not like he was a rookie who just gets slotted into a certain range based on draft round. He and his agent analyzed the market and the Bears were the ideal situation for the next 6 years. Well, those 6 years aren't over yet. Sorry Lance.
Of course it can work, but people are acting like Lance is some victim here. He's not.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

He seemed pretty happy when he signed the deal. He even knew that it was front loaded!
http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/story/09000d5d806fb8cb/article/briggs-signs-sixyear-36-million-deal-to-stay-with-bears

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

No its not. Just like everything else in life Rick, its not completely black and white.

The deal is legal, not fair. By your logic every form of employment ever has been fair because it was legal at the time. So I guess every Union ever was a waste of time becasue there is no such thing as unfair employment practices.
Just because you are forced to sign a deal doesnt mean that you think its fair.


No one is acting like Lance is a victim. Not one person. What are you Bernstein now?


The bottom line is this: Holdouts are a part of the game now. Technically the contract is being violated but in actuality the holdout/ holdout threat is all part of the negotiation game.

I dont think Briggs deserves one more cent than he has gotten, but im not gonna paint him as some villianous traitor because he's using the only leverage he has to try and get a raise.

Contracts are inherently fair because both sides negotiate and get the best deal available. Let me also point out the link above, where Lance indicates that he thought the deal was fair.

I'm not talking about unfair employment practices, and given that the issue is over money, I don't think that's relevant. Lance makes well over minimum wage.
People are saying he is underpaid and you are saying the deal is unfair. I take that as you saying that Lance is a victim.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

No one is acting like Lance is a villianous traitor. Not one person. What are you Bernstein now?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Lance also said he'd never play another down for the Bears. What Lance says in the media should be dismissed.

Contracts are not inherently fair. You could sign a deal you feel is underpaying you (due to not having leverage at the time ) and hope to rectify it later. People who are studying for a degree or certification or plan on making a pro bowl the next year would be examples of this.


Its relavent because youre equating legal with fair


I dont know who has said he is underpaid. I disagree with that though. I have not said the deal is unfair. Im saying the way these deals are structured is unfair.

Briggs is paid as he should be IMO.

_________________

Fair enough

But more people are using swear words, slurs and "he should just shut the fuck up and play" than people saying "Poor Lance, he deserves more"


I think anyone who is arguing for Lance's side is saying Lance has a right to ask, and Jerry has a right to say no.

That doesn't make sense. You don't sign a contract that locks you into a certain pay scale and then want to renegotiate. Lance Briggs signed away his options for 6 years.
Not really, though clearly this contract was legal. I'm saying that it is fair because Lance thought it was fair at the time of signing.
Are you reading this thread? It happened in this thread.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

It was a direct response to rpb using that line on me.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

It makes perfect sense in and industry where contracts are torn up and renegotiated frequently.



Thats what he said at the time. Maybe he believed it. Maybe he was trying to be a good employee.


2 people of the over 30 who posted in it said give him some more money. Its heavily going the other way.

Didn't the union just sign a ten year collective bargaining agreement which essentially continues the types of contracts signed in the past? If the contract structure is so unfair why didn't the NFLPA address it during negotiations?

_________________
“Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.”- JD Vance
“My god, what an !diot.”- JD Vance tweet on Trump
“I’m a ‘Never Trump’ guy”- JD Vance

Why didn't they win anything? They screwed rookies and veterans.

_________________

I don't think he was happy it was the only offer he got wasn't it? I think he sat out some of the practices.

Of course. He probably wished that every team in the league was bidding for him. However, he was happy with what the Bears offered and said so.

He was mad about his previous contract situation but was happy with the deal he is currently on. That was until he finally hit the part where he makes less because it was front loaded.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!