MMQB: In defense of Kam Chancellor

[libertforever12]

A contract is realy NOT a MORAL agreement that says “I will show up no matter what and if I don’t, then I’m a greedy selfish bad person”.

A contract is a businees agreement which states the terms of compensation IF a player chooses to play and IF a team chooses to keep him on the roster, and what happens IF either party freely chooses not to.

Players are just as free to hold out their services for a better offer as teams are to cut players and offer to bring them back at a lower salary. The agreement never says the player has to play no matter what. The decision to not play can he health, financial, family, personal, religious, and etc reasons.

Hmmmm.....

Dude, no one is arguing with you that Kam could choose not to play his contract and "hold out".

My focus was the morality issue. See the comments below:

I love Kam, but he is a moron.

This is about greed and stubborn pride, pure and simple.

There is no excuse for what he is doing, period.

Kam's being illogical and is just trying to get more money. That looks like it's failed, and now he's just being stubborn/fatalistic.

I can't wait until we stop talking about this scrub

Actually, he doesn't have a right to sit at home.

Now, look at how Kam is screwing over Seahawks fans and players.

A lot of the comments are link to morality. So when you say no one is arguing... you are wrong.

But were not wrong in saying hes stupid. He's in a union. That means hes subject to the fines and penalties his union agreed too. So this guy that thought he could "hold out", could. But guess what, its stupid. And we all know that. And the team knows that. And his teammates know that. Thats why no one has done it since the new CBA. Thats why its his fault and his stupidity for even doing it.

It is a fact that there have been many hold out since the new CBA. I don't think I even need to provide any examples.

You fault him for doing this. You also attempted to judged him based on morality. You are conflicting yourself.

I don't think people should judged Kam as a person because of the hold out. You are not him. You don't know everything in the situations. Kam doesn't owe you any explanations.

 

[BlueTalon]

Players are just as free to hold out their services for a better offer as teams are to cut players and offer to bring them back at a lower salary. The agreement never says the player has to play no matter what. The decision to not play can he health, financial, family, personal, religious, and etc reasons.

No, they are not. They are not "just as free" to do what you say they are free to do. I think you don't have a firm grasp on the concept of "free" -- or "contract" for that matter. Some people, including you apparently, think that because a team can cut a player, that a contract isn't a contract, or that it's unfair. It might be one-sided, but it's no less a contract.

It's like your mortgage. It's a legal document that defines the relationship between the signatories, and spells out what the responsibilities of each are. You are not free to decide not to pay your mortgage, or attempt to arbitrarily redefine the terms of your mortgage. You can choose to do that, but it's not something you are free to do, and there are serious ramifications if you decide to go down that road.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The analogy comparing his contract with the mortgage is fair.

So what happens if you don't pay your mortgage?

Now, go look up the term "jingle mail".

Some of you act like breaking a contract is some strange ethical violation. People break contracts all the time, what matters when breaking a contract is the clause that specifically lays out the penalties for not following through. But if the net benefit of not following through is significant, you probably should. Businesses break contracts all the time, hell tonight I am contemplating breaking a contract in moving an event my organization is hosting. But, it makes more sense to move it.

It won't be the first contract broken or the last, because moving forward with bad deals is stupid when eating the penalty makes more sense.

So the factors that matter are :

1 - What are the legal penalties or ramifications?

2 - What is the cost of non-performance?

The rest does not matter, unless you honestly feel that violating the deal might limit similar deals in the future, but even then it is a cost vs benefit analysis. Do you honestly think Kam won't get good deals later if he pushes for a better one? Talk to Revis about that, because he wants new deals all the time. And he gets them, because he delivers.

People with means do not put all this emotional resonance into it. Go look at all the stars that have had their houses repossessed. You think they cannot afford the place? Of course they can make the payments, but it does not make sense for them to pay continually for an item that is a net loss. If you are upside down in the house, where what is owed absolutely exceeds the value of the house - it is a reasonable action.

And in this case, players do not get reasonable contracts because the clubs have the leverage, players cannot hold out because their skill/abilities are wasting assets. They are given a limited amount of earning years, holding out significantly cuts that, while clubs do not. So a player that might have only a 5 year career gets lifetime earnings cut by 1/5, that is significant. And that is how crappy deals don't get fought by the NFLPA, because they have to pick their battles.

Even by that standard Kam's deal is crappy though, as the FG article pointed out. Sure max money is "good" for a SS but not for the value he brings. One of the best SS to ever play should not be paid less than a middling FS on a middle tier team, esp when SS take more punishment and have a shorter career.

Kam chose to come back, but he was absolutely not given a good contract. Now, that might be his agent's fault but my rule is always make sure the deals you enter benefit both parties, because people that benefit continue to be partners. So the Hawks should have made sure it was at least a palatable deal. Otherwise, if you try to get over because of someone's ignorance - eventually they find out and then ignorance becomes anger/dissatisfaction.

Don't be shocked if Kam brings this up next year, because if we go on a tear with noticeably improved defense Kam will have a lot of data to push his case or attract potential suitors who might trade for him. Either way, we probably hear about his deal again, unless the club does the right thing and gets him a new/fairer deal.

 

[Cartire]

But were not wrong in saying hes stupid. He's in a union. That means hes subject to the fines and penalties his union agreed too. So this guy that thought he could "hold out", could. But guess what, its stupid. And we all know that. And the team knows that. And his teammates know that. Thats why no one has done it since the new CBA. Thats why its his fault and his stupidity for even doing it.

It is a fact that there have been many hold out since the new CBA. I don't think I even need to provide any examples.

You fault him for doing this. You also attempted to judged him based on morality. You are conflicting yourself.

I don't think people should judged Kam as a person because of the hold out. You are not him. You don't know everything in the situations. Kam doesn't owe you any explanations.

No one has held out into the regular season. You know what I meant. Your really trying hard here Kam. And get over the morality shaming with your "that is wrong".

He took a stupid risk that did nothing but hurt himself and the team. He lowered his value while simultaneously losing money, completely negating his holdout. Oh, and then he caved after his bluff was called but not before being a serious factor in at least one loss.

Also, I have no idea why I keep saying he when you are obviously Kam. No one else is this thick headed about your mistakes.

 

[libertforever12]

But were not wrong in saying hes stupid. He's in a union. That means hes subject to the fines and penalties his union agreed too. So this guy that thought he could "hold out", could. But guess what, its stupid. And we all know that. And the team knows that. And his teammates know that. Thats why no one has done it since the new CBA. Thats why its his fault and his stupidity for even doing it.

It is a fact that there have been many hold out since the new CBA. I don't think I even need to provide any examples.

You fault him for doing this. You also attempted to judged him based on morality. You are conflicting yourself.

I don't think people should judged Kam as a person because of the hold out. You are not him. You don't know everything in the situations. Kam doesn't owe you any explanations.

No one has held out into the regular season. You know what I meant. Your really trying hard here Kam. And get over the morality shaming with your "that is wrong".

He took a stupid risk that did nothing but hurt himself and the team. He lowered his value while simultaneously losing money, completely negating his holdout. Oh, and then he caved after his bluff was called but not before being a serious factor in at least one loss.

Also, I have no idea why I keep saying he when you are obviously Kam. No one else is this thick headed about your mistakes.

You still don't get it. You can't fault a player for not playing. Anyone can choose to play or not to play. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that.

 

[Cartire]

You still don't get it. You can't fault a player for not playing. Anyone can choose to play or not to play. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that.

You can repeat it as much as you want, it doesnt make it right.

I can very well fault you. There was a holdout, its someones fault. Guess who's. Yours.

Its not the teams fault you didnt play. Its not your teammates fault or the fans fault. Its your fault. I can very well fault you for this. Fault fault fault. You're at fault.

And I already said you were right about choice. We all have a choice, but that doesnt mean there isnt a wrong one. You chose the wrong choice.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

One little thing about contracts, Employers break them all the time, thats the biggest issue with most Sports figures, in fact in business in general thats what happens, everytime you take a job you sign a contract. The employer wanst gaurentees and also many times non compete clauses to limit your future employment should they break the contract and cut you loose.(most of these stipulations are illegal by the way but are in the employment contract to limit competitive advantage should you get fired for casue or let go for no cause) The Corperations and or Leagues pull the strings, when a player or an employee bucks the system most businesses want to make an example of you to keep the other lemmings in line.

If he wants to, I am sure he can go be a greeter at WalMart. I dont think it pays 6million a year tho. But it will put food on the table. :sarcasm_off:

This post is not directed at anyone. I just used it to make a funny. :mrgreen: :twisted:

 

[Seahawkfan80]

This was an interesting article I just came across on MMQB.

No, in the NFL, a contract is not a contract. Some fans think NFL contracts are like retail transactions, wherein a price is set, goods or services exchange hands, and the seller has no more right to recall the half-eaten apple than the buyer has call to negotiate a better deal on the apple after he’s bitten into it.

This is a list of people the Seahawks have waived or released with time and cash remaining on their contracts in the calendar year 2015. This is typical of all 32 teams:

Robert Turbin. Will Blackmon. Anthony McCoy. Tyrell Adams. RaShaun Allen. R.J. Archer. Obum Gwacham. Keenan Lambert. Ronald Martin Jr. T.Y. McGill. Douglas McNeil III. KeaVon Milton. Ryan Murphy. Will Pericak. Eric Pinkins. Terry Poole. Alex Singleton. Kevin Smith. Rod Smith. Julius Warmsley. Kasen Williams. Lemuel Jeanpierre. D’Anthony Smith. Jesse Davis. George Farmer. Deshon Foxx. Deontay Greenberry. Keelan Johnson. Quayshawn Nealy. Greg Scruggs. Ty Zimmerman. Brandon Cottom. Triston Wade. Jake Waters. Jeremy Crayton. Robert Smith. Tony McDaniel. Ryan Robinson. Tory Slater. Demitrius Bronson. Nate Isles. C.J. Davis. Justin Renfrow. Mike Taylor. Jared Wheeler. Mike Zimmer. Luke Ingram. Zach Miller. Jesse Williams. Garrett Scott.

...Such is the kind of pact that Kam Chancellor wants to amend—the kind that can be ripped up if the employee sprains his ankle.

There's a lot more food for thought in the article. I suggest some of you go read it.

I think the author possibly needs to read an NFL contract.

The contract grants exclusive "rights" to a player's (WORKER'S) services for it's stated duration. In return, the player (WORKER) receives a certain amount of his payment at the time of signing that is his to keep regardless of whether the team chooses to exercise that right to services (USE HIM/HER IN THEIR CHOSEN FIELD) for the entire term or not. In addition the team agrees to pay additional amounts if they choose to retain the player (WORKER) on their (PERSONNEL LISTING FOR WORK AVAILABILITY) roster past certain dates rather than "waiving" those rights and releasing the player (WORKER) to play (WORK) for whomever (WHICHEVER COMPANY) will hire them.

The contract does not include a "right to employment" for the player, it merely acts effectively as an option on the player's services for it's duration in return for whatever guaranteed amount is paid and an agreement on what the player will receive should the team choose to exercise that option by putting the on the roster.

Just sayin'...

Thought I would throw this in more laymans terms. A friend does contract work for some companies and does the work until there is no more work. Then he gets laid off and searches for another part time work detail. Constantly doing this in his line of work.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

This was an interesting article I just came across on MMQB.

No, in the NFL, a contract is not a contract. Some fans think NFL contracts are like retail transactions, wherein a price is set, goods or services exchange hands, and the seller has no more right to recall the half-eaten apple than the buyer has call to negotiate a better deal on the apple after he’s bitten into it.

This is a list of people the Seahawks have waived or released with time and cash remaining on their contracts in the calendar year 2015. This is typical of all 32 teams:

Robert Turbin. Will Blackmon. Anthony McCoy. Tyrell Adams. RaShaun Allen. R.J. Archer. Obum Gwacham. Keenan Lambert. Ronald Martin Jr. T.Y. McGill. Douglas McNeil III. KeaVon Milton. Ryan Murphy. Will Pericak. Eric Pinkins. Terry Poole. Alex Singleton. Kevin Smith. Rod Smith. Julius Warmsley. Kasen Williams. Lemuel Jeanpierre. D’Anthony Smith. Jesse Davis. George Farmer. Deshon Foxx. Deontay Greenberry. Keelan Johnson. Quayshawn Nealy. Greg Scruggs. Ty Zimmerman. Brandon Cottom. Triston Wade. Jake Waters. Jeremy Crayton. Robert Smith. Tony McDaniel. Ryan Robinson. Tory Slater. Demitrius Bronson. Nate Isles. C.J. Davis. Justin Renfrow. Mike Taylor. Jared Wheeler. Mike Zimmer. Luke Ingram. Zach Miller. Jesse Williams. Garrett Scott.

...Such is the kind of pact that Kam Chancellor wants to amend—the kind that can be ripped up if the employee sprains his ankle.

There's a lot more food for thought in the article. I suggest some of you go read it.

I think the author possibly needs to read an NFL contract.

The contract grants exclusive "rights" to a player's (WORKER'S) services for it's stated duration. In return, the player (WORKER) receives a certain amount of his payment at the time of signing that is his to keep regardless of whether the team chooses to exercise that right to services (USE HIM/HER IN THEIR CHOSEN FIELD) for the entire term or not. In addition the team agrees to pay additional amounts if they choose to retain the player (WORKER) on their (PERSONNEL LISTING FOR WORK AVAILABILITY) roster past certain dates rather than "waiving" those rights and releasing the player (WORKER) to play (WORK) for whomever (WHICHEVER COMPANY) will hire them.

The contract does not include a "right to employment" for the player, it merely acts effectively as an option on the player's services for it's duration in return for whatever guaranteed amount is paid and an agreement on what the player will receive should the team choose to exercise that option by putting the on the roster.

Just sayin'...

Thought I would throw this in more laymans terms. A friend does contract work for some companies and does the work until there is no more work. Then he gets laid off and searches for another part time work detail. Constantly doing this in his line of work.

Perhaps then, you'll understand the difference between a monopoly and a free work environment. In your laymans terms, the friend has no where else to search for another part time job. It's one company that monopolizes all the work.

 

[libertforever12]

You still don't get it. You can't fault a player for not playing. Anyone can choose to play or not to play. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that.

You can repeat it as much as you want, it doesnt make it right.

I can very well fault you. There was a holdout, its someones fault. Guess who's. Yours.

Its not the teams fault you didnt play. Its not your teammates fault or the fans fault. Its your fault. I can very well fault you for this. Fault fault fault. You're at fault.

And I already said you were right about choice. We all have a choice, but that doesnt mean there isnt a wrong one. You chose the wrong choice.

Somehow not playing is at fault is clearly an incorrect assumption. There has never been an assumption in this country that all hold outs are the player's fault.

I don't think you will get it. Some people are just too stupid to understand, but I won't say this is your fault because I don't know everything about you. It is nature, nurture, or other factors. I don't know.

 

[Cartire]

You still don't get it. You can't fault a player for not playing. Anyone can choose to play or not to play. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that.

You can repeat it as much as you want, it doesnt make it right.

I can very well fault you. There was a holdout, its someones fault. Guess who's. Yours.

Its not the teams fault you didnt play. Its not your teammates fault or the fans fault. Its your fault. I can very well fault you for this. Fault fault fault. You're at fault.

And I already said you were right about choice. We all have a choice, but that doesnt mean there isnt a wrong one. You chose the wrong choice.

Somehow not playing is at fault is clearly an incorrect assumption. There has never been an assumption in this country that all hold outs are the player's fault.

I don't think you will get it. Some people are just too stupid to understand, but I won't say this is your fault because I don't know everything about you. It is nature, nurture, or other factors. I don't know.

Kam, honestly, at this point, who are you trying to convince here? No one is on your side on this one. You can call me stupid, thats fine. But I dont know why it makes you feel better. You lost so much money. For nothing. You lost more money in 54 days then I'll probably make in the next 40 years. In 54 days, you flushed close to 3 million dollars down the toilet, over pride.

Why are you even on .net? I mean, its cool you care about what us fans think, but you already reported. Why dig your hole deeper?

 

[vin.couve12]

The analogy comparing his contract with the mortgage is fair.

So what happens if you don't pay your mortgage?

Now, go look up the term "jingle mail".

Some of you act like breaking a contract is some strange ethical violation. People break contracts all the time, what matters when breaking a contract is the clause that specifically lays out the penalties for not following through. But if the net benefit of not following through is significant, you probably should. Businesses break contracts all the time, hell tonight I am contemplating breaking a contract in moving an event my organization is hosting. But, it makes more sense to move it.

It won't be the first contract broken or the last, because moving forward with bad deals is stupid when eating the penalty makes more sense.

So the factors that matter are :

1 - What are the legal penalties or ramifications?

2 - What is the cost of non-performance?

The rest does not matter, unless you honestly feel that violating the deal might limit similar deals in the future, but even then it is a cost vs benefit analysis. Do you honestly think Kam won't get good deals later if he pushes for a better one? Talk to Revis about that, because he wants new deals all the time. And he gets them, because he delivers.

People with means do not put all this emotional resonance into it. Go look at all the stars that have had their houses repossessed. You think they cannot afford the place? Of course they can make the payments, but it does not make sense for them to pay continually for an item that is a net loss. If you are upside down in the house, where what is owed absolutely exceeds the value of the house - it is a reasonable action.

And in this case, players do not get reasonable contracts because the clubs have the leverage, players cannot hold out because their skill/abilities are wasting assets. They are given a limited amount of earning years, holding out significantly cuts that, while clubs do not. So a player that might have only a 5 year career gets lifetime earnings cut by 1/5, that is significant. And that is how crappy deals don't get fought by the NFLPA, because they have to pick their battles.

Even by that standard Kam's deal is crappy though, as the FG article pointed out. Sure max money is "good" for a SS but not for the value he brings. One of the best SS to ever play should not be paid less than a middling FS on a middle tier team, esp when SS take more punishment and have a shorter career.

Kam chose to come back, but he was absolutely not given a good contract. Now, that might be his agent's fault but my rule is always make sure the deals you enter benefit both parties, because people that benefit continue to be partners. So the Hawks should have made sure it was at least a palatable deal. Otherwise, if you try to get over because of someone's ignorance - eventually they find out and then ignorance becomes anger/dissatisfaction.

Don't be shocked if Kam brings this up next year, because if we go on a tear with noticeably improved defense Kam will have a lot of data to push his case or attract potential suitors who might trade for him. Either way, we probably hear about his deal again, unless the club does the right thing and gets him a new/fairer deal.

Very much a reasonable, level headed post. The problem with the subject, as you say, is rooted in an emotional response by most, which by default isn't generally rational. Bravo.....

 

[libertforever12]

You still don't get it. You can't fault a player for not playing. Anyone can choose to play or not to play. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that.

You can repeat it as much as you want, it doesnt make it right.

I can very well fault you. There was a holdout, its someones fault. Guess who's. Yours.

Its not the teams fault you didnt play. Its not your teammates fault or the fans fault. Its your fault. I can very well fault you for this. Fault fault fault. You're at fault.

And I already said you were right about choice. We all have a choice, but that doesnt mean there isnt a wrong one. You chose the wrong choice.

Somehow not playing is at fault is clearly an incorrect assumption. There has never been an assumption in this country that all hold outs are the player's fault.

I don't think you will get it. Some people are just too stupid to understand, but I won't say this is your fault because I don't know everything about you. It is nature, nurture, or other factors. I don't know.

Kam, honestly, at this point, who are you trying to convince here? No one is on your side on this one. You can call me stupid, thats fine. But I dont know why it makes you feel better. You lost so much money. For nothing. You lost more money in 54 days then I'll probably make in the next 40 years. In 54 days, you flushed close to 3 million dollars down the toilet, over pride.

Why are you even on .net? I mean, its cool you care about what us fans think, but you already reported. Why dig your hole deeper?

Trying to say I am Kam because no body can be on Kam's side is quite stupid. All you need to do is google for a minute you would be able to find quite a lot of articles and comments who are neutral or on Kam's side. Who on the world would think those are all Kam? This is beyond stupid.

 

[Hawkpower]

You can repeat it as much as you want, it doesnt make it right.

I can very well fault you. There was a holdout, its someones fault. Guess who's. Yours.

Its not the teams fault you didnt play. Its not your teammates fault or the fans fault. Its your fault. I can very well fault you for this. Fault fault fault. You're at fault.

And I already said you were right about choice. We all have a choice, but that doesnt mean there isnt a wrong one. You chose the wrong choice.[/quote]
Somehow not playing is at fault is clearly an incorrect assumption. There has never been an assumption in this country that all hold outs are the player's fault.

I don't think you will get it. Some people are just too stupid to understand, but I won't say this is your fault because I don't know everything about you. It is nature, nurture, or other factors. I don't know.[/quote]

Kam, honestly, at this point, who are you trying to convince here? No one is on your side on this one. You can call me stupid, thats fine. But I dont know why it makes you feel better. You lost so much money. For nothing. You lost more money in 54 days then I'll probably make in the next 40 years. In 54 days, you flushed close to 3 million dollars down the toilet, over pride.

Why are you even on .net? I mean, its cool you care about what us fans think, but you already reported. Why dig your hole deeper?[/quote]
Trying to say I am Kam because no body can be on Kam's side is quite stupid. All you need to do is google for a minute you would be able to find quite a lot of articles and comments who are neutral or on Kam's side. Who on the world would think those are all Kam? This is beyond stupid.[/quote]




"Quite a lot" of articles on your side? Maybe you could link them for us. I just googled it and 9 of the first 10 results were not in your favor.

I think you are seeing what you want to see.

 

[libertforever12]

"Quite a lot" of articles on your side? Maybe you could link them for us. I just googled it and 9 of the first 10 results were not in your favor.

I think you are seeing what you want to see.

It is not that hard to google. Here are a few:

Don't blame Kam Chancellor for his holdout in Seattle
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... 8427,d.cGU

As cap grows, NFL teams fear more Kam Chancellor holdouts
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -holdouts/

Seahawks need to find face-saving solution to Chancellor holdout
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... r-holdout/

In today’s NFL, players have every right to hold out
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -hold-out/

In Defense of Kam Chancellor
http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/09/15/nfl- ... ks-holdout

Richard Sherman says every Seahawks player understands holdout Kam Chancellor’s stance
http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/nf ... le34634511

 

[BlueTalon]

 

[Hawkpower]

"Quite a lot" of articles on your side? Maybe you could link them for us. I just googled it and 9 of the first 10 results were not in your favor.

I think you are seeing what you want to see.

It is not that hard to google. Here are a few:

Don't blame Kam Chancellor for his holdout in Seattle
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... 8427,d.cGU

As cap grows, NFL teams fear more Kam Chancellor holdouts
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -holdouts/

Seahawks need to find face-saving solution to Chancellor holdout
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... r-holdout/

In today’s NFL, players have every right to hold out
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -hold-out/

In Defense of Kam Chancellor
http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/09/15/nfl- ... ks-holdout

Richard Sherman says every Seahawks player understands holdout Kam Chancellor’s stance
http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/nf ... le34634511

LOL at your belief that every one of those articles backed up your decision.

A few were pro Kam. A few were neutral and pondered what would happen next in the world of the NFL.

But hey you found a few, nice work. We could link the articles that wondered what on gods green earth you were doing, but I'm not sure .net has the bandwidth to handle that

Either way, glad you are back and you were able to find it your heart to forgive us all. Good Luck Sunday.

 

[TwistedHusky]

I am just going to leave this here:

http://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/23/9364951/the-reckoning

Go ahead, read it and then, ask yourself how much money is fair to subject someone to that kind of life after football?

I suppose the simple answer is "well then don't play football if you don't want to be hurt later", but the solution is more complex.

Either way, just be aware that there is a price to be paid for burning this candle. Kam chooses to do so, just like other NFL players - and we all get to enjoy the sport because of it. But to act like he is obligated to make that sacrifice because "it is fun to watch our team win" is kind of d*ckish.

I still watch it, I still enjoy the game and I know the impact (or at least some of it). But I know that choice is a choice that any player should have the right to walk away from or the right to say the risk is too high, it isn't worth it for what I am being paid. Just remember that even 2 years ago, some of the impact of this stuff was not close to as well understood.

(To be honest, Lynch being one of my favorite players, this is one of my fears for him - he takes such punishment and has brought this city so much - I at least would like him to be able to walk when he is 45 or 50. Hopefully medical advances make that possible).

 

[Exittium]

I am just going to leave this here:

http://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/23/9364951/the-reckoning

Go ahead, read it and then, ask yourself how much money is fair to subject someone to that kind of life after football?

I suppose the simple answer is "well then don't play football if you don't want to be hurt later", but the solution is more complex.

Either way, just be aware that there is a price to be paid for burning this candle. Kam chooses to do so, just like other NFL players - and we all get to enjoy the sport because of it. But to act like he is obligated to make that sacrifice because "it is fun to watch our team win" is kind of d*ckish.

I still watch it, I still enjoy the game and I know the impact (or at least some of it). But I know that choice is a choice that any player should have the right to walk away from or the right to say the risk is too high, it isn't worth it for what I am being paid. Just remember that even 2 years ago, some of the impact of this stuff was not close to as well understood.

(To be honest, Lynch being one of my favorite players, this is one of my fears for him - he takes such punishment and has brought this city so much - I at least would like him to be able to walk when he is 45 or 50. Hopefully medical advances make that possible).

I understand some of what you said but it could easily be spun into something similar with military ones entertainment the other is freedom, and since this isn't the PNW section I won't bother. In the end, He chose to play football, he chose to accept the original contract offer, and he signed the dotted line, just like that of our military. So in the end if he's not happy its on him. If he's worried about his health, HE is choosing to play the style he is, we're not forcing him to and can't.

 

[Hawkpower]

I am just going to leave this here:

http://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/23/9364951/the-reckoning

Go ahead, read it and then, ask yourself how much money is fair to subject someone to that kind of life after football?

I suppose the simple answer is "well then don't play football if you don't want to be hurt later", but the solution is more complex.

Either way, just be aware that there is a price to be paid for burning this candle. Kam chooses to do so, just like other NFL players - and we all get to enjoy the sport because of it. But to act like he is obligated to make that sacrifice because "it is fun to watch our team win" is kind of d*ckish.

I still watch it, I still enjoy the game and I know the impact (or at least some of it). But I know that choice is a choice that any player should have the right to walk away from or the right to say the risk is too high, it isn't worth it for what I am being paid. Just remember that even 2 years ago, some of the impact of this stuff was not close to as well understood.

(To be honest, Lynch being one of my favorite players, this is one of my fears for him - he takes such punishment and has brought this city so much - I at least would like him to be able to walk when he is 45 or 50. Hopefully medical advances make that possible).

Obligated to make that sacrifice? What are you talking about? You think Kam suits up...sacrifices his body...for us? Sacrifice? The guy plays football so he can be rich, not to sacrifice himself for the pleasure of others. Dang right he chose to play....nobody forces him, and he is rewarded HANDSOMELY for it.


Do police officers, firefighters and military personell get rewarded in the way Kam does for their "sacrifice"??? For burning that candle?

This is getting ridiculous. The guy is off his rocker, and some are bending over waaaaaay too far to be some voice of reason, elevated thinker.... that just isnt necessary. The guy wanted more cash. Period. End of story.

Sacrifice?

Cmon.