Chukarhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2011
- Messages
- 5,090
- Reaction score
- 2,776
the kid is a chowder head and is lucky he was even drafted after getting kicked off his college team. I wouldn't give him any guaranteed money either.
pinksheets":2upo2n7m said:To all you knuckleheads who are saying "I wouldn't give him any guaranteed money either," then you shouldn't/wouldn't draft him. If you think a guy is only worth a totally non-guaranteed contract, don't draft him in a position where a contract with guaranteed money is the norm. You wait or you pay, simple as that. You can't have your cake and eat it, too (assuming Honeybadger didn't eat it when he got the munchies).
onanygivensunday":1zpbjgct said:I believe that the Cards have every right to do with Mathieu as the Jags did wiith Justin Blackmon.
The club has a right to protect themselves.
pinksheets":345w0p0g said:To all you knuckleheads who are saying "I wouldn't give him any guaranteed money either," then you shouldn't/wouldn't draft him. If you think a guy is only worth a totally non-guaranteed contract, don't draft him in a position where a contract with guaranteed money is the norm. You wait or you pay, simple as that. You can't have your cake and eat it, too (assuming Honeybadger didn't eat it when he got the munchies).
bigtrain21":1iiblj9q said:This is exactly right. Part of when you are making an assessment of whether to pick a player in a given is the guaranteed money you are going to give him. If they didn't want to pay it, then they shouldn't have drafted him in that spot.
Is it confirmed they want to do this or is it just a rumor. If they did this I find it a terrible way to start off with the kid.
That goes without saying.pehawk":2h8rfki0 said:onanygivensunday":2h8rfki0 said:I believe that the Cards have every right to do with Mathieu as the Jags did wiith Justin Blackmon.
The club has a right to protect themselves.
They're not offering anything close to what the Jags offered Blackmon. Just saying.
LawlessHawk":2v6293a2 said:Not sure that there's endless ways to structure a contract under the CBA that can satisfy and "protect" both sides, but I'm quite positive they'll work it out. Of course the agent is going to be gunning for as much "up front" money as he can possibly get for his client (and himself). The agent sure doesn't want to wait to get paid... the concerns of him coming away with nothing when the Badger inevitably eff's-up are just as valid as the teams.
kidhawk":1iojwcqg said:LawlessHawk":1iojwcqg said:Not sure that there's endless ways to structure a contract under the CBA that can satisfy and "protect" both sides, but I'm quite positive they'll work it out. Of course the agent is going to be gunning for as much "up front" money as he can possibly get for his client (and himself). The agent sure doesn't want to wait to get paid... the concerns of him coming away with nothing when the Badger inevitably eff's-up are just as valid as the teams.
Nobody forces him to take the guy on as a client. If the risk vs reward is too much, spend your time on other clients. He took the kid on and should have known by then exactly the risk he was getting into. And if the agent is so worried about him offending again, then that's even more reason for the Cardinals to be wary in the way they structure his deal.
pehawk":382tyyt7 said:I love the "he can get guaranteed paycheck for every game" nonsense. It's entirely ignorant to the NFL CBA and business model. The game comes with inherent risks. Guaranteed money is the ONLY reward for taking those risks. If Mathieu gets paralyzed in the first preseason game, that's it, he gets nothing.
And NONE of you saying that the Cardinals are right, would take a fiscal deal less than your peers. Even if you’re a garbage man, you're not going to say "hmm, okay, I'll take less than what you pay everyone else". And chances are you cant get paralyzed doing your job...Mathieu can.