Kiwaunuka Calls NFL Contracts Unfair..............

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by soulman, Jun 18, 2014.

  1. 4dabers

    4dabers Veteran DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    601
    Ratings:
    +736 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    81ß
    Butkus, you have said this or something like this several times in this thread:
    "And again...take the emotion of how much these guys make out of it."
    Yet you then use your emotions to suggest the opposite view. Ya can't have it both ways brother. You can't tell people to take their opinion about the amount of money these players make out of the argument (even though this discussion WAS supposed to be outside of that perspective), but then argue yourself that the amount of money they make is well earned.

    Frankly, I don't have a problem with the amount of money they make. I am a free market guy and I believe in the market to set value in almost every corner of our economy. As a business owner that has some good years and some bad, I also agree with your assessment of the tax burden these kids are hit with. Despite what some might believe, MOST of these guys WILL pay over 50% of everything they make in taxes when you consider all levels (Federal, State and Local). It's true and that, in and of itself isn't right, but that is a whole different argument for a different forum.

    The point is, while I don't have a problem with these guys making as much as they can, I do have a problem with it being guaranteed when their work product 3 years down the road isn't guaranteed. As Ric indicated above, both parties sign these contracts and the conditions of said contracts are every bit a part of them as the dollar figures. The only reason these conditions are in the contracts is because the potential money is LARGE. If a player is willing to take less money, then I'm sure a team would be willing to guarantee it ALL, but since it is the PLAYER that wants the $$$ to be as large as possible, then the team wants an out if the players performance becomes less valuable. Again, Supply and Demand.

    Just for the record, I'll say it again, yes these players take physical risks with their bodies, but that is NOT what they are paid for. So they have difficulty walking around on Mondays, and maybe some of them have life long physical problems, but I could name AT LEAST a dozen occupations right now (without even thinking very hard) that are far more hazardous and leave the participants with equal or worse physical ailments that will not yield a fraction of the income these players get, even the back-ups.
    • Like Like x 2
  2. 4dabers

    4dabers Veteran DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    601
    Ratings:
    +736 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    81ß

    Soul, from my perspective, I apologize for not fully responding to you question. Especially the point you make about the timing of it all, which I though was the most significant element of you question in the original post (then I go and ignore it all together in my rants).

    I think my general feelings about contracts have been stated above, HOWEVER, to the point you made about schedules/timing, I completely AGREE. Now is not the time to pull this shit, and if it was going to be done, it should have been done much earlier to allow the player the opportunity to go elsewhere. In my opinion, that is exactly why the Giants did it, and I believe it's unethical to do business this way. Yea, by the letter of the contract and NFL rules, they are probably OK, but it doesn't pass the smell test and probably doesn't set well with the rest of the roster either. I think the cut is fair and part of the game, but using the timing to maximize the teams objective is pretty shitty and I would not be opposed at all in a rule change limiting the deadline date to a period early on in FA. Hell, even right after the draft would have been better
  3. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1,472
    Ratings:
    +1,867 / 6 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,597ß
    :drinking61: No apology needed. I think we were on the same page and I liked the way you put the definition of the fairness issue. That was spot on. Now that he's beyond he guarantees (which was the risk NY took) his risk begins. If his production doesn't justify his current salary or even if the team is hard against the cap and needs to create some space I believe that risk is on him and the upfront money he got was his compensation for accepting it. So all he can really bitch about is the timing and actually that may be all he really is bitching about. Who knows how it was said and then how it was quoted by the media.

    The Bears typically release vets who have shot at landing somewhere else as early as possible and although I haven't seen them offer many players salary reductions in exchange for a shot at keeping their jobs at least this year with Weems and Bennett they did it well in advance of the beginning of Free Agency. It see that as a good move as far as not only showing respect to the player but it's good PR for the organization as far as other free agents who may be thinking of signing here.

    I think it's one more thing to be pleased about as far as how intelligently the organization is being run these days. Whether it remains that way or not is yet to be seen but for now I like how we go about even things like that.

    I may be more sensitive to this timing issue than some because twice in my career as an independent contractor I have been offered positions in writing that were later withdrawn through no fault of my own. Of course having accepted these offers, also in writing, I was obliged to turn down other business I couldn't handle once I began these projects. In both cases I had shown up at their offices on the day we contracted for me to start only to be told they didn't have the funds to pay me. :badmood: One guy even offered to rent me the office space he was providing for free under the term of our agreement. How's that for chutzpah? Those two deal (fortunately many years apart) cost me a pretty sum of money I didn't have to spare at the time and could well have bankrupted me. So I guess I get a little annoyed when I see what I believe to be the kind of manipulation it appears the Giants may have been guilty of. May being the key word here because there are two sides to this story and we're only getting one.

    Anyway I just thought it made a good topic for discussion and debate since other than this kind of non-event mini-camp were gonna be without our football for a month. Damn. :alright:

    :guinness:
  4. 4dabers

    4dabers Veteran DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    601
    Ratings:
    +736 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    81ß
    "The Bears typically release vets who have shot at landing somewhere else as early as possible and although I haven't seen them offer many players salary reductions in exchange for a shot at keeping their jobs at least this year with Weems and Bennett they did it well in advance of the beginning of Free Agency. It see that as a good move as far as not only showing respect to the player but it's good PR for the organization as far as other free agents who may be thinking of signing here."

    I was going to bring this up also, but I was getting tired of typing. It doesn't help Mathias much, but the Giants could rue the day they pull shit like this, especially during FA. By contrast, I think the Bears are slowly becoming an attractive place to come for FA's and if our FO staff treats players with respect like they have been, that will only help our rep with FA's


    "I may be more sensitive to this timing issue than some because twice in my career as an independent contractor I have been offered positions in writing that were later withdrawn through no fault of my own. Of course having accepted these offers, also in writing, I was obliged to turn down other business I couldn't handle once I began these projects. "

    Whow, I've been there! In fact, I may be there right now. Sucks when you give a commitment (especially when said commitment HELPS the other side get work because of the reputation that YOU bring as a part of the team) and the other side decides to go in a different direction. Then again, reputations tend to follow you. What goes around, comes around and I am not one to forget people that screw me.:4 2 111v[1]:
    • Like Like x 1
  5. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    21,636
    Likes Received:
    2,532
    Ratings:
    +2,990 / 8 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,006ß
    That's the thing, shitty or not, but players will take notice of this kind of practice and NY won't be as attractive as other teams b/c of it. That's how the system corrects itself and it will.

    You are correct I think more players are going to look at the Bears as a place to land b/c of how they have traditionally done business w/their players and NY is going to take a hit b/c of how they treated Mathy
  6. Ski-Whiz

    Ski-Whiz George Halas Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1996
    Messages:
    36,659
    Likes Received:
    728
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    497ß

    Yes, but the players have tried their hardest to leverage toward their benefit.

    I agree the players need to be taken care of, I'm just saying there is also an understanding that you will probably not walk away injury free.
  7. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    499
    Ratings:
    +579 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    284ß
    Soul...that's a great summation.
  8. short faced bear

    short faced bear Assistant Head Coach DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    10,345
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Ratings:
    +1,197 / 0 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    95ß
    I'm just glad the players for the most part have abandoned the platitude of "I've got a family to feed".
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1,472
    Ratings:
    +1,867 / 6 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,597ß

    That's part of my operating system now. I forgive for my own benefit because it's never a good mentally or physically to harbor long term grudges but I don't ever forget what they did to me and they'll never get that chance again. :rock:
  10. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1,472
    Ratings:
    +1,867 / 6 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,597ß

    True Ski but again I'm seeing this more as a timing and manipulation thing more than it is a money thing. If Kiwanuka didn't take care of his family and his future with what ever nearly $11 mil less taxes did for him over the last two years then that's his problem. He can't run a poor me on that issue and I don't actually think that's his point. It's the control issue that bothers him. The fact that the Giants waited so long to pop this on him was not to his benefit.

    I agree that the players should be running the league either. They have their bodies invested in the game but not the capital and the risk the owners do. But just the same the owners can't have it both ways. I believe there should be a clause written into the standard player contract that stipulates a date by which a team can make a an offer to a player to either take a salary cut of be released and I believe it needs to come before Free Agency and the Draft.

    Forcing that decision on a guy this late is like asking him to sell his snow shovel in July. The offers he gets will be well below market and to me keeping him tied up too long creates a restraint of trade issue. Like it or not players are products used by teams to make money. When the product is used up or out of date it gets discarded just like a carton of milk gone bad. That being the case I don't begrudge them all reasonable opportunities to maximize their income during their short careers.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1,472
    Ratings:
    +1,867 / 6 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,597ß
    Actually that's not true Jimmors. Certain portions of NFL contracts may be guaranteed in any number of different ways and in many cases the player doesn't need to be on the team to receive whatever sums were guaranteed.

    For instance a signing bonus that's paid upfront but amortized over the life of the contract has no bearing on whether that player is with the team for the duration of that contract. That was the case with Pep and the reason for the dead cap space. Most teams say the don't pay for past performance and when it comes to their own players that may be partially true but a big signing bonus for an URFA is almost all about past performance when you hand a guy $10 mil and he's yet to even wear your jersey and play a single down of football for you.

    Teams guarantee player salaries to just as we did with Cutler. If he's released before all of his salary guarantees are paid out he still gets them. Some salary guarantees are only for injury and don't apply if a players performance drops but some are also guaranteed unconditionally if the player is that much in demand and his agent drives a hard enough bargain.

    The rest of what you say is very accurate. The NFL standard players contract is very one sided compared to other sports where contracts are guaranteed for their duration. I guess it's a credit to wealthy owners and their legal staffs to have come up with the worst deal for the class of pro athletes who typically has the shortest career and possibly the shortest life span of any other pro athlete.

    I'm neither pro owner or pro player. I'm pro balance and fairness like a good mediator should be. LOL
  12. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1,472
    Ratings:
    +1,867 / 6 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,597ß

    I think that was mostly the NBA players many of whom barely have a HS level education let alone a college education and some even have an IQ lower than their shoe size. That's their street level ghetto education talking. They're morons but lucky for them most are 6'6" to 7'1'" morons who can shoot hoops and those don't grow on trees.

    A lot of those guys grew up as little more than big city playground all stars who got coaxed into playing HS ball in order to get a scholarship that would get them to the pros. Quite a few have made the jump to the pros with little or no college experience because after their first year or two they'd have been declared academically ineligible.

    The overall intelligence of NFL players is IMHO one hell of a lot higher than those ghetto punks.
  13. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1,472
    Ratings:
    +1,867 / 6 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,597ß
    Good points and I agree. I also have no issues at all with any man trying to make the best living he can for himself or for himself and his family. I don't care what business or trade he's in.

    What I bold faced is an important point and I'm glad you posted this because I don't if every one is aware of it. Now that the CBA limits the dollar amounts of rookie 1st round draft picks deals, and even slots their total contract value based on where they're selected, those deals are almost all 100% guaranteed. So your statement 4da is actually a matter of fact as it relates to that class of player but how many vets would be willing to accept that deal? I'd say the numbers would be pretty damn small right?

    With a hard salary cap NFL teams with 53 players under contract would have a very hard time dealing with fully guaranteed contracts. The main reason many teams have gotten themselves in "cap hell" is due to the sheer amount of "dead cap space" they were carrying. The Bears were fortunate to have only one deal like that Pep's. Others had many more.
  14. Loki

    Loki Assault Admin Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    23,227
    Likes Received:
    3,245
    Ratings:
    +3,498 / 17 / -6
    ßearz ßuckz:
    608ß
    Not gonna happen. Your asking people that make an hourly wage, or maybe even an exempt salary, providing a service to their communities or society as a whole to discuss the "fairness" of some guy whining that the +19 million he's been given over the past three years is "unfair" because he's not gonna get an additional 7mil. These are amounts unheard of the bank accounts of the every day citizen and you will never be able to remove their salary amounts from their consideration.

    YES, it is a contract. YES, it should be paid as contracted. But, most importantly, YES... the contract can be modified under circumstances allowed under that very same contract. Does the contract allow him to be cut? Yes. Does the contract allow the team to REQUEST he take a cut in salary? Yes. Did his representatives in the CBA allow language in the contract that allows these things to occur? Why yes... yes it does. This flexibility is what makes the contract what it is. Without it, they would never have gotten the "progress" he says they have.

    Funny. He's upset that he's not gonna get the amount stated in his contract when 1) he agreed to it, and 2) he doesn't seem to give a crap about the other paragraphs in the same contract. Only the part where he gets paid.

    I understand his concerns that the actions taken on his contract were AFTER the period of time where he could have shopped himself around. Well... he can kick the players union in the ass for not pushing for language to prevent that from being added into the CBA.

    I don't believe this is correct. The team might be shady as hell in what they are doing, but the contract as written ALLOWS it. Contract Law works both ways, and if the team was able to actually unilaterally change the terms of the contract, without language in the CBA that allows it, there would be a shitload of legal cases in the local courthouses. In other words, the teams (and NFL) got a much better side of the CBA than the players did and this is merely the fall-out from the players having to negotiate from a position of weakness during the last CBA.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1,472
    Ratings:
    +1,867 / 6 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,597ß
    I guess I under estimated our collective abilities to look at it as if it were any person in a position where his employer manipulated a situation to what to some may seem and unfair advantage for themselves. I'm not saying they did. I simply suggested that as point of discussion.

    Besides bro I can ask whatever I want even when I don't expect that the debate will go that way in 100% of the responses. Some were able to debate within that context others can't. We have a diverse group here. It's to late to read the rest of your post tonight but I will tomorrow and I'll respond then. :cheers:
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Ski-Whiz

    Ski-Whiz George Halas Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1996
    Messages:
    36,659
    Likes Received:
    728
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    497ß
    In a nutshell this can be viewed from a more generic stand point.

    If you don't like the deal the company is given, they can and will get what they need elsewhere. So in a sense, be thankful you have something.

    Whether it's jobs over seas, or other players etc.

    When you start pushing back too hard, be careful. In the end you aren't entitled to work.

    I bust my butt and become valuable. They could fire me any second. Would they? I've adapted my personality to my work place. Now I love my job so that makes it easy, but if they asked me to do something that isn't in my job scope, I'm probably going to do it.

    In the end, you have to keep the hand that feeds you happy.
  17. Ski-Whiz

    Ski-Whiz George Halas Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1996
    Messages:
    36,659
    Likes Received:
    728
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    497ß
    Forgot to add, I DO think they league should sort of put a time limit on contracts.

    Yeah the timing was wrong, but can you image how the teams hands would be tied if they see a player they want, but can't do anything becuase they can't make any salary room?

    So maybe a limit on when contracts can be negotiated?
  18. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    499
    Ratings:
    +579 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    284ß
    They really haven't tried that hard. They cave as soon as a game check is threatened to be missed.
  19. BearDownUnder

    BearDownUnder Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    56
    Ratings:
    +66 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    26ß
    I think all contracts should be guaranteed but the money comes down to reasonable levels and then no more need for crazy signing bonuses and instead you just play out the length of the contract. Fill them with clauses so the value comes down if the players aren't in shape or aren't performing and the value goes up if the player performs well.

    I know some players might rort the system and cash out big money deals and then not perform but those guys will be regarded as low character and will find their way out of the league. NFL teams will then respond by only picking more solid citizens who will work for their part of the deal and that might end up with less bone head players in trouble off the field.

    I certainly agree with the player in this article where his value for that season is slashed by a team who pretty much threaten him to leave but they do it at an inopportune time so he's not really a true free agent and there's often little warning so he can't uproot his family.

    The biggest issue with guaranteeing contracts is that you have to go from 90 to cut right down. You obviously can't guarantee everyones deal when you have to cut a whole bunch of guys.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. 4dabers

    4dabers Veteran DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    601
    Ratings:
    +736 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    81ß
    LOL, I agree completely. When you're in business it's also wise to avoid burning bridges. However, sometimes if the screwing is bad enough, it sure feels good to go ahead and torch that bitch! :toast:
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page